Suchergebnisse

Chapter 1. Introduction -- Chapter 2. Whole systems thinking and modelling in the UK -- Chapter 3. Environment-friendly energy research in Norway -- Chapter 4. Calculating the 'price' of infrastructure reliability in Finland -- Chapter 5. A Sociology of Interdisciplinarity.

This Open Access book builds upon Science and Technology Studies (STS) and provides a detailed examination of how large-scale energy research projects have been conceived, and with what consequences for those involved in interdisciplinary research, which has been advocated as the zenith of research practice for many years, quite often in direct response to questions that cannot be answered (or even preliminarily investigated) by disciplines working separately. It produces fresh insights into the lived experiences and actual contents of interdisciplinarity, rather than simply commentating on how it is being explicitly advocated. We present empirical studies on large-scale energy research projects from the United Kingdom, Norway, and Finland. The book presents a new framework, the Sociology of Interdisciplinarity, which unpacks interdisciplinary research in practice. This book will be of interest to all those interested in well-functioning interdisciplinary research systems and the dynamics of doing interdisciplinarity, including real ground-level experiences and institutional interdependencies.

"An impressive take on contemporary energy policy issues with much needed fresh perspectives and an all-star roster of leading thinkers. I hope that every energy policymaker or even student of energy policy reads it." - Benjamin K. Sovacool, Professor of Energy Policy, University of Sussex, UK. "The authors brilliantly demonstrate through a number of approaches, cases and examples, how interdisciplinary Social Sciences and Humanities research could and should be mobilised in EU energy policy and future energy transition research agendas." - Marianne Ryghaug, Professor of Science and Technology Studies, Norwegian University of Science and Technology. This open access book advocates for the Social Sciences and Humanities to be more involved in energy policymaking. It forms part of the European platform for energy-related Social Sciences and Humanities' activities, and works on the premise that crossing disciplines is essential. All of its contributions are highly interdisciplinary, with each chapter grounded in at least three different Social Sciences and Humanities disciplines. These varying perspectives come together to cover an array of issues relevant to the energy transition, including: energy poverty, justice, political ecology, governance, behaviours, imaginaries, systems approaches, modelling, as well as the particular challenges faced by interdisciplinary work. As a whole, the book presents new ideas for future energy policy, particularly at the European level. It is a valuable resource for energy researchers interested in interdisciplinary and society-relevant perspectives. Those working outside the Social Sciences and Humanities will find this book an accessible way of learning more about how these subjects can constructively contribute to energy policy. Chris Foulds is Senior Research Fellow at Anglia Ruskin University's Global Sustainability Institute, UK, and is co-lead of SHAPE ENERGY. His interests involve sociotechnical change, energy demand and policy interventions. Rosie Robison is Senior Research Fellow at Anglia Ruskin University's Global Sustainability Institute, UK, and co-lead of SHAPE ENERGY

Overland and Sovacool (2020) and Baum and Bartkowski (2020), in this journal, have provided important insights on the neglect of Social Sciences and Humanities (SSH) in energy and sustainability research. In this response, we develop this conversation further, arguing that the commissioning and funding of energy research can be understood as part of a process of making evidence, which is co-constructive with policy-making. This helps us analyse how exclusions of SSH within the energy research-policy landscape are reproduced, and, crucially, to identify opportunities for change. We draw on concepts from Science and Technology Studies regarding the co-construction of knowledges and policies; epistemic communities; and the active role of expectations and imaginaries around energy evidence, and we apply these to empirical material from workshops with EU policyworkers, and analysis of key documents relating to European energy research and policy. We explore ways that SSH are excluded through expectations around: i) the research enterprise and purpose of evidence; ii) the contributions of different SSH communities, iii) how different epistemic communities should work together; and iv) validity and rigour. Finally, we offer some reflections for research professionals and research funding organisations who wish to integrate SSH more meaningfully into energy research and policy, including suggestions around actors; documents; and the processes of reviewing and monitoring that are involved in the making of energy evidence.

