• Energy Research

AbstractThe crises that cities face—such as climate change, pandemics, economic downturn, and racism—are tightly interlinked and cannot be addressed in isolation. This paper addresses compound urban crises as a unique type of problem, in which discrete solutions that tackle each crisis independently are insufficient. Few scholarly debates address compound urban crises and there is, to date, a lack of interdisciplinary insights to inform urban governance responses. Combining ideas from complex adaptive systems and critical urban studies, we develop a set of boundary concepts (unsettlement, unevenness, and unbounding) to understand the complexities of compound urban crises from an interdisciplinary perspective. We employ these concepts to set a research agenda on compound urban crises, highlighting multiple interconnections between urban politics and global dynamics. We conclude by suggesting how these entry points provide a theoretical anchor to develop practical insights to inform and reform urban governance.

Energy feedback is a prominent feature of policy initiatives aimed at reducing domestic energy consumption. However little research has been conducted on the phenomenon of energy monitoring itself, with most studies looking at whether, and how, feedback impacts on energy conservation. This paper aims to address that gap from a practice theory perspective. In particular we: set out the difference between energy feedback and energy monitoring; define the practice of energy monitoring; and investigate the rationale and qualitative experiences of those performing energy monitoring. An online energy feedback tool (‘iMeasure’) was the basis of the case study. A netnographic analysis of online discussion about the tool informed complementary in-depth interviews with ten current/former iMeasure users. We found energy monitoring to be a distinct practice that focuses on measuring and identifying energy use trends and requires specific know-how to perform. However, its connections to other household practices were weak and, for those who did perform monitoring, there was no guarantee that this practice would reorganise other practices to induce household energy saving. In fact, monitoring often followed decisions to make energy-related changes, rather than prompting them. We conclude that policy expectations need to be reframed in terms of how energy monitoring tools are used.