Gerd Lintz

Streifzug mit Michel Foucault durch die Landschaften der Energiewende: Zwischen Government, Governance und Gouvernementalität

Die Energiewende verandert Landschaften. Die Forschung dazu aus politikwissenschaftlicher und steuerungstheoretischer Sicht hat zugenommen, beschrankt sich jedoch oft auf monoperspektivische Ansatze. Ziel des Beitrags ist es deshalb, einen multiperspektivischen Ansatz bereitzustellen, um die Landschaften der Energiewende und ihre Entstehung umfassender zu analysieren und zu verstehen. Dabei greifen wir auf das so genannte Triple- G-Modell zuruck, das Arts und Visseren-Hamakers (2012) vorgeschlagen haben. Der Name ‚Triple G‘ bezieht sich auf die drei Perspektiven Government, Governance und Gouvernementalitat, die sich in den Kontext von Landschaftspolitik stellen lassen. Von besonderer Bedeutung sind dabei die Arbeiten von Michel Foucault. Sein Denken kommt in zweifacher Hinsicht zum Tragen: Erstens zeigen wir auf, welche Erkenntnisse zu den Landschaften der Energiewende aus einer Gouvernementalitats-Perspektive und den beiden anderen Perspektiven zu gewinnen sind. Zweitens – und grundlegender – folgen wir Foucaults konstruktivistischer Forschungshaltung. Nachdem die Windenergielandschaften in Deutschland beispielhaft entsprechend den Perspektiven Government, Governance und Gouvernementalitat analysiert wurden, vergleichen wir die Zugange und identifizieren Schnittstellen.

A Conceptual Framework for Analysing Inter-municipal Cooperation on the Environment

Lintz G. A conceptual framework for analysing inter-municipal cooperation on the environment, Regional Studies. While there is a wealth of literature on cooperation between cities, local environmental policy-making and regional sustainable development, voluntary inter-municipal collaboration between neighbouring municipalities on environmental issues seems to have been neglected. This paper presents a conceptual framework for analysing the factors that influence such cooperation, drawing on actor-centred and discursive institutionalism and explicitly considering the aspects knowledge, values and power. It integrates substantive and interaction-oriented analysis of sectoral and territorial coordination in a two-level governance setting, examining intra- and inter-municipal as well as global environmental effects. The study thus provides a systematic basis for further theoretical and empirical research. Video abstract Read the transcript Watch the video on Vimeo

Editorial: Environmental Governance of Urban and Regional Development – Scales and Sectors, Conflict and Cooperation

Recent years have continued to see a concern for the detrimental environmental impacts of human economic activities particularly in the form of enhanced global warming, sea level rise, land degradation and deforestation. Although it can be argued that economic development and growth remain the priority for governments at a variety of spatial scales or levels, these same governments also express a desire through a growing number of policy initiatives to make such development more sustainable and environmentally-friendly. A growing interest amongst policy makers has been in identifying the ways in which environmental protection measures can be made complementary to economic development aims. Rather than seeing the environment and the economy in opposition, there has been a focus on the growth potential from developing a green or low-carbon economy (OECD, 2011). At the urban and regional scale governments have increasingly begun to try and position themselves as destinations for new forms of green economy investments as a source of a new round of capital accumulation (GIBBS and O’NEILL, 2014). In total then, questions around the environment, climate change and sustainability look set to grow in importance for decision makers in cities and regions.

