Smale, R; Spaargaren, G and van Vliet, B (2019) Householders co-managing energy systems: Space for collaboration? Building Research & Information, 47(5), pp. 585-597. ISSN 0961-3218
Abstract
The potential role of households as 'co-managers' of energy in smart grids is widely discussed in the social science literature. Much remains uncertain about the social relations and practices emerging around novel smart grid technologies and their contribution to sustainability. Drawing on 14 'show-and-tell' home tours with householders in a smart grid trial, an analysis is presented of how home energy management (HEM) is performed in everyday life. The focus is on three technologies: monitoring technologies, smart heat pumps and home batteries. How and why householders do (not) engage with energy management during the pilot project is described. When householders participate in HEM practices, they gain energy management understandings and an awareness of smart grid objectives. Since HEM practices are shared between householders and actors from the energy provision system, they display particular ways of distributing responsibilities, power and agency over technologies, experts and householders. The time and space granted to these three smart grid technologies are shown to depend on the trust relationships between householders and the more or less absent providers of technologies and services. These insights emphasize the need to develop smart grid solutions reflexively with respect to the different spaces and practices in households in which they operate.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | domestic energy; energy behaviours; energy management; smart grids; smart homes; technological change; trust |
| Index terms: | everyday life, energy management, heat pump, technological change, monitoring, household, energy system, social science, smart home, drawing, manager, agency, collaboration |
| Subjects: | sociology, demography, management, theoretical framing, design practice, energy systems, sustainability and energy, technical documentation, control systems, practitioner, innovation studies |
| Topics: | Organizational Design, Site Management, Urban Studies, Design Practice, Sustainability, Roles and Professions, Research Practice, Business Strategy |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCT |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here