The climate crisis and goals for 'green growth' have led governments worldwide to adopt cluster-based approaches to decarbonise carbon-intensive industries (e.g. steel, petrochemicals) and to revive declining industrial regions, a predominant concern for late capitalist societies. Research has begun to investigate the role played by sense of place in sustainability transitions in regions with fossil fuel-intensive industries. However, ways that sense of place may shape just industrial transitions have been underexplored. Adopting a novel analytical approach with the concept of spatial imaginaries, we explore contested senses of place in decarbonising industrial regions and their implications to just transitions. A multi-phase, multi-scalar qualitative methodology was used to investigate 'net zero senses of place' held by government and industry stakeholders and host communities in three emerging UK net zero industrial clusters. Our findings reveal an ontological contrast of industrial places existing between stakeholders and host communities. There was a gulf between the top-down, win-win, and hopeful place visions in policy/industry discourses (e.g. the idea of 'SuperPlaces') and the more ambivalent socio-cultural imaginaries of industrial places held by host communities, comprising bleak lived experiences of extractive place-industry relations alongside positive examples of community-led resilience. The contrasting senses of place underlay local scepticism about proclaimed benefits and visions of industrial decarbonisation, indicating the stakeholders' deficiency in recognising local grievance and struggles, in engaging community in cluster development, and in supporting community wellbeing. We conclude by arguing that stakeholders must go beyond a narrow techno-economic ontology to view industrial decarbonisation as a form of inclusive place-making, working with host communities to address local needs and co-produce shared visions of net zero futures.

Abstract This chapter examines the competing visions of sociotechnical and spatial order that structure the national controversy over wind energy deployment in France between 2015 and 2022. In recent years, national wind energy policies have elicited controversy, prompting actors to articulate contrasting visions of (un)desirable energy futures crystallizing in competing sociotechnical imaginaries (STIs). Based on the analysis of a corpus of 170 documents from government, industry and civil society actors, the chapter identifies four STIs struggling for traction. It highlights the ambivalent status of wind energy, integrated into a dominant STI of ecological modernization shared by government and industry actors and a more transformative STI propagated by citizen energy actors, faced with contestation on both flanks of the political spectrum by an anti-capitalist STI and a more conservative STI. Each of these STIs is co-constituted with spatial imaginaries, coalescing into divergent visions of (un)desirable socio-spatial orders. Spatial imaginaries are strategic in emphasizing the (un)desirability of wind energy, but also contribute to a deeper contrast between localist STIs rejecting centralization and neoliberalism (anti-capitalist and citizen energy STIs), and centralized visions of socio-spatial order that reproduce existing modes of energy, political and economic organization (dominant STI and conservative STI). The chapter concludes that it is important not to confine the geographical analysis of STIs to the local scale but to interrogate the spatial imaginaries implicated in technological development at the national level to capture how sociotechnical and spatial orders are co-constituted and negotiated.

Grid networks are electrical distribution infrastructures that are typically represented as essential for society, however, constructing new power lines often creates conflict. Developing a critical-spatial approach to social acceptance, this research defined such conflicts as underpinned by spatially-embedded and multi-scalar power asymmetries between different stakeholders and organisations. Attending to the spatial dimensions of power, we extend the critical social acceptance literature in three ways. First, by investigating how stakeholders, technologies and discourses are embedded across spaces, places and scales. Second, by assessing the performative dimensions of imaginaries used to legitimise or contest power line proposals. Third, by adopting a methodological approach that integrated participatory GIS into semi structured interviews. We use the Munga-Hamra power line proposal in Sweden as a case study. Thematic analysis revealed how the powerline was legitimated by an ‘elite’ coalition of private and public sector stakeholders who ‘localised’ a national socio-technical imaginary in regional and local imaginaries of industrial growth. The power line was contested by a coalition of rural stakeholders including affected landowners, residents and tourism businesses who invoked imaginaries of a ‘rural idyll’ to argue for undergrounding the line. Both coalitions legitimated their positions by ‘othering’ imaginaries held by the adversary coalition (e.g., urban vs. rural). Moreover, we identified a third set of ‘neutral’ actors who strategically avoided adversarial positions and coalition membership. The findings illustrate the valuable contributions that critical-spatial approaches to social acceptance research can make; and the significance of attending to stakeholders with overlooked ‘neutral’ positionalities within such conflicts.

