Energy transition narratives in the European Union

Today, there is a broad international consensus on the need to ensure carbon neutrality and, more broadly, to address global environmental issues. By promoting increasingly stringent ecological standards and climate regulations in the energy sector and consistently forcing others to emulate its example, the European Union seeks to present itself as a normative power in this area. At the same time, the EU leaders face the need to mobilize public support for the idea of the sustainable climate-oriented transition in order to mitigate its negative economic and social effects. This, in turn, requires the construction and promotion of the compelling and unambiguous energy transition narrative designed to legitimize the EU’s environmental and energy policy. This paper identifies and examines the key elements of such a narrative propagated within the European Union, as well as assesses its perception by various groups of the European countries’ population. The author also outlines a few alternative ‘greentransition’ narratives, which have arisen as a reaction to both the deficiencies of the EU’s energy policy and the challenges posed by the Ukrainian crisis. The author concludes that the EU leaders and the non-governmental and non-profit actors backing them have managed to build a broad and solid public consensus around the official narrative of the energy transition. Under these conditions, one of the central objectives facing the EU leaders is to maintain and strengthen the attained level of public support for its policies, given new transition-related challenges to the territorial integrity and political cohesion of the union. The latter include high inflation rates and the general rise in the cost of living, negative tendencies in the labor market due to its structural transformation, as well as the growing economic heterogeneity of the member states.

1. Govorushko S.M. 2011a. Vozdeistvie vetrovykh electrostantsii na okruzhayushchuyu sredu [Wind power stations impact on the environment]. Alternative Energy and Ecology (ISJAEE), no. 4 (96), pp. 38−42. (In Russ.)

2. Govorushko S.M. 2011b. Geotermal’nye elektrostantsii i ekologicheskie posledstviya ikh ekspluatatsii [Geothermal power plants and environmental consequences of their use]. Alternative Energy and Ecology (ISJAEE), no. 4 (96), pp. 43−47. (In Russ.)

3. Kaveshnikov N.Yu. 2013. Razvitie vneshnei energeticheskoi politiki Evropeiskogo soyuza [Development of the external energy policy of the European Union]. MGIMO Review of International Relations, no. 4 (31), pp. 82−91. DOI: 10.24833/2071-8160-2013-4-31-82-91. (In Russ.)

4. Kaveshnikov N.Yu. 2015. Strategiya ES v oblasti klimata i energetiki [European Union’s climate and energy strategy]. Contemporary Europe, no. 1 (61), pp. 93–103. DOI: 10.15211/soveurope1201593103. (In Russ.)

5. Korolev I.S. 2022. ‘Global’noe poteplenie’ i energeticheskii perekhod (vneshneekonomicheskii aspekt) [‘Global warming’ and the energy transition (foreign trade aspect)]. Analysis and Forecasting. IMEMO Journal, no. 2, pp. 13−22. DOI: 10.20542/afij-2022-2-13-22. (In Russ.)

6. Nestik T.A., Zhuravlev A.L. 2018. Psikhologiya global’nykh riskov [Psychology of global risks]. Moscow, Institut psikhologii RAN Publ. (In Russ.)

7. Dynkin A.A., Baranovskiy V.G. (eds.). 2021. Rossiya i mir: 2022. Ekonomika i vneshnyaya politika. Ezhegodnyi prognoz [Russia and the world: 2022. Economy and foreign policy. Annual forecast]. Moscow, IMEMO RAN Publ. (In Russ.)

8. Savorskaya E.V. 2015. Evropeiskii soyuz kak uchastnik mezhdunarodnogo klimaticheskogo rezhima: organizatsionnii analiz [European Union in the global climate regime: Organizational analysis]. Lomonosov World Politics Journal, vol. 7, no. 2, pp. 96–125. (In Russ.)

9. Voropai N.I., Makarov A.A. (eds.). 2021. Sistemnye issledovaniya v energetike: energeticheskii perekhod [Systems studies in energy: Energy transition]. Irkutsk, ISEM SO RAN Publ. (In Russ.)

10. Strezhneva M.V. 2021. Finansovye aspekty ‘Evropeiskoi zelenoi sdelki’ [Financial aspects of the European green deal]. Analysis and Forecasting. IMEMO Journal, no. 4, pp. 13−23. DOI: 10.20542/afij-2021-4-13-23. (In Russ.)

