Ross Wallace, a PhD candidate in the Doctoral Program in Psychology, will defend the thesis titled "Representing Renewable Energy Communities: a social psychological approach to imagining the future". The public defense is scheduled for November 15, 2024, 10:00 at Sala de Atos, (Building 1 - Reitoria) of Iscte-University Institute of Lisbon. And online: https://videoconf-colibri.zoom.us/j/97490543317
Changes on room and Zoom link may be updated at Iscte's website.
Abstract
This dissertation employs a critical qualitative approach to examine how the future is represented through the intertwined dynamics of institutional and everyday meaning-making, regarding national transitions to renewable energy and particularly "Renewable Energy Communities" (RECs) in Portugal. RECs, introduced at the European Union level, aim to mobilize collective action for local renewable electricity production and consumption, and are now being integrated in policy in Portugal, a country with high renewable energy production but issues in public participation and energy poverty. The research analyzes formal institutions (policies and laws) that define what is possible, likely, and desirable in public energy systems, as well as how these directives are interpreted and challenged by mediating systems (the media and energy experts) and the general public. Theoretically, the research synthesizes the theory of social representations with the pragmatic sociology of engagements and critique (convention theory). Empirically, the dissertation comprises four studies. Study 1 examines the representation of energy futures and RECs in national policies and legal frameworks. Study 2 investigates how energy experts interpret REC laws and future energy imaginaries. Study 3 analyzes representations of RECs in the mainstream Portuguese press. Study 4 explores how different "energy publics" perceive the energy future, distinguishing between REC participants and those affected by large-scale solar projects. Key findings highlight tensions between competing notions of the common good in REC initiatives and reveal how actors use future-oriented discourses to legitimize REC models that prioritize commercial interests and private ownership, potentially overshadowing collective action and broader social benefits.
Comments