19
alternatives, thus opening up space for debate and the emergence of competing actors; and closing down particular claims by pointing to countervailing accounts, often more established ones with some formal backing.
Observation and analysis of which actors legitimate what sort of action
and on what basis, which actors level competing claims, and the platforms
they pick to address specific target audiences, can furnish a telling picture
of a given energy transition. Is it driven by a culture of informed public
engagement, healthy debate, friendly critique and an effort at reflexive
learning by authoritative institutions in the sector? Or are there several
opposing camps, with those currently in a position of authority trying to
maintain the status quo and others challenging their authority, vying to
constitute their own authority, or to simply improve their position within
structural limits they dare not challenge?
Discursive legitimation provides insight into this power interplay precisely because it serves as a means by which actors legitimate their own
positions and decisions (Haarstad et al. 2018). In an ideal world, it enables
deliberation along democratic lines to institute accountability in the manner in which energy transitions are discussed and implemented (Späth and
Rohracher 2010). Deliberative democracy remains hard to obtain in most
political contexts, and a technical sector like energy hardly lends itself easily to informed public debate and engagement. Given its bureaucratic,
often top-down history, a transition in this sector faces a real challenge to
engender energy democracy, with the norm having long been to leave
decision-making in the hands of narrow groups of experts (Sareen 2018).
Examining discursive legitimation, then, is a sound approach to also identify specific opportunities to build public accountability into energy
transitions.
2.2
Bureaucratic Legitimation
Bureaucratic legitimation pertains to practices, often codified and sequential, that validate some actions and actors and limit the range of possibilities for other actors. Readers will be familiar with bureaucracy as a particular
method of ensuring conformity with existing laws and regulations
(Ferguson and Gupta 2002). For instance, actors might have to furnish
proof of a certain competence or qualification in order to secure approval
necessary to take on a formal role, operate a private enterprise or maintain
access to public services. Bureaucracy is ubiquitous; it is part of the paraphernalia of daily life whereby we conduct our everyday affairs. It also
2 A TYPOLOGY OF PRACTICES OF LEGITIMATION TO CATEGORISE…
alternatives, thus opening up space for debate and the emergence of competing actors; and closing down particular claims by pointing to countervailing accounts, often more established ones with some formal backing.
Observation and analysis of which actors legitimate what sort of action
and on what basis, which actors level competing claims, and the platforms
they pick to address specific target audiences, can furnish a telling picture
of a given energy transition. Is it driven by a culture of informed public
engagement, healthy debate, friendly critique and an effort at reflexive
learning by authoritative institutions in the sector? Or are there several
opposing camps, with those currently in a position of authority trying to
maintain the status quo and others challenging their authority, vying to
constitute their own authority, or to simply improve their position within
structural limits they dare not challenge?
Discursive legitimation provides insight into this power interplay precisely because it serves as a means by which actors legitimate their own
positions and decisions (Haarstad et al. 2018). In an ideal world, it enables
deliberation along democratic lines to institute accountability in the manner in which energy transitions are discussed and implemented (Späth and
Rohracher 2010). Deliberative democracy remains hard to obtain in most
political contexts, and a technical sector like energy hardly lends itself easily to informed public debate and engagement. Given its bureaucratic,
often top-down history, a transition in this sector faces a real challenge to
engender energy democracy, with the norm having long been to leave
decision-making in the hands of narrow groups of experts (Sareen 2018).
Examining discursive legitimation, then, is a sound approach to also identify specific opportunities to build public accountability into energy
transitions.
2.2
Bureaucratic Legitimation
Bureaucratic legitimation pertains to practices, often codified and sequential, that validate some actions and actors and limit the range of possibilities for other actors. Readers will be familiar with bureaucracy as a particular
method of ensuring conformity with existing laws and regulations
(Ferguson and Gupta 2002). For instance, actors might have to furnish
proof of a certain competence or qualification in order to secure approval
necessary to take on a formal role, operate a private enterprise or maintain
access to public services. Bureaucracy is ubiquitous; it is part of the paraphernalia of daily life whereby we conduct our everyday affairs. It also
2 A TYPOLOGY OF PRACTICES OF LEGITIMATION TO CATEGORISE…