For the Few, Not the Many: Tracing the Residualist and Compensatory Nature of British Energy Support

IF 3.4 3区 社会学 Q2 ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES
Environmental Policy and Governance Pub Date : 2026-06-03 Epub Date: 2026-03-24 DOI:10.1002/eet.70067
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,&nbsp;M. G. Elsinga,&nbsp;J. S. C. M. Hoekstra,&nbsp;M. Sunikka-Blank,&nbsp;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.

Abstract Image

为了少数人,而不是大多数人:追踪英国能源支持的剩余主义和补偿性质
通过大量文献分析,本文追溯了二战以来英国能源政策支持的演变。它通过两个解释视角分析了政策设计的转变:资格(剩余主义vs普遍主义)和功能(补偿主义vs预防主义)。虽然英国曾是预防性、相对广泛的能源效率投资的全球领导者,但自上世纪80年代以来,它越来越多地转向被动的、目标狭隘的计划,这些计划主要通过能源供应商的义务来实现,并提供经过经济状况调查的救济。危机时刻,如上世纪70年代的石油危机和最近的能源价格飙升,促使人们暂时转向普遍主义,但事实证明,这些措施都是昙花一现。尽管历届政府都强调了能效计划的诸多协同效益,但这些计划的实施仍然前后不一,资金也不足。我们认为,剩余补偿模式的持续存在是由政治、制度和观念因素驱动的。为了理解这些发展,我们引入了四种模型的类型学——剩余主义补偿、剩余主义预防、普遍主义补偿和普遍主义预防——用于绘制关键政策转变并评估其影响。最后,我们解释说,向普遍预防方法过渡必须以基于权利的框架为基础。
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
Environmental Policy and Governance
Environmental Policy and Governance ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES-
CiteScore
6.10
自引率
13.30%
发文量
67
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.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书