This is a Nonmarket Analysis Case Study completed as a Team Project, with a few assignments that are to be done individually. All due dates will be posted in the Canvas calendar.
On the following page, you will find a list of Case Study Issues for the current semester. Each topic is phrased as an issue appropriate for nonmarket analysis and is accompanied by several general references to help you become acquainted with the issue.
The Case Study is a TEAM project with three parts. Each part is submitted via drop boxes or discussion forums in Canvas.
Detailed guidelines for each part of your Nonmarket Analysis Case Study will be provided. Your Team will receive one grade for each part of the Case Study. These grades will not be posted to the grade book.
After all parts of the Case Study are complete, each member of the team will complete a team assessment survey of individual contributions by each team member (see below).
Your Team will be given one total Case Study score. Individual scores for the Case Study will be calculated as:
Depending on your level of contribution to the Case Study, your individual score may be the same as the Team Score, or it may be lower or higher (not to exceed 100 points).
This is a survey, completed INDIVIDUALLY.
In this survey, you will provide feedback on the contributions of other members of your team to this project. This is to encourage all team members to work together and contribute fully to this project. Each student's final score on this team project is calculated as:
Depending on the Team's assessment of your level of contribution to the Case Study, your individual score may be the same as the Team Score, or it may be lower, or it may be higher (not to exceed 100 points).
You will find the “Team Assessment of Contribution” survey under the Modules tab. You'll be asked to assess the contributions of other Team members to this group project. When considering the contributions of each team member, please include these factors: level of engagement, timeliness of work, quality of work, and integrity of work (correct and complete source citations). For each Team member, your options are:
These are Discussion Forums, graded INDIVIDUALLY.
Near the end of the semester, each Case Study will be presented in a Q&A Discussion Forum. Each student is required to participate by commenting on the uploaded presentations. Comments will be graded on an individual basis.
Please note that the list of resources provided here is not meant to be comprehensive. You are encouraged to research these issues on your own as well.
1. Do you support or oppose allowing state-subsidized power plants to participate in regional electricity markets without price controls?
(Note: This topic concerns a policy in electricity markets known as the "minimum offer price rule" or MOPR. The idea behind MOPR is that if renewable energy plants are highly subsidized by governments, but compete with conventional power plants in electricity markets, the government subsidy gives renewable power plants an unfair competitive advantage in the electricity market because the subsidy makes the renewable power plants look cheaper than they actually are. MOPR is a rule that forces a price floor on subsidized power plants in competitive electricity markets.)
2. Is the Biden Administration correct to increase the Social Cost of Carbon to $51/ton or should it have been kept at a lower level set by the Trump Administration?
3. Do you support or oppose California's initiative to ban the sales of new gasoline-fueled cars by 2035?
4. Do you support or Oppose H.R. 1019 (the E-BIKE Act)?
5. Would you support or oppose legislation that requires legislative approval for Pennsylvania to enter into a cap-and-trade program (such as the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative, or RGGI), as HB 2025 of 2020 does?
6. Do you support or oppose permitting of the Thacker Pass lithium mine in Nevada?
7. Do you support or oppose the domestic content requirements for renewable energy projects (wind and solar) to earn large tax credits under the Inflation Reduction Act?
The Case Study Nonmarket Analysis Team Project consists of three parts submitted individually. Parts I and II are written documents, which may include figures, tables, and graphics. Part III is a slide presentation. Please see Canvas calendar for due dates.
Guidelines for individual Parts of the Case Study are provided below. The following important guidelines apply to all Parts--
Please remember that all parts of this Case Study project must be formatted using APA style, with the exception that you do NOT need an abstract. APA requires in-text citation, which means you have to place a citation in the text of the document next to any information that you gathered from an outside source. Think of it this way: If you did not know the information before you put it in the document, you should cite it. Penn State has an APA guide here [26], but Purdue University as a more comprehensive one here [27].
All Parts of all Team Case Studies will be shared with others in this course and will be the subject of Case Study Q & A Discussion Forums. This will happen near the end of the term after all Case Studies are complete.
(For example, see RPS Case Study, Lesson 1, “Background and Status”)
Research and collect background on your Case Study Issue. Document key terms and concepts, historical context, current status, and the overall timeline of relevant past events and upcoming ones (if known). Clearly explain what the issue is about! Use data, graphs, pictures, and tables as needed to describe the issue. You are NOT taking a side on the issue (yet)! Provide an objective analysis of the issue.
Format Part I as a Word (.doc or .docx) file and upload to Canvas using the link to "Case Study Part I. Background and Status." This is under the Case Study Assignments subheading in the Modules tab. Don't forget to submit your individual contribution on the first due date!
