重新定义当代能源市场

IF 3 2区 社会学 Q2 BUSINESS Competition & Change Pub Date : 2021-05-14 DOI:10.1177/10245294211011308
A. Lawrence
{"title":"重新定义当代能源市场","authors":"A. Lawrence","doi":"10.1177/10245294211011308","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article provides a conjunctural synopsis of both empirical trends and new approaches to analytically and normatively assessing energy markets. The preceding eras of coal and oil entailed not only differing technologies but also historically distinct political geographies, modes of production, and characteristic commodities and systems of value. They also coincided with and helped reinforce several misleading assumptions: of ‘pure’, ‘stateless’ energy markets; of scarcity as a defining feature of all economies; of unlimited growth and of market equilibrium. These assumptions tended to reinforce established approaches to energy markets that were insufficiently historically grounded, abstracted from social, political and ecological relations, and – with particular reference to oil – premised on zero-sum geostrategic calculations of interest. They are inadequate to, or misleading about, fossil fuel markets, and do not adequately address such recent phenomena as unprecedented levels of financialization of the global economy with an unprecedented intensity of ecological crisis entailing, most prominently, global warming. These factors undermine the prior assumptions in several respects: it is not scarcity, but rather abundance of greenhouse gas emissions that is of paramount concern; this in turn necessarily implies that unlimited growth is neither possible nor desirable; and furthermore, that ecological degradation has fundamentally displaced the analytical plausibility of market equilibrium, no less than its normative appeal. An exercise in reconceptualizing energy markets is therefore one that should explore not only what was misperceived and what has changed but also what needs to change in order to restore economic, political and ecological sustainability.","PeriodicalId":46999,"journal":{"name":"Competition & Change","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-05-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/10245294211011308","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Reconceptualizing contemporary energy markets\",\"authors\":\"A. Lawrence\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/10245294211011308\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This article provides a conjunctural synopsis of both empirical trends and new approaches to analytically and normatively assessing energy markets. The preceding eras of coal and oil entailed not only differing technologies but also historically distinct political geographies, modes of production, and characteristic commodities and systems of value. They also coincided with and helped reinforce several misleading assumptions: of ‘pure’, ‘stateless’ energy markets; of scarcity as a defining feature of all economies; of unlimited growth and of market equilibrium. These assumptions tended to reinforce established approaches to energy markets that were insufficiently historically grounded, abstracted from social, political and ecological relations, and – with particular reference to oil – premised on zero-sum geostrategic calculations of interest. They are inadequate to, or misleading about, fossil fuel markets, and do not adequately address such recent phenomena as unprecedented levels of financialization of the global economy with an unprecedented intensity of ecological crisis entailing, most prominently, global warming. These factors undermine the prior assumptions in several respects: it is not scarcity, but rather abundance of greenhouse gas emissions that is of paramount concern; this in turn necessarily implies that unlimited growth is neither possible nor desirable; and furthermore, that ecological degradation has fundamentally displaced the analytical plausibility of market equilibrium, no less than its normative appeal. An exercise in reconceptualizing energy markets is therefore one that should explore not only what was misperceived and what has changed but also what needs to change in order to restore economic, political and ecological sustainability.\",\"PeriodicalId\":46999,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Competition & Change\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-05-14\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/10245294211011308\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Competition & Change\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/10245294211011308\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"BUSINESS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Competition & Change","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10245294211011308","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"BUSINESS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

这篇文章提供了经验趋势和分析和规范评估能源市场的新方法的综合概述。之前的煤炭和石油时代不仅涉及不同的技术,还涉及历史上不同的政治地理、生产方式以及特色商品和价值体系。它们也与一些误导性的假设不谋而合,并有助于强化这些假设:“纯粹”、“无状态”的能源市场;稀缺是所有经济体的一个决定性特征;无限增长和市场均衡。这些假设倾向于强化既定的能源市场方法,这些方法没有足够的历史基础,从社会、政治和生态关系中抽象出来,尤其是在石油方面,其前提是利益的零和地缘战略计算。它们不足以或误导化石燃料市场,也没有充分解决最近出现的现象,如全球经济金融化程度空前,生态危机强度空前,最突出的是全球变暖。这些因素在几个方面破坏了先前的假设:最令人关切的不是温室气体排放的稀缺性,而是大量排放;这反过来必然意味着无限增长既不可能也不可取;此外,生态退化从根本上取代了市场均衡的分析合理性,不亚于其规范吸引力。因此,重新定义能源市场的做法不仅应该探索被误解的地方和已经发生的变化,还应该探索需要改变的地方,以恢复经济、政治和生态的可持续性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Reconceptualizing contemporary energy markets
This article provides a conjunctural synopsis of both empirical trends and new approaches to analytically and normatively assessing energy markets. The preceding eras of coal and oil entailed not only differing technologies but also historically distinct political geographies, modes of production, and characteristic commodities and systems of value. They also coincided with and helped reinforce several misleading assumptions: of ‘pure’, ‘stateless’ energy markets; of scarcity as a defining feature of all economies; of unlimited growth and of market equilibrium. These assumptions tended to reinforce established approaches to energy markets that were insufficiently historically grounded, abstracted from social, political and ecological relations, and – with particular reference to oil – premised on zero-sum geostrategic calculations of interest. They are inadequate to, or misleading about, fossil fuel markets, and do not adequately address such recent phenomena as unprecedented levels of financialization of the global economy with an unprecedented intensity of ecological crisis entailing, most prominently, global warming. These factors undermine the prior assumptions in several respects: it is not scarcity, but rather abundance of greenhouse gas emissions that is of paramount concern; this in turn necessarily implies that unlimited growth is neither possible nor desirable; and furthermore, that ecological degradation has fundamentally displaced the analytical plausibility of market equilibrium, no less than its normative appeal. An exercise in reconceptualizing energy markets is therefore one that should explore not only what was misperceived and what has changed but also what needs to change in order to restore economic, political and ecological sustainability.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
7.20
自引率
7.70%
发文量
37
期刊最新文献
Making “strategic autonomy” rhyme with “fiscal austerity?” Unresolved conflicts of (geo)economic ideas in EU infrastructure policy Erratum to “An international interface: Democratic planning in a global context” The regulator’s trilemma: On the limits of technocratic governance in digital markets The invisible leverage of the rich. Absentee debtors and their hedge funds Partial organization and economic coordination: The gradual re-organization of Finnish corporatism
×
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