Language shapes the practices and processes of energy research and policy. It is thus challenging that each disciplinary community has its own taken-for-granted terminology, which can be difficult for 'outsiders' to understand. Much of the interdisciplinary literature has focused on the challenges experienced in relation to this, with very little done on solutions. Moreover, most attempts to provide an overview of such (energy-related) definitions have still been undertaken within disciplinary silos and have tended to be narrow in scope (e.g. glossaries for one particular research/policy community), and have thereby failed to provide an adequate platform for cross-cutting policy debate and interdisciplinary exchange. This paper therefore aims to investigate how an interdisciplinary lexicon might be practically produced for energy researchers across the Social Sciences and Humanities (SSH), as part of providing a basis for interdisciplinary collaboration and a transparent platform for subsequent policy discussions. Specifically, the core of this paper (1) identifies a set of guiding principles that may assist in the creation of a lexicon and (2) proposes a method for creating an energy-SSH lexicon. All this is discussed in the context of a new EU Platform (SHAPE-ENERGY: Social sciences & Humanities for Advancing Policy in European ENERGY), which is following this proposed method in creating its own interdisciplinary energy lexicon. We will conclude by reflecting on how a lexicon such as the one that we propose – e.g. one that is reflexive, participatory, solutions-focussed, noted as being the start (not the end) of dialogue, and accounts for difference, etc. – could be used more broadly in other interdisciplinary and multi-stakeholder contexts.

Energy feedback tools are commonly used to promote energy saving. In the UK, energy feedback provision (currently via an In-Home Display) is part of the government-mandated roll-out of smart meters to all homes by 2020. A core assumption underlying this widespread provision is that information, or evidence, can lead to positive changes in action. This is analogous to assumptions underlying the notion of 'Evidence-Based Policy', which raises questions about how users, researchers and policymakers go about using evidence in aiming for a 'successful' outcome. In addition the 'policy feedback' research agenda has asked how policies alter the landscapes within which they operate by, for example, affecting relationships between actors. Via an in-depth review of DECC (now BEIS) policy literature over 2010-2016, the UK smart meter roll-out was analysed in terms of how its energy feedback focussed measures may be deemed as 'successful'. Findings include that direct energy savings played a smaller role than might be expected, and translation from one success measure to another was repeatedly observed. A key conclusion is that acting on feedback requires an assessment of success, but such assessment is highly contextual, for consumers and policymakers alike. Ways to increase reflexivity in this area are discussed.

This paper focusses on investigating the underlying mechanisms and influences of the policy decision making process and how it affects and impacts the governance of the Nigerian energy industry, and energy infrastructure provisions. In-depth semi-structured interviews were used; all interviewees had been involved, directly or indirectly, in energy infrastructure policy decisions in Nigeria. Five key themes subsequently emerged as salient intra-country induced influences that were affecting the governance and performance of the Nigerian energy sector: (1) competencies – i.e. practical knowledge of energy policy making; (2) expectations – i.e. past, present, and forecasted future expectations from the energy industry; (3) legislation – i.e. institutionalized (and unwritten) rules/procedures; (4) future visions – i.e. future vision of the energy industry/energy market; (5) recruiting experts – i.e. recruiting new energy and public policy makers. In addition, three major inter-country induced influences were also identified: (1) the changing dynamics of international and foreign aid; (2) the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals; and (3) the Paris Agreements on Climate Change. The paper concludes by highlighting the policy implications of these influences, and the consequences for policy makers in the governance of the energy industry in ensuring a secured energy future.

Changes to the energy supply infrastructure are a vital component of climate change mitigation strategies. But what exactly underlies changes to energy supply infrastructure? This paper, through exploration and critical analysis of relevant literature, explores the various underpinning influences on energy infrastructure supply using a comparison of different theoretical perspectives. These influences were explored with specific emphasis on techno-economics, social psychology, socio-technical transitions, social practices and institutional dimensions to energy supply. The aim was to have a better understanding of the (direct and indirect) role of politics and the political system in influencing energy supply infrastructure decisions through the various theoretical lenses. The study revealed that techno-economics uses financial instruments and market information as intervention tools. Its effectiveness is measured by social welfare and cost effectiveness. Social psychology uses a combination of information, incentives and innovative informative instruments as its intervention tools. Its effectiveness is measured by behavioural change. Institutions use regulatory instruments as its intervention tool. Its effectiveness is measured by regulatory compliance. Social practices look at change in broader social systems. Its effectiveness is measured by social change. Socio-technical transitions focus on determining social movements and social innovations. Its effectiveness is measured by legitimacy and social learning.

