Matthew Lane’s research while affiliated with University of Edinburgh and other places

In the Isthmus of Tehuantepec in southern Mexico, utility-scale wind power developments are hotly contested. Steady local resistance is presented by indigenous and peasant "anti" wind power groups, whilst "pro" wind local stakeholders, including many landowners, are perceived as antagonistic to the arrival of wind power. Engaging the energy justice literature and in applying a novel intersectionality approach, this paper presents an exploration of the diverse voices involved, problematising seemingly "rival" discourses in the indigenous town of Union Hidalgo. The research explores how issues of energy justice are intertwined with elements including ethnicity, class, gender, age, power, and the treatment of more-than-humans. Using a mixed methods approach that draws on concept mapping and semi-structured interviews, this paper aims to understand to what extent the lens of intersectionality serves to blur the boundaries between 'pro' and 'anti' voices. It does so by illustrating and discussing how Propietarios ("pros") and Comuneros ("antis") articulate different constructs of energy justice according to varying intersectional positionalities both as groups, and as individuals. Empirically, the paper enriches the literature on local opposition to utility-scale wind power from a non-Western perspective and deepens the exploration of the case study of utility wind power in the Isthmus of Tehuantepec. Conceptually, it advances the use of intersectional approaches in energy justice, advocating for their role in connecting energy justice theory with deeper understandings of individual and collective stances in renewable energy development contestations. This, in turn, offers opportunities to further conceptualise how to achieve energy justice for these communities.

In the debate on the decarbonisation of heat, renewable electricity tends to play a much more dominant role than green gases, despite the potential advantages of gas in terms of utilising existing transportation networks and end-use appliances. Informed comparisons are hampered by information asymmetry; the renewable electricity has seen a huge grid level deployment whereas low-carbon hydrogen or bio-methane have been limited to some small, stand-alone trials. This paper explores the regulatory and commercial challenges of implementing the first UK neighbourhood level 100% low-carbon hydrogen demonstration project. We draw on existing literature and action research to identify the key practical barriers currently hindering the ability of strategically important actors to accelerate the substitution of natural gas with low carbon hydrogen in local gas networks. This paper adds much needed contextual depth to existing generic and theoretical understandings of low-carbon hydrogen for heat transition feasibility. The learnings from pilot projects, about the exclusion of hydrogen calorific value from the Local Distribution Zone calorific value calculation, Special Purpose Vehicle companies, holding of liability and future costs to consumers, need to be quickly transferred into resilient operational practice, or gas repurposing projects will continue to be less desirable than electrification using existing regulations, and with more rapid delivery.

This open access book brings together a collection of cutting-edge insights into how action can and is already being taken against climate change at multiple levels of our societies, amidst growing calls for transformative and inclusive climate action. In an era of increasing recognition regarding climate and ecological breakdown, this book offers hope, inspiration and analyses for multi-level climate action, spanning varied communities, places, spaces, agents and disciplines, demonstrating how the energy and dynamism of local scales are a powerful resource in turning the tide. Interconnected yet conceptually distinct, the book’s three sections span multiple levels of analysis, interrogating diverse perspectives and practices inherent to the vivid tapestry of climate action emerging locally, nationally and internationally. Delivered in collaboration with the UK’s ‘Place-Based Climate Action Network’, chapters are drawn from a wide range of authors with varying backgrounds spread across academia, policy and practice. Candice Howarth is Senior Policy Fellow at the LSE Grantham Research Institute and Co-director of the Place-based Climate Action Network (PCAN). She has an interdisciplinary background in climate policy, communication and pro-environmental behaviour with degrees in meteorology (BSc), climate change (MSc) and a Ph.D. in climate policy and pro-environmental behaviour. Matthew Lane is Researcher in Sustainable Urban Governance at the University of Edinburgh. His research focuses on how city and regional governments are coping with an increased responsibility to act on crises of sustainability despite having limited legal, institutional, political and economic capacity to do so. He has undertaken fieldwork in the UK, Zambia, China and the United States of America. Amanda Slevin is Environmental Sociologist with 20+ years’ experience in community development, adult and community education. Co-Director of QUB’s Centre for Sustainability, Equality and Climate Action, Amanda works with the Place-based Climate Action Network through which she co-founded Belfast Climate Commission and chairs its Community Climate Action Working Group.

Highlights Understanding and responding to the unique context and challenges of places is fundamental to the success of place-based adaptation projects.

Effective action taken against climate change must find ways to unite scientific and practice-based knowledges associated with the various stakeholders who see themselves as invested in the global delivery of climate governance. Political decision-makers, climate scientists and practitioners approach this challenge from what are often radically different perspectives and experiences. While considerable work has been done to develop the idea of ‘co-production’ in the development of climate action outputs, questions remain over how to best unite the contrasting epistemological traditions and norms associated with different stakeholders. Drawing on the existing literatures on climate action co-production and from translational perspectives on the science-policy interface, in this paper we develop the concept of ‘boundary agency’. Defining this as the agency ‘possessed’ when willing and able to translate between different epistemological communities invested in a similar policy and governance challenge such as climate change, we offer it as a useful means to reflect on participants’ understanding of the ‘co’ in co-production. This is in contrast to the more established (often academic-led) focus on what it is that is being produced by co-production processes. We draw from two complementary empirical studies, which explicitly encouraged i) engagement and ii) reflection on cross-boundary co-production between climate action stakeholders from different backgrounds. Reflecting on the two studies, we discuss the benefits of (and barriers to) encouraging more active and sustained engagement between climate action stakeholders so as to try to actively blur the boundaries between science and policy and, in doing so, invent new epistemological communities of practice.

Highlights We ask who exactly it is that represents the ‘place’-based interests of the private sector? Nuanced understanding of private sector required; beyond simply the biggest emitters and richest organisations.

The UK, like other countries, has seen a proliferation of declarations of local climate emergencies. While these declarations have been interpreted as a demonstration of ambition, little is known about how and why they actually came about when they did and the implications this will have for what happens next. Focusing on London, UK, we present evidence collected via semi-structured interviews with experts and practitioners involved in the propagation of climate emergency declarations to critically explore how and why these declarations emerged, and the various different roles they are perceived to play for different local actors. Our findings reveal four journeys to local government declaration of a climate emergency (made actively from above, passively from above, actively from below, and passively from across) and three interwoven purposes (statements of intent, acting as a political gesture, and stimulating local action). We argue that these three purposes combine and coalesce to correlate the declaration of climate emergency with a local responsibility for emissions reduction, leaving little analytical space to question the scalar disconnect between the immediacy of the narrative at local scales and the slow-burning (and) global nature of the threat in question. If these emergency declarations are to be an opportunity for change in the governance of climate change, then the question of ‘what next?’ requires more in-depth, thorough and constructive engagement with the type of climate action the declarations are expected to induce while considering how this aligns with existing responsibilities and resource bases of local government.