Infrastructures of Consumption

Environmental Innovation in the Utility Industries

Bas Van Vliet, Heather Chappells, Elizabeth Shove

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2012
• ISBN:
  9781136563010
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Architecture
• Subtopic: Urban Planning & Landscaping

For many years, a uniform and uncontested picture of utility system organization has endured across Europe. Provider and consumer roles have been largely taken for granted, and consumers have had little choice but to use the infrastructure of the only network provider available. Recent transformations have challenged this model. This book examines the ongoing environmental restructuring of consumption and provision in energy, water and waste systems. In accounting for the distinctive environmental qualities, technical features, and institutional dynamics of utility systems this book challenges contemporary conceptualizations of consumers as the autonomous drivers of environmental change. Instead, utilities and users are positioned as the 'co-managers' of utility systems, and processes of environmental innovation are seen to depend on the systemic restructuring of demand.

1

Introduction

__________________________

In a recent report, Towards Sustainable Household Consumption, the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) showed how the environmental impact of household activities has increased over the last three decades and how it is set to intensify over the next 20 years. Some of the trends the OECD considers most worrying include the growth in household waste, increasing energy demand and regional imbalances in water supply (OECD, 2002). The OECD concludes that achieving environmental sustainability in households will require a ‘shift [in] the structure of consumption’ (OECD, 2002, p14).

In Infrastructures of Consumption, we show what might be involved in restructuring household resource consumption along more sustainable lines. The last two decades have seen a major realignment of relations between utilities and their users. Although numerous studies of social and environmental change in utility sectors exist, these have generally been one sided – focusing either on the macro-institutional transformation of networks, or on the micro-manipulation of household behaviour (Künneke, 1999; Ekins, 2003). Taking a distinctly different approach, we explore the idea that more sustainable systems of service provision suppose and require new contexts for the ‘co-management’ of demand between consumers and providers.

The concept of ‘co-management’ as it relates to the provision of energy, water and waste requires further explanation. Energy and water infrastructures actually enter and are part of the home. Although waste networks rarely involve quite so much physical interconnection, the activities of consumers and providers are interdependent, as when households separate waste to facilitate processes of collection and disposal. In these and other ways, utility consumers are literally plugged into the ‘upstream’ world of providers. These connections mean that action in any one part of the supply chain has implications for what happens elsewhere. This is demonstrated most dramatically in situations of crisis or where resources are in short supply. In times of drought or fuel shortage, utilities often ask consumers to save water or energy, effectively engaging them as co-managers of the supply system.

Such arrangements illustrate the point that relations between the users and producers of energy, water and waste management have distinctive qualities and properties. Most obviously, they do not revolve around the ‘one-off’ purchase of discrete commodities. In the cases we consider, distinctions between supply and demand are often blurred: whether acknowledged or not, consumers and providers are both involved in managing flows of energy, water and waste. Just how this works out is of considerable significance for the reduction of consumption, for recycling and for the promotion of renewable resources. In what follows, we therefore address two central questions: first, how are social and material ‘connections’ or interdependencies between utilities and users changing; and, second, what do these developments mean for the construction of more sustainable systems of provision?

We start by taking stock of how commentators from the environmental and social sciences have conceptualized the consumption and provision of utility services. Taking further inspiration from social studies of technology, we explore the idea that relations between consumers and providers are constructed and mediated by suites of technology and that technical systems shape the dynamics of demand. We draw on case studies of environmental innovation with respect to the provision and management of household waste, energy and water systems in The Netherlands and the UK as a means of developing and elaborating upon different aspects of the consumer–provider relationship.

We focus, in particular, on:

• the differentiation of utility services (for example, the development of green electricity; grey water systems and multiple-waste streams);

• changing scales of provision (from pan-European networks to new forms of embedded generation);

• the experiences of individuals and organizations who have deliberately challenged ‘mainstream’ systems of provision; and

• the technological and institutional conditions and contexts of different forms of demand-side management.

In the process, we identify the potential for new types of ‘green’ connection.

UTILITIES AND USERS

Cohen (1998) concludes that the production-oriented ethos of environmental policy – one in which demand is explained in terms of population growth or macro-economic development – is giving way to a more consumer-oriented focus on issues of lifestyle, behaviour and individual choice. This shift is reflected in a number of contemporary policy documents. For example, a recent UK government consultation paper entitled ‘Sustainable development: Opportunities for change’ suggests that consumers have a huge impact on sustainable development through their influence as purchasers (DETR, 1998). Others point to the very wide range of activities through which consumers contribute to environmentally significant consumption. Illustrating this point, the OECD defines sustainable consumption as a set of choices relating to the ‘selection, purchase, use, maintenance, repair and disposal of any product or service’ (OECD, 2002, p16; after Campbell, 1998). By implication, the transition to a more sustainable society requires a sea change in the behaviour of individual consumers.

