T. M. Croon, M. G. Elsinga, J. S. C. M. Hoekstra, M. Sunikka-Blank, R. Galvin
{"title":"For the Few, Not the Many: Tracing the Residualist and Compensatory Nature of British Energy Support","authors":"T. M. Croon, M. G. Elsinga, J. S. C. M. Hoekstra, M. Sunikka-Blank, R. Galvin","doi":"10.1002/eet.70067","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Drawing on extensive documentary analysis, this article traces the evolution of British energy policy support since World War II. It analyses shifts in policy design through two interpretive lenses: eligibility (residualist vs. universalist) and function (compensatory vs. preventive). While the UK was once a global leader in preventive, relatively broad-based energy efficiency investments, since the 1980s it has moved increasingly towards reactive, narrowly targeted schemes, mostly delivered through energy supplier obligations and providing means-tested relief. Moments of crisis, such as the oil shocks of the 1970s and the recent energy price surge, prompted temporary shifts to universalism, but such measures have proved short-lived. While successive governments emphasised the many co-benefits of energy efficiency schemes, they remain inconsistently implemented and underfunded. We argue that the persistence of residualist-compensatory models is driven by political, institutional, and ideational factors. To make sense of these developments, we introduce a typology of four models - residualist compensatory, residualist-preventive, universalist-compensatory, and universalist-preventive- which is used to map key policy shifts and assess their implications. We conclude by explaining that a transition towards a universalist-preventive approach must be grounded in a rights-based framework.</p>","PeriodicalId":47396,"journal":{"name":"Environmental Policy and Governance","volume":"36 3","pages":"529-547"},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2026-06-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/eet.70067","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Environmental Policy and Governance","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/eet.70067","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/3/24 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Drawing on extensive documentary analysis, this article traces the evolution of British energy policy support since World War II. It analyses shifts in policy design through two interpretive lenses: eligibility (residualist vs. universalist) and function (compensatory vs. preventive). While the UK was once a global leader in preventive, relatively broad-based energy efficiency investments, since the 1980s it has moved increasingly towards reactive, narrowly targeted schemes, mostly delivered through energy supplier obligations and providing means-tested relief. Moments of crisis, such as the oil shocks of the 1970s and the recent energy price surge, prompted temporary shifts to universalism, but such measures have proved short-lived. While successive governments emphasised the many co-benefits of energy efficiency schemes, they remain inconsistently implemented and underfunded. We argue that the persistence of residualist-compensatory models is driven by political, institutional, and ideational factors. To make sense of these developments, we introduce a typology of four models - residualist compensatory, residualist-preventive, universalist-compensatory, and universalist-preventive- which is used to map key policy shifts and assess their implications. We conclude by explaining that a transition towards a universalist-preventive approach must be grounded in a rights-based framework.
期刊介绍:
Environmental Policy and Governance is an international, inter-disciplinary journal affiliated with the European Society for Ecological Economics (ESEE). The journal seeks to advance interdisciplinary environmental research and its use to support novel solutions in environmental policy and governance. The journal publishes innovative, high quality articles which examine, or are relevant to, the environmental policies that are introduced by governments or the diverse forms of environmental governance that emerge in markets and civil society. The journal includes papers that examine how different forms of policy and governance emerge and exert influence at scales ranging from local to global and in diverse developmental and environmental contexts.