Click the star to add/remove an item to/from your individual schedule.
You need to be logged in to avail of this functionality.
Log in
- Convenors:
-
Sophie Nyborg
(Technical University of Denmark)
Julia Kirch Kirkegaard (Technical University of Denmark)
Send message to Convenors
- Chairs:
-
Tom Cronin
(Technical University of Denmark)
Emil Nissen (Technical University of Denmark)
- Format:
- Traditional Open Panel
Short Abstract:
Embracing the interventionist and implicated nature of STS (Elgaard, 2012) this panel inquires into the role of STS in the ‘age of participation’ (Chilvers and Kearnes 2016), focusing on the ‘co-creation paradigm’ (Ramaswamy and Ozkan, 2014) as intervention in the green energy transition.
Long Abstract:
Embracing the inherently interventionist, political and implicated nature of STS (Elgaard, 2012), this panel critically inquires into what STS can contribute with in the ‘age of participation’ (Chilvers and Kearnes 2016, 2), of ‘action research’ and ‘intervention’, focusing on the ‘co-creation paradigm’ (Ramaswamy and Ozkan, 2014) and its role in the green energy transition. Co-creation has become a buzzword in recent years as an intervention strategy to handle techno-scientific development responsibly (e.g. Müller et al., 2021) by facilitating the coming together of different actors in a joint activity that leads to mutual benefits and value for all. Co-creation overlaps with conceptual boundaries of e.g. public engagement in technoscientific controversies and RRI (Irwin, 2014, Stilgoe et al 2013, 2014), democratization of expertise (Nowotny, 2003), hybrid forums and issue and object-oriented engagement (Callon et al 2009; Marres 2007, 2012; Latour & Weibel, 2005), newer science communication (e.g. Horst and Michael, 2011) and Mode 2 knowledge production (Gibbons et al 1994). Co-creation also connects with concepts on e.g. user innovation (Von Hippel, 2005), open innovation (Tekic and Willoughby 2019) as well as design research, e.g. co-design and participatory design (Sanders and Stappers, 2008), which has recently been making itself useful for transition studies (e.g. Irwin, 2015; Hyysalo et al., 2019). We welcome papers that theorize on what co-creation and intervention means in STS in terms of bringing about sustainable and inclusive transformation.
More specific questions to be discussed may be:
- How do we approach inherent power issues related to how world-making always involves inclusion/exclusions and who gets to co-create?
- What are the potentials – and limits – for what can be co-created in energy transitions?
- Taking into account the many shapes of interventions – e.g. co-creation workshops, co-produced digital sprints, etc. –what is being intervened in, and with what purposes?
Accepted papers:
Session 1Simone Casiraghi (Vrije Universiteit Brussel) Ana Pop Stefanija (imec-SMIT, Vrije Universiteit Brussel) Rocco Bellanova (Vrije Universiteit Brussel) Rob Heyman (Vrije Universiteit Brussel)
Short abstract:
This contribution explores the development of AI-driven renewable energy distribution systems within local energy communities. It examines the techno-political aspects of co-creation, honoring citizen involvement and addressing potential frictions through citizen science and STS approaches.
Long abstract:
The constitution of local energy communities is a crucial site to unpack the techno-political dimension of the so-called green energy transition. In this contribution, we follow the development of an automated system for the coordination and facilitation of renewable energy distribution through Artificial Intelligence (AI) proxies. Developed in a multidisciplinary research project within a so-called ‘energy community’ in Belgium, the envisioned AI system involves the community’s members as energy prosumers and AI users. Focusing on the design of these AI proxies the paper casts a light on the techno-political dimension of an energy community’s co-creation. It also honors the “Nothing about us without us” request of citizens, thus countering the tendency of building AI systems that affect people’s lives without asking the same people if that is needed at all, or how. Drawing on insights from STS approaches to the ‘sociology of testing’ (Downer, 2007; Marres & Stark, 2020; Pinch, 1993) and ‘citizen science’ (Strasser et al., 2019) we study the interface between the AI’s and the energy community’s lifeworld. We ask how citizens’ values, practices, and priorities are translated into an AI proxy system and how co-creation unfolds when it comes to integrating AI into a (energy) community. Involving citizens from the start through citizen juries and interviews, we expect to better identify 1) citizens’ guidelines and redlines against AI solutionism; 2) the divergences between what researchers and users deem important to be tested, and 3) frictions not foreseen in the research design phase of the co-creation project.
