Accountability and sustainability transitions

TL;DR: In this paper, the authors identify sustainability transitions as premised on shifts in accountability relations, assessments of conformance with institutional controls coupled with application of sanctions, incentives, and subsidies, which shape future demographics, technical practices, and social and material trajectories of an economic sector or domain.

About: This article is published in Ecological Economics.The article was published on 2021-07-01 and is currently open access. It has received 13 citations till now. The article focuses on the topics: Accountability & Sustainability.

Summary

1. Introduction

• These vary from densely analytical and theoretical, historical and descriptive, to actionoriented and prescriptive.
• The institutional shifts that the authors identify as driving socio-material change represent selection pressures in environments characterised by competition.
• The authors provide a brief overview of sustainability transitions, in terms of both sociotechnical aspects and institutional dimensions, and their relationship with accountability.

2.1 Sociotechnical and institutional dimensions of transitions

• The idea of sociotechnical transitions originates in science and technology studies (STS), which has sought to explain how some technological innovations come to have broad effects on society, while others do not.
• Within STS thinking, a technological innovation becomes widespread not simply due to its own characteristics, but by amplifying existing social and economic structures and trends.
• The ontology that underlies most research on sustainability transitions, as of much thematic social science scholarship, is that (1) technological innovation defines transitions, and (2) transition dynamics are structured by a relatively coherent system (Sareen and Haarstad 2018).
• Analysis of dynamics including growth in renewable energy production, shifts in automobile ownership, and changes in diet must include analysis of agency and localised politics.
• The authors argue for a need to go beyond attention to institutional design (i.e., forms of ownership, specification of rights and responsibilities, monitoring and information reporting pathways) and formal institutions (i.e., forms of ownership, specification of rights and responsibilities, monitoring and information reporting pathways).

2.2 Why focus on accountability relations under sustainability transitions?

• In calling for attention to shifts in the disciplining effects of institutions, the authors aim to advance a symmetrical analysis in which the likelihood of discipline contributing positively to shared ecological security and social equality is equal to the likelihood of advancing crony capitalism, distributional inequities, and authoritarianism.
• For us, accountability has potential to change the distribution of actors in the relevant population and the distribution of behaviours that give rise to sustainability concerns (e.g., pollution, ecosystem simplification, over-consumption of fossil fuels).
• Accountability analysis approaches complex systems in a way that respects the multiple layers and players involved, and attends to power relations as constituted by actors’ capacity to change formal and informal standards and codes of legitimacy, and the potential to distribute sanctions and rewards that can drive population or even systems change.
• Legitimacy flows to organisations when they are regarded as having internalised institutional norms derived from foundational aspects (i.e., deep structures) of society (e.g., family, community, market, government).
• The first practice centres on information flows that support assessment, and the second on the willingness and ability to sanction.

3.1 Changing accountability regimes and the reflexive cycle of sectoral transition

• The authors note that points (1a) and (1b) are inputs within an accountability regime; (2) is the output of an accountability regime; and (3a) and (3b) are, respectively, proximate and ultimate outcomes of an accountability regime.
• Figure 1 visualises this cycle in a manner that highlights pathways.
• It constitutes accountability relationships between greenhouse gas emitters and a range of actors who evaluate their conformance with evolving standards of probity.
• They capture the reshaping of competitive dynamics through both new institutional structures and new physical infrastructures.
• It is in this domain that the outcomes of an accountability regime, (3.1) emergent change and (3.2) structural change, can be examined and characterised as institutionalization.

3.2 The 2x2 ‘LASH’ matrix for case results of accountability analysis

• The authors treatment of accountability within sustainability transitions is closely linked to concerns about authority and discipline (Wolf 2020).
• The authors conception of accountability as a social process predicated on interplay between assessment and sanctioning positions us to identify four ideal-type ‘worlds’ of accountability (Table 1).
• As discussed above, their approach is symmetrical in that the authors aim to account for all potential states of the world, not just some normative conception of what is needed to progress toward a specific conception of sustainability.
• In a given social context, the authors may observe i) radical liberalism or laissez-faire tendencies (L), authoritarianism or private interest governance (A), strongly substantiated accountability (S), and hollow accountability (H).
• Applied to a sustainability transition, substantive accountability takes the form of institutionalizing new selection pressures that can ostensibly restructure material dynamics (from dependence on fossil fuels to low-carbon energy, for instance).

