IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jchals/v7y2016i2p16-d80549.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Soft Energy Paths Revisited: Politics and Practice in Energy Technology Transitions

Author

Listed:
  • Chelsea Schelly

    (Department of Social Sciences, Michigan Technological University, Houghton, MI 49931, USA)

  • Aparajita Banerjee

    (Department of Social Sciences, Michigan Technological University, Houghton, MI 49931, USA)

Abstract

This paper argues that current efforts to study and advocate for a change in energy technologies to reduce their climate and other environmental impacts often ignore the political, social, and bodily implications of energy technology choices. Framing renewable energy technologies exclusively in terms of their environmental benefits dismisses important questions about how energy infrastructures can be designed to correspond to democratic forms of socio-politics, forms of social organization that involve independence in terms of meeting energy needs, resilience in terms of adapting to change, participatory decision making and control, equitable distribution of knowledge and efficacy, and just distribution of ownership. Recognizing technological choices as political choices brings explicit attention to the kinds of socio-political restructuring that could be precipitated through a renewable energy technology transition. This paper argues that research on energy transitions should consider the political implications of technological choices, not just the environmental consequences. Further, emerging scholarship on energy practices suggests that social habits of energy usage are themselves political, in that they correspond to and reinforce particular arrangements of power. Acknowledging the embedded politics of technology, as the decades’ old concept of soft path technologies encourages, and integrating insights on the politics of technology with insights on technological practices, can improve future research on energy policy and public perceptions of energy systems. This paper extends insights regarding the socio-political implications of energy paths to consider how understandings of energy technologies as constellations of embedded bodily practices can help further develop our understanding of the consequences of energy technologies, consequences that move beyond environmental implications to the very habits and behaviors of patterned energy usage, which are themselves arguably political. This paper calls for future research that involves explicit examination of the relationship between technologies, socio-political distributions of power and access to energy resources, the social organization of energy practices, and options for energy transitions not just in terms of energy source, but also in terms of scale, design, and modes of ownership and control.