Underground Thermal Energy Storage (UTES) offers the potential to manage seasonal demand for heat, thereby reducing reliance on fossil fuels. The Horizon EU project PUSH-IT (Piloting Underground Storage of Heat In geoThermal reservoirs) is testing three ways to store heat up to 90°C, in mines, boreholes and aquifers at six pilot sites. The project also explores governance, policies, business models, and societal engagement. Societal engagement is essential to ensure that such technologies are acceptable, fair and legitimate (Soutar et al., 2024). A key to effective engagement lies in strategic listening (Pidgeon and Fischhoff, 2011), which involves understanding existing public perceptions; a critical area that remains underexplored in the context of underground thermal energy storage (Environment Agency, 2025). To address this gap, we conducted a 15-minute online questionnaire (N=5,800) with nationally representative samples (n=1,000) across each of four countries (Germany, the Netherlands, the Czech Republic, and the United Kingdom) and locally representative samples (n=300) in each of six communities within 20 km of each site. We analyse public perceptions and understandings of UTES, including its perceived advantages and disadvantages, emotional responses to the technology, trust in stakeholders, and overall levels of support nationally and close to each site. We then outline the implications of our findings for designing effective societal engagement strategies for UTES and other underground energy technologies, thereby contributing to sustainable energy goals. Acknowledgements: Funded by the European Union under grant agreement 1011096566 (PUSH-IT project). Views and opinions expressed are however those of the author(s) only and do not necessarily reflect those of the European Union or CINEA. Neither the European Union nor CINEA can be held responsible for them.

Despite the growing international use of citizens’ assemblies to address climate change challenges, there remains a lack of consensus about the best means of integrating these into existing political decision-making contexts, particularly at the local level. Furthermore, there is a dearth of research which evaluates the ‘robustness’ of efforts to integrate mechanisms such as climate assemblies into structures of governance whilst also examining their role in unlocking creative solutions to climate change. We fill this gap with findings from an interview-based study of a local climate assembly in Devon, England. We apply and evaluate the framework of Boswell et al (2023) which incorporates three dimensions of robust integrative design relating to polity, policy and politics. The framework aids in the identification and categorisation of facilitators and processes of integration relevant to local climate assemblies. However, our research also identifies salient barriers to integration on each dimension, which occur both within and across scales of governance. Recognising and addressing these obstacles, we suggest, is as important as adopting formal processes of integration. Barriers to polity robustness include party political differences and competing priorities across organisations. Challenges for policy robustness include resource and capacity issues, a lack of clarity over implementation responsibility, and national government policy. Political robustness is inhibited by difficulties with engaging certain stakeholders such as business, and cross-sectoral tensions. Finally, a narrow focus on achievable outcomes linked to existing organisational priorities may undermine climate assemblies’ more transformational potential, suggesting trade-offs between polity/policy robustness and political robustness.