Annabel Pinker (The James Hutton Institute) Johannes Hollenhorst (London School of Economics and Political Science)
Short abstract:
Based on experiences from a co-creative research project we reflect on how the shift in the positionality of STS researchers in participatory projects reverses the role of the researcher and the researched. We suggest that we need to render STS knowledge actionable to truly participate.
Long abstract:
As the emergence of community and farm-owned wind and solar energy has shown, green energy transitions can offer an opportunity for the creation of new income streams for rural areas if a supportive regulatory environment exists. Building on this partial historical success, we have explored through research with potential stakeholders in the North-East of Scotland (UK) whether decentralised green hydrogen production, storage, and distribution could contribute to a more social and ecological creation of a regional hydrogen market. This paper reports on our attempt to intensify the social potential of green hydrogen production by connecting the hydrogen farm project “HydroGlen” to the highly successful community energy project of the Huntly Development Trust. Together with a workshop facilitator from Tripod Training, we planned a system-building workshop on the back of a series of interviews to bring the different stakeholders and their perspectives together, seeking to lay the foundations for a cooperative approach to producing, using, and transporting decentralised green hydrogen. Based on our research, we suggest that the co-creation of green energy transitions requires the integration of a multiplicity of future imaginaries, expectations, and practices, creating a new ethical responsibility for researchers to make decisions that centrally influence the shape and form of an only emerging network. The perspective that STS research can provide in the "age of participation" is therefore one in which the traditional responsibilities of the researcher and the researched are reversed and in which earlier empirical research findings need to be translated back into actionable knowledge.
Chihyuan Yang (National Chengchi University)
Short abstract:
Energy landscape is assembled with technology, sensitivity and localities. A PV greenhouse designed after a disaster meets local needs by connecting crops, soils, steel and young workers; a large-scale PV in abandoned salt pans involved a co-created conservation plan to ensure habitat management.
Long abstract:
Taking the material conditions and sensory dimensions seriously, an energy landscape is perceived as a specific mode of valuing and combining the senses with the environment and material things in a specific cultural context (Howes, 2005; Olwig, 2002; Ingold, 1993); landscape, artefacts and social life are mutually constitutive in the emergence of assemblages (Latour, 2005). The sensory interaction between technology and humans filling the environment causes the meaning of the energy landscape to differ, which means it is a contested concept subjecting to differing interpretations. Sensory groups and ethno-epistemic assemblages (EEAs) (Irwin & Michael, 2003) around the installations are crucial to the meaning-making of RE technology.
Two cases in Taiwan are documented below to illustrate this point. PV greenhouse designed in the aftermath of Typhoon Morakot exemplifies assembling RE technology locally, which can be understood as establishing connections among local environments, materiality and attachments while negotiating and experimenting with the most practical and acceptable formations of installations. Under these PV greenhouses, young people are conjured along with PVs, vegetables, steel frames, and gusty winds, forming the assemblage reflecting local concerns.
Under the policy target of zero-emission, large-scale PV installation was planned for Budai's abandoned salt pans, which serve as an interconnecting habitat for migratory birds. To ensure habitat management, a group formed by the central and local governments, NGOs, associations, renewable energy developers, and local participants created a conservation plan; 30% of the contracted area was reserved for ecological conservation and entrusted to a local NGO for close habitat management.
Ilgın İrem Gündüz (Middle East Technical University) Yelda Erden Topal (Middle East Technical University)
Short abstract:
The intervention of STS through the 'co-creation' paradigm in clean energy sectors like electric vehicles and battery technologies can be examined. This paper could focus on how STS can play a role in Turkey's green energy transition and its potential effectiveness in policy-making.
Long abstract:
This panel is closely related to my thesis which is titled "Electrical Vehicles and Storage Technologies 'Analysis of Technological Capability: Case of Turkey" research on Turkey's policies regarding electric vehicles and battery technologies. My thesis examines the strategies for achieving Turkey's energy sufficiency goals and highlights the role of science and technology studies (STS) in reaching these goals through interventionist strategies.In my thesis, while examining Turkey's policies in the electric vehicle and battery technology sector, I investigate how interventionist strategies can facilitate sustainable and inclusive innovations. In this panel, I aim to emphasize how the findings and discussions from my thesis can provide valuable insights into understanding the practical and political aspects of green energy transformation.My participation can bring a fresh perspective to the discussions on Turkey's policies and practices in the electric vehicle and battery technology sector, and evaluate the role of STS in this field within a broader context. Additionally, by interacting with other academics in the panel, I will have the opportunity to approach the findings of my thesis from a wider perspective.In conclusion, this panel will provide a platform to emphasize the role of STS in shaping the strategies for achieving Turkey's energy sufficiency goals and to advance research in this field.