You must identify who worked on each section. You can just insert comment boxes or indicate who wrote the section by putting the student's name next to the section title/header (as long as it is clear who did each section).
Note that all sources must be cited, and direct quotes must be indicated. I use a software that will clearly indicate any material that is plagiarized. I will be very strict about this, and take academic dishonesty very seriously.
(For example, see RPS Case Study, Lesson 2, “Stakeholder and Nonmarket Analysis Summary Framework”)
Identify stakeholders (firms, associations, groups, or individuals) that have an interest in the outcome of your team’s Issue. Each team member must analyze one stakeholder. Your stakeholder list MUST represents a balance of different positions on the Issue. You need to have at least two that support and two that oppose the issue.
Use the RPS Case Study Part II as a model. For each stakeholder, provide name, type of organization, and its mission. Establish stakeholder’s initial position on the issue and explain the basis for this position.
For each stakeholder, continue the analysis with an orderly presentation of all variables related to demand and supply of nonmarket action.
To evaluate demand for nonmarket action, assess available substitutes, aggregate benefits, and per capita benefits. To evaluate supply of nonmarket activities, assess effectiveness (numbers, coverage, and resources) and cost of organizing. Provide specific justifications for the supply/demand scale item that you use.
To make these assessments, you’ll need to establish a scale for each variable. You can use the one in the RPS case study (for example, benefits are “small”, “moderate”, “considerable”, “large” or “substantial”) or design your own. Either way, include the scale you are using in your case study.
In all cases, be sure to give some reasoning that supports the value you have assigned. E.g. if you indicate that “coverage” is “extensive,” explain why you believe this to be true.
Now you are ready to predict the likelihood of the stakeholder taking nonmarket action. To do this, review the information you have collected to this point. For each stakeholder, weigh the demand for taking action against the supply of action. The greater the demand, the more likelihood of taking action. The greater the cost (considering available resources), the less likelihood of taking action. You’ll need to establish a scale for this too. You can use the one from the RPS case study or establish your own. Either way, be sure to include it.
Finally, summarize all of your findings into a Nonmarket Analysis Summary Framework. You’ll find an Excel template for the Nonmarket Analysis Summary Framework in the “Team Project/Case Study Info” folder under the Modules tab. Be sure to group stakeholders based on their position on the issue. Integrate the Excel Summary Framework into your Part II document.
You must identify who worked on each section. You can just insert comment boxes or provide a list of who worked on what.
Again, you are not taking sides on this issue. You must include two stakeholders that support and two stakeholders that oppose the issue.
Format Part II as a Word (.doc or .docx) file and upload to Canvas ("Case Study Part II. Stakeholders and Framework"). Don't forget to submit your individual submission by the first due date!
Parts I and II of the Case Study didn't "pick sides." Part I framed the issue (Background and Status). Part II identified key stakeholders on all sides of the issue and gave a basis for their positions.
In Part III, your Team WILL take sides. As a Team, select one of your stakeholders and assume you are making nonmarket strategic recommendations to that stakeholder. Clearly identify the stakeholder to whom your presentation is submitted.
Imagine that your Team has been invited to make recommendations to this stakeholder. You've been asked to prepare and submit a presentation of no more than 20 slides. The presentation needs to stand on its own (you can include limited notes in the Notes section of PowerPoint if desired). It will be submitted electronically and shared with others, without your being there.
Present your Team's nonmarket strategy recommendations with as much detail as possible. If your issue will be handled in a government arena, consider appropriate public politics strategies. If your issue is not being addressed in a government arena, consider appropriate private politics strategies. Or some of both. Include specifics; be imaginative!
You must identify who worked on each section. You can just insert comment boxes or provide a list or put names in the notes section of the PowerPoint.
Organize your strategy and recommendations carefully. Be sure that what you are suggesting and why will be clear to your stakeholder. But, do not pack your slides with words and data. Be creative and succinct. Feel free to write limited narrative in the slide notes at the bottom of the page, but please keep the slides themselves relatively uncluttered.
The RPS Case Study “Strategy and Recommendations" in Lesson 3 gives an example of a nonmarket strategy that you may find to be a helpful reference. It is not, however, in a presentation (slide) format as required for Part III of your Team's Case Study.
Format Part III as a PowerPoint Presentation (.ppt or .pptx) file and upload to Canvas ("Case Study Part III. Strategy and Recommendations"). Individual submissions must be made by the due date.
Case Study Issue Interest Survey
You will find the “Case Study Issue Interest Survey" under the Case Study Assignments sub heading in the Modules tab. All students should complete the survey.