11. Bomberg E. 1998. Green parties and politics in the European Union. London, Routledge.

12. Bošnjaković M., Stojkov M., Jurjević M. 2019. Environmental impact of geothermal power plants. Tehnicki Vjesnik, vol. 26, no. 5, pp. 1515−1522. DOI: 10.17559/TV-20180829122640.

13. Brown P. 2017. Narrative: An ontology, epistemology and methodology for pro-environmental psychology research. Energy Research & Social Science, vol. 31, pp. 215−222. DOI: 10.1016/j.erss.2017.06.006.

14. Dahlstrom M.F. 2014. Using narratives and storytelling to communicate science with nonexpert audiences. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, vol. 111, pp. 13614–13620. Available at: https://www.pnas.org/doi/pdf/10.1073/pnas.1320645111 (accessed: 05.02.2023). DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1320645111.

15. Oberthür S., Dupont C. (eds.). 2015. Decarbonization in the European Union: Internal policies and external strategies. London, Palgrave Macmillan.

16. Detlef J. 2021. Quick and dirty: How populist parties in government affect greenhouse gas emissions in EU member states. Journal of European Public Policy, vol. 28, no. 7, pp. 980−997. DOI: 10.1080/13501763.2021.1918215.

17. Ewick P., Silbey S.S. 1995. Subversive stories and hegemonic tales: Toward a sociology of narrative. Law & Society Review, vol. 29, no. 2, pp. 197–226. DOI: 10.2307/3054010.

18. Hafner M., Tagliapietra S. (eds.). 2020. The geopolitics of the global energy transition. Cham, Springer.

19. Gielen D., Boshell F., Saygin D. et al. 2019. The role of renewable energy in the global energy transformation. Energy Strategy Reviews, vol. 24, pp. 38–50. DOI: 10.1016/J.ESR.2019.01.006.

20. Hamed T.A., Alshare A. 2022. Environmental impact of solar and wind energy — A review. Journal of Sustainable Development of Energy, Water and Environment Systems, vol. 10, no. 2, pp. 1−23. DOI: 10.13044/j.sdewes.d9.0387.

21. Holden E., Linnerud K., Rygg B.J. 2021. A review of dominant sustainable energy narratives. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, vol. 144, pp. 1−11. DOI: 10.1016/j.rser.2021.110955.

22. Howarth C. 2017. Informing decision making on climate change and low carbon futures: Framing narratives around the United Kingdom’s fifth carbon budget. Energy Research & Social Science, vol. 31, pp. 295−302. DOI: 10.1016/j.erss.2017.06.011.

23. Martínez‐Valderrama J., Barrio del G., Sanjuán M.E. et al. 2022. Desertification in Spain: A sound diagnosis without solutions and new scenarios. Land, vol. 11, no. 2, pp. 1−13. DOI: 10.3390/land11020272.

24. Meadows D.H., Meadows D.L., Randers J., Behrens III W.W. 1972. The limits to growth: A report for the Club of Rome’s project on the predicament of mankind. New York, Universe Books.

25. Moezzia M., Jandab K.B., Rotmann S. 2017. Using stories, narratives, and storytelling in energy and climate change research. Energy Research & Social Science, vol. 31, pp. 1−10. DOI: 10.1016/j.erss.2017.06.034.

26. Fischer D., Fücker S., Selm H., Sundermann A. (eds.). 2022. Narrating sustainability through storytelling. London, Routledge.

27. Oberthür S., Dupont C. 2021. The European Union’s international climate leadership: Towards a grand climate strategy? Journal of European Public Policy, vol. 28, no. 7, pp. 1095−1114. DOI: 10.1080/13501763.2021.1918218.

28. Petri F., Biedenkopf K. 2021. Weathering growing polarization? The European Parliament and EU foreign climate policy ambitions. Journal of European Public Policy, vol. 28, no. 7, pp. 1057−1075. DOI: 10.1080/13501763.2021.1918216.

29. Saidur R., Rahim N.A., Islam M.R., Solangi K.H. 2011. Environmental impact of wind energy. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, vol. 15, no. 5, pp. 2423−2430. DOI: 10.1016/j.rser.2011.02.024.

30. Valentine S.V., Brown M.A., Sovacool B.K. 2019. Empowering the great energy transition: Policy for a low-carbon future. New York, Columbia University Press.