4. Accountability analysis of sectoral change: Solar energy uptake in Portugal

• The authors assess inputs, outputs and outcomes during the period 2017-2018.
• This feeds into their characterisation of accountability relations into the quadrants of the LASH matrix in Section 5.
• The authors attention is focused on changes, debates about potential changes, and lack of changes.
• The authors treatment is not aimed at comprehensiveness.
• Rather, the authors focus on demonstrating the value of accountability analysis for assessing prospects for a sustainability 16 transition.

4.1 The accountability regime of solar energy uptake in Portugal

• Portugal is a long-standing leader in renewable energy in Europe, a region that set some of the world’s most ambitious targets for climate change mitigation and specifically energy transition during the 2017-2018 period of the case study.
• During 2017-2018, Portugal underwent a change from seeing renewable energy as a burden on taxpayers that had to be subsidised, to putting in place highly ambitious policies premised on rapid unsubsidised growth in renewable energy.
• Subsequently, in 4.2 the authors analyse the uneven and indeterminate processes through which existing sociotechnical arrangements were critiqued and new knowledge and values were established to shape processes of selection; in other words, a change in accountability regime.
• The government was ambivalent on offshore oil efforts until a statement for energy transition in late 2018 2.
• Old license system dismantled to increase transparency, and solar auctions of 1.75 GW capacity declared for mid-2019 with options of competitive tariffs or grid access payments with PPAs or market trade.

4.2 Accountability analysis: Inputs, outputs and outcomes

• This is informed by empirical observation of how the population of actors used specific metrics and information about energy infrastructure to shape sectoral change; the application of standards and assessment in practice.
• Domestic grid investments planned for the next decade in 2017 included strengthening and expanding transmission capacity in Portugal’s southern region.
• In mid-2018, the European Commission committed €578 million to expand interconnectivity between Portugal, Spain and France.
• Another niche, household and community solar generation, could not benefit from prosuming to the grid as regulations mainly supported self-consumption, instead of sale to neighbours, use by multiple households or sale to the grid at a fair price.

4.2.2 Outputs: Sanctions

• In terms of outputs, the authors examine conventional governance modes, public resistance against fossil fuel expansion, and the emergence of financing mechanisms for solar energy.
• During 2017 and 2018, solar energy received modest political support, and techno-economic competitiveness was represented as mediating Portuguese solar uptake, also known as Conventional governance.
• Power differences among stakeholders proved problematic, with partial interests being represented via associations, and preferential access to information and to decisionmaking forums for traditionally influential, networked actors, e.g., when nominating members to committees to make decisions concerning the electric grid.
• This lack of state support limited debates around solar energy to technocratic issues without substantive public engagement.
• The quarterly ECO123 from the Monchique region of the Algarve – which experienced devastating wildfire during 2018 – explicated links between environmentally responsible choices and wellbeing, encouraging just energy transitions and profiling leaders of such initiatives in Portugal.

4.2.3 Outcomes: Structural and material change

• In terms of outcomes, the authors profile two key arenas that shape prospects for solar power: energy production licensing processes and stuttering growth, and the emergence of a new ministry and selection mechanisms for solar uptake.
• But not all of this was installed within a twoyear timeline, and one-year extensions were granted to delayed projects.
• Through this process, 23 targeted increases in solar power were achieved as represented by a formal licensing process, yet this energy supply was not fully realised.
• Interviewed solar developers and ministry officials voiced a concern that a speculative market was emerging around solar licenses, with buyers profiting by selling licenses to foreign investors.
• The national regulator Entidade Reguladora dos Serviços Energéticos (ERSE), executive agency DGEG, the political office of the Secretary of State of Energy (SSE), and numerous sectoral actors and associations sought to further their interests during this period of sectoral change.

5. Characterising sectoral change in terms of accountability relations

• This concluding section discusses the implications of their accountability analysis for characterising the changing accountability regime in Portuguese solar uptake.
• The basis for allocation of grid capacity during this period was publicly contested, and limited deliberative assessment took place among policymakers.
• Turning to authoritarian forms of accountability, the authors emphasize treatment of small- and medium-scale solar energy projects during 2017-2018.
• Hence, while libertarian tendencies characterised sectoral performance for most of 2017-2018, changes to move beyond them emerged.
• The authors accountability analysis during the 2017-2018 period finds evidence of an emerging appetite for deliberative assessment and sanctions in the rollout of solar energy in Portugal.

