We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
This chapter presents the book’s major insight: no single “energy transition” takes place as countries contemplate adding wind and solar power. Rather, the issue convokes a variety of state and societal actors responding to the interests and institutions associated with four different policy arenas: climate change, industrial policy, electricity service provision, and the siting of infrastructure projects in communities. As the book shows, national energy transition results from the intersection of these arenas; some push transition forward; others hold it back. The chapter previews the overarching empirical argument that South Africa’s reliance on fossil fuel for electricity meant that climate concerns presented the sector with an existential threat, leading it to challenge energy transition on industrial policy and cost/consumption grounds, in a politicized process. Meanwhile, electricity’s small role in Brazil’s climate emissions led to a less politicized process: a series of national bureaucracies followed discrete standard procedures in interaction with just a few business/citizen groups, with industrial policy and cost concerns most influential in Brazil’s overall outcomes.
Recommend this
Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this to your organisation's collection.