What do we know about the effectiveness of local energy plans? A systematic review of the research

IF 6.9 2区 经济学 Q1 ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES
Richard Cowell , Jan Webb
{"title":"What do we know about the effectiveness of local energy plans? A systematic review of the research","authors":"Richard Cowell ,&nbsp;Jan Webb","doi":"10.1016/j.erss.2024.103767","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Local energy planning is increasingly promoted as pivotal to decarbonising energy. However, widespread interest has not been matched by examination of whether plans achieve positive outcomes in practice. Nor is it clear whether the research surrounding local energy planning is useful in understanding and enhancing efficacy. To address these gaps, this paper systematically reviews research into local energy planning, using multiple search terms and content analysis of 182 items, applying analytical categories derived from planning theory. Results show a literature dominated by development of analytical tools, mobilising planning theories of ‘technocratic rationality’, but limited evidence of these tools being used in plan-making. By comparison, our review found relatively modest research interest in stakeholder engagement, negligible analysis of plan outcomes, and minimal critical analysis of implementation challenges. These findings can be treated as an indicator of research deficit, but also as <em>reflective of</em> local energy planning ‘realities’, in which plan-making is voluntaristic, implementation is patchy, and most effort is directed towards municipalities' own energy practices. Consequently, local energy planning and research have rarely driven the more challenging decarbonisation actions that might prompt critiques which could generate a broadening of theoretical and methodological perspectives. Future research agendas need to escape the confines of single loop learning.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48384,"journal":{"name":"Energy Research & Social Science","volume":"118 ","pages":"Article 103767"},"PeriodicalIF":6.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Energy Research & Social Science","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S221462962400358X","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Local energy planning is increasingly promoted as pivotal to decarbonising energy. However, widespread interest has not been matched by examination of whether plans achieve positive outcomes in practice. Nor is it clear whether the research surrounding local energy planning is useful in understanding and enhancing efficacy. To address these gaps, this paper systematically reviews research into local energy planning, using multiple search terms and content analysis of 182 items, applying analytical categories derived from planning theory. Results show a literature dominated by development of analytical tools, mobilising planning theories of ‘technocratic rationality’, but limited evidence of these tools being used in plan-making. By comparison, our review found relatively modest research interest in stakeholder engagement, negligible analysis of plan outcomes, and minimal critical analysis of implementation challenges. These findings can be treated as an indicator of research deficit, but also as reflective of local energy planning ‘realities’, in which plan-making is voluntaristic, implementation is patchy, and most effort is directed towards municipalities' own energy practices. Consequently, local energy planning and research have rarely driven the more challenging decarbonisation actions that might prompt critiques which could generate a broadening of theoretical and methodological perspectives. Future research agendas need to escape the confines of single loop learning.
我们对地方能源计划的有效性了解多少?研究系统回顾
地方能源规划越来越被视为能源去碳化的关键。然而,在人们普遍关注的同时,并没有对规划是否在实践中取得积极成果进行研究。围绕地方能源规划的研究是否有助于理解和提高效率也不清楚。为了弥补这些不足,本文采用多种搜索条件,对 182 个项目进行内容分析,并运用从规划理论中得出的分析类别,系统地回顾了有关地方能源规划的研究。结果表明,文献以开发分析工具为主,调动了 "技术官僚理性 "的规划理论,但在规划制定过程中使用这些工具的证据却很有限。相比之下,我们的综述发现,利益相关者参与方面的研究兴趣相对较小,对规划成果的分析微乎其微,对实施挑战的批判性分析也少之又少。这些发现可以被视为研究不足的指标,但也反映了地方能源规划的 "现实",即规划的制定是自愿的,实施是零散的,大部分努力都是针对市政当局自身的能源实践。因此,地方能源规划和研究很少推动更具挑战性的去碳化行动,而这些行动可能会引发批评,从而拓宽理论和方法论视角。未来的研究议程需要摆脱单循环学习的束缚。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Energy Research & Social Science
Energy Research & Social Science ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES-
CiteScore
14.00
自引率
16.40%
发文量
441
审稿时长
55 days
期刊介绍: Energy Research & Social Science (ERSS) is a peer-reviewed international journal that publishes original research and review articles examining the relationship between energy systems and society. ERSS covers a range of topics revolving around the intersection of energy technologies, fuels, and resources on one side and social processes and influences - including communities of energy users, people affected by energy production, social institutions, customs, traditions, behaviors, and policies - on the other. Put another way, ERSS investigates the social system surrounding energy technology and hardware. ERSS is relevant for energy practitioners, researchers interested in the social aspects of energy production or use, and policymakers. Energy Research & Social Science (ERSS) provides an interdisciplinary forum to discuss how social and technical issues related to energy production and consumption interact. Energy production, distribution, and consumption all have both technical and human components, and the latter involves the human causes and consequences of energy-related activities and processes as well as social structures that shape how people interact with energy systems. Energy analysis, therefore, needs to look beyond the dimensions of technology and economics to include these social and human elements.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信