The micro smart grid as a materialised imaginary within the German energy transition

Abstract In technical terms, a micro smart grid is one solution for future energy supply from renewable energy sources with the aid of information technology. However, it also symbolises the idea of a transformation into a low-carbon, non-fossil-fuel society. This paper analyses that the micro smart grid works as a sociotechnical imaginary and boundary object across a specific actor constellation with plural backgrounds, interests and perspectives. Empirical data has been gathered for this study from an urban innovation campus in Germany, an ascribed living lab for innovation and research that represents an especially designated place combined with spatially embedded visions of the future city and energy system. Here the micro smart grid imaginary is closely interlinked with the place and becomes materialised: it is argued that despite the micro smart grid's incomplete status in terms of technical advancement and reliability, the imaginary already generates cooperation and commitment across actor groups and sectors. The place provides a shared, protected experimental space as well as boundary objects, thus, first, enabling the actors to cope with the perceived uncertainty in the transition process. Second, it fosters innovation, new business models and forms of cooperation, and thereby, third, contributes to the energy system transformation.

[1]  W. Powell,et al.  The iron cage revisited institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields , 1983 .

[2]  Thomas Berker,et al.  Dealing with uncertainty in sustainable innovation: mainstreaming and substitution , 2010 .

[3]  Ingo Schulz-Schaeffer,et al.  Scenarios as Patterns of Orientation in Technology Development and Technology Assessment. Outline of a Research Program , 2013 .

[4]  Wendell Bell,et al.  The Third Wave. , 1982 .

[5]  Frank W. Geels,et al.  Strategic niche management and sustainable innovation journeys: theory, findings, research agenda, and policy , 2008, Technol. Anal. Strateg. Manag..

[6]  H Roberts,et al.  Risk Society: Towards a New Modernity , 1994 .

[7]  David Lane,et al.  Ontological uncertainty and innovation , 2005 .

[8]  T. M. Skjølsvold,et al.  Back to the futures: Retrospecting the prospects of smart grid technology , 2014 .

[9]  Hanna Scheck,et al.  Die Stadt als „Reallabor“ für Systeminnovationen , 2013 .

[10]  Ulrich Dolata Technologische Innovationen und sektoraler Wandel: Eingriffstiefe, Adaptionsfähigkeit, Transformationsmuster ; Ein analytischer Ansatz , 2008 .

[11]  S. Jasanoff,et al.  Sociotechnical Imaginaries and National Energy Policies , 2013 .

[12]  S. L. Star,et al.  This is Not a Boundary Object: Reflections on the Origin of a Concept , 2010 .

[13]  Susan Leigh Star,et al.  Institutional Ecology, `Translations' and Boundary Objects: Amateurs and Professionals in Berkeley's Museum of Vertebrate Zoology, 1907-39 , 1989 .

[14]  Alfred Nordmann,et al.  Visioneering Assessment On the Construction of Tunnel Visions for Technovisionary Research and Policy , 2013 .

[15]  Ulrich Dolata Soziotechnischer Wandel als graduelle Transformation , 2011 .

[16]  N. Brown,et al.  Contested Futures: A Sociology of Prospective Techno-Science , 2000 .

[17]  D. Massey Global sense of place , 1991 .

[18]  Fritz Böhle,et al.  Management of Uncertainty - A Blind Spot in the Promotion of Innovations , 2011 .

[19]  Mads Borup,et al.  The sociology of expectations in science and technology , 2006, Technol. Anal. Strateg. Manag..

[20]  Akhil Gupta,et al.  Culture, Power, Place: Ethnography at the End of an Era , 1997 .