The provision of energy infrastructure is essential for economic growth, social cohesion, and environmental sustainability. Understanding the multiple functions and services it provides us requires firstly a deeper understanding of the factors that influence energy infrastructure itself. This paper focusses on the factors that influence the evolution of energy infrastructure in Nigeria. By studying different eras of energy use according to the technologies that were being implemented, resources that were available, and the political practice of the time it is possible to better frame the drivers of energy infrastructure. The paper explores the transitions of how Nigerians managed to obtain the vast majority of energy from food calories and traditional biomass, to the broad portfolio of energy sources that is in use today.

This paper focuses on investigating the linkages and consequences of the policy decision process in the governance of energy infrastructure in Nigeria. It attempts to gain a better understanding of the role of policy makers and institutions in the provision of energy infrastructure in Nigeria. Using a combination of semi-structured interviews and documentary evidences from published literature, this study reveals three essential areas where the policy-making processes (and therefore policy makers) intervene in the provision of energy infrastructure. These are: (1) granting access to historical data; (2) regulations; and (3) permitting/issuance of licenses. This study also reveals three major unintended consequences of the policy decision processes and institutions in the governance of energy infrastructure provisions in Nigeria, which are: (1) government financing corruption in the energy sector; (2) economic delusion; and (3) uncontrolled growth in energy demand driven more by export and not local internal demand.

The challenge: * By 2014, transport had overtaken power companies as the sector with the highest carbon emissions across the European Union (EU). * From 1990 to 2014, EU road transport emissions rose by 17% and aviation emissions by 82%. Road transport accounted for 70% of EU transport emissions in 2014. Aim: * European energy policy has so far mainly relied on research from Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (STEM) disciplines. Energy-related Social Sciences and Humanities (energy-SSH) have been significantly underrepresented. This bibliography provides a broad overview of SSH perspectives on transport decarbonisation. It is not intended to be comprehensive, but rather aimed at presenting initial insights into the variety of questions posed, areas explored, and methods used by SSH scholars and demonstrating their relevance for EU energy policy. Coverage: * This bibliography presents publications from History, Human Geography, Sociology, Urban Planning, Political Science, Psychology, Anthropology, Theology, Economics, Philosophy and Ethics, Criminology, as well as intersectional disciplines such as Transport, Tourism, and Gender studies. * In order to better represent SSH debates, some transport publications which were of wider relevance to decarbonisation (but did not solely focus on it) were included. Key findings: * Much research concerns technological fixes and individual consumer choices. Consumer research tends to focus on attitudes towards technologies or policies, what determines transport mode preference, or what might prompt mode shift. There is less research on institutional and systemic issues, as well as the role of corporations. * Since the 1990s, the so-called 'Mobilities turn' has become dominant, associated with Miriam Sheller, John Urry, Tim Cresswell and Marc Augé. This paradigm emphasises the role of travel, globalisation and movement for our contemporary world. * A large volume of research was found on the car (including electric cars), cycling, commuting, and short distance urban travel. * Underrepresented topics include rural mobility, long distance travel, and shipping and freight. Walking has received far less decarbonisation focused enquiry than cycling. * Whilst not all EU research could be represented, intra-EU differences were noted: e.g. the greater importance of two wheelers in Latvia; how more children to walk to school in Eastern European countries; the renaissance of the tram in France; and the large proportion of urban Finns frequently driving to their rural second home. * Across the span of SSH, researchers frame the problem of transport decarbonisation differently (both from each other, and from more technical disciplines). These framings often point towards different solutions. For instance, they ask: what is the effect of technological, demographic and economic trends on transport emissions?; why do policymakers/scholars focus on certain transport solutions over others?; how do transport modes 'compete'?; how does the meaning of transport change over time?; and why do we travel?

