Just energy transitions? Social inequities, vulnerabilities and unintended consequences

The transitions literature has framed energy transitions as a process involving material and social consequences. Such radical changes can also be viewed as constituting discursive dimensions, involving debate, idea exchange and value positioning. The implementation of a biomass energy system in res...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Stephen Axon, John Morrissey
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Ubiquity Press 2020-07-01
Series:Buildings & Cities
Subjects:
Online Access:https://journal-buildingscities.org/articles/14
id doaj-378b6f55d44142338aaee6764ae91d88
record_format Article
spelling doaj-378b6f55d44142338aaee6764ae91d882020-11-25T03:56:55ZengUbiquity PressBuildings & Cities 2632-66552020-07-011110.5334/bc.1425Just energy transitions? Social inequities, vulnerabilities and unintended consequencesStephen Axon0John Morrissey1Department of the Environment, Geography, and Marine Sciences, Southern Connecticut State University, New Haven, CTDepartment of Geography, Mary Immaculate College, University of Limerick, LimerickThe transitions literature has framed energy transitions as a process involving material and social consequences. Such radical changes can also be viewed as constituting discursive dimensions, involving debate, idea exchange and value positioning. The implementation of a biomass energy system in residential buildings in a socioeconomically deprived community near Liverpool, UK, is investigated for its acceptance by, and impacts on, the community. A mixed-methods approach involving questionnaire, focus group and interview data reveal how practical, on-the-ground energy transitions are understood at the community level. Given the changes to how residents pay for their energy in the study community, from prepayment meters to pay-as-you-use methods, considerations of ‘efficiency’ are debated and framed on the cost of energy rather than from an environmental performance perspective. Although the intention of low-carbon energy transitions in low-income communities is to deliver economic and environmental benefits, many unintended social consequences arose from top-down decision-making choices and implementation mechanisms. These processes exacerbate economic inequalities and inequities. Justice implications arising from this study have clear repercussions for future implementation of similar, and additional, sustainability interventions that attempt to address climate change in the built environment.   'Practice relevance' The successful implementation of a decentralised energy system requires more than a technological approach. This case study emphasises the need for extensive community engagement when undertaking local energy transitions. In particular, attention needs to be given to how vulnerable people are affected by pricing and given clear information on how to use the new system. Policy recommendations include: the choice of energy technologies should not disrupt vulnerable residents’ daily routines and ability to pay; the provision of substantial pre-, during and post-installation community engagement is needed to improve familiarity with new energy systems; and adequate opportunities for listening and responding to residents’ concerns prior, during, and after the installation of low-carbon energy systems.https://journal-buildingscities.org/articles/14climate justiceenergy inequitiesenergy justiceenergy transitionfuel povertypublic engagementrenewable energy
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Stephen Axon
John Morrissey
spellingShingle Stephen Axon
John Morrissey
Just energy transitions? Social inequities, vulnerabilities and unintended consequences
Buildings & Cities
climate justice
energy inequities
energy justice
energy transition
fuel poverty
public engagement
renewable energy
author_facet Stephen Axon
John Morrissey
author_sort Stephen Axon
title Just energy transitions? Social inequities, vulnerabilities and unintended consequences
title_short Just energy transitions? Social inequities, vulnerabilities and unintended consequences
title_full Just energy transitions? Social inequities, vulnerabilities and unintended consequences
title_fullStr Just energy transitions? Social inequities, vulnerabilities and unintended consequences
title_full_unstemmed Just energy transitions? Social inequities, vulnerabilities and unintended consequences
title_sort just energy transitions? social inequities, vulnerabilities and unintended consequences
publisher Ubiquity Press
series Buildings & Cities
issn 2632-6655
publishDate 2020-07-01
description The transitions literature has framed energy transitions as a process involving material and social consequences. Such radical changes can also be viewed as constituting discursive dimensions, involving debate, idea exchange and value positioning. The implementation of a biomass energy system in residential buildings in a socioeconomically deprived community near Liverpool, UK, is investigated for its acceptance by, and impacts on, the community. A mixed-methods approach involving questionnaire, focus group and interview data reveal how practical, on-the-ground energy transitions are understood at the community level. Given the changes to how residents pay for their energy in the study community, from prepayment meters to pay-as-you-use methods, considerations of ‘efficiency’ are debated and framed on the cost of energy rather than from an environmental performance perspective. Although the intention of low-carbon energy transitions in low-income communities is to deliver economic and environmental benefits, many unintended social consequences arose from top-down decision-making choices and implementation mechanisms. These processes exacerbate economic inequalities and inequities. Justice implications arising from this study have clear repercussions for future implementation of similar, and additional, sustainability interventions that attempt to address climate change in the built environment.   'Practice relevance' The successful implementation of a decentralised energy system requires more than a technological approach. This case study emphasises the need for extensive community engagement when undertaking local energy transitions. In particular, attention needs to be given to how vulnerable people are affected by pricing and given clear information on how to use the new system. Policy recommendations include: the choice of energy technologies should not disrupt vulnerable residents’ daily routines and ability to pay; the provision of substantial pre-, during and post-installation community engagement is needed to improve familiarity with new energy systems; and adequate opportunities for listening and responding to residents’ concerns prior, during, and after the installation of low-carbon energy systems.
topic climate justice
energy inequities
energy justice
energy transition
fuel poverty
public engagement
renewable energy
url https://journal-buildingscities.org/articles/14
work_keys_str_mv AT stephenaxon justenergytransitionssocialinequitiesvulnerabilitiesandunintendedconsequences
AT johnmorrissey justenergytransitionssocialinequitiesvulnerabilitiesandunintendedconsequences
_version_ 1724463058054545408