Suggested Citation

  • Chelsea Schelly & Aparajita Banerjee, 2016. "Soft Energy Paths Revisited: Politics and Practice in Energy Technology Transitions," Challenges, MDPI, vol. 7(2), pages 1-10, October.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jchals:v:7:y:2016:i:2:p:16-:d:80549
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2078-1547/7/2/16/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2078-1547/7/2/16/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Evans, Geoff & Phelan, Liam, 2016. "Transition to a post-carbon society: Linking environmental justice and just transition discourses," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 99(C), pages 329-339.
    2. Heidari, Negin & Pearce, Joshua M., 2016. "A review of greenhouse gas emission liabilities as the value of renewable energy for mitigating lawsuits for climate change related damages," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 899-908.
    3. Walker, Gordon & Devine-Wright, Patrick, 2008. "Community renewable energy: What should it mean," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(2), pages 497-500, February.
    4. Seyfang, Gill & Park, Jung Jin & Smith, Adrian, 2013. "A thousand flowers blooming? An examination of community energy in the UK," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 977-989.
    5. Wiser, Ryan H., 1998. "Green power marketing: increasing customer demand for renewable energy," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 7(2), pages 107-119, June.
    6. Peters, Michael & Fudge, Shane & Sinclair, Philip, 2010. "Mobilising community action towards a low-carbon future: Opportunities and challenges for local government in the UK," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(12), pages 7596-7603, December.
    7. Walker, Gordon, 2008. "What are the barriers and incentives for community-owned means of energy production and use?," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(12), pages 4401-4405, December.
    8. Panwar, N.L. & Kaushik, S.C. & Kothari, Surendra, 2011. "Role of renewable energy sources in environmental protection: A review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 15(3), pages 1513-1524, April.
    9. Noah J. Goldstein & Robert B. Cialdini & Vladas Griskevicius, 2008. "A Room with a Viewpoint: Using Social Norms to Motivate Environmental Conservation in Hotels," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 35(3), pages 472-482, March.
    10. Bomberg, Elizabeth & McEwen, Nicola, 2012. "Mobilizing community energy," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 435-444.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Abas, N. & Kalair, A. & Khan, N. & Kalair, A.R., 2017. "Review of GHG emissions in Pakistan compared to SAARC countries," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 80(C), pages 990-1016.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Dalia Streimikiene & Tomas Baležentis & Artiom Volkov & Mangirdas Morkūnas & Agnė Žičkienė & Justas Streimikis, 2021. "Barriers and Drivers of Renewable Energy Penetration in Rural Areas," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(20), pages 1-28, October.
    2. Klein, Sharon J.W. & Coffey, Stephanie, 2016. "Building a sustainable energy future, one community at a time," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 867-880.
    3. Nuñez-Jimenez, Alejandro & Mehta, Prakhar & Griego, Danielle, 2023. "Let it grow: How community solar policy can increase PV adoption in cities," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 175(C).
    4. Chiara Candelise & Gianluca Ruggieri, 2017. "Community Energy in Italy: Heterogeneous institutional characteristics and citizens engagement," IEFE Working Papers 93, IEFE, Center for Research on Energy and Environmental Economics and Policy, Universita' Bocconi, Milano, Italy.
    5. Jenny Palm, 2021. "The Transposition of Energy Communities into Swedish Regulations: Overview and Critique of Emerging Regulations," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(16), pages 1-15, August.
    6. Berka, Anna L. & Creamer, Emily, 2018. "Taking stock of the local impacts of community owned renewable energy: A review and research agenda," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 82(P3), pages 3400-3419.
    7. Brummer, Vasco, 2018. "Community energy – benefits and barriers: A comparative literature review of Community Energy in the UK, Germany and the USA, the benefits it provides for society and the barriers it faces," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 94(C), pages 187-196.
    8. Holstenkamp, Lars & Kahla, Franziska, 2016. "What are community energy companies trying to accomplish? An empirical investigation of investment motives in the German case," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 97(C), pages 112-122.
    9. van der Schoor, Tineke & Scholtens, Bert, 2015. "Power to the people: Local community initiatives and the transition to sustainable energy," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 43(C), pages 666-675.
    10. Fuentes González, Fabián & van der Weijde, Adriaan Hendrik & Sauma, Enzo, 2020. "The promotion of community energy projects in Chile and Scotland: An economic approach using biform games," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 86(C).
    11. Thomas Hoppe & Antonia Graf & Beau Warbroek & Imke Lammers & Isabella Lepping, 2015. "Local Governments Supporting Local Energy Initiatives: Lessons from the Best Practices of Saerbeck (Germany) and Lochem (The Netherlands)," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(2), pages 1-32, February.
    12. Binod Prasad Koirala & Ellen van Oost & Henny van der Windt, 2020. "Innovation Dynamics of Socio-Technical Alignment in Community Energy Storage: The Cases of DrTen and Ecovat," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(11), pages 1-22, June.
    13. Bauwens, Thomas, 2019. "Analyzing the determinants of the size of investments by community renewable energy members: Findings and policy implications from Flanders," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 129(C), pages 841-852.
    14. Salm, Sarah & Hille, Stefanie Lena & Wüstenhagen, Rolf, 2016. "What are retail investors' risk-return preferences towards renewable energy projects? A choice experiment in Germany," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 97(C), pages 310-320.
    15. Maarten Wolsink, 2020. "Framing in Renewable Energy Policies: A Glossary," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(11), pages 1-31, June.
    16. Lorenzo De Vidovich & Luca Tricarico & Matteo Zulianello, 2023. "How Can We Frame Energy Communities’ Organisational Models? Insights from the Research ‘Community Energy Map’ in the Italian Context," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(3), pages 1-25, January.
    17. Mehmet Efe Biresselioglu & Siyami Alp Limoncuoglu & Muhittin Hakan Demir & Johannes Reichl & Katrin Burgstaller & Alessandro Sciullo & Edoardo Ferrero, 2021. "Legal Provisions and Market Conditions for Energy Communities in Austria, Germany, Greece, Italy, Spain, and Turkey: A Comparative Assessment," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(20), pages 1-25, October.
    18. Yalçın-Riollet, Melike & Garabuau-Moussaoui, Isabelle & Szuba, Mathilde, 2014. "Energy autonomy in Le Mené: A French case of grassroots innovation," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 347-355.
    19. Kazuki Horiuchi, 2018. "Diverse interpretations enabling the continuity of community renewable energy projects: A case study of a woody biomass project in rural area of Japan," Local Economy, London South Bank University, vol. 33(8), pages 822-841, December.
    20. Jay Sterling Gregg & Sophie Nyborg & Meiken Hansen & Valeria Jana Schwanitz & August Wierling & Jan Pedro Zeiss & Sarah Delvaux & Victor Saenz & Lucia Polo-Alvarez & Chiara Candelise & Winston Gilcrea, 2020. "Collective Action and Social Innovation in the Energy Sector: A Mobilization Model Perspective," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(3), pages 1-24, February.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jchals:v:7:y:2016:i:2:p:16-:d:80549. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.