Constructing consumers. Efforts to make governmentality through energy policy Åsne L. Godbolt Knut H. Sørensen Centre for Energy and Society, Department of Centre for Energy and Society, Department of Interdisciplinary Studies of Culture Interdisciplinary Studies of Culture Norwegian University of Science and Technology Norwegian University of Science and Technology Norway Norway [email protected] [email protected] Henrik Karlstrøm Centre for Energy and Society, Department of Interdisciplinary Studies of Culture Norwegian University of Science and Technology Norway [email protected] Keywords energy conservation, consumer construction, governmental- engage more actively with other social science research than ity, market deregulation, market performance, paternalism, economics to fi nd knowledge about consumers. policy Introduction Abstract During the latter half of the 1970s, in the wake of the so-called Th e paper focuses on the way household consumers have oil crisis, Norwegian governments began to develop a policy been perceived and constructed by Norwegian policy-makers for increased energy effi ciency or energy conservation.1 Th is through a period of 30 years. It shows how, Norwegian energy led to the introduction of the specifi cally Norwegian concept of policy makers have engaged in the making of ambiguous, vague ‘energiøkonomisering’ (ENØK) to weld concerns related to en- and shift ing constructions of consumers and their anticipated ergy conservation with a preoccupation with the economic ef- market behaviour. We have identifi ed three main shift s in the fi ciency of the energy sector. Arguably, this amalgam of policy constructions, each related to a particular time period. Th e fi rst concerns emanates from Norway’s situation as a country rich in came about in the wake of the international oil crisis of 1973, energy resources and economically dependent on a high level when a combined focus on energy conservation and economic of production of energy. To emphasize the particularity of this effi ciency of energy use were introduced as a goal in Norwegian aspect, we use the Norwegian acronym ENØK to denote this energy policy. Th is construction was based on a belief in eco- set of policies (see also Ryghaug and Sørensen 2009). Several nomically rational behaviour, but rendered unclear by observa- White Papers were proposed, with shift ing suggestions of what tions of defi cits related to knowledge and morals. Th e second instruments should be applied to support ENØK goals. How- shift occurred at the end of the 1980s, with the introduction ever, increasingly, economic instruments were emphasized rel- of the proposal of a new Energy Act with the aim of deregu- ative to institutional and technological ones (Sørensen 2007). lating the electricity trade. Th e result was a controversy and In 1990, the Norwegian Parliament passed a new Energy Act construction of two versions of the consumer–as economically intended to transform the Norwegian electricity trade from a rational or as in need of political care. Th e third change came government-controlled to a deregulated market. A main goal with the crisis in the supply of electricity that occurred during was to improve the economic effi ciency of the industry. Th is the winter of 2002/2003. Th is meant a shift towards a focus on included loosening geographical constraints on the trade in investment in technology rather than the act of consuming. We electricity as well as transferring pricing power from Parlia- suggest that the ineff ectiveness of energy effi ciency measures ment to the individual utility. During the last 5-6 years, we to some extent has been due to these constructions. On this basis, we propose the need for policy-makers to be more refl ex- ive about the performance of their constructions, maybe also 1. In the paper, we use energy effi ciency and energy conservation synonymously to designate policies and activities that aim to achieve an absolute or a relative reduction in the consumption of energy. ECEEE 2009 SUMMER STUDY • ACT! INNOVATE! DELIVER! REDUCING ENERGY DEMAND SUSTAINABLY 63 have observed yet another change with a renewed interest in Markets, discipline and governmentality environmental issues, in particular man-made global warming. One typical but rather abstract way of understanding the rise Th is has resulted in a resurgent engagement with energy effi - of neo-liberal policies in Western capitalist societies today is to ciency and eff orts to stimulate a shift towards so-called climate see this as its triumph over post-war Keynesian social demo- neutral sources of energy. cracy as the organising principle of the economy (Larner 2000). Th roughout this period of more than 30 years, the con- By neo-liberal policies, we mean the promise of “rolling back” sumption of electricity in Norway has continued to grow, and government intervention into