Zora Kovacic

Proposing a master’s programme on participatory integrated assessment of energy systems to promote energy access and energy efficiency in Southern Africa

Purpose This paper aims to present a new master’s programme for promoting energy access and energy efficiency in Southern Africa. Design/methodology/approach A transdisciplinary approach called “participatory integrated assessment of energy systems” (PARTICIPIA) was used for the development of the curriculum. This approach is based on the two emerging fields of “multi-scale integrated assessment” and “science for governance”, which bring innovative concepts and methods. Findings The application of the PARTICIPIA methodology to three case studies reveals that the proposed transdisciplinary approach could support energy and development policies in the region. The implementation of the PARTICIPIA curriculum in three higher education institutions reveals its ability to respond to the needs of specific contexts and its connection with existing higher education programmes. Practical implications Considering energy issues from a transdisciplinary approach in higher education is absolutely critical because such a holistic view cannot be achieved through engineering curricula. Deliberate and greater efforts should be made to integrate methods from “multi-scale integrated assessment” and “science for governance” in higher education curricula to train a new breed of modern-day energy planners in charge of coming up with solutions that are shared by all relevant stakeholders. Originality/value This paper presents an innovative higher education curriculum in terms of the attention given to energy access and energy efficiency that affect the southern Africa region and the nature of the methodology adopted to face these issues.

Conceptualizing Numbers at the Science–Policy Interface:

Quantitative information is one of the means used to interface science with policy. As a consequence, much effort is invested in producing quantitative information for policy and much criticism is directed toward the use of numbers in policy. In this paper, I analyze five approaches drawn from such criticisms and propose alternative uses of quantitative information for governance: (i) valuation of ecosystem services, (ii) social multicriteria evaluation, (iii) quantification of uncertainty through the Numeral, Unit, Spread, Assessment, Pedigree approach, (iv) Quantitative Story-Telling, and (v) the heuristic use of statistics. The analysis shows the varied ways that numbers are conceptualized and how different conceptualizations matter for the science–policy interface. Alternative conceptualizations of numbers are used to challenge the model of science-speaking truth to power. Uncertainty, complexity, pluralism, malpractice, and values are mobilized to redefine the relations between science and policy. Alternative quantification may produce alternative facts, but reflexive approaches that use numbers to discuss the relevance of equity, positionality, and quality in science for policy may offer a remedy.

Radical Transitions from Fossil Fuel to Renewables: A Change of Posture

The transition from fossil fuel to renewable resources is more difficult than it at first appears. It is not just a pressing issue of policy and governance; it is a special case of a whole raft of problems that press contemporary society in transition. The trap is that fossil fuel and renewables both are matters of energy in the service of human society, but they are essentially different. The issue invites giving privilege to an engineering level of analysis which is not special except it is regularly chosen by experts. The justification for the privilege of energy as understood by engineers is reification of that level of analysis. Reification in turn leads to an assertion of a situation in material terms, when it is in fact an abstraction. More data do not help if the situation is not material; it is not a data problem. Dominant and recessive genes are not a data problem as conventionally conceived, so the errors coming from reification are commonplace. It has led to 60 years of misconception in the Darwinian new synthesis. The effects of genes do not simply cascade up to phenotype, but instead pass through a hierarchy of physiological processes. Similarly, joules do not simply cascade upward to give sums for fossil fuels and renewables that are equivalent and straightforwardly comparable. The critical complication is the distinction between energy sources versus energy carriers. Embedded in all this are the purposes of energy use. Wheat is an energy source, flour is a carrier, but horse feed uses the source while making cake uses the carrier. At each stage, there are grammars that act as constraints on sources and carriers. The language of fossil fuel use is different from renewable energy use. The reference systems for time and energy are simply different. To bring energy systems into equivalent terms, it is crucial that the language of energy capture in the environment be distinguished from language of energy currency inside the system. Energy use is a complex system because it requires more than one level of analysis, with no simple nor necessary translation between levels. Fossil fuel is so fundamentally different from renewable because fossil fuel is simply consumed while renewables must be hugely processed outside the system. These ideas are remarkably general because goods are carriers of service.