Regional Structural Change and Resilience

The terms “resilience” and “vulnerability” have both acquired prominence in recent academic and political debate. Originating in the natural sciences, they have meanwhile established themselves not only in the social sciences, but also—and more recently—in the areas of economic geography, as well as urban and regional development. Nevertheless, as is the case with many of the issues adopted from the natural sciences, the social sciences have had to struggle to fully capture and conceptualise the theoretical meaning of the terms. The present article will explore the added-value and limits of using the notions of resilience and vulnerability in relation to structural change in old industrial regions. It will also draw on empirical information from a qualitative case study of Lusatian Lakeland, a former lignite mining region in Eastern Germany that is currently being turned into a tourist destination. Research focuses on analysing the sectoral and regional cooperation between various actors in the region. The introduction of the terms resilience and vulnerability in this case study raises some interesting questions about the nature and interpretation of regional development processes that are characterised by a high degree of uncertainty and severe structural change. The research results also highlight the conceptual difficulties these terms present, particularly in the context of structural transformation.ZusammenfassungDie Begriffe „Resilienz“ und „Vulnerabilität“ haben eine große Bedeutung in der gegenwärtigen wissenschaftlichen und politischen Diskussion erlangt. Ausgehend von den Naturwissenschaften wurde das Begriffspaar in die Sozialwissenschaften übertragen – zuletzt auch in die Wirtschaftsgeographie sowie die Stadt- und Regionalentwicklung. Dabei ist dieser Transfer, wie oft bei naturwissenschaftlichen Begriffen, von konzeptionellen und theoretischen Unklarheiten gekennzeichnet. Der vorliegende Beitrag beschäftigt sich daher mit den Möglichkeiten und Grenzen der Nutzung der Begriffe im Kontext des Strukturwandels in altindustriellen Regionen. Die empirische Grundlage bildet eine qualitative Fallstudie des Lausitzer Seenlandes, ein ehemaliges ostdeutsches Braunkohlerevier, welches nun zu einer Tourismusregion umgestaltet wird. Dabei spielt die Analyse der sektoralen und regionalen Kooperationen von verschiedenen Akteuren der Region eine besondere Rolle. Bei der Anwendung der Begriffe „Resilienz“ und „Vulnerabilität“ auf dieses Fallbeispiel stellen sich einige interessante Fragen bezüglich der Merkmale und Interpretation von Regionalentwicklung unter der Bedingung von Unsicherheit und starkem Strukturwandel. Daneben zeigt die Forschung auch die konzeptionellen Schwierigkeiten der Begriffe, besonders im Kontext tiefgreifender struktureller Transformationen.

Understanding ‘landscape governance’: the case of wind energy landscapes in Germany

Abstract Although the term ‘landscape governance’ has been attracting increased attention in literature, its use until now has been rather heterogeneous. In order to conceptually systematise various notions of landscape governance, the paper applies the Triple G model developed in the context of forest governance. We demonstrate that three distinct concepts of governance, namely government, governance in the narrow sense and governmentality provide the observer with a range of genuine lenses for analysing space, scale, actors, institutions and political decision-making processes as well as the relations between them and how they are mutually constitutive of one another. The three perspectives are discussed with an eye to overlaps and differences, the constitution of landscapes, the respective take on power and the potential interfaces between science and policy. For illustration, the paper draws on empirical evidence of German wind energy landscapes.

Die räumliche Nähe von Akteuren zählt in der nachhaltigen Entwicklung.

ZusammenfassungIn der Literatur wird immer wieder auf eine große Bedeutung der lokalen und regionalen Politikebene für das Erreichen von Zielen einer nachhaltigen Entwicklung hingewiesen. Allerdings wird bislang nur unzureichend erläutert, worauf genau diese Bedeutung gründen kann. Der Beitrag präsentiert am Beispiel des von Kommunen getragenen betrieblichen Umweltmanagementansatzes Ökoprofit deutliche Hinweise darauf, dass Städte und Regionen durch die räumliche Nähe zwischen den Akteuren tatsächlich ein spezifisches Steuerungspotenzial für eine nachhaltige Entwicklung aufweisen. Die Untersuchung erfolgt anhand eines Ökoprofit-Projekts in Dresden und zeigt die dort wirkenden sozialen Mechanismen auf.AbstractThe literature often points out that the local and regional political levels are important for achieving sustainable development objectives. However, it is not sufficiently clear in what this importance consists. Looking at the example of the Ökoprofit management approach, the article discusses indications that towns, cities and regions do indeed show a specific capacity for facilitating sustainability owing to the spatial proximity of actors. Local authorities are in charge of implementing Ökoprofit projects in which companies engage in environmental management. The article draws empirically on the case of an Ökoprofit project carried out in Dresden, examining the social mechanisms at work.

