Contested scales of democratic decision-making and procedural justice in energy transitions

Walker, Colin; Ryder, Stacia; Roux, J.B.; Chateau, Zoé; Devine‐Wright, Patrick

doi:10.1016/b978-0-12-822796-1.00034-6

Energy Democracies for Sustainable Futures 2023

DOI: 10.1016/b978-0-12-822796-1.00034-6

|View full text |Cite

Contested scales of democratic decision-making and procedural justice in energy transitions

Colin Walker

Stacia Ryder

J.B. Roux

et al.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...

Citation Types

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Year Published

2023

2024

Publication Types

Select...

Article3

Relationship

Self Cite0

Independent3

Authors

Journals

Cited by 3 publications

References 32 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

Drilling Setbacks vs Government Takings: The Case of Colorado’s 2018 Colorado Ballot Initiatives

Fisk,

Aistrup,

Mahato

et al. 2023

Society & Natural Resources

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Drilling Setbacks vs Government Takings: The Case of Colorado’s 2018 Colorado Ballot Initiatives

Fisk,

Aistrup,

Mahato

et al. 2023

Society & Natural Resources

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The “four Ds” and support for Local Smart Grids: analysis from national surveys in the UK and Canada

Walker,

Rowlands,

Devine-Wright

et al. 2024

Oxford Open Energy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Local Smart Grids (LSGs) are emerging during the climate crisis, as governments and industry recognize the need to better integrate intermittent renewable energy, storage, transportation, heating, and smart technologies. Such projects can represent profound changes to the status quo of energy and citizen lifestyles. They are also being associated with the ‘4 Ds’, whereby LSGs are decarbonizing, decentralizing, digitalizing, and potentially democratizing energy systems. Yet due to their recent arrival, there is very little social scientific research that has aimed to better understand the views, expectations, and support for this change. We attempt to fill this important gap in the literature through the analysis of two nationally representative surveys in the United Kingdom (UK) (n=3034) and Canada (n=941). This analysis highlights within and between-country trends, including how the variation in responses regarding the ‘four Ds’, demographic factors, and other variables may explain the differences we see in terms of support for energy system change in the UK and Canada. Our analysis also shows that there are common elements including the importance of the decentralization, and especially the democratization of energy in shaping support. We hope that this study will help governments, industry, community groups, and local residents themselves in both countries come together to advance the kind of LSGs that address climate change, and represent a supported, just energy transition.

show abstract

‘The system is engineered to do this’: Multilevel Disempowerment and Climate Injustice in Regulating Colorado’s Oil and Gas Development

Ryder,

Malin

2024

Social Problems

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Continuing to emit greenhouse gases (GHGs) moves our planet closer to crossing critical tipping points, making ongoing development of fossil fuels an act of climate injustice. Yet, the United States has doubled down on unconventional oil and gas (UOG), becoming the top global producer of hydrocarbons. Significant segments of the public resist UOG drilling, mobilizing to limit or stop production due to intersecting climate, environmental, and public health concerns. However, regulatory conflicts complicate the power of public resistance and problematize the role of the state in facilitating industry. UOG production has rapidly expanded with little capacity for public participation in decision-making. We contend this is a climate injustice—where procedural injustices across levels of governance make it difficult for the public to prevent fossil fuel extraction. We examine these injustices across state legislative, judicial, and executive governance processes in Colorado where residents have actively resisted UOG production. We demonstrate how the public consistently faces procedural inequities and power disadvantages across multiple sites and levels of decision-making, resulting in multilevel disempowerment. In this high-stakes context, our policy ethnography illustrates how these multilevel procedural injustices can facilitate rapid expansion of UOG production, where state-sanctioned activities also constitute broader acts of climate violence and injustice.

show abstract

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.

Contact Info

hi@scite.ai

10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614

Henderson, NV 89052, USA

Blog Terms and Conditions API Terms Privacy Policy Contact Cookie Preferences Do Not Sell or Share My Personal Information

Made with 💙 for researchers

Part of the Research Solutions Family.

Contested scales of democratic decision-making and procedural justice in energy transitions

Cited by 3 publications

References 32 publications

Drilling Setbacks vs Government Takings: The Case of Colorado’s 2018 Colorado Ballot Initiatives

Drilling Setbacks vs Government Takings: The Case of Colorado’s 2018 Colorado Ballot Initiatives

The “four Ds” and support for Local Smart Grids: analysis from national surveys in the UK and Canada

‘The system is engineered to do this’: Multilevel Disempowerment and Climate Injustice in Regulating Colorado’s Oil and Gas Development

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About