MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2556945024 · doi:10.1353/tech.2016.0134

Energy and Ethics: Justice and the Global Energy Challenge by Benjamin K. Sovacool

2016· article· en· W2556945024 on OpenAlex
Paul W. Hirt

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueTechnology and Culture · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnergy
TopicGlobal Energy and Sustainability Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEconomic JusticeBlueprintEnergy (signal processing)SociologySustainabilityPolitical scienceEnvironmental ethicsLawLaw and economicsEngineeringEcologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Reviewed by: Energy and Ethics: Justice and the Global Energy Challenge by Benjamin K. Sovacool Paul Hirt (bio) Energy and Ethics: Justice and the Global Energy Challenge. By Benjamin K. Sovacool. London: Palgrave Macmillan, 2013. Pp. 304. $100/$29. Benjamin Sovacool’s Energy and Ethics is a blueprint for advancing energy justice at both local and global scales. His energy justice framework includes eight key principles: energy should be widely available, energy should be affordable, decision making should follow due process, energy information should be openly accessible, energy development should prudently manage for long-term sustainability, energy costs and benefits should be distributed equitably in the present as well as intergenerationally, and finally, energy systems should responsibly mitigate externalities, make harmed communities whole, and protect the health of the biotic communities of our planet. After Sovacool’s concise introduction, each chapter in the book elaborates one of these eight principles through a specific case study. Methodically organized, each has an introduction to the principle, a history of the case study, and a discussion of the benefits and challenges of implementing that particular justice principle. Interestingly, the author profiles case studies where a community or a nation or an institution successfully advanced (or at least sought to advance) such a principle. The international scope of Sovacool’s case studies reflects his global ambitions. Across the eight chapters readers learn about energy justice efforts in England, Denmark, Brazil, Bangladesh, Nigeria, Chad, Ecuador, and more. There is also a profile of the World Bank in the chapter on due process. Historians of the United States and Canada should note that there are no case studies of North America. In fact, Canada does not even appear in the index. This is not a global synthesis of energy ethics so much as it is an exploration of energy justice principles illuminated through examples in Europe, Asia, Africa, and South America. From my perspective, the takeaway messages from this book are fourfold: (1) Energy systems involve far more than technology and economics. Too often we conceive of energy systems or solutions to energy problems as reducible to these two basic components, but that reductionism leads to the kinds of social inequities and environmental harms that Sovacool seeks to remedy. (2) Energy and electrical systems are socially governed, and governance works best when it is transparent, participatory, and attentive to equity and justice principles. (3) Progress toward energy justice is achievable and often profitable. (4) The path to a more just energy system will be founded on clean renewable energy, distributed and democratized energy systems, and international climate policies in which developed countries responsible for most global warming emissions financially assist developing [End Page 1029] countries to shift to carbon-neutral energy systems and adapt to climate change. Admirably, the book is cogently written and moves along at a quick pace. There is no superfluous detail, no opaque digressions into theoretical discourse, and no hyperbole, despite Sovacool’s obvious didactic intentions. He offers arguments with evidence and then leaves readers to do with them as they please. The case studies are clearly elaborated and the implications systematically laid out. It is a model of clarity and accessibility, while at the same time being insightful and provocative. I think Energy and Ethics would make an ideal text in both undergraduate and graduate classes and would stimulate far-ranging class discussions about the ethics of global energy systems. The timing for this book is perfect. We are undoubtedly in the most comprehensive global energy transition since the advent of the internal combustion engine and the invention of electricity. We need to think deeply and collaboratively about the ethical implications of our energy systems as a carbon-neutral, distributed, renewable energy revolution rapidly advances around the world. Paul Hirt Paul Hirt is professor of history and Senior Sustainability Scholar at Arizona State University. He specializes in water, energy, and natural resources, with an emphasis on sociotechnological systems and the evolution of environmental policy. Copyright © 2016 The Society for the History of Technology

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.810
Threshold uncertainty score0.803

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.009
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.254 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it