A transition toward decentralized and land-intensive renewable energy production systems is one among many factors re-shaping rural areas, leading to reimaginations and contestations. Especially in the Global North, the rural narrative now includes not just rural ‘production’ but also the ‘consumption’ of rural amenity and experience. Previous research into public attitudes toward renewable energy correlates the former with positive attitudes to renewable energy, and the latter with negative attitudes toward renewable energy. Territorial structures, such as official land-use plans, reflect dominant discourses and narratives that shape ongoing rural transformation. The purpose of this work is to understand the extent to which, if at all, those correlations at the individual level between landscape conceptualizations and sentiment toward renewable energy are manifest in territorial structures. In what ways are energy transitions present in rural land-use plans and planning systems? Is there a relationship between how rural landscapes are conceptualized and how energy transitions are framed and addressed, in land-use planning systems? These questions are answered through a structured content and discourse analysis of 10 land-use plans of rural municipalities in southern Ontario; an agriculturally intensive region that hosts much of Ontario’s large-scale renewable energy systems. Correlations observed between landscape conceptualizations and sentiment toward renewable energy observed are not strongly reflected in land-use plans. Land-use plans in this region are not positioned to manage the place-based opportunities and impacts associated with renewable energy development. The research reveals an opportunity for rural land-use planning systems to more explicitly incorporate energy transitions in their evolving discourses, identities and development trajectories.
Participatory approaches to science and decision making, including stakeholder engagement, are increasingly common for managing complex socio-ecological challenges in working landscapes. However, critical questions about stakeholder engagement in this space remain. These include normative, political, and ethical questions concerning who participates, who benefits and loses, what good can be accomplished, and for what, whom, and by who. First, opportunities for addressing justice, equity, diversity, and inclusion interests through engagement, while implied in key conceptual frameworks, remain underexplored in scholarly work and collaborative practice alike. A second line of inquiry relates to research–practice gaps. While both the practice of doing engagement work and scholarly research on the efficacy of engagement is on the rise, there is little concerted interplay among ‘on-the-ground’ practitioners and scholarly researchers. This means scientific research often misses or ignores insight grounded in practical and experiential knowledge, while practitioners are disconnected from potentially useful scientific research on stakeholder engagement. A third set of questions concerns gaps in empirical understanding of the efficacy of engagement processes and includes inquiry into how different engagement contexts and process features affect a range of behavioral, cognitive, and decision-making outcomes. Because of these gaps, a cohesive and actionable research agenda for stakeholder engagement research and practice in working landscapes remains elusive. In this review article, we present a co-produced research agenda for stakeholder engagement in working landscapes. The co-production process involved professionally facilitated and iterative dialogue among a diverse and international group of over 160 scholars and practitioners through a yearlong virtual workshop series. The resulting research agenda is organized under six cross-cutting themes: (1) Justice, Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion; (2) Ethics; (3) Research and Practice; (4) Context; (5) Process; and (6) Outcomes and Measurement. This research agenda identifies critical research needs and opportunities relevant for researchers, practitioners, and policymakers alike. We argue that addressing these research opportunities is necessary to advance knowledge and practice of stakeholder engagement and to support more just and effective engagement processes in working landscapes.
Climate change and energy poverty are two sustainability challenges that can be addressed through deep-energy retrofits for homes. This systematic review identifies which factors influence the achievement of energy retrofits for households vulnerable to energy poverty. It covers both energy-poor households and the landlords or building owners of energy-poor households. The results identify a range of influential factors across several themes: financial, policy and organizational, trust and communication, technical, attitudes and values, and health. Health and quality of life are particularly influential motivating factors among households vulnerable to energy poverty, as is the presence of trust and communication between stakeholders. Multiple financial considerations are also important, such as the availability of no-cost retrofit options and the prospect of lower energy and maintenance costs. Lastly, government requirements to retrofit and minimum energy standards are motivating, particularly in the social housing sector. These findings and the lack of focus on energy poverty within the energy retrofit literature and policies point to a need for further research on this topic, and for retrofit policies specifically targeted to households vulnerable to energy poverty. Policy relevance Energy retrofit policies targeting households vulnerable to energy poverty could be more effective if they: Improve access to low or no-cost retrofit options alongside tenant protection mechanisms Include requirements for resident consent and engagement Build capacity to collect, centralize and publicize information about building stocks to align retrofit projects with necessary upgrades Disseminate knowledge of retrofit programs through trusted communicators Increase stakeholders’ understanding of retrofit benefits Take a holistic approach by emphasizing the co-benefits of energy retrofits in energy-poor households Implement government requirements to pursue energy retrofits aligned with overarching government climate policies, particularly for publicly owned housing.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.