建构能源未来:中国与台湾自反性公共理性的经验教训

IF 6.9 2区 经济学 Q1 ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES
Tadeusz Józef Rudek
{"title":"建构能源未来:中国与台湾自反性公共理性的经验教训","authors":"Tadeusz Józef Rudek","doi":"10.1016/j.erss.2025.104091","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>This paper explores the application of Reflexive Public Reason (RPR) and the Capturing Invisible Protocol (CIP) in addressing the complexities of energy transitions in China and Taiwan. RPR is a framework that emphasizes reflexivity, co-production and the critical role of imaginaries in shaping energy policy and managing uncertainty and risk. Through a comparative analysis of energy transitions in China and Taiwan, the study highlights sociotechnical imaginaries (STI) and civic epistemologies that guide their approaches to managing uncertainty and risk. As a result, this paper identifies two models of managing uncertainty and risk, China's flexible experimentation model and Taiwan's internally diverse civic epistemology. Building on this comparative dimension, I offer valuable insights for energy transitions around the world and the relationship between different visions of the future, risks and uncertainties, and resilience. Lessons from Chinese and Taiwanese energy transitions can be used as case studies of how resilience to the unknown in energy transitions can be approached differently. I argue that increasing awareness of the relationships between imaginaries, uncertainties, and risks by incorporating reflexivity into energy policy can help to increase resilience of energy transition. Furthermore, this paper argues for the adoption of CIP to systematically map visions, expert knowledge, and governance models. This paper contributes to the discussion on how the energy transition can be governed in different sociopolitical orders and shaped by different sociotechnical imaginaries.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48384,"journal":{"name":"Energy Research & Social Science","volume":"125 ","pages":"Article 104091"},"PeriodicalIF":6.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Constructing energy futures: Lessons from Reflexive Public Reason in China and Taiwan\",\"authors\":\"Tadeusz Józef Rudek\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.erss.2025.104091\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><div>This paper explores the application of Reflexive Public Reason (RPR) and the Capturing Invisible Protocol (CIP) in addressing the complexities of energy transitions in China and Taiwan. RPR is a framework that emphasizes reflexivity, co-production and the critical role of imaginaries in shaping energy policy and managing uncertainty and risk. Through a comparative analysis of energy transitions in China and Taiwan, the study highlights sociotechnical imaginaries (STI) and civic epistemologies that guide their approaches to managing uncertainty and risk. As a result, this paper identifies two models of managing uncertainty and risk, China's flexible experimentation model and Taiwan's internally diverse civic epistemology. Building on this comparative dimension, I offer valuable insights for energy transitions around the world and the relationship between different visions of the future, risks and uncertainties, and resilience. Lessons from Chinese and Taiwanese energy transitions can be used as case studies of how resilience to the unknown in energy transitions can be approached differently. I argue that increasing awareness of the relationships between imaginaries, uncertainties, and risks by incorporating reflexivity into energy policy can help to increase resilience of energy transition. Furthermore, this paper argues for the adoption of CIP to systematically map visions, expert knowledge, and governance models. This paper contributes to the discussion on how the energy transition can be governed in different sociopolitical orders and shaped by different sociotechnical imaginaries.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48384,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Energy Research & Social Science\",\"volume\":\"125 \",\"pages\":\"Article 104091\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":6.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-05-13\",\"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/S2214629625001720\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"经济学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Energy Research & Social Science","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2214629625001720","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

摘要

​RPR是一个框架,强调反身性、合作生产和想象在制定能源政策和管理不确定性和风险方面的关键作用。通过对中国大陆和台湾能源转型的比较分析,该研究强调了社会技术想象(STI)和公民认识论,它们指导了他们管理不确定性和风险的方法。因此,本文确定了两种管理不确定性和风险的模式,即中国大陆的灵活实验模式和台湾内部多样化的公民认识论。基于这一比较维度,我对世界各地的能源转型以及对未来的不同愿景、风险和不确定性以及弹性之间的关系提供了有价值的见解。​我认为,通过将反思性纳入能源政策,提高对想象、不确定性和风险之间关系的认识,有助于提高能源转型的弹性。此外,本文主张采用CIP系统地映射愿景、专家知识和治理模型。本文旨在探讨能源转型如何在不同的社会政治秩序中被治理,并被不同的社会技术想象所塑造。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Constructing energy futures: Lessons from Reflexive Public Reason in China and Taiwan
This paper explores the application of Reflexive Public Reason (RPR) and the Capturing Invisible Protocol (CIP) in addressing the complexities of energy transitions in China and Taiwan. RPR is a framework that emphasizes reflexivity, co-production and the critical role of imaginaries in shaping energy policy and managing uncertainty and risk. Through a comparative analysis of energy transitions in China and Taiwan, the study highlights sociotechnical imaginaries (STI) and civic epistemologies that guide their approaches to managing uncertainty and risk. As a result, this paper identifies two models of managing uncertainty and risk, China's flexible experimentation model and Taiwan's internally diverse civic epistemology. Building on this comparative dimension, I offer valuable insights for energy transitions around the world and the relationship between different visions of the future, risks and uncertainties, and resilience. Lessons from Chinese and Taiwanese energy transitions can be used as case studies of how resilience to the unknown in energy transitions can be approached differently. I argue that increasing awareness of the relationships between imaginaries, uncertainties, and risks by incorporating reflexivity into energy policy can help to increase resilience of energy transition. Furthermore, this paper argues for the adoption of CIP to systematically map visions, expert knowledge, and governance models. This paper contributes to the discussion on how the energy transition can be governed in different sociopolitical orders and shaped by different sociotechnical imaginaries.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信