Search

Recent scientific assessments of climate change have shifted towards evaluating solutions for removing atmospheric carbon dioxide (CDR). This paper reports a participation experiment in which we involved an interdisciplinary group of researchers in mapping issues relating to two CDR approaches: afforestation and bioenergy with carbon capture and storage (BECCS). We describe the responses of individual researchers when presented with visualisations aggregated from posts about afforestation and BECCS on the platform Twitter. We then compare the researchers’ responses with a qualitative analysis of a subset of the Twitter data. The analysis highlights challenges the researchers experienced in identifying issues and relating these visualisations to their own research on afforestation and BECCS. We discuss the prospects for bringing experimental approaches to mapping issues, publics and participation into closer relation with science and technology assessments. The paper concludes with reflections on the value of qualitative traditions of STS research for digital controversy analysis.

This briefing paper, presents the key findings of a mapping of public engagement with energy, climate change, and net zero occurring in the UK between 2015 2022.

Appraisals of deliberate, large-scale interventions in the earth's climate system, known collectively as 'geoengineering', have largely taken the form of narrowly framed and exclusive expert analyses that prematurely 'close down' upon particular proposals. Here, we present the findings from the first 'upstream' appraisal of geoengineering to deliberately 'open up' to a broader diversity of framings, knowledges and future pathways. We report on the citizen strand of an innovative analytic-deliberative participatory appraisal process called Deliberative Mapping. A select but diverse group of sociodemographically representative citizens from Norfolk (United Kingdom) were engaged in a deliberative multi-criteria appraisal of geoengineering proposals relative to other options for tackling climate change, in parallel to symmetrical appraisals by diverse experts and stakeholders. Despite seeking to map divergent perspectives, a remarkably consistent view of option performance emerged across both the citizens' and the specialists' deliberations, where geoengineering proposals were outperformed by mitigation alternatives.

Agriculture is undergoing a technology revolution supported by policy-makers around the world. While smart technologies will play an important role in achieving enhanced productivity and greater eco-efficiency, critics have suggested that a consideration of social impacts is being side-lined. Research illustrates that some agricultural practitioners are concerned about using certain technologies. Indeed, some studies argue that agricultural societies may be changed, or ‘re-scripted’, in undesirable ways, and there is precedent to suggest that wider society may be concerned about radical new technologies. We therefore encourage policy-makers, funders, technology companies, and researchers to consider the views of both farming communities and wider society. In agriculture, the concept of responsible innovation has not been widely considered, although two recent papers have made useful suggestions. We build on these interventions by arguing that key dimensions of responsible innovation - anticipation, inclusion, reflexivity, and responsiveness - should be applied to this fourth agricultural revolution. We argue, however, that ideas in responsible innovation should be further developed in order to make them relevant and robust for emergent agri-tech, and further that frameworks should be tested in practice to see if they can actively shape innovation trajectories. In making suggestions on how to construct a more comprehensive framework for responsible innovation in agriculture, we call for: (i) a more systemic approach that maps and attends to the wider ecology of innovations associated with this fourth agricultural revolution; (ii) a broadening of notions of ‘inclusion’ in responsible innovation to account better for diverse and already existing spaces of participation in agri-tech, and (iii) greater testing of frameworks in practice to see if they are capable of influencing the innovation process.

The United Kingdom has placed itself on a transition towards a low-carbon economy and society, through the imposition of a legally-binding goal aimed at reducing its ‘greenhouse gas’ emissions by 80% by 2050 against a 1990 baseline. A set of three low-carbon, socio-technical transition pathways were developed and analysed via an innovative collaboration between engineers, social scientists and policy analysts. The pathways focus on the power sector, including the potential for increasing use of low-carbon electricity for heating and transport, within the context of critical European Union developments and policies. Their development started from narrative storylines regarding different governance framings, drawing on interviews and workshops with stakeholders and analysis of historical analogies. The quantified UK pathways were named Market Rules, Central Co-ordination and Thousand Flowers; each reflecting a dominant logic of governance arrangements. The aim of the present contribution was to use these pathways to explore what is needed to realise a transition that successfully addresses the so-called energy policy ‘trilemma,’ i.e. the simultaneous delivery of low carbon, secure and affordable energy services. Analytical tools were developed and applied to assess the technical feasibility, social acceptability, and environmental and economic impacts of the pathways. Technological and behavioural developments were examined, alongside appropriate governance structures and regulations for these low-carbon transition pathways, as well as the roles of key energy system ‘actors’ (both large and small). An assessment of the part that could possibly be played by future demand side response was also undertaken in order to understand the factors that drive energy demand and energy-using behaviour, and reflecting growing interest in demand side response for balancing a system with high proportions of renewable generation. A set of interacting and complementary engineering and techno-economic models or tools were then employed to analyse electricity network infrastructure investment and operational decisions to assist market design and option evaluation. This provided a basis for integrating the analysis within a whole systems framework of electricity system development, together with the evaluation of future economic benefits, costs and uncertainties. Finally, the energy and environmental performance of the different energy mixes were appraised on a ‘life-cycle’ basis to determine the greenhouse gas emissions and other ecological or health burdens associated with each of the three transition pathways. Here, the challenges, insights and opportunities that have been identified over the transition towards a low-carbon future in the United Kingdom are described with the purpose of providing a valuable evidence base for developers, policy makers and other stakeholders.

