4.4 Article

From 'energy geography' to 'energy geographies': Perspectives on a fertile academic borderland

Journal

PROGRESS IN HUMAN GEOGRAPHY
Volume 40, Issue 1, Pages 105-125

Publisher

SAGE PUBLICATIONS LTD
DOI: 10.1177/0309132514566343

Keywords

energy GIS; interdisciplinary; production of space; renewable energy; transition

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This paper takes stock of geographical contributions to the study of energy and energy futures. The paper is written in two parts. First, I trace the methodological and philosophical traditions that underpin geographical approaches to energy studies. I argue that while 'energy geography' is arguably a pragmatic shorthand with which to communicate to the broader energy studies community, geographical studies of energy have expanded in scope and theoretical plurality so that 'energy geographies' is a more appropriate label. Energy geographers are well positioned to contribute to scientific and policy debates surrounding energy due to their privileged position at the borderland between various philosophical and methodological traditions. Second, I identify some of the problems, opportunities and uncertainties that contemporary energy geographers are helping to identify, understand, and resolve. Past contributions and critical issues for future scholarship are highlighted in four themes: (1) using advanced socio-spatial theory to better understand the energy-society relationship; (2) geo-political and geo-economic assessments of (changing) global energy trade networks; (3) geographical perspectives on socio-technical (energy) transitions; and (4) advanced spatial decision-support for energy planning and technology implementation. While this discussion is by no means exhaustive, it aims to bring some clarity and specificity to the policy and academic relevance of geographical thought and practice as it relates to energy issues.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available