Search

Sustainable Development Goal 7 and the Paris Agreement reiterate the importance of a worldwide uptake of renewable energy. However, the present growth rate of renewables in the global energy mix is too slow to meet international targets. There exists at present a wide range of institutions with different characteristics that work internationally to promote a steeper increase. Whereas previous studies have examined the institutional landscape for renewable energy and the considerable interactions occurring across institutions, it remains unclear what the implications of these institutional interactions are for effectiveness. This paper assesses how institutional interactions can strengthen effectiveness, by focusing on three multi-stakeholder partnerships for renewable energy. Based on an expert survey and semi-structured interviews, the study provides both theoretical and empirical contributions to understanding institutional interactions in relation to effectiveness. Moreover, it provides insights on how to strengthen the effectiveness of multi-stakeholder partnerships for renewable energy. Results show that different levels and types of institutional interactions may influence effectiveness differently, with the sharing of procedural information and coordination mechanisms being considered most fruitful to increase effectiveness. Importantly, however, such interactions should not harm the autonomy, nor the efficiency of multi-stakeholder partnerships.

Given the interconnectedness of climate change and sustainable development, policymakers and scholars have started to investigate how climate actions can contribute to achieving the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), and vice versa. To date, research has mainly focused on the national and international levels, while little is known about the interlinkages between climate actions and the SDGs at the transnational level. Not only nation states, but also non-state actors undertake ambitious actions designed to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and to promote sustainable development. Using content analysis and network analysis techniques, we examine the interlinkages between the climate actions of 72 transnational initiatives and the 169 targets of the 17 SDGs. We find that actions of 71 initiatives contribute to achieving 16 SDGs, thus generating valuable co-benefits. Besides SDG 13 on climate action and SDG 17 on partnerships for the goals, transnational climate actions frequently address SDGs 9 on industry, innovation and infrastructure, SDG 7 on affordable and clean energy, and SDG 12 on responsible consumption and production. While SDG 3 on good health and well-being and SDG 4 on quality education are barely addressed, SDG 5 on gender equality is not at all covered by transnational climate actions. Additionally, the network reveals that SDG 9 is highly synergistic with many other frequently addressed SDGs and functions as an important connector between them. Finally, our results indicate that transnational initiatives fill a governance gap left by states with regards to SDG 12. Climate initiatives of non-state actors can thus complement state-led actions to implement the Paris Agreement and the SDGs jointly.

Combating climate change and transitioning to fossil-free energy are two central and interdependent challenges facing humanity today. Governing the nexus of these challenges is complex, and includes multiple intergovernmental and transnational institutions. This book analyses the governance interactions between such institutions, and explores their consequences for legitimacy and effectiveness. Using a novel analytical framework, the contributors examine three policy fields: renewable energy, fossil fuel subsidy reform, and carbon pricing. These fields are compared in terms of their institutional memberships, governance functions and overarching norms. Bringing together prominent researchers from political science and international relations, the book offers an essential resource for future research and provides policy recommendations for effective and legitimate governance of the climate-energy nexus. Rooted in the most recent research, it is an invaluable reference for researchers, policymakers and other stakeholders in climate change and energy politics. This title is also available as Open Access on Cambridge Core.

A global transition towards renewable energy is key for a sustainable future, and effective global governance is required to make this possible. However, global renewable energy governance is often regarded as fragmented and ineffective. Existing research has provided useful insights into the multiplicity of governance goals and diversity in institutions, but an understanding of underlying frames is yet lacking. Frame analysis explores how actors interpret and define a problem in different ways, based on which different solutions can be put forward of which some are more adequate than others. It thus provides a compelling new angle to the scientific debate on fragmentation. This paper therefore poses the question how the global energy challenge and the role of renewables are framed throughout the overall institutional complex for renewable energy, among different institutional types, and across individual institutions. To facilitate the search for an answer, it applies an innovative computational method that allows for a large-scale and multi-level frame analysis. The results demonstrate that renewable energy institutions currently prioritize climate change, with a stronger growing focus on universal access to energy services, while undermining concerns of energy scarcity. Nevertheless, frames vary strongly across different levels of governance, and among various types of institutions. The paper therewith forms an important contribution to our understanding of global renewable energy governance and its fragmented nature.

Theoretical advances suggest that international governance in general and the Paris Agreement in particular provide a strong signal guiding sociotechnical systems toward decarbonization. We assess this signal and its effects empirically, by examining the struggle of competing narratives as present in the communications of leading US fossil fuel industry associations and companies. The results are then discussed in the context of the national and international climate and energy policy debates in a study period from late 2014 until the announcement of withdrawal from the Paris Agreement in June 2017. We find that the Paris Agreement has institutionalized a narrative paradigm that is surprisingly resilient. While the election of Donald Trump and his climate and energy policy led to a narrative shift in the coal industry, the oil and gas industry remained conspicuously silent in its immediate response and maintained its narrative strategies despite its alignment with the Paris Agreement.