The United Kingdom (UK) has placed itself on a transition towards a low carbon economy and society, through the imposition of a legally-binding goal aimed at reducing its ‘greenhouse gas’ (GHG) emissions by 80% by 2050 against a 1990 baseline. A set of three low-carbon, sociotechnical transition pathways were developed and analysed via an innovative collaboration between engineers, social scientists and policy analysts. The pathways focus on the power sector, including the potential for increasing use of low-carbon electricity for heating and transport, within the context of critical European Union developments and policies. Their development started from narrative storylines regarding different governance framings, drawing on interviews and workshops with stakeholders and analysis of historical analogies. The quantified UK pathways were named Market Rules (MR), Central Co-ordination (CC) and Thousand Flowers (TF); each reflecting a dominant logic of governance arrangements. The aim of the present contribution was to use these pathways to explore what is needed to realise a transition that successfully addresses the so-called energy policy 'trilemma', i.e., the simultaneous delivery of low carbon, secure and affordable energy services. Analytical tools were developed and applied to assess the technical feasibility, social acceptability, and environmental and economic impacts of the pathways. Technological and behavioural developments were examined, alongside appropriate governance structures and regulations for these low-carbon transition pathways, as well as the roles of key energy system 'actors' (both large and small). An assessment of the part that could possibly be played by future demand side response (DSR) was also undertaken in order to understand the factors that drive energy demand and energy-using behaviour, and reflecting growing interest in DSR for balancing a system with high proportions of renewable generation. A set of interacting and complementary engineering and techno-economic models or tools were then employed to analyse electricity network infrastructure investment and operational decisions to assist market design and option evaluation. This provided a basis for integrating the analysis within a whole systems framework of electricity system development, together with the evaluation of future economic benefits, costs and uncertainties. Finally, the energy and environmental performance of the different energy mixes were appraised on a ‘life-cycle’ basis to determine the GHG emissions and other ecological or health burdens associated with each of the three transition pathways. Here the challenges and opportunities that have been identified over the transition towards a low-carbon future in the UK are described with the purpose of providing a valuable evidence base for developers, policy makers, and other stakeholders.

A previous version of this paper has been part of TRANSIT Deliverable 3.3 (July 2016), the second prototype of TSI theory. [Abstract] This working paper presents a set of propositions about the agency and dynamics of transformative social innovation (TSI) that have been developed as part of an EU-funded research project entitled “TRANsformative Social Innovation Theory” (TRANSIT; 2014-2017). These TSI propositions represent first steps towards the development of a new theory of TSI, taking the form of proto-explanations of the agency and dynamics of TSI, based on the bringing together of our empirical observations on TSI and the project's theoretical reviews and theoretical framings. Ideally this working paper should be read in conjunction with the working paper entitled “A framework for transformative social innovation” (Haxeltine et al 2016) which presents in skeletal terms the theoretical and conceptual framing of TSI developed in the TRANSIT project. This TSI framework builds on sustainability transition studies, social innovation research, social psychology studies of empowerment and other several other areas of social theory to deliver a bespoke theoretical and conceptual framework that is grounded in a relational ontology and which is being employed as a platform for the development of a middle-range theory of TSI. Next we provide a very brief overview of some key elements of the framework, in particular how we conceptualise social innovation, transformative change, and transformative social innovation. Propositions were developed for each of four relational dimensions implied by the TSI framework with also a brief statement of the topic addressed by each of the twelve propositions. This article is based on research carried out as part of the Transformative Social Innovation Theory (“TRANSIT”) project, which is funded by the European Union's Seventh Framework Programme (FP7) under grant agreement 613169