Lucie Middlemiss

Influencing individual sustainability: a review of the evidence on the role of community-based organisations

Academics and policymakers claim that community-based organisations can mobilise citizens to take on more sustainable behaviours. The evidence for the influence of activities run by community-based organisations on individual sustainability is in relatively short supply, particularly in developed country contexts. There is limited understanding of the contextual conditions that are favourable for such interventions, the types of individuals that are likely to be affected and the decision-making processes of individuals in taking on particular behaviours. This paper presents a descriptive model built from current empirical literature in the area, and the wider pro-environmental behaviour literature, which begins to explain the causal factors present in interventions of this type.

The role of learning in sustainable communities of practice

This paper adds to the literature on skills for sustainable communities by examining the role and processes of learning in “communities of practice” that exist within a “grassroots association”. Interviews were conducted with participants in the communities of practice of a student group called Green Action, which engages with environmental issues in practical ways. The findings demonstrate how learning occurred in the communities of practice, how participants gained skills and knowledge for sustainable consumption, and how learning in the communities of practice appeared to help Green Action to sustain itself in the long-term. This paper could serve as a useful demonstration to others as to how to apply the theories and concepts from the literature on communities of practice when researching skills and knowledge for sustainable communities. It also has some value for grassroots associations themselves in understanding their own activities.

Individualised or participatory? Exploring late-modern identity and sustainable development

The idea of individualisation is powerful: in late-modern society, people’s sense of identity is based on their individual experience rather than their relationships with others. This is problematic for sustainable development because it conflicts with the ideal of participation enshrined in its theory and practice. It is also unclear how the idea plays out in this field, with emerging evidence that some sustainable development policy and practice is individualising. The realities of individualisation are more complex. Empirical studies outside sustainable development have shown that individualising policy does not necessarily have individualising effects. Considering how the idea and realities of individualisation cast new light on subjectivities imagined in sustainable development theory and practice, I argue that sustainable development scholars and practitioners need to consider a range of late-modern subjectivities, and be critically aware of how individualisation is potentially reproduced in policy and practice.

A critical analysis of the new politics of fuel poverty in England

A household is fuel poor when it is unable to afford the level of energy services required to allow its members to live a decent life. From 2010 to 2015, the UK government transformed the politics of fuel poverty, with a new definition (‘Low income, high costs’ or LIHC), indicators and targets. Using a subjectivity framework to analyse the government documentation around LIHC, I find that: a distinction between poverty and fuel poverty is reinforced by the new politics, resulting in energy efficiency measures being prioritised as the appropriate solution. The austerity maxim of ‘helping those most in need’ is threaded through this new politics, belying an acceptance that not all fuel poverty can be alleviated. Further, LIHC underplays the role of changing energy costs, which now have no impact on the headline indicator. I argue that this new politics is symbolic, and unlikely to have positive impacts for most fuel poor households.

Sustainable Consumption : Key Issues

Sustainable Consumption: Key Issues provides a concise introduction to the field of sustainable consumption, outlining the contribution of the key disciplines in this multi-disciplinary area, and detailing the way in which both the problem and the potential for solutions are understood. Divided into three key parts, the book begins by introducing the concept of sustainable consumption, outlining the environmental impacts of current consumption trends, and placing these impacts in social context. The central section looks at six contrasting explanations of sustainable consumption in the public domain, detailing the stories that are told about why people act in the way they do. This section also explores the theory and evidence around each of these stories, linking them to a range of disciplines and approaches in the social sciences. The final section takes a broader look at the solutions proposed by sustainable consumption scholars and practitioners, outlining the visions of the future that are put forward to counteract damage to environment and society. Each chapter highlights key authors and real-world examples to encourage students to broaden their understanding of the topic and to think critically about how their daily lives intersect with environmental and ethical issues. Exploring the ways in which critical thinking and an understanding of sustainable consumption can be used in daily life as well as in professional practice, this book is essential reading for students, academics, professionals and policy-makers with an interest in this growing field.

Plugging the Gap Between Energy Policy and the Lived Experience of Energy Poverty: Five Principles for a Multidisciplinary Approach

In this chapter, we illustrate the value of a multidisciplinary approach to energy poverty policy, drawing on insights from research into the lived experience of energy poverty in three European countries. We argue that understanding the lived experience of energy poverty is critical in designing energy policies which are fair, effective and aligned with peoples daily lives. In addition, we contend that bringing together a range of disciplines to examine dimensions of the lived experience of energy poverty (such as housing, employment, education, social policy, health, energy, etc.) is essential to give breadth to our understanding of this challenging and multifaceted condition. We propose five principles for policy design, informed by our multidisciplinary understanding of the lived experience. These principles can be applied at a range of scales (local, regional, national and European) to help ensure that the energy poor are both well served, and represented, by energy policy.