Knowing and Governing Super-Wicked Problems
A Social Analysis of Low-Carbon Scenarios
Thesis submitted by Aurore FRANSOLET
in fulfilment of the requirements of the PhD Degree in sciences (“Docteur en
sciences”)
Academic year 2018-2019
Supervisor: Professor Tom BAULER
Table of Contents
INTRODUCTION ___________________________________________________________________________ 1
1. Towards a Social Analysis of Low-Carbon Scenarios ____________________________________________________ 1 2. Ontological and Epistemological Posture _____________________________________________________________ 5 3. Outline of the Thesis _____________________________________________________________________________ 8
CHAPTER I. Scenarios for Knowing and Governing Super-Wicked Problems __________________________ 11
Introduction _____________________________________________________________________________________ 11 1. Transition to a Low-Carbon Society in 2050 __________________________________________________________ 12 1.1. Context ___________________________________________________________________________________ 12 1.2. Conceptualization of the Low-Carbon Transition __________________________________________________ 15 1.2.1. Socio-Technical Approach ________________________________________________________________ 15 1.2.2. Multi-Level Perspective on Transition _______________________________________________________ 16 2. Low-Carbon Transition: A Super-Wicked Problem _____________________________________________________ 19
2.1. Wicked Nature of the Low-Carbon Transition _____________________________________________________ 19 2.2. Forms of Knowledge Production and Modes of Governance to Address Super-Wicked Problems ____________ 24 2.2.1. From Normal Science to Post-Normal Science and Foresight _____________________________________ 24 2.2.2. From Traditional Top-Down Modes of Governance to Bottom-Up Approaches Involving Stakeholders ___ 27 3. Knowing Super-Wicked Problems __________________________________________________________________ 29
3.1. Foresight and Scenario Approach ______________________________________________________________ 29 3.1.1. Foresight: Conceptual Clarification _________________________________________________________ 29 3.1.2. Scenarios for Envisioning and Exploring Alternative Images of the Future __________________________ 31 3.2. Scenarios Tackling Super-Wicked Problems ______________________________________________________ 34 3.3. Low-Carbon Scenarios _______________________________________________________________________ 44 3.3.1. Overview _____________________________________________________________________________ 44 3.3.2. Typology of Low-Carbon Scenarios _________________________________________________________ 45 4. Governing Super-Wicked Problems ________________________________________________________________ 49
4.1. Governance _______________________________________________________________________________ 49 4.1.1. Governance: Conceptual Clarification _______________________________________________________ 49 4.1.2. Policy, Politics and Polity Dimensions of Governance ___________________________________________ 50 4.2. Governance of the Low-Carbon Transition _______________________________________________________ 54 4.2.1. Causal Model, Policy Goals and Constellation of Actors _________________________________________ 54 4.2.2. Coexistence of Traditional Top-Down Modes of Governance and Bottom-Up Approaches Involving Stakeholders ________________________________________________________________________________ 57 4.2.3. Development of Subnational Actions and Transnational Cooperation in a Polycentric System __________ 59 4.3. How to Govern the Low-Carbon Transition: A Knowledge Gap _______________________________________ 61 5. Low-Carbon Scenarios and Governance _____________________________________________________________ 63
DESIGN OF THE RESEARCH __________________________________________________________________ 87
1. Research Questions _____________________________________________________________________________ 87 2. Empirical Studies _______________________________________________________________________________ 89
CHAPTER II. Contextual Background __________________________________________________________ 93
Introduction _____________________________________________________________________________________ 93 1. Walloon Region ________________________________________________________________________________ 94 2. Domestic GHG Emissions _________________________________________________________________________ 96 2.1. Historic GHG Emissions ______________________________________________________________________ 96 2.2. Projections of GHG Emissions _________________________________________________________________ 98 3. Climate Mitigation Governance in a Multi-Level Perspective ___________________________________________ 101
