Deconstructing facts and frames in energy research: Maxims for evaluating contentious problems

Sovacool, Benjamin K.; Brown, Marilyn A.

doi:10.1016/j.enpol.2015.06.020

Cited by 34 publications

(19 citation statements)

References 24 publications

(21 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…While the work on factors influencing individual environmental behavior 65,66,67 has often highlighted users as consumers and activists ('user-citizens' in our typology), we have complemented this view by showing that users also participate in transitions as producers, legitimators and intermediaries. Furthermore, we have argued that in addition to making decisions as individuals, users also shape transitions as collectives.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 84%

The roles of users in shaping transitions to new energy systems

2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Current government information policies and market-based instruments aimed at influencing energy choices of consumers often ignore the fact that consumer behavior is not fully reducible to individuals making rational conscious decisions all the time. Rather, the decisions of consumers are largely configured by shared routines embedded in socio-technical systems. To achieve a transition towards a decarbonized and energy-efficient system, an approach is needed that goes beyond individual consumer choice and puts shared routines and system change at its center.Here, adopting a transitions perspective, we argue that consumers should be reconceptualized as users who are important stakeholders in the innovation process and are shaping new routines and enacting system change. We review the role of users in the building up of new decarbonized and energy-efficient systems and provide a typology of user roles.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 84%

The roles of users in shaping transitions to new energy systems

2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…" Sovacool, Brown and Valentine (2016, p.4) state that frames underpin differing conceptions of reality, influencing how knowledge is shaped, conditioned and digested. Frames therefore represent the organisation of collective interests and normative assumptions -a worldview of an issue (Sovacool and Brown, 2015;Valentine et al 2017). This means the notion of a frame cuts across political communication, discourse, potential logic schisms, and content.…”

Section: Energy Frames and Media Framingmentioning

confidence: 99%

The presidential politics of climate discourse: Energy frames, policy, and political tactics from the 2016 Primaries in the United States

Brown

Sovacool

2017

Energy Policy

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study presents the results of an investigation into the frequency in which four candidates of the 2016 US. Presidential primary season communicated their political positions on climate change, and how they subsequently framed these stances in numerous contextual drivers alongside energy policies. A systematic content analysis of political debates, campaign speeches, and press statements reveals how Hillary Clinton, Bernie Sanders, Donald Trump, and Ted Cruz undertook in vote-seeking behaviour to create distinct stances on energy and climate issues. Results indicate not only partisan polarization, but also-that stakeholder dynamics, control of communications and communication frequency are inter-dependent and reinforcing in generating differing climate positions. Institutional dynamics exacerbate these 'logic schisms' rather than providing a means of collective decision making. We test such climate discourse according to a typology of scientific, economic, national security, and moral frames. We also assess how particular frames morph over time, and are impacted by exogenous factors such as global climate change negotiations, national environmental crises (such as the Flint Water Crisis), and contestation over stranded assets and fossil fuel divestment. We find that political climate discourse must communicate to collective, bipartisan interests whilst avoiding politically divisive climate frames. National security is offered as a means of potential reconciliation and the discourse surrounding this must be deliberative in order to promote consensus driven politics and raise public awareness, bringing more stakeholders into the discussion. Keywords 2: Political Communication, Discourse, Content Analysis, and FramesThis section of the paper presents our key conceptual approaches, namely those of political communication, discourse, content analysis, and frames. Thus, the framework utilized in this study is the result of synthesising several literatures. Political communication and political economy literature provide the assumption that all candidates seek power and communicate policy stances to gain votes. Content analysis reveals the extent to which candidates regard the issue of climate change as a source of political capital, denoted by the frequency in which the issue is raised. Discourse analysis and framing literature reveal how the candidates communicate a narrative by specifically constructing climate stances to engage specific stakeholders. How candidates employ certain frames will ultimately uncover whether candidates frame their stances different in context specific situations in order to maximise political capital. Discourse and logic schisms

show abstract

“…Instead, they are more due to a clash of priorities, interests, and normative assumptions which create a number of subjective truths" [38]. Although visions are key drivers of the energy policy debate, they are largely ignored by the mainstream literature [7][8][9].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…As different persons value problems differently, the subset of problems to solve differs between visions, and the visions themselves canalthough they address the same physical reality -be fundamentally different. Hence, there is not one single techno-economic truth, but multiple socially constructed truths with different but valid endstate aims and governance pathways [9,38] (see below). This is a key source of conflict, since "people are unlikely to support a policy that is aimed at solving what they do not see to be the problem" [39].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Shades of green: Centralisation, decentralisation and controversy among European renewable electricity visions

Lilliestam

Hanger

2016

Energy Research & Social Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

a b s t r a c tTo decarbonise its electricity system, Europe must rapidly expand renewables. We analyse the controversy between two organisations, Eurosolar and Desertec, which seemingly pursue the same goal of 100% renewable electricity. We show that they interpret "100% renewables" differently and envision fundamentally different renewable electricity futures, to be reached through different governance pathways driven by different actors. Desertec reacts to mankind's violation of the Earth's carrying capacity and seeks secure decarbonisation through renewables, for which centrally regulated, large-scale imports of controllable concentrating solar power from the desert are necessary. Eurosolar, in contrast, seeks to decentralise the electricity supply and disempower the actors who caused the unsustainable and undemocratic energy system, for which renewables are suited as they are carbon-neutral and decentralised by nature. As the core aim of Desertec, controllable solar power imports through large-scale infrastructure, violates Eurosolar's core aim of decentralisation, a compromise is difficult: this would require one organisation to give up its primary objective. Our results show that the reason for this controversy among renewables proponents lies not in technology or cost, and can thus not be identified or resolved through techno-economic analysis or modelling, but in irreconcilable differences in normative aims and governance choices.

show abstract

Deconstructing facts and frames in energy research: Maxims for evaluating contentious problems

Cited by 34 publications

References 24 publications

The roles of users in shaping transitions to new energy systems

The roles of users in shaping transitions to new energy systems

The presidential politics of climate discourse: Energy frames, policy, and political tactics from the 2016 Primaries in the United States

Shades of green: Centralisation, decentralisation and controversy among European renewable electricity visions

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About