National and international policy-makers responsible for regulating the environmental performance of energy, water and waste utilities routinely suppose that the achievement of more sustainable patterns of consumption rests upon the decisions and actions of individual households. This kind of thinking has justified extensive programmes of social environmental enquiry bent on identifying the economic and psychological determinants of consumer behaviour (Ekins, 2003). Studies of this sort have, in turn, informed the design of policy ‘instruments’ intended to make consumers aware of the environmental costs and consequences of their purchasing decisions and lifestyle choices. Demand-side management programmes such as the UK Energy Efficiency Standards of Performance (EESOP) programme share this orientation.

Though dominant, this is not the only paradigm on offer. A number of social scientists have questioned the relevance of behavioural and individualistic theories of consumption and the policy approaches they support. Writers including Otnes (1988) and Spaargaren (1997) suggest that the environmental ‘choices’ of consumers are influenced by their attachment to shared social and collective networks. Taking a different tack, Shove and Warde (1998) conclude that it is difficult to make sense of the routinely inconspicuous forms of consumption involved in the reproduction of everyday life in terms of lifestyle choice or social differentiation. As these and other authors argue, people do not consume energy or water. In reality, such resources are used in the process of accomplishing normal social practices and achieving taken-for-granted standards – for example, of comfort or cleanliness. Demand consequently depends upon how these all-important services are defined and delivered and on patterns of resource consumption thereby entailed.

Different ways of conceptualizing consumption have practical consequences for the design and development of environmental policy. As we have already seen, many commentators equate sustainable consumption with the production and promotion of ecological products and services (Ekins, 2003). For Mol and Spaargaren (1992), the sustainable transformation of domestic practices requires ‘bottom-up’ consumer activism in combination with a ‘top-down’ greening of supply chains. Instead of taking present levels of demand for granted, other commentators argue that environmental policy should seek to challenge assumptions, commitments and conventions around which ordinary consumption is organized (Redclift, 1996; Shove, 2003).

This book explores the relevance of debates such as these for the analysis and interpretation of the changing relationship between utilities and their users.

INFRASTRUCTURES AND ENVIRONMENTAL INNOVATION

As we have already noticed, the provision and consumption of energy and water and the management of waste is mediated and structured by all manner of technological systems. In practice, the actions and inactions of individual households are rather directly dependent upon a variety of mediating devices and upon the infrastructures to which they are attached (Otnes, 1988). Contemporary routines of washing and bathing suppose the existence of taps, showers and sinks. Likewise, using electricity is impossible in the absence of things such as light bulbs, vacuum cleaners, washing machines, heaters and computers. At the same time, none of the activities mentioned above would be possible without a wider infrastructure of supply comprising transmission lines, sub-stations, reservoirs and disposal sites.

Environmental policy-makers who view sustainable consumption as an expression of individual choice generally focus on isolated technical fixes – for example, on the acquisition of more efficient freezers, light bulbs or heating systems. These ‘solutions’ allow people to maintain current lifestyles and social practices but with fewer resources. What is missing here is an analysis of the co-evolution of technology and practice – for instance, of how freezers structure and are structured by systems of food provisioning. Throughout this book we illustrate the extent to which consumption practices are shaped by the distinctive socio-technical systems upon which they depend.

Increasing the efficiency of domestic technology makes it possible to get more from a given amount of water or electricity (von Weizsäker et al, 1998). But however efficient, such technologies may also increase demand for services and/or promote ultimately unsustainable patterns of waste production. In other words, there are different ways in which technical infrastructures structure the resource intensity of everyday life. The household dustbin is, for instance, more than just a receptacle for waste. Its size and design permit certain practices and prevent others. These characteristics do not arise by accident. As Chappells and Shove (1999) argue, they are the physical embodiment of an institutional relationship between the household and those who collect the rubbish. To borrow terms developed by Akrich (1992) and Latour (1992), energy- and water-consuming appliances, such as the dustbins referred to above, are ‘inscribed’ with meanings, assumptions and rule sets. Scripts do not determine the processes and practicalities of use; but household technologies are, nonetheless, implicated in mediating relations between utility consumers and providers and in creating particular contexts for environmental action.

It is important to think about how mediating technologies structure the ways in which consumers use, store and dispose of resources. But as Otnes (1988) observes, households are part of a more extensive socio-material system in which yet other technologies are involved in processes of generation, distribution, storage and treatment. The design and management of these socio-technical complexes is itself of consequence for the timing and intensity of resource flows and, hence, for the dynamics of household demand. Various authors have written about how large technical systems come to be as they are and about the political, organizational and operational norms they embody (Hughes, 1983; Coutard, 1999; Moss, 2004). For example, Hughes explains that power networks built to meet universal needs perpetuate a ‘predict-and-provide’ culture that is at odds with the systematic and careful management of demand (Hughes, 1983). Although infrastructural hardware is relatively durable (in the form of pumping stations, sewerage systems, power plant, etc.), the institutional environment is more fluid. Writers such as Coutard (1999), Guy and Osborn (1997) and Summerton (1994) claim that new regimes of ownership and management generate new priorities and objectives, the realization of which has practical consequences for the ways in which networks are managed and developed.