Over the past twenty years, global efforts to combat climate change have become an increasingly complex matter. The central forum for multilateral, state-led climate governance, the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), has been complemented by numerous cross-border initiatives comprising both state and non-state actors, including non-governmental organizations (NGOs), firms, academia, cities, sub-national regions and international organizations. 2The broader institutional structure has developed from a single regime to a regime complex, 3 showing increasing signs of fragmentation and functional overlaps that threaten coherence and overall effectiveness. 4 In Ostrom’s words, global climate governance is best described as a polycentric system with ‘multiple governing authorities at different scales rather than a monocentric unit’. 5 However, while fragmentation is largely accepted in theory as a ubiquitous phenomenon in global climate governance, few empirical studies exist that map institutional complexity and consequently attempt to measure degrees of fragmentation or coherence. 6sures of institutional coherence or fragmentation in global climate governance. First, we present a mapping of all governance institutions that constitute the climate change regime complex, departing from Abbott and Snidal, Abbott and Keohane and Victor. 7 We include both international and non-state public institutions (for example, the UNFCCC and transnational municipal networks) as well as the broad range of bottom-up initiatives constituted by various mixes of actors, including firms, civil society, governments and international organizations. Second, we add the organizational, agent-based dimension of climate governance by showing how the institutional meta-structure is constituted by actors and their connections. To this end we have collected data on membership in all climate governance institutions that make up the regime complex, in total more than 10,000 unique organizations. As a third analytical step, we report on advances in measuring discursive structures in the climate change regime complex. Here we analyse how the 80 climate governance institutions relate to 4 pre-identified metadiscourses in environmental policy via their mission statements. In the discussion section we revisit the three complementary assessments of the current climate change regime complex to establish whether the overall institutional structure is fragmented, that is, polycentric, or rather centralized, that is, integrated. In the conclusions we reflect on how to advance this research agenda further.

Decentralized local energy is seen as key in achieving energy transition goals (Young & Brans, 2017). However, the success of socio-technical energy system transitions at the local level is influenced by general trends and contextual issues alike (cf. Koirala et al. 2016). While the general trends are inevitable or at least difficult to modulate in the short term, contextual issues can be addressed. Learning about such malleable contextual conditions can best be done by looking at specific empirical contexts.This SERENE deliverable 3.2 considers the socio-technical dynamics of energy transitions, including their potential influence on the ‘hardware’ of energy technologies, which may play a role for the implementation of local citizen-centred energy systems. Specifically, it addresses the questions:- Which obstacles and conditions are present in three local energy transition contexts regarding the local energy transition?- Which conditions for stakeholder engagement are present or need to be developed in those same local energy transition contexts?The SERENE project accompanies local energy system transitions in Skanderborg (Denmark), Olst (the Netherlands), and Przywidz (Poland). These three sites of local energy systems transitions are embedded in socio-technical systems, comprising both technical components (e.g., energy generation equipment) and social components (e.g., actors and institutions). Moreover, the transition of these local energy systems is seen as socio-technical systems change, referring to the technical and social innovations that are introduced to disrupt and change the incumbent systems in the demonstrators. As energy transitions at the local level are confronted with various societal issues, we map these based on key actor interviews with local representatives of the transition sites (in the remainder, these are called ‘demonstrator sites’) and cross-referencing these with literature reviews from various social-scientific perspectives (e.g. socioeconomics, laws and regulatory frameworks, governance, urban planning, social acceptance, and societal debates). All thus generated obstacles and conditions are categorised using an existing framework which was adapted for SERENE’s purposes. The issue domains in this framework include (1) technological issues such as energy efficiency, (2) socioeconomic issues such as a lack of the ‘right’ economic incentives, (3) environmental issues such as pollution, and (4) institutional issues such as trust, motivation, and continuity. Apart from enumerating and describing the current obstacles and conditions present in each of the transition sites (section 3), we also include a brief reflection on obstacles and conditions that were found to be relevant in the literature, but not (yet) present locally in order to predict the obstacles and conditions that the demonstration sites may encounter as the project progresses.The second objective of this deliverable is a discussion of the conditions for citizen engagement. While many of the obstacles also affect citizen engagement, we therefore also discuss the role of innovation agents, such as SERENE project partners, in the governance of innovation processes (section 5). If the co-evolution of society and (energy) technology is to be taken seriously, a different mindset is required of scientists that involves an inclusive and open-minded perspective. Besides briefly describing the scientific perspective on this, we also provide a very generic guideline to achieve greater levels of responsible involvement from citizens in innovation processes (section 5).Assessing the obstacles and conditions in SERENE, shows that the contexts of the three transition sites are quite different from each other. Only a few obstacles and conditions are shared, and will, then, also play out differently. Depending on which stage of the innovation process that each transition site is in, the obstacles and conditions also differ per issue domain. For example, as in Przywidz, the energy monitoring technologies are currently being installed, so there are no social issues related to these technologies, yet. Currently, more issues are reported relating to institutions in that transition site. Regardless of the between-case differences, the findings present an opportunity for learning and the exchange of experiences between the sites. We conclude that while a deeper understanding of the local circumstances will further improve the support of the innovation process on the local level, the findings presented here already provide a good baseline from which to further engage in the co-evolutionary accompaniment of each innovation ‘journey’.