Spatial imaginaries refer to collective understandings of socio-spatial relations that encompass three types: imaginaries about specific places in the world, generic types of space (e.g. a rural village), and transformations to space (e.g. industrialisation). The concept has been applied in diverse fields, notably city and regional planning, yet significant gaps remain in terms of understanding interdependencies between types of spatial imaginary at multiple scales, and of the fairness and justice implications of contested imaginaries, particularly in contexts of low carbon energy transitions. To address these gaps, we draw on qualitative data from 45 interviews with residents in two UK communities—Great Altcar and Woodsetts— to analyse arguments about proposals for local shale gas exploration. We highlight three key findings. First, objections are underpinned by the three types of spatial imaginary, which are used relationally to contest local proposals. We demonstrate the distinction, consistencies and contradictions across the types of spatial imaginaries in practice. Second, the spatial imaginaries create particular sets of ‘othering’, in terms of where residents believe fracking should or should not occur, which build upon distinctions between city and countryside, locals and ‘outsiders’, the north and south of England, and internationally between Great Britain and other countries. Finally, concerns with fairness and justice underpin how spatial imaginaries are used to object to local fracking proposals. By recognising community-level concerns with energy infrastructure projects, in the form of diverse spatial imaginaries at multiple scales, we can move toward more inclusive approaches to sustainable energy transitions.

In Canada, climate change and the rising cost of fossil fuel-based energy are driving a transition to cleaner local energy systems-combining renewable energy, storage, and smart devices. While these technologies are important, without public support and participation, they will not ensure a just and sustainable transition. In this context, we analyze data from a nationally representative survey (n = 941) of Canadians' views towards local energy system change, with a focus on three actions (hosting generation, agreeing to external control, and trading electricity) that will be vital. We are interested in overall trends across Canada, though given regional differences and the need to understand the people likely to support these actions, we utilize geographic, socio-demographic, and political variables to explore variations. In this, four key distinctions were found: females were more likely to support local generation; Quebec residents were more likely to consider coordination by letting an authority take control of their household's appliances; younger Canadians were more interested in all actions; and there was a left-right divide along political lines, with those supporting left-leaning parties being more interested in energy management. We locate these findings within broader discussions and close our article with recommendations for further research and policy.

Communities and workers in England, Scotland and Wales are facing historic local transitions amid a rapidly changing climate and growing political and economic inequality. Those within industrial clusters seeking better treatment of workers, vulnerable and marginalized groups, and the environment demand that action to combat the climate crisis contribute to "just transitions." Yet what constitutes a just transition is subjective, involving competing claims and tensions between key advocates about what has been (un)just and what is required to advance more fair and equitable outcomes. This study brings into view the perspectives of those not typically at the decision-making table. We build from previous projects collecting the "lived experiences" that aim to lift-up diverse voices from local communities. Our approach uses original semi-structured interviews (N = 24), focus groups (six with N = 45 total participants), participant observation in England, Scotland and Wales coupled with local surveys in three clusters (n = 600) and nationally representative survey data (N =1,178 respondents), all of which were conducted from June 2022-November 2024. We identify five themes arising from these data: place-based perceptions and local identities, potent lived experiences of injustice, technology-specific concerns, issues of trust and awareness, and issues concerning policy and governance. We then discuss these five themes considering recent literature on recognition justice and sense of place, procedural justice and community engagement, and distributive justice and localising benefits. The resulting evidence provides insight as to how net-zero industrial transitions are perceived by local communities, and data from the national survey allows us to show how local perspectives align and resonate with UK publics on a national scale.

A growing policy focus in many economies is decarbonising energy-intensive industries such as steel, chemicals, and cement, responsible for a quarter of global CO2 emissions. While policy discourses underscore the need for rapid, cost-effective industrial decarbonization, how to implement decarbonization in ways that are fair and just to workers and local communities and build a social licence to operate remains unclear. This perspective addresses a gap in guiding how governments and industries decarbonise by collaborating with affected communities and workers. We propose a Place-based, Just Transition framework that synthesises findings from four UK research projects and three under-connected research fields - Sense of Place, Just Transition, and Social Licence to Operate. The framework highlights seven themes: ongoing processes; place sensitivity; genuine community engagement; localised benefits and fairness; trust, credibility and legitimacy; multi-level governance; and tradeoffs and tensions. Reflecting on our engagement with stakeholders in three UK industrial clusters, we identify four challenges impacting application of the framework: expectations, scope, resources, and leadership. We argue that negotiating these challenges and applying the framework can go beyond narrow technological and economic framings of industrial decarbonization and can guide place-sensitive and fair industrial decarbonisation with a social licence.

