TY - JOUR
T1 - Challenging the social-power paradigm
T2 - Moving beyond consumer empowerment to an energy ecosystem of shared value
AU - Bedggood, Rowan
AU - Russell-Bennett, Rebekah
AU - McAndrew, Ryan
AU - Glavas, Charmaine
AU - Dulleck, Uwe
N1 - Funding Information:
In Australia, energy retailers are required by government regulation to provide support for those in energy poverty or hardship. Such support typically includes delayed payment plans, bill reductions and bill waivers (AER, 2019). Some retailers have invested beyond compliance with regulation by allocating funds to support programs that partly retrofit consumer homes or provide products to reduce energy/water consumption (e.g., LED lighting, shower heads, timers, etc.) for some of their energy consumers. By so doing, they support households to improve the energy efficiency of their home and thus help to reduce future bills (e.g., Origin Energy, 2018; Energy Australia, 2019; ShellEnergy, 2019; ActewAGL, 2020). Such efforts are encouraged, though in practice, they are sporadic amongst retailers, which means their prevalence and reach to those who need them is questionable.Shared value (SV) goes beyond corporate social responsibility and corporate citizenship. It provides a framework for business operations that considers societal stakeholders and the environment, not as external to the organisation, but to improve society's wellbeing. As Lapina et al. (2012) explain, it involves long-term investment wherein profits result from advancing society while delivering products required by that society. The surrounding society and environment are considered as part of the business model so that doing well in business results from ‘doing good’ for society and the environment. It involves engaging the whole sector and thus adopts a multi-stakeholder position. Shared value has moved beyond an abstract scholarly term to a practical approach that has been implemented by organisations globally to address social and environmental problems. “Shared value harnesses the resources, skills and innovation of an organisation to target the issues that intersect with its business” (Shared Value Project: www.sharedvalue.org.au) and has been used to reconceive products and markets, redefine productivity in the value chain and enable local skills development (www.sharedvalue.org.au). An example of implementing a shared value approach across an ecosystem is the Closed Loop Fund initiated by Walmart in the USA. This fund brought together over 18 partners representing companies, agencies, consumer groups and competitors to provide sufficient supplies of recycled plastics that can be used in packaging (Closed Loop Partners: www.closedlooppartners.com). Over $100m has been invested in the fund and is likely to reduce greenhouse emissions by more than 250,000 tons while creating hundreds of jobs (Kramer and Pfitzer, 2016). For further practical examples of shared value success by individual organisations, see https://sharedvalue.org.au/resources/case-studies/.Energy policy should identify how to establish backbone support. This could be achieved by a new organisation, enhancement to the remit of a current independent organisation or sharing the functions across multiple organisations (Hanleybrown et al., 2012). For example, the Magnolia Place Community Initiative in the USA has a small level of staff with backbone support functions distributed across 70 organisations in the network (see Hanleybrown et al., 2012). Similarly, in a health initiative to make healthy food accessible through a variety of retail outlets, a local health department provided backbone support (Flood et al., 2015). Regardless of the organizational structure, the fundamental principle is to maintain neutrality, be able to mobilise stakeholders (Hanleybrown et al., 2012) and provide technical support to the stakeholders (Flood et al., 2015).
Publisher Copyright:
© 2022
PY - 2023/2
Y1 - 2023/2
N2 - The evidence to date on the effectiveness of promoting ‘consumer empowerment’ in energy policy as a method to address consumer needs is limited and inconclusive, especially in light of power-relations amongst energy stakeholders which gives rise to both ‘winners’ and ‘losers’. As such, we challenge conventional wisdom by suggesting that emphasising consumer sovereignty reflects an abrogation of responsibility by policy makers, which unnecessarily imbues burdensome responsibilities to the consumer and household. This raises the question: if consumer empowerment is not delivering energy policy outcomes for consumers, then what should be the approach? We challenge four key assumptions commonly used to advocate for greater ‘consumer empowerment’ and instead introduce an alternative paradigm of shared value. While traditional economic theory argues that markets maximize shared value (i.e., Adam Smith's invisible hand) then it is assumed that the behaviour of consumers is rational and is fully informed, although there is ample evidence that neither of these assumptions hold. Thus, shared value has to be achieved differently. When value is shared across the key stakeholders in a market, collective impact is achieved which fosters shared understanding of the problems and shared responsibility for addressing these problems, resulting in more amenable and effective solutions. Within the context of the deregulated Australian energy market, this conceptual paper introduces the Ecosystem of Shared Value framework (Kramer and Pfitzer, 2016) to the energy sector and explains how policymakers can implement the five key elements: common agenda and language; shared measurement system; mutually reinforcing activities; dedicated ‘backbone’ support; frequent and transparent communication. We note that consumer empowerment does not solve the scarcity problem in the current energy crisis, whereas the shared value approach has the potential to align the interests of producers and consumers in most contexts. Wherever there is a scarcity of resources, whether they are consumer, government or natural resources, the shared value approach provides utility. Exceptions would be in situations where energy is a free resource, or in civil uprisings where it would be difficult to enact.
AB - The evidence to date on the effectiveness of promoting ‘consumer empowerment’ in energy policy as a method to address consumer needs is limited and inconclusive, especially in light of power-relations amongst energy stakeholders which gives rise to both ‘winners’ and ‘losers’. As such, we challenge conventional wisdom by suggesting that emphasising consumer sovereignty reflects an abrogation of responsibility by policy makers, which unnecessarily imbues burdensome responsibilities to the consumer and household. This raises the question: if consumer empowerment is not delivering energy policy outcomes for consumers, then what should be the approach? We challenge four key assumptions commonly used to advocate for greater ‘consumer empowerment’ and instead introduce an alternative paradigm of shared value. While traditional economic theory argues that markets maximize shared value (i.e., Adam Smith's invisible hand) then it is assumed that the behaviour of consumers is rational and is fully informed, although there is ample evidence that neither of these assumptions hold. Thus, shared value has to be achieved differently. When value is shared across the key stakeholders in a market, collective impact is achieved which fosters shared understanding of the problems and shared responsibility for addressing these problems, resulting in more amenable and effective solutions. Within the context of the deregulated Australian energy market, this conceptual paper introduces the Ecosystem of Shared Value framework (Kramer and Pfitzer, 2016) to the energy sector and explains how policymakers can implement the five key elements: common agenda and language; shared measurement system; mutually reinforcing activities; dedicated ‘backbone’ support; frequent and transparent communication. We note that consumer empowerment does not solve the scarcity problem in the current energy crisis, whereas the shared value approach has the potential to align the interests of producers and consumers in most contexts. Wherever there is a scarcity of resources, whether they are consumer, government or natural resources, the shared value approach provides utility. Exceptions would be in situations where energy is a free resource, or in civil uprisings where it would be difficult to enact.
KW - Assumptions
KW - Australian energy market
KW - Consumer empowerment
KW - Eco-system
KW - Energy
KW - Energy poverty
KW - Shared value
KW - Social power
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85146064262&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.enpol.2022.113405
DO - 10.1016/j.enpol.2022.113405
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85146064262
SN - 0301-4215
VL - 173
SP - 1
EP - 12
JO - Energy Policy
JF - Energy Policy
M1 - 113405
ER -