Discourse and Materiality in Environmental Policy: the Case of German Federal Policy on Thermal Renovation of Existing Homes
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Discourse and Materiality in Environmental Policy: the Case of German Federal Policy on Thermal Renovation of Existing Homes Raymond James Galvin BE(Hons); BD; MEd(Hons); MSc(Dist); NZCE; DipTchg; KDSDipl. Submitted for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy, University of East Anglia, School of Environmental Sciences January 2011 © This copy of the thesis has been supplied on condition that anyone who consults it is understood to recognise that its copyright rests with the author and that no quotation from the thesis, nor any information derived therefrom, may be published without the author’s prior, written consent. 1 Abstract This thesis extends policy discourse theory to enable researchers to take fuller account of the interplays between environmental policy discourse, and the material objects that such policies aim to influence. It defends the social constructivist basis of policy discourse theories, but addresses their lack of methodological means to judge the comparative reliability of competing discourses about the material objects of policy. In particular, it shows how their ontology and epistemology cause them to treat the knowledge of materiality produced in the natural sciences as of no more value than knowledge produced in any other realm. It proposes a ‘modest realist’ solution that draws on Roy Bhaskar’s historical account of the pragmatic success of natural science, Rom Harrés understanding of science as a ‘moral’ endeavour, and both these philosophers’ robust theorising as to the ‘real’ nature of the objects of scientific enquiry. This approach preserves a thoroughly social constructivist view of knowledge, while showing how we can judge the reliability of discourses about material reality in a way that is adequate for most practical purposes. It then tests the usefulness of this theoretical framework in a case study, namely an analysis of German Federal policy on thermal renovation of existing homes, evaluating the policy’s effectiveness in achieving its stated aims, which are material in nature. This trans-disciplinary investigation comprises both policy discourse analysis, based on interviews and document research, and natural science-based research on salient features of the German built environment. It finds clear mismatches between the policy, with its accompanying discourse, and the material realities of its target environment, and makes recommendations for policy change. The approach developed in the thesis is therefore offered as a useful extension to policy discourse theory. 2 Acknowledgements This is a self-funded PhD. It would not have been possible without the practical assistance, generosity and support of many kind people. The fieldwork in Germany and Austria was made possible by those who generously provided me with accommodation along the way: Wiebke Sossinka in Cologne, Annie Singh in Frankfurt, Gundel Fallenbacher and Lothar Almarsch in Augsburg, Toni and Maria Blum in Rütschenhausen, Gabriela and Thomas Holzer in Klosterneuburg, Xaver and Waltraud Kainzbauer in Vienna, Nelly Akef in Lübeck, Heinz and Monika Frankenberg in Cottbus, Meike Kretschmar in Bonn and Miriam Ewald, Malter Stöck and Julia Glahe in Berlin. Thanks also to generous hosts in other parts of the world: Norman and Liz Sidebottom in Norwich, Erin Hanifin, Rinny and Barbara Westra and Sue and Warren Deason in Auckland, and John and Alyson Howell in Taupo. Thanks to Fabiola Blum and Anna Frankenberg for repairing my German in formal letters to policymakers, and for the many tips and creative ideas on how best to invent English translations for concepts that seem uniquely or strangely German. I am very grateful to my supervisors, Gill Seyfang, Peter Simmons and Irene Lorenzoni, for their support throughout the project, the intellectual challenge they offered, and their openness to the peculiarities of my subject matter and style of working. Thanks, too, for short-term supervision provided by Basil Bornemann in Germany and Neil Broom in Auckland, and for extensive discussions in qualitative social science research, with Ruth Levine in Cambridge. And many thanks to fellow PhD students, at the University of East Anglia and elsewhere, for that sense of solidarity that seems to help keep us all going. A special note of thanks to those who allowed me to interview them for the research. Their generosity with their time, and their openness and willingness to engage with my questions, provided me with unique insights into many aspects of my subject matter. 3 During the long and intensive journey of a PhD it is essential to find distractions. I therefore wish to thank my musician friends in Cambridge for their support and companionship in creating sounds that transport one into a different world, my cycling friends for our many long tours and training rides together, and my fellow church members for their warm support and genuine interest in my work. Thanks above all to my adult children, Jo and Paul, for being fun companions and good listening ears, and to my partner, Fabiola, for her wonderful support in everyday practical matters, and unwavering interest in the broad scope, the details, and the progress, of my research. 4 Table of Contents Chapter 1 INTRODUCTION TO THE THESIS......................................................... 11 1.1 THE QUESTIONS AT ISSUE...................................................................... 11 1.2 POLICY DISCOURSE ANALYSIS AND MATERIALITY....................... 14 1.2.1 Policy discourse analysis in context....................................................... 14 1.2.2 Under-theorising materiality .................................................................. 16 1.3 POLICY ANALYSIS AND POLICY EVALUATION................................ 19 1.3.1 Defining the terms .................................................................................. 19 1.3.2 Policy evaluation within and outside official circles.............................. 21 1.3.3 Criteria for policy evaluation.................................................................. 22 1.3.4 Policy evaluation and the logic of this thesis ......................................... 22 1.3.5 Criteria of evaluation in this thesis......................................................... 23 1.4 CLIMATE CHANGE.................................................................................... 25 1.5 THERMAL RENOVATION IN REDUCING ENERGY USE AND MITIGATING CLIMATE CHANGE................................................................. 30 1.5.1 Space-heating, energy use and CO 2 emissions....................................... 30 1.5.2 Perceptions of thermal renovation as a means of CO 2 reduction........... 31 1.5.3 The EU’s Energy Performance of Buildings Directorate....................... 34 1.5.4 Germany, the Energy Performance of Buildings Directive, and the building code ................................................................................................... 35 1.5.5 Germany as a case study in thermal renovation of existing homes........ 36 1.6 ECOLOGICAL MODERNISATION ........................................................... 38 1.7 SUMMARY .................................................................................................. 40 Chapter 2 LITERATURE REVIEW: POLICY DISCOURSE THEORY AND MODEST REALISM ............................................................................................ 42 2.1 INTRODUCTION......................................................................................... 42 2.2 CLARIFYING TERMS AND CONCEPTS ................................................. 42 2.2.1 The world ............................................................................................... 43 2.2.2 Being and Knowledge ............................................................................ 43 2.2.3 Heuristic and representational models.................................................... 44 2.2.4 Phenomenology...................................................................................... 46 2.2.5 Subjective and objective......................................................................... 46 2.3 POLICY DISCOURSE THEORY ................................................................ 47 2.3.1 Preliminary issues................................................................................... 47 2.3.2 Decentring and the post-modern project ................................................ 48 2.3.3 Post-positivism ....................................................................................... 49 2.3.4 Social construction and the linguistic turn ............................................ 54 2.3.5 Post-structuralism................................................................................... 57 2.3.6 Post-Marxism and the concept of hegemony ......................................... 62 2.3.7 The solution and its problem .................................................................. 64 2.4 PROPOSED SOLUTIONS TO THE PROBLEM ........................................ 65 2.4.1 Relativism is OK .................................................................................... 65 2.4.2 Degrees of social constructedness.......................................................... 67 2.4.3 Democratising science............................................................................ 70 2.4.4 Human and material symmetry .............................................................. 72 2.4.5 Critical Realism.....................................................................................