Peter Zeniewski

Framing new threats: the internal security of gas and electricity networks in the European Union

This Handbook brings together energy security experts to explore the implications of framing the energy debate in security terms, both in respect of the governance of energy systems and the practices associated with energy security.

Neoliberalism, Exogenous Elites and the Transformation of Solidarity

IN LATE 1989, POLAND’S SOLIDARITY(SOLIDARNOŚĆ)-LED government took charge of a deteriorating economy and opted for a radical programme of neoliberal market reform. In many ways, this programme belied Solidarity’s political values and thereby inexorably shaped the movement’s post-communist political identity. This essay will argue that ‘shock therapy’ in Poland was facilitated by exogenous elites and institutions whose neoliberal ideas clashed with Solidarity’s original bottom-up approach to social and political change. This, in turn, prompted the Solidarity movement to redefine its identity in the post-communist period. It did so by reneging on its previous commitment to build a civil society based on social justice, worker selfmanagement and bottom-up labour activism, and instead identified itself as a rightwing advocate of free market economics. Before embarking on an analysis of Solidarity’s transformation during the implementation of shock therapy reform in Poland, it is necessary to clarify what is meant by political identity. As with any term appropriated by a wide variety of academic disciplines, theoretical approaches and empirical studies, the concept eludes a comprehensive and commonly accepted definition (Calhoun 1994, pp. 20–29; Kenny 2004, pp. 1–11; Heyes 2007; Sampson 1993; Scott 1992). This essay does little to clarify outstanding terminological debates on the subject. In fact, it may confuse matters further by deviating from the notion of political identity as guided by de facto reference to social categories such as race, gender or ethnicity (Hoover 2001, p. 201). Liberal political theories, busying themselves with the normative tensions between ‘universalist’ liberalism and ‘particularist’ identity politics, are also not very useful for exploring the political identity of Solidarity as a social movement. Moreover, much of the literature on identity politics emphasises social mobilisation ‘based upon various collective identities that were previously hidden, suppressed or neglected . . . [and that] set them apart from the larger population—a commonality that is based on difference’ (Kenny 2004, p. 3). Implicit in such an understanding of identity politics is the notion that the conditions under which such movements flourish—such as a democratic and pluralistic society—are a given.

Reducing uncertainty through a systemic risk-management approach

Abstract Problems of energy security (ES) and climate change mitigation (CCM) are inextricably connected and form complex and unstructured problems (see Chapter 9), the solution of which is hard if not impossible to accommodate by conventional structures of governance. This chapter offers an attempt at describing and operationalising possible governance strategies for ES by following the iterative types of knowledge production to reduce both the normative and the factual uncertainty characterising ES. First, we present an argument on how a systemic approach to ES can unfold in a conceptual perspective and help reduce its normative ambiguity. Second, we present an account of how this conceptual account relates to empirical and factual uncertainties. Finally, we discuss how the systemic integration of ES issues are connected to the strengths and weaknesses of specific governance activities, which each have particular strengths and weaknesses vis-a-vis specific elements of systemic ES.

Low-Carbon Energy Security from a European Perspective

Abstract Problems of energy security (ES) and climate change mitigation (CCM) are inextricably connected and form complex and unstructured problems (see Chapter 9), the solution of which is hard if not impossible to accommodate by conventional structures of governance. This chapter offers an attempt at describing and operationalising possible governance strategies for ES by following the iterative types of knowledge production to reduce both the normative and the factual uncertainty characterising ES. First, we present an argument on how a systemic approach to ES can unfold in a conceptual perspective and help reduce its normative ambiguity. Second, we present an account of how this conceptual account relates to empirical and factual uncertainties. Finally, we discuss how the systemic integration of ES issues are connected to the strengths and weaknesses of specific governance activities, which each have particular strengths and weaknesses vis-a-vis specific elements of systemic ES.