“Just” energy? An ecofeminist analysis and critique of a predominant conception of energy

IF 4.6 3区 工程技术 Q2 ENERGY & FUELS Energy, Sustainability and Society Pub Date : 2024-12-12 DOI:10.1186/s13705-024-00495-8
Noemi Calidori, Giovanni Frigo, Rafaela Hillerbrand
{"title":"“Just” energy? An ecofeminist analysis and critique of a predominant conception of energy","authors":"Noemi Calidori,&nbsp;Giovanni Frigo,&nbsp;Rafaela Hillerbrand","doi":"10.1186/s13705-024-00495-8","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>This theoretical paper offers an ecofeminist analysis and critique of a specific conception of energy. The hypothesis is that, at least in the Western context, there is a characteristic socio-economic understanding of energy as a resource and commodity for human needs and the development of human societies. This conception corresponds to a cultural understanding that is both different from and broader than the scientific notion of energy. Such a conception has become part of several narratives, including energy policy. Our research question is: <i>does this conception of energy as a commodity and resource affect the relation between humans and nature? And if so, how?</i></p><h3>Results</h3><p>Drawing on the work of Val Plumwood, and Greta Gaard, we argue that conceiving of energy as a resource and commodity for human needs and the socio-economic development of human societies reinforces and mediates the hierarchical and oppressive dualism “human-nature”, thus contributing to backgrounding, excluding, incorporating, and instrumentalizing some parts of nonhuman nature as well as some human groups.</p><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>The idea of energy as a commodity shapes public debates and policies, worsening existing environmental issues. This dominant perspective affects how people respond to environmental challenges and crises, both individually and collectively. This article aims to encourage more critical and open discussions about energy. It suggests that researchers and policymakers adopt more radical and less oppressive approaches in their academic work, benefiting both the human and non-human world.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":539,"journal":{"name":"Energy, Sustainability and Society","volume":"14 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://energsustainsoc.biomedcentral.com/counter/pdf/10.1186/s13705-024-00495-8","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Energy, Sustainability and Society","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s13705-024-00495-8","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"工程技术","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ENERGY & FUELS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

This theoretical paper offers an ecofeminist analysis and critique of a specific conception of energy. The hypothesis is that, at least in the Western context, there is a characteristic socio-economic understanding of energy as a resource and commodity for human needs and the development of human societies. This conception corresponds to a cultural understanding that is both different from and broader than the scientific notion of energy. Such a conception has become part of several narratives, including energy policy. Our research question is: does this conception of energy as a commodity and resource affect the relation between humans and nature? And if so, how?

Results

Drawing on the work of Val Plumwood, and Greta Gaard, we argue that conceiving of energy as a resource and commodity for human needs and the socio-economic development of human societies reinforces and mediates the hierarchical and oppressive dualism “human-nature”, thus contributing to backgrounding, excluding, incorporating, and instrumentalizing some parts of nonhuman nature as well as some human groups.

Conclusions

The idea of energy as a commodity shapes public debates and policies, worsening existing environmental issues. This dominant perspective affects how people respond to environmental challenges and crises, both individually and collectively. This article aims to encourage more critical and open discussions about energy. It suggests that researchers and policymakers adopt more radical and less oppressive approaches in their academic work, benefiting both the human and non-human world.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
“只是”能量?生态女性主义对能源主流概念的分析和批判
这篇理论论文提供了一种生态女性主义的分析和对特定能源概念的批判。假设是,至少在西方背景下,有一种独特的社会经济理解,即能源是人类需求和人类社会发展的资源和商品。这个概念对应于一种文化理解,它既不同于能量的科学概念,又比它更广泛。这样的概念已经成为包括能源政策在内的一些叙事的一部分。我们的研究问题是:这种能源作为商品和资源的概念是否会影响人与自然的关系?如果有,是怎么做到的?根据Val Plumwood和Greta Gaard的研究,我们认为,将能源视为满足人类需求的资源和商品,以及人类社会的社会经济发展,强化和调解了“人-自然”的等级制和压迫性二元论,从而有助于背景、排除、整合和工具化非人类本性的某些部分以及一些人类群体。能源作为一种商品的观念影响了公共辩论和政策,加剧了现有的环境问题。这种占主导地位的观点影响着人们个人和集体应对环境挑战和危机的方式。这篇文章的目的是鼓励对能源问题进行更加批判性和开放性的讨论。它建议研究人员和政策制定者在他们的学术工作中采取更激进和更少压迫的方法,使人类和非人类世界都受益。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Energy, Sustainability and Society
Energy, Sustainability and Society Energy-Energy Engineering and Power Technology
CiteScore
9.60
自引率
4.10%
发文量
45
审稿时长
13 weeks
期刊介绍: Energy, Sustainability and Society is a peer-reviewed open access journal published under the brand SpringerOpen. It covers topics ranging from scientific research to innovative approaches for technology implementation to analysis of economic, social and environmental impacts of sustainable energy systems.
期刊最新文献
Safe-and-sustainable-by-design redox active molecules for energy storage applications No easy way out: towards a framework concept of long-term governance Development of a GIS-based register of biogas plant sites in Lower Saxony, Germany: a foundation for identifying P2G potential Correction: Energy efficiency as a driver of the circular economy and carbon neutrality in selected countries of Southern Europe: a soft computing approach Empirical case study of a digitally enabled energy community with prosumers and P2P trading
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1