UK Perceptions of EnergyUK Perceptions of Energy Securityy

Caroline KuzemkoCaroline Kuzemko

University of Warwick

Ideas and Political Paradigms as Context

UK t i d b ti l• UK energy governance constrained by a particular political paradigm (Helm 2003 and 2005; Mitchell 2008; Scrase et al 2009; Kern 2009)2008; Scrase et al 2009; Kern 2009)

• Variety in paradigms/idea sets that influence energy security and associated policy choicesenergy security and associated policy choices (Correlje and van der Linde 2006; Finon and Locatelli 2008; Youngs 2009; Cherp and Jewell 2011)

• Ideas (normative choices) about energy also important

Context: Ideas about EnergyContext: Ideas about Energy

S• Sources:– Inanimate sources: coal, oil, gas, nuclear, water… 

Biofuels, wind, waves, sun (whole systems analysis)

• Uses:– Transport, central heating, electricity, cooking, light, military

Energ as capacit to achieve certain ends– Energy as capacity to achieve certain ends

• Socio‐economic Roles:– Central to economic growth;– Distributional role in society (universal access – public good);

A itt f b d th i i– As emitter of carbon, and other, emissions– Replaceable commodity, sector of the economy– The ‘lifeblood of modern society’f f y

Context: Political ParadigmsContext: Political Paradigms

P liti l l d t “d ‘ i ’” b t id i fl• Political leaders may not “do ‘‐isms’” but… ideas influence, constrain and enable, policymaking and institutions

• Political paradigms: three traditional, ‘varieties of p g ,capitalism’ (state‐led, pro‐market), environmentalism

• Change: paradigm shift, incremental… Wider Context

• NB:• Varying starting points ontology regarding how the world• Varying starting points, ontology, regarding how the world 

functions• Different language and methodology• Be informed in order to communicate in a meaningful way 

across paradigms

Energy Security 1980/90sEnergy Security 1980/90s• Ideas about Energy:• Ideas about Energy:

– Sources as replaceable commodities, electricity supply as a service, lower intrinsic value 

h f l– Energy and harmful emissions

• Pro‐Market Political Paradigm:– Markets to supply energy, more economically efficient– Private, competitive, freely‐ trading, transparent markets to 

provide energy security (inter‐dependence)p gy y ( p )

• Policymaking and Institutions:– Primary Objective: privatisation and de (re )regulation (security– Primary Objective: privatisation and de‐(re‐)regulation (security 

an outcome)– Disband Energy Ministry – DTI’s Mandate (competitive markets)

2000s: Energy Security Climate Nexus2000s: Energy‐Security‐Climate Nexus

• Ideas about Energy:– Fixed and finite, dependent, value enhanced, , p , ,national supplies under threat: politically salient (popular interest and political acceptance)(p p p p )

– Increasing political acceptance of environmental ideas: need to have binding climate objectives (UKideas: need to have binding climate objectives (UK limited public acceptance)

Energy Security Climate NexusEnergy‐Security‐Climate Nexus

P liti l P di• Political Paradigms:– Markets responsible for supplies, Government responsible for 

security: energy supplies less ‘safe’– Avoid dependence: more home‐grown energy to boost energy 

security and climate objectives– Energy efficiencygy y

• Policymaking and Institutions:– New institutions: DECC: energy and climate policy inter‐related– ‘Home grown’ energy and facilitation of renewables and nuclear– Greater role for the state: more involved in facilitatingGreater role for the state: more involved in facilitating 

production of energy from certain sources

Lack of Paradigm Shift: ‘Inter‐paradigm Borrowing’l f h b h• Greater role for the UK Government but have 

we rejected the idea that state intervention is often counter‐productive for energy security?

• ‘Independence’ within an inter‐dependent p pworld and energy security?  Multipolar…

• ‘Home grown’: renewables and/or nuclearHome grown : renewables and/or nuclear (environmental security)C ‘ i ffi i ’ till b t• Can ‘economic efficiency’ still be a strong driver of policy choices

ConclusionsConclusions

• Ways to further reconcile positions (Cherp and Jewell 2011) – or ‘pix and mix’?) p

• Understanding ideas about energy security: what are the ontologies positives andwhat are the ontologies, positives and limitations of each political paradigm – within context

Energy Security 1940s 1980Energy Security 1940s‐1980

P t W ld W II (d ti )• Post World War II (domestic): – Ideas about Energy: vital to economic recovery; electricity 

access prioritised; energy a ‘merit good’– Political Ideas: active role for the state (Keynes)– Governance Practices: nationalised industry

• 1969 Ministry of Power disbanded lower political saliency• 1969 Ministry of Power disbanded… lower political saliency

• Oil Shocks: ‘second era of energy security’ (Leaver 2005):Oil Shocks:  second era of energy security  (Leaver 2005):– Ideas about Energy: still vital, but less secure– Political Ideas: re‐focus on domestic capacity and energy 

efficiencyefficiency – Governance Practices: new political institutions, Department of 

Energy (1974) and International Energy Agency (IEA)

CommentaryCommentary

l i l ‘d li i i d’• Energy relatively ‘depoliticised’:– Lack of political debate disengages ‘publics’ from energy (re‐engage at times of high prices) (cf. Stern 1987)

– Other political approaches to understanding and governing energy are de‐emphasised (end of id l ) t id d ‘ ’ideology), not considered or ‘wrong’

– Disengagement from ‘national policy’ – Historic role of state politics, and funding, underestimated