3.1. Overview of the Belgian Political System ________________________________________________________ 101 3.1.1. Belgian Federalism _____________________________________________________________________ 101 3.1.2. Partitocracy __________________________________________________________________________ 102 3.1.3. Corporatism __________________________________________________________________________ 102 3.1.4. Pillarization ___________________________________________________________________________ 102 3.2. Climate Mitigation: A Shared Competence between the Federal State and the Regions __________________ 103 3.2.1. Vertical Integration ____________________________________________________________________ 103 3.2.2. Horizontal Integration __________________________________________________________________ 104 3.3. Energy Market Governance __________________________________________________________________ 105 3.3.1. Liberalisation of the Energy Market _______________________________________________________ 105 3.3.2. Energy Market Operators _______________________________________________________________ 105 3.4. Involvement of Civil Society in Climate-Energy Policy-Making _______________________________________ 107 3.4.1. Civil Society organizations _______________________________________________________________ 107 3.4.2. Involvement of Civil Society in Policy-Making ________________________________________________ 108 3.5. Main Climate Mitigation Policies ______________________________________________________________ 108 3.5.1. Emergence of Climate Mitigation Governance and First Commitment Period of the Kyoto Protocol (2008-2012) ____________________________________________________________________________________ 109 3.5.2. Post-2012 Climate Mitigation Policy _______________________________________________________ 110 4. Climate-Energy Foresight in Wallonia ______________________________________________________________ 117
4.1. Foresight: A Scarcely Institutionalized Practice ___________________________________________________ 117 4.1.1. Emergence of Foresight (1974-2004) ______________________________________________________ 117 4.1.2. Rhetorical Public Practice of Foresight (2004-2009) ___________________________________________ 118 4.1.3. Effective Public Practice of Foresight (2009-2016) ____________________________________________ 119 4.2. Foresight on Climate-Energy Issues ____________________________________________________________ 121 4.2.1. Main Contractors of Foresight Studies on Climate-Energy Issues ________________________________ 121 4.2.2. Climate Mitigation Scenarios for Wallonia __________________________________________________ 124 Conclusion to the Chapter _________________________________________________________________________ 128
CHAPTER III. Interactions between Low-Carbon Scenarios and Governance: A Multiple Case Study ______ 131
Introduction ____________________________________________________________________________________ 131 1. Framework to Analyse the Role of Foresight Studies in Policy-Making ___________________________________ 133 2. Methodology _________________________________________________________________________________ 136
3. Case Studies __________________________________________________________________________________ 147 3.1. Case Study n°1. Towards a Low-Carbon Wallonia in 2050 __________________________________________ 147
3.1.1. Emergence ___________________________________________________________________________ 147 3.1.2. Presentation of the Study _______________________________________________________________ 147 3.1.3. Communication, Follow-Up and Reception __________________________________________________ 150 3.1.4. Role of the Study in Policy-Making ________________________________________________________ 152 3.1.5. Key Lessons __________________________________________________________________________ 158 3.2. Case Study n°2. Scenarios for a Low Carbon Belgium by 2050 _______________________________________ 162 3.2.1. Emergence ___________________________________________________________________________ 162 3.2.2. Presentation of the Study _______________________________________________________________ 163 3.2.3. Communication, Follow-Up and Reception __________________________________________________ 165 3.2.4. Role of the Study in Policy-Making ________________________________________________________ 169 3.2.5. Key Lessons __________________________________________________________________________ 172 3.3. Case Study n°3. Towards 100% Renewable Energy in Belgium by 2050 ________________________________ 175 3.3.1. Emergence ___________________________________________________________________________ 175 3.3.2. Presentation of the Study _______________________________________________________________ 176 3.3.3. Communication, Follow-Up and Reception __________________________________________________ 179 3.3.4. Role of the Study in Policy-Making ________________________________________________________ 182 3.3.5. Key Lessons __________________________________________________________________________ 187 3.4. Case Study n°4. Prospective Study: Energy Transition _____________________________________________ 192 3.4.1. Emergence ___________________________________________________________________________ 192 3.4.2. Presentation of the Study _______________________________________________________________ 192 3.4.3. Communication, Follow-Up and Reception __________________________________________________ 195 3.4.4. Role of the Study in Policy-Making ________________________________________________________ 197 3.4.5. Key Lessons __________________________________________________________________________ 198 4. Cross-Case Analysis ____________________________________________________________________________ 202
