The major report just released by the Hard-to-Reach Energy Users Task delves deeply into the question which unintended consequences arise (and why) when well-intentioned energy interventions don’t turn out the way they were intended. It is the primary milestone of Year 1 Phase 2 of the HTR Task (Subtask 2 – Energy Justice Landscape & Stakeholder Analysis), and is based on mixed methods research including a literature review, cross-country case study comparison and policy analysis of 67 international energy hardship programmes, as well as expert survey (n=72) and interview (n=18) responses, and case study analyses from our participating countries (Aotearoa NZ, the U.S., Canada and Sweden).
DOWNLOAD the full report HERE.
The case studies analysed from our participating countries fall into the following themes:
- Electricity Pricing and Tariffs, including Demand Response (DR) and Demand Flex
(DF) interventions - Home Upgrades and Retrofits, including insulation, weatherisation, clean heating
- Decarbonisation and Electrification, including cooking, water and space heating
- Uptake of Electric Vehicles (EVs), including access to EV charging infrastructure
- Government Policies around the Just Transition
- Energy Information & Education Campaigns, Behaviour Change Interventions.
We use Suckling et al’s (2021) framework which separates unintended consequences into being:
- Knowable and Avoidable
- Knowable and Unavoidable
- Unknowable and Avoidable
- Unknowable and Unavoidable.
We provide insights into the types, underlying causes, potential solutions and recommendations for avoiding unintended consequences when designing interventions aimed at a clean, just and fair energy transition.
