22
least on the citizens and users whom the energy sector should serve in a
manner responsive to their evolving needs. As part of energy transitions,
these could include regulatory frameworks for individuals and communities to prosume and receive appropriate compensation for power sold to
the grid from rooftop solar panels.
Studying such practices of bureaucratic legitimation can be challenging, but is an essential component of identifying whether and how energy
transitions can proceed with public accountability (Kalkuhl et al. 2013;
Saltzstein 1979). Such examination must often be undertaken in several
locations across multiple scales (Krause and Meier 2005)—down the corridors of power where bureaucracy is executed; in policy documents,
where its formal contours are delineated; by listening to the accounts of
actors who claim they are marginalised; through attention to emergent
material changes that open new possibilities and how these possibilities are
bureaucratised; and by triangulating between the various concurrent
changes in bureaucratic requirements during sectoral evolution (Sareen
and Kale 2018). Where such examination uncovers bureaucratic mediation that forecloses opportunities for energy transition to aid decarbonisation and social equity, these practices can be specifically challenged to
build accountability gains within specific contexts of energy transition.
2.3 technocratic Legitimation
Technocratic legitimation refers to a set of practices that perform systematic checks and approval of actions that entail technical expertise. This is
distinct from bureaucratic legitimation in that it extends beyond filling
forms or ticking boxes to secure validation from a designated authority, to
a practice that is itself substantive along the same register as the action that
it evaluates for approval. This requires some clarification: practices of technocratic legitimation devise a method to assess whether specific actions by
specific actors should be permitted or not, and this method itself exhibits
a certain element of sophistication in order to lend credibility to the
approval as something that takes place after due consideration of the technicalities involved.
Energy transitions raise many highly technical questions that require
expert knowledge and do not always have existing scientific consensus
around one answer. There may be several possibilities and a basis is needed
to determine which ones to permit and prioritise, and which actors should
be in charge of executing them and on what basis (Chilvers and Longhurst
S. SAREEN
least on the citizens and users whom the energy sector should serve in a
manner responsive to their evolving needs. As part of energy transitions,
these could include regulatory frameworks for individuals and communities to prosume and receive appropriate compensation for power sold to
the grid from rooftop solar panels.
Studying such practices of bureaucratic legitimation can be challenging, but is an essential component of identifying whether and how energy
transitions can proceed with public accountability (Kalkuhl et al. 2013;
Saltzstein 1979). Such examination must often be undertaken in several
locations across multiple scales (Krause and Meier 2005)—down the corridors of power where bureaucracy is executed; in policy documents,
where its formal contours are delineated; by listening to the accounts of
actors who claim they are marginalised; through attention to emergent
material changes that open new possibilities and how these possibilities are
bureaucratised; and by triangulating between the various concurrent
changes in bureaucratic requirements during sectoral evolution (Sareen
and Kale 2018). Where such examination uncovers bureaucratic mediation that forecloses opportunities for energy transition to aid decarbonisation and social equity, these practices can be specifically challenged to
build accountability gains within specific contexts of energy transition.
2.3 technocratic Legitimation
Technocratic legitimation refers to a set of practices that perform systematic checks and approval of actions that entail technical expertise. This is
distinct from bureaucratic legitimation in that it extends beyond filling
forms or ticking boxes to secure validation from a designated authority, to
a practice that is itself substantive along the same register as the action that
it evaluates for approval. This requires some clarification: practices of technocratic legitimation devise a method to assess whether specific actions by
specific actors should be permitted or not, and this method itself exhibits
a certain element of sophistication in order to lend credibility to the
approval as something that takes place after due consideration of the technicalities involved.
Energy transitions raise many highly technical questions that require
expert knowledge and do not always have existing scientific consensus
around one answer. There may be several possibilities and a basis is needed
to determine which ones to permit and prioritise, and which actors should
be in charge of executing them and on what basis (Chilvers and Longhurst
S. SAREEN