4.1. Roles of the Studies in Policy-Making __________________________________________________________ 202 4.1.1. Similarities between Case Studies _________________________________________________________ 203 4.1.2. Differences between Case Studies ________________________________________________________ 206 4.2. Appropriation and Use of the Studies per Actor __________________________________________________ 209 5. Discussion ____________________________________________________________________________________ 212
5.1. Foresight: An Oddity in the Political Landscape ___________________________________________________ 212 5.2. Governing the Low-Carbon Transition: A Predictable Failure? _______________________________________ 215 6. Limits of the Study _____________________________________________________________________________ 219 Conclusion to the Chapter _________________________________________________________________________ 220
CHAPTER IV. Making of Knowledge about Governance in Low-Carbon Scenarios: A Needs Assessment ___ 225
3. Results ______________________________________________________________________________________ 249 3.1. Policy-Relevance of Governance Issues in Comparison with Other Questions ___________________________ 249 3.2. Governance Issues Perceived as the Most or Least Policy Relevant ___________________________________ 249 3.2.1. Governance Issues Perceived as the Most Policy-Relevant _____________________________________ 250 3.2.2. Governance Issues Perceived as the Least Policy Relevant ______________________________________ 251 3.3. Similarities and Differences between the Factors _________________________________________________ 252 3.3.1. Similarities between the Factors: Area of Consensus __________________________________________ 253 3.3.2. Specificities of Each Factor: Terms of the Debate _____________________________________________ 253 4. Key Lessons Arising from the Q Survey _____________________________________________________________ 267 5. Discussion of the Method _______________________________________________________________________ 270 5.1. Forced and Free Distributions ________________________________________________________________ 270 5.1.1. Comparison of the Results Obtained with Free and Forced Distributions __________________________ 270 5.1.2. Value of Combining Forced and Free Distributions ____________________________________________ 278 5.2. Limits of the Method _______________________________________________________________________ 279 Conclusion to the Chapter _________________________________________________________________________ 281
CHAPTER V. Making of Knowledge about Governance in Low-Carbon Scenarios: A Critical Review of
Socio-Technical Energy Transition Models _________________________________________________________ 285
Introduction ____________________________________________________________________________________ 285 1. Integrating Governance in Energy Transition Models _________________________________________________ 287 1.1. Integrated Modelling _______________________________________________________________________ 287 1.2. Socio-Technical Energy Transition (STET) Models _________________________________________________ 287 2. Methodology _________________________________________________________________________________ 289 3. Framework for Analysing how STET Models Make Knowledge about Governance __________________________ 291 4. Review of STET Models _________________________________________________________________________ 292 4.1. Making of Knowledge about Governance in STET Models __________________________________________ 292 4.2. Limits of STET Models in Making Knowledge about Governance _____________________________________ 298 4.2.1. Problem of Scope ______________________________________________________________________ 298 4.2.2. Absence of Vision ______________________________________________________________________ 298 4.2.3. Technocentric Perspective on Energy Transition _____________________________________________ 299 4.2.4. Instrumental Understanding of the Policy Process ____________________________________________ 299 4.2.5. Non-Integration of Polity Dimensions as Variables ____________________________________________ 299 5. Discussion ____________________________________________________________________________________ 301 5.1. Factors that Might Explain the Failure of STET Models in Capturing the “Reality” of Governance ___________ 301 5.1.1. Path Dependence of Scientific Innovation __________________________________________________ 301 5.1.2. Substantial Differences in Ontological and Epistemological Foundations __________________________ 302 5.2. Combining Complementary Approaches to Explore the Governance of the Low-Carbon Transition _________ 302 5.2.1. Advantages of the Complementarity-Based Approach compared to the Pluralistic Approach __________ 303 5.2.2. Complementarity-Based Approaches for Making Knowledge about Governance in Low-Carbon Scenarios 303 Conclusion to the Chapter _________________________________________________________________________ 306
CONCLUSION ___________________________________________________________________________ 311
1. Key Contributions of the Research ________________________________________________________________ 311 2. Avenues for Future Research ____________________________________________________________________ 319