The SERENE project strives for integrated local energy systems that are decentralized, digitalized and much more citizen-centered than current energy systems. These energy systems do not neatly fit into today’s policies, regulations and rules, which were designed for more centralized energy systems characterized by large-scale energy providers. This report (SERENE project deliverable 3.1) thereforeconsiders the non-technological dynamics of energy transitions which might play a role for the implementation of the SERENE project. Specifically, it addresses the question: Which socio-economic, governance and regulatory factors influence the local energy system transition?In this report, we consider the energy system as a socio-technical system comprising both technologicaland social components, and energy system transitions as socio-technical transitions in which technological and social components co-evolve. Conceptually, this analysis is rooted in the socio-technical system change and transition management literature.The report is the result of a three-step process (Figure 0.1). First, we identify general social factors that influence socio-technical transitions in local energy systems based on extensive literature reviews from six different social science perspectives: 1) socio-economics, 2) regulations, 3) governance, 4) urban planning, 5) social acceptance, and 6) societal debates. Second, we relate these general factors to the characteristics of the different SERENE demonstrator sites in Denmark, the Netherlands and Poland, drawing from SERENE project documents, policy reports and key actor input during project meetings, focus groups and interviews. Third, we specify areas in need of attention during the implementation of SERENE activities in the demonstrator sites that can inform the work of local implementation partners, and opportunities for SERENE to provide new knowledge on social dynamics in local energy system transitions. We provide a brief summary of the key results of this process below.Socio-economic factors, including the personal circumstances and motives of individual citizens and the interactions between technology and the energy market, influence energy consumption patterns and can create incentives for investments in the local energy system. With regards to the SERENE demonstrators, a broad community survey will be needed to capture the individual socio-economic circumstances and motivations of local residents. The SERENE project implementation will be influenced by the different economic and non-economic incentives in the local contexts and by potential paradigm shifts sparked by technological or social interventions. Project activities also need to be sensitive to local energy poverty conditions and avoid increasing local vulnerabilities.Regulatory factors are predominantly related to the mismatch between the existing regulations, which were originally designed for fossil fuel-based energy systems, and the regulations needed to facilitate local energy systems based on renewable energy sources, including corresponding market regulations. The incomplete transposition of the new EU energy directives is creating significant regulatory uncertainty in the demonstrators, as the specific conditions for energy communities and their implications for the SERENE project implementation are yet to be determined. At the same time, it is already clear that interventions will need to address a wide range of regulatory issues related to their specific technological or social innovations, and related to broader regulations like the right of EU citizens to choose their energy supplier. The Dutch and Polish demonstrators provide some opportunities for experimentation, as they both enjoy some degree of exemptions from energy laws, giving them a ‘regulatory sandbox’ status. Governance factors cover a range of factors related to the polycentric nature of energy governance, with transition processes including various institutions and actors across different levels, each of which may influence the local energy system transition. It is therefore crucial to account for the role of different actors and institutions in the energy transition processes in each demonstrator, and to reflect on whether their role matches their position within the SERENE project. Implementation partners additionally need to ensure opportunities for the active participation of local residents, and account for emerging self-organization structures and the heterogeneous energy visions and preferences of the local community and actors.Urban planning factors revolve around the decentralized local energy system as a new contender for urban land use, and the need to integrate energy and urban planning in multi-sectoral and multi-objective considerations. The current energy infrastructure capacity and mobility patterns in the demonstrators influence potential trajectories for the expansion of local renewable energy generation and electric mobility, which are part of the planned SERENE interventions in all demo sites. Project implementation should capitalize on urban commoning potential where it is available (Dutch demonstrators), and help create potential where it is lacking (Danish and Polish demonstrators), to ensure bottom-up, adaptive urban and energy planning. Social acceptance factors, related to people’s perceptions, attitudes, and thoughts towards a social transformation of energy, determine likely positive or negative community reactions to the local energy system transformation. Prior experiences with decentralized, renewable energy generation and the overall environmental awareness in the demonstrators have created various levels of expected social acceptance and attitudes towards the SERENE project. More detailed insights based on individual-level acceptance will need to be gathered with a community survey. Throughout the project, implementation partners need to be mindful of and, where possible, capitalize on changes in social acceptance through community movements or in reaction to specific interventions.Societal debate factors reflect on the changing role of citizens in the local energy system transition and cover issues related to notions of discourse, socio-technical imaginary and citizen empowerment. The demonstrators start out in different places with regards to existing social organization on energy and other issues, as well as with regards to the on-going energy and sustainability discourses within the local communities. It will be important to assess how these discourses change throughout the SERENE project, both organically and due to social interventions that aim to open spaces for new local energy debates.The most important implications of each set of social factors for the SERENE project and for the implementation of different innovations related to the local energy system transition in the demonstrators are summarized in Table 0.1. The different factors identified in this deliverable can present obstacles to the implementation of specific technical or social innovations or to the overall local energy transition, as well as lead to unintended side effects of innovations, e.g., the marginalization of vulnerable groups. A follow-up to this report, SERENE project deliverable 3.2, builds on our analysis to assess the obstacles related to these factors in more detail.