Energy efficiency left behind? Policy assemblages in Sweden’s most climate-smart city

ABSTRACT

Smart city experiments have the potential to reshape urban climate change governance. Smart city initiatives have been supported by international technology companies and the European Union for many years and continue to be promoted by national and municipal governments. In relation to sustainability and climate change, such initiatives promise more efficient use of resources through the use of information and communications technology in energy infrastructure. Experiments with smart city technologies such as urban smart grids have shown the potential to restructure relationships between energy utilities, energy users and other actors by reconfiguring the dynamics of energy supply and demand. But do urban experiments lead to institutional change? The aim of the article is to provide a better understanding of how smart city experiments reshape the urban governance of building energy use. Hyllie, a new city district in Malmö, Sweden, was home to two smart city experiments that contributed to the institutionalization of urban smart grid technology. However, the analysis of Hyllie’s policy assemblages shows that this institutional change could redefine sustainability at the expense of energy efficiency.     

Family assemblages

Abstract

In this paper, we develop and extend the emerging concept of ‘family assemblages’ to theorise the bodies, objects, habits, spaces, technologies, discourses and affects that participate in family life. We argue that existing conceptualisations of the family tend towards anthropocentrism, a sundering of the world into active human subjects and passive non-human objects. Assemblage theory offers a means of overcoming this anthropocentrism in order to generate richer accounts of the more-than-human dynamics of family life. From this perspective, anything that participates in the action of family life can be considered a member of the family assemblage, establishing the ontological ground for a non-anthropocentric and relational view of the family. We elaborate these arguments with reference to ethnographic research on fathers’ mental health conducted in Melbourne, Australia. Our ethnographic material provides a rich empirical context for the development of the notion of family assemblages. We conclude by suggesting that the concept of the family assemblage is not simply a provocation to the human-centric assumptions that guide most studies of family life, but may also prove useful for human and health geographers already attuned to the materiality of family life.     

Experimentalist Governance with Interactive Central–Local Relations: Making New Pension Policies in China

Although regional policy experimentation has become a global trend, the distinct features of experimentalist governance in a given country, such as China, remains to be investigated. This article extends policy process theory by proposing the framework of experimentalist governance with interactive central–local relations or Chinese‐style experimentalist governance, which combines three features. First, policy goals and instruments are formed separately and interactively by the central and local governments. Second, the central government is burdened with its own concerns about policy performance for maintaining authority and legitimacy. Third, the evaluation of policy pilots relies primarily on the responses of local governments. We further conceptualize three new patterns of experimentalist governance in China, namely, “comparative trial,” “selective recognition,” and “adaptive reconciliation,” in addition to “hierarchical experimentation.” These patterns are illustrated with case studies on four pension policies in China, which are for public sector employees, urban employees, rural residents, and migrant workers.     

Whom Do Bureaucrats Believe? A Randomized Controlled Experiment Testing Perceptions of Credibility of Policy Research

More than ever before, analysts in government have access to policy‐relevant research and advocacy, which they consume and apply in their role in the policy process. Academics have historically occupied a privileged position of authority and legitimacy, but some argue this is changing with the rapid growth of think tanks and research‐based advocacy organizations. This article documents the findings from a randomized controlled survey experiment using policy analysts from the British Columbia provincial government in Canada to systematically test the source effects of policy research in two subject areas: minimum wage and income‐splitting tax policy. Subjects were asked to read research summaries of these topics and then assess the credibility of each article, but for half of the survey respondents the affiliation/authorship of the content was randomly reassigned. The experimental findings lend evidence to the hypothesis that academic research is perceived to be substantially more credible than think tank or advocacy organization research, regardless of its content. That increasingly externalized policy advice systems are not a pluralistic arena of policy research and advice, but instead subject to powerful heuristics that bureaucrats use to sift through policy‐relevant information and advice, demands added nuance to both location and content‐based policy advisory system models.     

城镇基础设施供给的政治经济学分析及其管治构建

基础设施供给包括规划决策、生产建设、运营管理一系列过程。计划经济时期的基础设施供给程式具有历时分离决策的特点,并且政府包揽了供给的全部过程。由于我国行政管理体制滞后于经济体制改革,致使基础设施供给程式无法适应由于分权化和市场化改革所引起的基础设施供给约束条件与作用机制的变化,导致基础设施供给中暴露出诸多严重问题。论文从政治经济学的角度分析了产生这些问题的机理,并设计了一个可以解释这个机理的政府竞争基础设施供给的结构模型。最后论文勾画了一个由规划决策层管治和建设、运营、管理层管治构成的适应市场经济的基础设施供给管治结构,并就两个层次的八种管治模式进行了分析。     

Status and Role of Formation Theory in Contemporary Archaeological Practice

Since Binford appropriated the term “middle-range theory,” it has signified the process of reasoning from the extant material record to the cultural past. Merton's sociological concept of middle-range theory is relevant to archaeology, but does not mean what Binford denoted by it. More accurately, Binford's domain should be called “formation theory.” By whatever name used, archaeologists differ greatly in our views of its role and status. Somehow, formation theory has come to be viewed as method but not theory, and as intrinsic to materialism, but irrelevant if not antithetical to other ontologies. Yet it is as critical to the contextual understanding of the past sought by many archaeologists today—a role that, among others, belies formation theory's marginal status in academic practice.