Together, these observations suggest that institutions and infrastructures actively create and structure contemporary patterns of demand. Taking these points on board, the challenge of engendering more sustainable forms of energy, water and waste management is one of reconfiguring these arrangements as well as (and as part of) shifting consumers’ habits and practices. Drawing on these ideas, this book recognizes the many scales and levels at which past and present systems of energy, water and waste management influence the actions of today’s consumers and providers and, hence, the potential for ‘greening’ connections between utilities and their users.

ENERGY, WATER AND WASTE: CHARACTERISTICS AND DYNAMICS

Fine and Leopold (1993) argue that attempts to analyse and explain patterns of consumption should take account of the unique characteristics and dynamics of commodity-specific ‘systems of provision’. Energy (by which we mostly mean electricity), water and waste have distinctive material properties. Most obviously, electricity is invisible and cannot be stored as easily as water or waste. Meanwhile, there are different qualities and grades of water and waste, and different ways of managing their separation, storage and treatment. In what follows we take note of these material features and what they mean for the dynamics of consumption and provision.

These differences aside, the continuous provision of energy, water and waste management is now regarded as essential for modern life. Partly because systems of public provision are already well established (many date from the 19th century), the ways in which infrastructures shape demand and consumer practice have faded from view. Consumers are only dimly aware of the social and technical systems and of the miles of wires and pipes upon which their routines depend. Having said that, in the UK and The Netherlands, as elsewhere, the utilities remain politically important for the social and economic development of the nation as a whole. Because of this, their organization and operation is not left to commercial interests alone. Even though the provision of these once public goods is now framed by a political economy of privatization and liberalized market arrangements, the utilities are closely regulated. Relations between utilities and their users, and between utilities and the technological systems for which they are responsible are, in turn, structured by an array of national and increasingly transnational regulatory regimes. These are of some consequence for the possibilities and practicalities of environmental reform.

To summarize, energy, water and waste networks share a number of distinctive characteristics. Consumers and providers are interdependent in rather special ways. As owners of the sensitive fingertips of the infrastructure itself (i.e. the home), consumers are directly implicated in the functioning of the system as a whole. Second, consumption is mediated by a set of intervening devices (showers, toasters, freezers etc.), the design, ownership and use of which determines changing patterns of demand. Third, the wider infrastructure, in the form of reservoirs, power plant, distribution systems etc., has qualities and properties that make a real difference to the management and flow of resources behind the scenes. Fourth, methods of management and patterns of future investment reflect institutional and regulatory regimes, many of which have changed dramatically during recent years. Finally, the resources we consider have specific material properties. These make a difference to the manner in which they are generated, delivered and used.

THEMES, QUESTIONS AND METHODS

Having set out some of the main features of our approach, we now elaborate on the central themes around which this book is organized. In one way or another, the four themes outlined below deal with the basic question of what changing systems of utility provision mean for the possibilities and prospects of sustainability.

Differentiation and choice

Utilities – as state monopolies – have traditionally provided an undifferentiated service, delivering ‘standard’ energy, supplying drinking-quality water and removing all waste. Consumers were ‘captive’ in the sense that they had no option but to connect to the network of the provider operating in their area. In many European countries, publicly owned monopolies have been privatized and markets opened up to competition. Partly, but not only, as a result of these developments, services and resources are not as uniform as they once were. In looking for ways to compete and segment markets, certain utility providers are exploring ways of developing and promoting specifically ‘green’ products and services. Does this mean that consumers can, at last, give expression to their green commitments and opt for ‘the environment’ as their brand of choice? More generally, what do new processes of differentiation – for instance, between ‘green’ and brown electricity, between different waste streams and different qualities of water – mean for the infrastructure as a whole?

Proponents of privatization generally argue that market liberalization ‘empowers’ consumers and offers them greater choice of service providers, products and tariffs (Awerbuch, 2003). Others are more sceptical. Summerton, for one, draws attention to the socially divisive character of service restructuring in the electricity sector and to the new ‘haves and have-nots’ of utility provision (Summerton, 2004). In what follows, we conclude that the representation of utility consumers as either ‘autonomous’ or ‘captive’ overlooks subtle but important distinctions in the (indirect) part that different consumers play in the management and operation of utility systems. The cases we consider illustrate the multiple ways in which consumer–provider relations are being reconfigured. Rather than observing a swing from captive to authoritative consumer, we detect a proliferation of new arrangements, each affording different degrees of ‘autonomy’ from mainstream pr...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Halftitle
• Title
• Copyright
• Contents
• List of Figures and Tables
• List of Acronyms and Abbreviations
• Preface
• Acknowledgements
• 1. Introduction
• 2. Linking Utilities and Users
• 3. Infrastructural Change and Sustainable Consumption
• 4. Differentiation and Choice in Water, Electricity and Waste Services
• 5. Shifting Scales and the Co-production of Green Grids
• 6. New Modes of ‘Sustainable’ Provision
• 7. Restructuring Demand and Efficiency
• 8. Systems of Provision and Innovation
• References
• Index