Levels of consumers’ agency and capacity as predictors for electricity demand reduction in the residential sector

Abstract

A field study of 50 households in a collective community in Israel provides initial support for the hypotheses about the relations between actors’ agency, capacity and electricity demand reduction. ‘Agency’ refers to actors’ willingness and ability to make their own free choices and ‘capacity’ refers to actors’ ability to perform the choices they made. According to the hypotheses, change is more likely to happen when actors’ levels of agency and capacity are high; unlikely to happen when the levels are low and uncertain when there is a mismatch between levels of agency and capacity (one is high and the other low). In the research, levels of agency and capacity regarding 11 energy saving actions were self-reported and electricity consumption was metered before and during energy saving campaign. Findings show that levels of agency were lower than those of capacity for no-cost actions which require high engagement, while levels of capacity were lower than those of agency for high-cost action which require low engagement. In addition, households with high agency and high capacity reduced their electricity consumption by 9.39 % (on average); those with low agency and low capacity increased their consumption by 6.67 %; and those with a mismatch between agency and capacity reduced their consumption by 1.91 %.

Annex 1: The middle-out framework for energy transition

The middle-out is a new and evolving framework for analyzing socio-techno-economic transitions, developed by Yael Parag and Kathryn B. Janda. Janda and Parag (2011, 2013) and Parag and Janda (2014) argue that despite the complex nature of the energy system, policy makers tend to simplistically divide it into energy suppliers and consumers. As a result, governments try to promote the transition to a low-carbon society by regulating energy suppliers in a top-down manner, while encouraging (economically and morally) end-users to reduce their energy consumption and support the transition from the bottom-up. However, at present, there seems to be a mismatch between many of the energy and climate change policy objectives (for example, 80 % emission reduction by 2050 in the UK) and the capability of top and bottom actors to deliver them within the existing frameworks of top-down and bottom-up actions. In this context, the middle-out framework (Janda and Parag 2011; Janda and Parag 2013; Parag and Janda, 2014) focuses on middle actors as agents of change. Middle actors in the case of energy are neither the regulator, the energy supplier or the consumer, but rather actors who influence various aspects of the ways energy is produced, delivered or consumed. This group includes actors such as community-based organizations and intermediaries that provide platforms and space for collective action (Hamilton, Mayne et al. 2014), religious leaders who influence behavioral norms including consumption norms, values and behavior (Parag and Janda, 2014), as well as building and planning professionals and associations who plan and construct buildings’ infrastructures and thus influence both the efficiency of the infrastructure and the energy-related interfaces with occupants (Janda and Parag 2011; Janda and Parag 2013).

Due to their position in-between top and bottom actors, to their own levels of agency and capacity, and to their unique characteristics and interactions with other actors in the field, middle actors are in a good position to meaningfully mediate between top and bottom actors, facilitate the interactions between them, enhance their levels of agency and capacity – and encourage and promote action. As such, they often serve as agents of change and exert their influence in three directions: downstream (e.g., on energy end users), upstream (e.g., on decision-makers) and sideways (e.g., on other middle actors) (Parag and Janda, 2014). Hence the name ‘middle-out’.