Der „Ausnahmezustand” als Entwicklungsstrategie

KurzfassungAltindustrialisierte, von Klein- und Mittelstädten geprägte Regionen zählen zu den größten Problemgebieten in Ostdeutschland. Der vorliegende Beitrag geht der Frage nach, inwieweit große umweltorientierte Kooperationsprojekte diesen Regionen einen Entwicklungsimpuls geben können. Die durchgeführten Fallstudienanalysen zeigen, dass die untersuchten Projekte tatsächlich einen erkennbar positiven Einfluss auf die regionale Entwicklung gehabt haben und dass die erzielten Effekte weit über die einzelnen Projekte hinausreichen. Dieser Erfolg ist insbesondere darauf zurückzufühlea, dass durch die umweltorientierten Kooperationsprojekte eine außergewöhnliche Situation, quasi ein „Ausnahmezustand”, in den betrachteten Regionen hergestellt und als Motor für Gas regionale Handeln wirksam wurde. Basierend auf den Erkenntnissen aus den Fallstudien, werden Empfehlungen für die regionale entwicklung und Politik gegeben.AbstractOld industrialised regions which are characterised by small and medium-sized towns are amongst the most deprived areas in eastern Germany. This article investigates the extent to which large-scale, environmentally focused co-operation projects may offer a stimulus for the development of these regions. Analysis of case studies shows that the projects investigated have indeed had a considerable positive impact on regional development. The effects achieved go far beyond the projects themselves. This success can be primarily put down to the exceptional situation in the regions under review, effectively a “state of emergency”, brought about by such large-scale, environmentally focused co-operation projects and acting as the driving force for regional action. Recommendations concerning regional development and policy are made on the basis of findings from the case studies.

Governance of energy landscapes between pathways, people and politics

Various energy transitions are under way in many countries. Typically, they involve an increased reliance on renewable energies instead of fossil fuels (Quitzow et al., 2016; Sarrica, Brondi, Cottone, & Mazzara, 2016). This has resulted in the proliferation of new types of landscapes, characterised by vast areas covered with solar panels, wind turbines or energy crops such as maize. These—often contested— developments have spurred a renewed interest in the relations between energies, politics and landscapes. Of course, energies have always been a fundamental factor in regard to materiality and the perception of landscapes (Crowe & Laurie, 1958). Nadaï and van der Horst (2010), together with other authors, explored some relations between landscapes and energies in a Special Issue of this journal on ‘Landscapes of Energies’. While they saw merit in viewing landscapes through the energy lens, they also proposed the converse approach, namely viewing energies through the landscape lens. In this Special Issue, we try to see both energies and landscapes through a governance lens. Governance refers to decision-making on issues in the public interest such as landscapes, and more broadly, to the social and political dimensions of landscapes (Gailing & Leibenath, 2017). Most of the papers in the present collection are based on contributions to the European Conference of the Landscape Research Group held in 2015 in Dresden, Germany, on ‘Energy Landscapes: Perception, Planning, Participation and Power’. The four P’s in the conference title are also relevant to varying degrees to the seven papers we have gathered in this Special Issue. Yet three other keywords—and these are far from exhaustive—might be better suited to precisely charting the territory of ‘governance of energy landscapes’ as well as capturing the commonalities and tensions between the contributions in this collection. These keywords are: pathways, people and politics. At first glance, the choice of ‘pathways’ may appear odd if we consider that energy transitions are about changing tack, leaving the beaten path and finding new directions. Taking a closer look, however, it becomes evident that recent transitions and reforms are largely shaped by long-standing trajectories. These concern institutional path dependencies in terms of rules, rights and customs, but also preferences for certain types of energy technology as well as historical events that have left their trace not only in collective memories, but also in the shape of landscapes and the way they are used (Breukers & Wolsink, 2007; Hasenöhrl, 2013). The relevance of ‘people’ as a category is more obvious. In recent years, there has been much talk about the role of active citizens, entrepreneurs and local populations with their values, attitudes and strategies in the context of energy transitions (Aitken, Haggett, & Rudolph, 2016; Matthew, 2015). Furthermore, ‘people’ refers to the different sorts of communities and collective identities which are forged and stabilised, which become challenged and eventually break or which simply emerge under the influence of energy transitions (Otto & Leibenath, 2014; Rygg, 2015). Finally, ‘people’ hints at a certain perspective on energy and landscape issues which, broadly speaking, is ethnographical in nature and involves in-depth engagement with place-specific cultures and practices (Krauss, 2010; Morton & Müller, 2016).