5.1 Conclusion

• The authors ambition with this article is primarily programmatic.
• The authors empirical application aimed to demonstrate its potential, rather than to unpack the case of Portuguese solar uptake in great depth.
• The authors argue that accountability analysis can move beyond scholarly emphasis on institutional design and governance as social inclusion and transparency, by evaluating the role of both assessment and sanctions in entangled processes of sociomaterial change.
• The authors hope that this demonstration prompts reflection on how these concepts and empirical strategies can contribute to sociotechnical transformations toward sustainability.
• While this programmatic article has presented the basis for this task and illustrated its potential, it must be elaborated and developed through future research.

Figures

Figure 1 Changing accountability regimes and the reflexive cycle of sectoral transition

Table 3. Characterisation of accountability in solar energy uptake in Portugal (2017-2018)

Table 2. Changes in inputs, outputs and outcomes in Portuguese solar energy uptake (2017-2018)

Table 1. The LASH matrix for accountability analysis: Assessment and sanctions

Frequently asked questions

Q1. What are the contributions in "Accountability and sustainability transitions" ?

Their approach targets both formal and informal means of legitimation. 

Q2. What are the future works mentioned in the paper "Accountability and sustainability transitions" ?

While this programmatic article has presented the basis for this task and illustrated its potential, it must be elaborated and developed through future research. 

Q3. What can be done to help make sense of dynamics of social regulation and environmental governance?

The analytical characterisation of interplay between understanding, values, standards of assessment, sanctions, selection pressure, and material change can help make sense of dynamics of social regulation and environmental governance. 

Q4. What are the institutional shifts that the authors identify as driving socio-material change?

The institutional shifts that the authors identify as driving socio-material change represent selection pressures in environments characterised by competition. 

Q5. What is the role of accountability in environmental economics?

For us, accountability has potential to change the distribution of actors in the relevant population and the distribution of behaviours that give rise to sustainability concerns (e.g., pollution, ecosystem simplification, over-consumption of fossil fuels). 

Q6. What was the first unsubsidised solar park in Portugal?

Solar developers, foreign banks and investors developed financial instruments for power purchase agreements (PPAs, where businesses contract large-scale solar power, giving developers an assured source of revenue) and Portugal’s first unsubsidised solar park was grid connected by summer 2018. 

Q7. What is the ontology that underlies research on sustainability transitions?

The ontology that underlies most research on sustainability transitions, as of much thematic social science scholarship, is that (1) technological innovation defines transitions, and (2) transition dynamics are structured by a relatively coherent system (Sareen and Haarstad 2018). 

Q8. What are the main strands of the research on sustainability transitions?

These are transition management and strategic niche management, which are oriented towards understanding how transitions can be purposely engendered, and the multilevel perspective (MLP) on sustainability transitions and technological innovation systems, which both take a systems approach to understanding transitions. 

Q9. What is the important element in the transition management literature?

In reviewing the sociotechnical transitions literature a decade ago, Smith and Stirling (2010) commented:Acknowledged to be the most important element, institutionalization is considered least in the transition management literature (Smith and Kern 2009). 

Q10. What are the implications of sustainability transitions?

Changing accountability regimes lead to sectoral transitions, and the values underlying these changes determine implications for sustainability. 

Q11. What was the main reason for the strengthening of the grid?

This included some strengthening of the grid in southern Portugal, creating scope to add more solar capacity even though standards and modes of assessment for electric grid use persisted. 

Q12. What is the role of carbon liability in the economic and social calculus?

The emergence of carbon liability as a central concern of13investors may drive changes in taxes, subsidies, and trade in carbon certificates – concrete manifestations of a change in thinking as a new social and economic calculus. 

Q13. What is the main criticism of the multilevel perspective?

The perspective has been criticised for both lacking a sense of geographical complexity (Bridge et al 2013; Hansen and Coenen 2015), and for favouring a systems perspective that emphasizes path dependence and stability over disruption and emergence (Haarstad and Wanvik 2016). 

Q14. What was the main reason for the constraints on solar developers?

solar developers were constrained to target areas where grid capacity remained available based on use by existing sources, rather than on the economic competitiveness of the technology. 

Q15. How many interviews were conducted during the period 2017-2018?

The assessment is based on 80 interviews conducted during five months of fieldwork (two months in 2017, one month in 2018, two months in 2019) with various experts and sectoral stakeholders, in-depth field observations including site visits to solar projects, and desk research. 

Q16. What is the role of accountability in sustainability transitions?

In this respect, the authors view accountability as a thoroughly ambiguous resource in relation to social justice, good governance, and potential to advance sustainability. 

Q17. What are the main components of accountability relations?

Audits and disclosures represent common oversight mechanisms that contribute to information flow, transparency, and accountability.