• Energy Research

Grand societal challenges such as climate change, poverty and biodiversity loss call for rapid and radical changes to systems of production and consumption. Consequently, there is a growing interest in the dynamics of innovation, both social and technical, to accelerate innovation diffusion so as to increase the possibility of a step‐change or large‐scale transition. Research on the water–energy–food nexus adds an additional dimension to existing discussions, calling for transitions that recognise the sustainability challenges facing three major resource domains, and the synergies and tensions involved in their management. This paper examines anaerobic digestion (AD) – an example of innovation with potential benefits across the water–energy–food nexus – to understand the conditions that influence the rate of AD implementation and the achievement of its potential multi‐sectoral benefits across the water–energy–food nexus. Interview data regarding 15 AD plants are examined alongside complementary data from interviews and workshops using the Technological Innovation Systems framework. This framework provides an analytical structure through which the processes that enable and constrain the implementation of AD in the UK can be examined, enabling the identification of potential mechanisms to support AD's wider and more effective deployment. The findings call for recognition of the unintended consequences of sectoral support mechanisms for technological adaptation, and consequent performance of AD in other resource domains and call for greater integration between policy mechanisms to enable AD to perform across the nexus. They also highlight a need to assimilate knowledge from multiple sources (including site‐specific understanding gained from experimentation) to enhance the base on which policy and decision‐making occurs. These findings contribute to existing literature on sustainable transitions by examining the complexities of multi‐sectoral resource management in the context of nexus research.

‘Energy decentralisation’ means many things to many people. Among the confusion of definitions and practices that may be characterised as decentralisation, three broad causal narratives are commonly (implicitly or explicitly) invoked. These narratives imply that the process of decentralisation: i) will result in appropriate changes to rules and institutions, ii) will be more democratic and iii) is directly and causally linked to energy system decarbonisation. The principal aim of this paper is to critically examine these narratives. By conceptualising energy decentralisation as a distinct class of socio-technical transition pathway, we present a comparative analysis of energy decentralisation in Cornwall, South West UK, the French island of Ushant and the National Electricity Market in Australia. We show that, while energy decentralisation is often strongly correlated with institutional change, increasing citizen agency in the energy system, and enhanced environmental performance, these trends cannot be assumed as given. Indeed, some decentralisation pathways may entrench incumbent actors' interests or block rapid decarbonisation. In particular, we show how institutional context is a key determinant of the link between energy decentralisation and normative goals such as democratisation and decarbonisation. While institutional theory suggests that changes in rules and institutions are often incremental and path-dependent, the dense legal and regulatory arrangements that develop around the electricity sector seem particularly resistant to adaptive change. Consequently, policymakers seeking to pursue normative goals such as democratisation or decarbonisation through energy decentralisation need to look beyond technology towards the rules, norms and laws that constitute the energy governance system.

Policy HighlightsTo achieve the recommendation stated in the chapter title, we propose the following: Policymakers should mandate that energy decision-making processes be more inclusive, supporting both geothermal representation in large-scale energy deliberation and the inclusive engagement of local communities in individual geothermal projects. Policymakers should foster inclusive societal engagement that goes beyond the minimal requirements of consulting and informing at planning stage, to incorporate processes of deliberation and co-creation with local communities. Geothermal industry actors should practise inclusive societal engagement which is early, continuous, and sensitive to the technical specificities (e.g. local resource, subsurface uncertainties) and social challenges (e.g. low public awareness) of geothermal technologies. Language alignment activities and mutual expert elicitation can support the exchange of knowledge across social-technical disciplines, bridging disciplinary siloes to tackle the problem above.