Regionaler Strukturwandel und Resilienz

Die Begriffe “Resilienz” und “Vulnerabilitat” haben eine wichtige Bedeutung in der gegenwartigen wissenschaftlichen und politischen Diskussion erlangt. Ausgehend von den Naturwissenschaften wurde das Begriffspaar in die Sozialwissenschaften ubertragen – zuletzt auch in die Felder der Wirtschaftsgeographie sowie der Stadt- und Regionalentwicklung. Dabei ist dieser Transfer, wie oft bei naturwissenschaftlichen Begriffen, von konzeptionellen und theoretischen Problemen gekennzeichnet. Der vorliegende Beitrag beschaftigt sich daher mit den Moglichkeiten und Grenzen der Nutzung der Begriffe im Kontext des Strukturwandels in altindustriellen Regionen. Die empirische Grundlage bildet eine qualitative Fallstudie des Lausitzer Seenlandes, ein ehemaliges ostdeutsches Braunkohlerevier, welches nun zu einer Tourismusregion umgestaltet wird. Dabei spielt die Analyse der sektoralen und regionalen Kooperationen von verschiedenen Akteuren der Region als Reaktion auf den industriellen Zusammenbruch eine besondere Rolle.

Sustainability Transitions and the Problem of Governance

There remain only a few contrarians to the notion that the human-environment relationship requires signifi cant changes, that we require some sort of ‘transition’. The transition to a ‘green economy’, ‘clean tech’, ‘green urbanism’ and sustainable development represent a few of these proposals. We can readily observe transitions toward the fi rst three concepts. Many countries have promoted greening their economies through direct government investment and incentives for fi rms to adopt energy saving measures or green their supply chains. Similarly, ‘clean tech’ clusters have been promoted to imagine and develop a new generation of environmentally friendly technology. Finally, cities are following suit, or leading in some ways, greening campaigns (e.g. Beatley, 2000). Congestion charges, cleaner running publ ic t ranspor t, bicycle lanes, and green space are key areas of interest for urban planners and developers alike. The ‘green’ transition is a needed step forward, to be sure. However, it also represents some of the easiest of wins because the ‘market’ can now ‘recognize’ the value of these interventions. Sustainabil ity transitions, true sustainability transitions, are in a different category altogether. This Regional Survey examines the tension between green and sustainable in the context of governance. For many, ‘sustainability’ and ‘green’ have become synonymous. We see it differently. As we alluded to above, greening represents one form of transforming the human-environment relationship. It’s about using less electricity, which has a direct impact on a fi rm’s bottom line, or a consumer’s purse. It’s about substitution of materials, from using less toxic materials in the supply chain (sometimes) to using ‘ubiquitous’ bamboo for fl ooring rather than oak or cherry, for example. Finally, it’s about urban regeneration through green retrofi ts, densifi cation, and building more bike paths and creating green spaces. Greening is a line of products from an LED light above your oven to a 75m2 uber designed, energy effi cient fl at in the transition neighbourhood of Zurich West. While these are ‘green’ they are not sustainable in the Brundtland sense. Brundtland, and the policy processes and proscriptions that followed in its name, require that we consider a tripartite set of concerns: economic prosperity, ecological integrity, and social equity. Green might capture two of the three. It almost certainly leaves out the social equity piece. Governance is a process where various stakeholders come together to accomplish a goal. However, governance is also about power, and who has it. It determines who qualifi es as a stakeholder and how they can represent themselves. Governance defi nes who makes the fi nal decision. It also determines the offi cial account of the issue it was trying to resolve. With these factors in mind, one can imagine how the social equity piece might get left out of the concept of ‘greening’. Yet, how do greening and sustainability become synonymous? One way is through governance. Greening is good for an economic activity, but sometimes, especial ly in the case of local and regional development, sustainability is better. As many people have pointed out: who can be against sustainability? Governance is the complex and power-laden process through which these issues are adjudicated. Governance can make what is ‘green’ appear ‘sustainable’. Explicit sustainability transitions research, as van den Bergh and Bruinsma state, “shifts the attention from a vague end goal to stimulating transition processes as a more concrete step” (2008). The main idea in this sense is “that a system-wide approach is needed, which takes into account sector interactions as well as the complex relations between the technologies, inst itut ions and behaviour of fi rms and consumers” (van den Bergh and Bruinsma, 2008). In this vein, for example, Truffer and Coenen (2012) examine the regional dimension of the sustainability transitions mapping out the contours of a geography of transitions.