Case Study Individual Submissions for Part I, II, and III
As noted in the Case Study description, you must submit your individual contribution to each Case Study assignment prior to when the full group assignment is due. This is required in order to provide the team leader time to integrate the assignments together. All due dates are on the Course Calendars.
Team Assessment of Contribution
You will find the “Team Assessment of Contribution” survey under the Modules tab. Not graded, but all students are required to complete the survey. (The individual case study final grade will be penalized 1 point for late, incomplete or missing survey results.)
Case Study Q & A
Case Studies will be presented in the Q&A Discussion Forum. Each student will participate in the Discussion forum by leaving comments. Participation will be graded on an individual basis.
The Team will receive one grade for Parts I and III of the Case Study. Part II will be graded individually. These grades will not be posted to the grade book.
After all parts of the Case Study are submitted, the Team will be given one total Case Study score. Each Part is weighted equally.
Scoring for each Part of the Case Study is based on:
All sources and references MUST be identified and properly referenced. Failure to do so can result in a failing grade and other possible sanctions. See College of Earth, Mineral and Sciences Academic Integrity and Research Ethics [29].
After all parts of the Case Study are submitted, each member of the team will complete a team assessment survey of individual contributions by each team member, including themselves. At the discretion of the instructor, the team assessments may result in an adjustment of your case study grade up or down from the grade that is calculated for the team. Any student whose grade is adjusted because of the team assessment will receive a written explanation from the instructor.
The Team Case Study is worth 30% of your course grade.
If you have questions, please post to the "Questions about EME 444?" Discussion Forum. I'll be happy to help you!
Links
[1] https://www.powermag.com/market-transitions-the-mopr-merry-go-round/
[2] https://info.aee.net/hubfs/Federal%20Policy%20(2018-2020)/PJM%20MOPR%20Explainer%2001_20.pdf
[3] https://www.resources.org/common-resources/what-minimum-offer-price-rule-mopr-means-clean-energy-pjm/
[4] https://www.greentechmedia.com/articles/read/ferc-orders-pjm-to-restrict-state-backed-renewables-in-capacity-market
[5] https://www.wired.com/story/the-biden-administration-weighs-the-social-cost-of-carbon/
[6] https://www.dwt.com/blogs/energy--environmental-law-blog/2021/04/biden-social-cost-carbon-iwg-report
[7] https://www.vox.com/future-perfect/22643358/social-cost-of-carbon-mortality-biden-discounting
[8] https://www.nytimes.com/2021/07/29/climate/carbon-emissions-death.html
[9] https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/news/california-moves-accelerate-100-new-zero-emission-vehicle-sales-2035
[10] https://www.pacificresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/05/CaliforniaSappedStudy_F.pdf
[11] https://www.wired.com/story/truckers-brace-for-a-rule-mandating-electric-vehicles-at-ports/
[12] https://www.nytimes.com/2022/08/25/business/energy-environment/electric-vehicles-automakers.html
[13] https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-bill/1019/text?r=1&s=1
[14] https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/house-bill/1685?s=1&r=4
[15] https://www.theverge.com/2023/3/22/23651557/ebike-act-bill-congress-rebate-tax-credit-amount
[16] https://www.alleghenyfront.org/rggi-regional-greenhouse-gas-initiative-carbon-pennsylvania/
[17] https://www.alleghenyfront.org/bill-to-keep-pa-out-of-regional-cap-and-trade-program-passes-faces-governors-veto/
[18] https://www.pennfuture.org/Blog-Item-So-Pennsylvania-Might-Join-RGGI-What-Comes-Next
[19] https://www.rggi.org/
[20] http://sites.law.duq.edu/juris/2019/11/11/gov-wolf-signs-executive-order-on-green-house-gas-but-legal-and-policy-questions-still-exist/
[21] https://ndep.nv.gov/land/thacker-pass-project
[22] https://insideclimatenews.org/news/07112021/lithium-mining-thacker-pass-nevada-electric-vehicles-climate/
[23] https://www.marketplace.org/shows/how-we-survive/white-gold/
[24] https://www.nytimes.com/2023/06/09/business/economy/energy-tax-credits.html
[25] https://www.shearman.com/en/perspectives/2023/05/inflation-reduction-act--new-guidance-on-domestic-content-bonus-credits#:~:text=To%20qualify%2C%20the%20minimum%20percentage,developers%20to%20cooperate%20with%20manufacturers.
[26] https://guides.libraries.psu.edu/apaquickguide/overview
[27] https://owl.purdue.edu/owl/research_and_citation/apa_style/apa_formatting_and_style_guide/general_format.html
[28] https://www.e-education.psu.edu/eme444/node/419
[29] https://www.ems.psu.edu/undergraduate/academic-integrity/academic-integrity-undergraduates