In the face of climate change and associated energy system change, there is a growing literature and more general recognition of the ‘four Ds’ (decarbonization, decentralization, digitalization, and democratization). Yet there has been very little quantitative work that analyzes public perceptions of these changes. Utilizing data from a Canada-wide, nationally representative survey (n = 941), this study conducted provincial and regional assessments to spatially explore the public's views of moves toward innovative local energy system change through the development of what we call Local Smart Grids (LSGs). Through descriptive statistics and t-tests, we sought to answer three main questions: i) To what extent does the public support energy democracy via new local energy systems? ii) What does the public desire in terms of participation? and iii) What motivates the public to participate? We find overall support for energy democracy across Canada, yet varied support among provinces and regions. Canadians seem to want to participate in moves toward energy democracy, although we found a strong preference for more passive participatory actions. Additionally, support and a desire to participate is predominantly motivated by environmental factors, including combating climate change, with community and social motivations playing a secondary role, followed by financial motivations. These findings, some of the first of their kind in the realm of energy democracy in Canada, provide useful insights relevant to scholars, policymakers, and practitioners working on LSG implementation as well as others with an interest in socio-technical innovation and energy system change.

AbstractLocal Smart Grids are emerging during the climate crisis, as governments and industry recognize the need to better integrate intermittent renewable energy, storage, transportation, heating, and smart technologies. Such projects can represent profound changes to the status quo of energy and citizen lifestyles. They are also being associated with the “four Ds,” whereby Local Smart Grids are decarbonizing, decentralizing, digitalizing, and potentially democratizing energy systems. Yet, due to their recent arrival, there is very little social scientific research that has aimed to better understand public views, expectations, and support for this change. We attempt to fill this important gap in the literature through the analysis of two nationally representative surveys in the UK (n = 3034) and Canada (n = 941). This analysis highlights within- and between-country trends, including how the variation in responses regarding the “four Ds,” demographic factors, and other variables may explain the differences we see in terms of support for energy system change in the UK and Canada. Our analysis also shows that there are common elements, including the importance of the decentralization, and especially the democratization of energy in shaping support. We hope that this study will help governments, industry, community groups, and local residents themselves in both countries come together to advance the kind of Local Smart Grids that address climate change and represent a supported, just energy transition.

Energy transitions require engagement with users, local communities and wider publics in order to be fair, acceptable and, ultimately, successful. Here we focus on the development of decentralised energy systems instigated by central government. Smart Local Energy Systems (SLES), involving low carbon generation, demand sources and smart technologies in a geographically-bounded location, are important but unexplored contexts for public engagement. Drawing on 23 interviews with partner organisations in 12 UK SLES projects, we investigate the targets, methods and rationales of engagement. Partners engage a range of user and community groups around multiple energy system components using a variety of methods, directly and via intermediary organisations. Project size is not a major influence on breadth and intensity of engagement. Project partners rationalise practices with reference to characterisations of users and engagement, and practices are conditioned by a range of factors (e.g. technological boundaries, place, partners involved, and the wider organisational context within which SLES projects take place). We highlight a need for future SLES policy to emphasise engagement as a key facet, institute systematic social learning between SLES projects, and consider how to engage publics beyond the boundaries of individual projects.

Abstract Issues of societal engagement in the energy system pervade both the study and the doing of energy policy. In both realms, narratives as persuasive ‘vehicles of meaning’ help us both to make sense of society’s role in past and current energy systems, and shape these roles in future energy systems. However, our eagerness to simplify complex histories and unwritten futures means that the narratives we create are often reliant on assumptions. This has implications for the degree to which narratives can find pragmatism, and thus be valuable, to a wide range of stakeholders. Drawing both on historic accounts of societal engagement in energy systems alongside emerging discourses around future energy systems, this paper offers several points of caution for the use of narratives of engagement. In terms of historic narratives, these relate to hindsight bias, predictability, and normative positioning, the combination of which depict histories of engagement as retrospectively obvious, and falsely suggest a controllability of past events. In terms of forward-looking narratives, while optimism and ambiguity play key roles in garnering interest in visions among stakeholders, they also mean that narratives vary in their relevance, and thus value to, different stakeholders. Fundamentally, narratives must find legitimacy in the actors they purport to recruit, and must thus simultaneously attend to regulative, normative and cognitive aspects of energy system engagement.