The active participation of energy consumers is regarded as essential for the effective roll-out and development of a wide range of smart energy technologies, micro-generation and energy demand policies. As such, the 'active consumer' has become a focus of European Union energy policy in recent years. Accordingly, and as an output of the SHAPE ENERGY project, this report has two aims: • to present and offer guidance for interested parties on different Social Sciences and Humanities (SSH) options for examining active consumers, including suggesting how particular SSH approaches might shape the direction of energy research and findings; and • to examine options for the integration of different SSH disciplinary approaches to the active consumer, as well as considering the implications of such integrations for future energy research. While recognising multiple understandings of active consumers and their energy consumption, we adopt a broad definition. Specifically, active (energy) consumption encompasses a level of participation by consumers in the purchase or use of products and services, which thereby reflects some agency on the consumers' part and/or is itself influential in how products and services are used and designed. This can include consumer feedback, and the use and appropriation of goods and services which go beyond that intended by providers/manufactures and can affect future design considerations. Drawing on an extensive review of the literature, we establish some of the key characteristics of how active consumers and their energy demand are conceptualised in SSH, both implicitly and explicitly. Specifically, we divide SSH approaches by their most common features into: • Individualised approaches, which focus on answering what shapes individual decisions/actions towards energy consumption; and • Relational Societal approaches, which focus on energy consumption as part of an evolving and interdependent relationship with society. The application of either approach will carry different implications for research on the active consumer in relation to potential energy research problems (such as smart technology participation). In particular, there are questions over whether research can be restricted or improved by either greater interdependency and inclusion of societal elements, as per the Relational Societal approaches; or by direct (often linear) modelling of active consumers, as per the Individualised approaches. We argue that Relational Societal, while more complex, offer a deeper understanding of dynamic and widespread change. In contrast, Individualised offer greater conceptual simplicity, but appear vulnerable on explanations of how consumption is shaped and changed. Recognising these fundamental differences is essential for researchers and project funders when considering which SSH approaches might best serve the development of energy interventions - this is especially important as the dominant STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, Mathematics) agenda would typically favour Individualised approaches. With interdisciplinarity being a key aspiration of SHAPE ENERGY and indeed of Horizon 2020 energy work programmes, we also consider options for integrating the two approaches. We recognise that integration attempts need to be cautious of paradigmatic differences that can make certain forms of integration unworkable. On the basis of all this, we present recommendations, including to the Commission concerning future EU research funding, to those interested in or working on interdisciplinary energy research projects and platforms, and to fellow SHAPE ENERGY partners on the organisation of our Platform's activities. Across all of these recommendations, we have prioritised: the importance of including SSH approaches in research on energy consumption; the need to acknowledge the relevance to energy consumption research of previously neglected Relational Societal approaches; and the need to be critical when considering interdisciplinary approaches to studying the active consumer.

The European Union (EU) funded Horizon 2020 'Social sciences and Humanities for Advancing Policy in European ENERGY' (SHAPE ENERGY) project organised an international summer school for Early Stage Researchers (ESRs) working within energy-social sciences and humanities (energy-SSH). This multidisciplinary summer school – entitled 'Advancing Energy Policy Summer School' – focused on how energy-SSH research can contribute to tackling the many energy-related challenges in Europe. Key energy topics were discussed with an emphasis on interdisciplinarity and on the translation of academic research into policy and practice, including:•• Global energy dilemmas;•• Energy transition;•• Public engagement and energy citizenship;•• Consumption and social practices;•• Energy poverty.Advanced researchers and practitioners involved in leading European energy projects were presenting their expertise and the role of energy-SSH research for policy and practice while the summer school was also an opportunity to meet and collaborate with other ESRs from a range of disciplines. Analysing the outputs of the summer school allowed us to draw attention to four recommendations, which could serve as points of reflection during the organisation of any future ESR and/or interdisciplinary SHAPE ENERGY activities:•• Make more explicit/visible the 'implicits' of the various disciplines and, while proposing a workshop, consider more carefully the time needed by each discipline to produce a 'rigorous' outcome/output.•• Pay attention to the fact that mainstream economic thinking innervates all disciplines. This element should be taken into greater consideration in prospective research as it influences the way the future is envisioned and closes alternative paths that could have been taken.•• Better consider the cultural background of the participants when asking them to work together, or at least make more explicit not only the rules of the exercise but also the cultural implicit behind it.•• Be sensitive to the gender and age of the participants, as these obviously play a role in how individuals express and put themselves forward. As it is crucial to devote time and resources, and to employ experts when implementing gender perspectives in research programmes and policy-making; more attention should be paid to this point as well as to how older researchers might influence the youngest.

