Resisting Change? The Transnational Dynamics of European Energy Regimes-猫眼课题宝

抵制改变？

DOI：

发表时间：

2012

期刊：

影响因子：

通讯作者：

中科院分区：

文献类型：

作者：

Eba Erik Vleuten;P. Högselius

许多学者、政策制定者、民间社会组织和企业家都观察到，改变当今的能源系统是困难的。尽管政治和公众对可持续能源转型的支持不断增加，旨在减少燃料储备枯竭、地缘政治能源依赖、停电、气候变化和其他形式的环境退化等脆弱性，但这一困难仍然存在。此外，目前太阳能、风能、水力和地热能的前景——有些会增加核能、生物质或“清洁”化石燃料的使用和转换——似乎使更可持续的能源供应在技术上成为可能（Pacala 和 Solocow，2004 年）。节能也是如此。如果现代能源系统难以改变，那并不是因为缺乏想象力或实际选择。为了审视能源体系变革的困难，一些创新学者将目光从新能源选择转向了现有能源部门的持续存在。显然，由于历史遗留下来的缓慢、路径依赖和对传统关键技术的锁定以及既得利益，现有的能源系统抵制根本性变革（例如，Kaijser、Mogren 和 Steen，1991 年；Islas，1997 年；Van Santen、Khoe 和 Vermeer，2007 年）。更一般地说，分析重点从孤立的能源创新和措施转向现有社会技术能源系统的动态（Hughes，1983、1986、1987；综述，参见 Van der Vleuten，2006）、复合体（Unruh，2000、2002；Unruh 和 Carrillo-Hermosille，2006）或制度（Kemp，1994；Rip 和 Kemp，1998；Kemp、Schot 和 Hoogma，1998；有关综述，请参见 Geels 和 Schot，2010）。尽管侧重点不同，但这些概念的共同点是，现有能源系统很难改变，因为它们是由许多技术和非技术组件的历史形成的排列构成的。燃料开采、转换和运输技术、标准、消费者愿望和习惯、利益相关者利益、就业和政府监管等异质组成部分相互调整并整合成稳定且有效的社会技术

Numerous scholars, policy makers, civil society organizations and entrepreneurs have observed that changing present-day energy systems is diffi cult. This diffi culty persists despite increasing political and public support for a sustainable energy transition, aiming to reduce such vulnerabilities as the depletion of fuel reserves, geopolitical energy dependencies, electricity blackouts, climate change and other forms of environmental degradation. Moreover, present-day prospects for solar, wind, hydro and geothermal power—and some would add nuclear power, biomass or ‘clean’ fossil fuel usage and conversion—seem to make a more sustainable energy supply technically possible (Pacala and Solocow, 2004). So does energy saving. If modern energy systems are diffi cult to change, it is not for a lack of imagination or practical options. To examine the diffi culties of energy system change, a number of innovation scholars shifted their gaze from new energy options to the persistence of the incumbent energy sector. Apparently existing energy systems resist radical change due to historical legacies of sluggishness, path-dependency and lock-in on conventional key technologies, and vested interests (e.g., Kaijser, Mogren and Steen, 1991; Islas, 1997; Van Santen, Khoe and Vermeer, 2007). In more general terms, the analytical focus shifted from isolated energy innovations and measures to the dynamics of incumbent socio-technical energy systems (Hughes, 1983, 1986, 1987; for a review, see Van der Vleuten, 2006), complexes (Unruh, 2000, 2002; Unruh and Carrillo-Hermosille, 2006), or regimes (Kemp, 1994; Rip and Kemp, 1998; Kemp, Schot and Hoogma, 1998; for a review, see Geels and Schot, 2010). Although diff ering in emphasis, these notions converge in foregrounding that incumbent energy systems are diffi cult to change because they are constituted by historically shaped alignments of many technical and nontechnical components. Such heterogeneous components as fuel extraction, conversion and transport technologies, standards, consumer desires and habits, stakeholder interests, employment and government regulation were mutually adjusted and aligned into a stable and working socio-technical

Resisting Change? The Transnational Dynamics of European Energy Regimes

抵制改变？

文献摘要

被引文献

相似文献