Shale gas is a contentious energy source. Yet, 'imagined' notions of the public (for example, NIMBYs) rarely reflect the reality of public opinion. We use an inductive, empirical approach to define UK publics in relation to shale gas extraction, drawing on multiple data sources (social media, a national survey, and two local surveys) and composite measures. Cluster analyses and thematic coding reveal a diversity of responses ranging from active opposition, through ambivalence, to active support. The number of communities varies by data source and analytical method, but across all datasets we see more opposition than support. Across all datasets, political views were an important lens through which shale gas was understood. Our findings have implications for how developers and policy-makers engage with the public, and expose limitations of pre-defined notions of the public that may not reflect empirical realities.

Energy communities (ECs) are considered important in transitioning the energy system. They are of particular interest due to their potential to empower citizens and support a more just energy transition. However, experiences from ECs remain limited and vary across countries, thus raising questions on potential future advancements. In this article, we explore experiences from ECs in several European countries to inspire discussions on further evolvement and improvements. Insights into lessons learned and key challenges within the selected countries have been collected and analysed, and recommendations for advancing these efforts are provided to policy makers. The results indicate that ECs are making progress in producing and sharing renewable energy while supporting a more just energy transition by engaging a variety of actors within local communities. The challenges, however, often stem from limited national support and difficulties in fully achieving diversity within engaged local communities. The recommendations stress the importance of building on early learnings in community energy and further strengthening local anchoring to achieve a just transition. This in turn, generates fertile ground for discussions on how to localize energy policy and reinforce a multi-level policy approach beyond the European and national levels.

Low carbon energy transitions reconfigure geographies of energy generation, distribution, and consumption, and are often subject to contestation. Social acceptance research has neglected relations between socio-political and market acceptance, and the role of socio-spatial beliefs in legitimating technology deployment. This research addressed these gaps in two ways. First, we devised a novel methodology integrating participatory GIS in semi- structured interviews with government, energy industry and non-governmental stakeholders. Second, we investigated how socio-spatial resources- spatial imaginaries and imagined publics- are drawn upon by stakeholders to legitimate 'acceptable' current and future pathways of low carbon energy technology deployment, using Sweden as a case study. Thematic analysis revealed consensus between government and industry stakeholders in 'othering' two established, relational place imaginaries- 'Northern Sweden' and 'Southern Sweden'. Established place imaginaries were legitimated through historic, economic, demographic and environmental characteristics, and associated with specific imagined publics ('Northern People', 'Indigenous Sami' and 'Southern People') with varying levels of 'acceptance'. An emergent place imaginary ('Mid-Sweden') focused on contestation over high voltage power lines. These socio-spatial resources were invoked to legitimate where future hydrogen deployment and offshore wind should be placed. Findings make four contributions. First, we extend understanding of the inter-relations between socio-political and market dimensions of social acceptance. Second, we develop a novel approach to social acceptance integrating the concepts of place imaginaries and imagined publics as socio-spatial resources. Third, we show how these socio-spatial resources can be captured using mapping methodologies. Finally, we map a future critical-spatial social acceptance research agenda.

Decentralisation offers one route to energy system decarbonisation, and local energy systems (LES) provide focal points for decentralisation. LES involve the integration of different generation, storage, and demand-side technologies across heat, power, and transport systems, within defined localities. Public support is necessary for LES deployment at pace and scale, but while past research has examined public attitudes towards individual technologies, few studies have investigated perceptions of systemic shifts towards LES. This paper presents findings from a nationally representative UK survey (n n = 3034) on LES. We compare two ways of exploring perceptions of decentralised energy: as a broad systemic shift, and as the cumulative deployment of multiple LES innovations. Results show high levels of public support for a systemic shift towards decentralisation, but more moderate levels of support for specific LES innovations. Regression analysis highlight the role of personal characteristics, climate concern, political beliefs, and engagement with technologies in influencing support for LES. Support is more predictable for decentralisation, whose meaning is clear in principle while containing ambiguities in practice. Support for LES innovations is less predictable and is explained by the diversity with which households interpret the multiple propositions afforded by LES innovations. For LES to benefit from majority public support for a systemic shift, policy and industry actors need to better understand the diverse set of perceptions and values that LES hold for the public and seek broader and deeper engagement with the public around specific LES innovations, as well as around systemic change more broadly.