The European Union (EU) funded Horizon 2020 'Social sciences and Humanities for Advancing Policy in European ENERGY' (SHAPE ENERGY) project organised an international summer school for Early Stage Researchers (ESRs) working within energy-social sciences and humanities (energy-SSH). This multidisciplinary summer school – entitled 'Advancing Energy Policy Summer School' – focused on how energy-SSH research can contribute to tackling the many energy-related challenges in Europe. Key energy topics were discussed with an emphasis on interdisciplinarity and on the translation of academic research into policy and practice, including:•• Global energy dilemmas;•• Energy transition;•• Public engagement and energy citizenship;•• Consumption and social practices;•• Energy poverty.Advanced researchers and practitioners involved in leading European energy projects were presenting their expertise and the role of energy-SSH research for policy and practice while the summer school was also an opportunity to meet and collaborate with other ESRs from a range of disciplines. Analysing the outputs of the summer school allowed us to draw attention to four recommendations, which could serve as points of reflection during the organisation of any future ESR and/or interdisciplinary SHAPE ENERGY activities:•• Make more explicit/visible the 'implicits' of the various disciplines and, while proposing a workshop, consider more carefully the time needed by each discipline to produce a 'rigorous' outcome/output.•• Pay attention to the fact that mainstream economic thinking innervates all disciplines. This element should be taken into greater consideration in prospective research as it influences the way the future is envisioned and closes alternative paths that could have been taken.•• Better consider the cultural background of the participants when asking them to work together, or at least make more explicit not only the rules of the exercise but also the cultural implicit behind it.•• Be sensitive to the gender and age of the participants, ...

The European Union (EU) funded Horizon 2020 'Social sciences and Humanities for Advancing Policy in European ENERGY' (SHAPE ENERGY) project organised an international summer school for Early Stage Researchers (ESRs) working within energy-social sciences and humanities (energy-SSH). This multidisciplinary summer school – entitled 'Advancing Energy Policy Summer School' – focused on how energy-SSH research can contribute to tackling the many energy-related challenges in Europe. Key energy topics were discussed with an emphasis on interdisciplinarity and on the translation of academic research into policy and practice, including: • Global energy dilemmas; • Energy transition; • Public engagement and energy citizenship; • Consumption and social practices; • Energy poverty. Advanced researchers and practitioners involved in leading European energy projects were presenting their expertise and the role of energy-SSH research for policy and practice while the summer school was also an opportunity to meet and collaborate with other ESRs from a range of disciplines. Analysing the outputs of the summer school allowed us to draw attention to four recommendations, which could serve as points of reflection during the organisation of any future ESR and/or interdisciplinary SHAPE ENERGY activities: • Make more explicit/visible the 'implicits' of the various disciplines and, while proposing a workshop, consider more carefully the time needed by each discipline to produce a 'rigorous' outcome/output. • Pay attention to the fact that mainstream economic thinking innervates all disciplines. This element should be taken into greater consideration in prospective research as it influences the way the future is envisioned and closes alternative paths that could have been taken. • Better consider the cultural background of the participants when asking them to work together, or at least make more explicit not only the rules of the exercise but also the cultural implicit behind it. • Be sensitive to the gender and age of the participants, as these obviously play a role in how individuals express and put themselves forward. As it is crucial to devote time and resources, and to employ experts when implementing gender perspectives in research programmes and policy-making; more attention should be paid to this point as well as to how older researchers might influence the youngest.