Frameworks, paradigms and practices for low energy futures

This project explores how the assessment of co-benefits of energy demand reduction measures relates to citizens’ well-being, and how this affects social norms and economic framings for policy decisions on ways of reducing energy consumption, while delivering benefits to citizens. Key aims are to identify useful and inclusive frameworks for UK Net Zero policy, to assess how different economic paradigms influence different stakeholder perspectives and to inform processes for governing low energy demand pathways. We are undertaking interviews with stakeholders from higher education, NGOs, local authorities and national government. Additionally, we are conducting a methodological review of quantitative and qualitative approaches for assessing the well-being co-benefits of energy demand reduction. 

The project addresses the following objectives:   

• To examine existing methodologies for assessing the economic, social, and environmental co-benefits of energy demand reduction measures.  

• To align different frameworks for evaluating the co-benefits and well-being impacts of energy demand reduction measures in the context of achieving net-zero goals.  

• To assess economic framings for governing low energy demand pathways. 

This project adopts a mixed-method research approach, which includes:   

• Semi-structured interviews with developers of co-benefits frameworks, end users in local government, and stakeholders in central government.   

• A review of assessment methodologies examines the strengths and weaknesses of adopting a quantitative or qualitative approach to evaluating co-benefits.    

• A deliberative workshop exploring public perception of the use of these new frameworks in decision-making.   

• A discourse analysis of the economic framings of energy demand reduction in national policy and strategy.

Energy demand reduction measures can deliver a range of co-benefits: health, energy security, economy, social, local environment. We have identified two broad approaches to assessing co-benefits:  

• Attributing a monetary value to benefits or risks within a cost-benefits analysis framework. This approach supports a governance model informed by mainstream economic analysis.   

• Using a multi-criteria analysis or wellbeing framework to assess trade-offs. This approach aims to equip policymakers with the necessary insights to independently evaluate decisions’ multiple potential impacts.   

However, both approaches encounter key challenges, such as the availability of data and capturing the distribution of benefits. 

We intend to publish outputs that conceptually and empirically compare the strengths and weaknesses of adopting quantitative and qualitative approaches to assessing the co-benefits of energy demand reduction in governance. Building on this, we will undertake a discourse analysis of the economic framings of energy demand reduction in the UK’s national energy policy and strategy. Specifically, we will explore how ideas and arguments from ‘green’ and ‘post-growth’ agendas frame energy demand reduction in this context.