Multiple transformations: theorizing energy vulnerability as a socio-spatial phenomenon

Abstract

The on-going transition towards low-carbon forms of energy provision (frequently termed 'energy transitions') has triggered far-reaching material, economic and institutional reconfigurations at the global scale. There is evidence to suggest that energy transitions increase the social vulnerability of actors involved in and affected by them, including entities operating at different scales, from individual households to entire states. However, the link between energy vulnerability and energy transitions remains poorly understood. We aim to formulate an explicitly geographical perspective on this relationship. The paper is based on an analysis of documentary evidence and 170 expert interviews undertaken between April 2013 and March 2015. This research took place in the post-communist states of Central and Eastern Europe where systemic change has fundamentally altered the institutional landscape of the energy sector since the early 1990s. Our findings point to the need for understanding energy vulnerability as an evolving socio-spatial phenomenon embedded in multiple layers of institutional change and organizational practice. We identify urban landscapes as the primary site for the geographic expression and articulation of domestic energy deprivation. ARTICLE HISTORY

The Spatially Varying Components of Vulnerability to Energy Poverty

“…These assessments have helped to articulate the importance of place, pinpointing how the relative contribution of a diverse range of vulnerability factors varies between locales. Understanding of the spatialities of energy vulnerability was furthered by Bouzarovski and Thomson (2018), who derived a neighborhood-scale typology of energy vulnerability using household-scale survey data. Vulnerability to energy poverty is subsequently recognized as a highly sociospatial phenomenon (Bouzarovski et al 2017).…”

“…Recently, the sociospatial vulnerability that gives rise to energy poverty has become a research focus (Hall, Hards, and Bulkeley 2013;Bouzarovski et al 2017;Bouzarovski and Thomson 2018), drawing attention to the multifaceted nature of this type of vulnerability and how it is "highly geographically variable and locally contingent" (Bouzarovski 2014, 282). In combination with concepts of justice (G. Walker and Day 2012), capabilities (Day, Walker, and Simcock 2016), and precarity (Petrova 2017), vulnerability framings have opened up relatively narrow debates ongoing in policymaking to reveal different household types and geographies within which energy poverty is likely to manifest (Bouzarovski and Petrova 2015;Middlemiss and Gillard 2015).…”

Tensions in the transition: The politics of electricity distribution in South Africa

“…We use the South African case study to advance understandings of how politics matters for energy transitions (Bouzarovski et al, 2017;Lockwood et al, 2017) and to consider questions of power, politics, equity and socio-economic welfare that remain under represented in research on energy transitions to date. Following evolving concepts of the political economy of electricity (Baker and Burton, 2018), we conceive of the electricity sector as a site of 'struggle' over the governance and ownership of generation, distribution and transmission; and the allocation and access to electricity services (Gentle, 2009;MacDonald, 2016).…”

Energy Poverty Revisited

“…I contend that the multidimensional nature of energy poverty makes it difficult to capture the phenomenon via a single indicator, thus suggesting that existing measures can only depict individual facets and experiences associated with the predicament. Following Bouzarovski et al (2017), I argue in favour of unravelling the wider political and spatial implications of energy poverty in contexts where this condition encompasses a wide range of demographic and spatial strata. This starts from the premise that, despite the recognition that indoor environments represent fluid and open spaces that are connected to broader social and ecological systems (Biehler & Simon, 2010), mainstream work on the dynamics of domestic energy deprivation has largely focused on a relatively narrow range of explanatory factors within the home-particularly micro-economic affordability, as well as the thermal efficiency of the dwelling, heating system or appliances (Boardman, 2010).…”