the economy, and thus –seem- in Norwegian policymaking, the issue of sustainable energy ingly– to create more freedom to act for all economic actors, consumption is still considered a challenge. Partly, this is due large corporations as well as individual consumers. However, to the slow growth in the production of electricity from new the reduction of direct government control may not sever all sustainable sources but also to the observation that energy ef- governance ties. Rather, it may mean a transfer of governing fi ciency measures directed at households as well as industry power from the visible authority of public government into the 2 have proved not to be very eff ective. self-governing by individuals (Lemke 2001). How is this related 3 In the paper, we focus on households and the way that to electricity markets and energy policy? household consumers have been perceived by policy-makers. Th e liberalized electricity market in Norway is argued to re- As we shall see, Norwegian energy policy makers have engaged sult from the introduction of a more systems oriented approach in the making of ambiguous, vague and shift ing images of con- (Olsen 2000, Th ue 2002) or the intervention of economists sumers and their anticipated market behaviour. We argue that from neoliberal micro economics (Hope 2000). However, both the ineff ectiveness of energy effi ciency measures partly is due positions tend to simplify what is involved in making –or in 4 to these portrayals or – more precisely - constructions. Th e this case rather transforming– a market for trade in electricity. next section introduces our theoretical approach. We then To see more clearly the complexity of the eff orts needed, one move on to the empirical analysis, which is based on a survey may turn to economic sociology that analyzes markets in terms of relevant Norwegian policy documents in the period 1975 – of network, institutions or performances (Fourcade 2007, Flig- 2007. Th e documents include Government White Papers and stein and Dauter 2007). Here, we pursue the latter idea, that minutes from the debates of these White Papers in Parliament. markets are made or constructed through the performances All quotes from these documents used in the paper have been of a variety of involved actors. From this perspective, a market translated by us into English. is no longer just a natural, autonomous mechanism that bal- In the analysis, we identify and discuss constructions of ances supply and demand through prices. Th ere is much more consumers on the basis of relevant White Papers and the re- involved. Actually, markets are made through the eff orts of eco- lated discussions of these papers in Parliament. In the more nomic, legal and other experts as well as a diversity of socio- than 30 year long period we have studied, we claim to have technical devices to facilitate, e.g., the calculations that needs to identifi ed three main shift s in the constructions, each related be made (Callon 1998, Callon and Muniesa 2005, MacKenzie to a particular time period. Th e fi rst came about in the wake et al. 2007). of the international oil crisis of 1973, when ENØK was intro- Th us, a main point is that markets are aff ected by advice, duced as a goal in Norwegian energy policy. Th rough several proposals, analysis and comments from experts, but also from government White Papers and the related discussions in the policy-makers, journalists, etc. Another important observation Parliament in the wake of the crisis, the ENØK perspective was is that actual market behaviour cannot be taken for granted. developed (Sørensen 2007). Th e second shift occurred at the Th e textbook image of suppliers as instinctively maximizing end of the 1980s, with the introduction of the proposal of a new profi ts while consumers are geared to maximize their utility Energy Act with the aim of deregulating the electricity trade. is a misleading simplifi cation. Suppliers and consumers have Th e third change came with the crisis in the supply of electric- to be shaped and disciplined from particular constructions to ity that occurred during the winter of 2002/2003. How may we make a market ‘work’. Th is requires ideas of what suppliers and understand these changes, and what were the implications? To consumers in a given market context are supposed to do and clarify some of the underlying issues, we shall briefl y turn to think, ideas that in turn may shape the legal framework, the sociological theories about markets. incentive systems and the interpretative resources involved. Suppliers and consumers do not come ready-made out of Eco- nomics 101 textbooks. Eff orts are needed to make enact them (Callon et al. 2007, MacKenzie et al. 2007). Let us briefl y consider what was involved in the process of liberalizing the Norwegian market for electricity. At the out- set, as noted, the trade was highly regulated.