For twenty years, social scientists have used place concepts to understand energy infrastructure siting. Much of this research stemmed from attempts to provide theoretical explanations that avoid pejorative NIMBY (Not in My Back Yard) assumptions about community objections. Despite a burgeoning literature, a comprehensive review of place-related energy infrastructure research is lacking. This paper addresses this gap for the first time by collating and systematically reviewing a corpus of 190 articles published between January 1999 and March 2022, using search terms combining 'energy' and five place concepts (place attachment, sense of place, place identity, identity of a place, place-technology fit). Content analysis revealed the application of place concepts most frequently to wind energy, as well as nuclear power, fossil-fuel extraction and energy distribution; a high number of journal outlets (n = 76); a prevalence of single case study and survey methods; geographical concentration in developed countries, and a high prevalence of female authors. Bibliometric analysis of key words indicated a hub and spoke structure centered on the term place attachment, with low levels of coherence. 8 research clusters were identified comprising disparate technologies, geographical contexts, concepts and methods. Two of the search terms (identity of a place, place-technology fit) had low prevalence. Analysis revealed the application of place concepts to be highly varied, with 15 place concepts identified that are often not the primary focus of research, and sometimes used superficially. To improve coherence, cumulative learning and rigour in future studies, a lexicon of place definitions and specific recommendations are provided.

In the face of climate change and associated energy system change, there is a growing literature and more general recognition of the 'four Ds' (decarbonization, decentralization, digitalization, and democratization). Yet there has been very little quantitative work that analyzes public perceptions of these changes. Utilizing data from a Canada-wide, nationally representative survey (n = 941), this study conducted provincial and regional assessments to spatially explore the public's views of moves toward innovative local energy system change through the development of what we call Local Smart Grids (LSGs). Through descriptive statistics and t-tests, we sought to answer three main questions: i) To what extent does the public support energy democracy via new local energy systems? ii) What does the public desire in terms of participation? and iii) What motivates the public to participate? We find overall support for energy democracy across Canada, yet varied support among provinces and regions. Canadians seem to want to participate in moves toward energy democracy, although we found a strong preference for more passive participatory actions. Additionally, support and a desire to participate is predominantly motivated by environmental factors, including combating climate change, with community and social motivations playing a secondary role, followed by financial motivations. These findings, some of the first of their kind in the realm of energy democracy in Canada, provide useful insights relevant to scholars, policymakers, and practitioners working on LSG implementation as well as others with an interest in socio-technical innovation and energy system change.

Local Smart Grids are emerging during the climate crisis, as governments and industry recognize the need to better integrate intermittent renewable energy, storage, transportation, heating, and smart technologies. Such projects can represent profound changes to the status quo of energy and citizen lifestyles. They are also being associated with the "four Ds," whereby Local Smart Grids are decarbonizing, decentralizing, digitalizing, and potentially democratizing energy systems. Yet, due to their recent arrival, there is very little social scientific research that has aimed to better understand public views, expectations, and support for this change. We attempt to fill this important gap in the literature through the analysis of two nationally representative surveys in the UK (n = 3034) and Canada (n = 941). This analysis highlights within- and between-country trends, including how the variation in responses regarding the "four Ds," demographic factors, and other variables may explain the differences we see in terms of support for energy system change in the UK and Canada. Our analysis also shows that there are common elements, including the importance of the decentralization, and especially the democratization of energy in shaping support. We hope that this study will help governments, industry, community groups, and local residents themselves in both countries come together to advance the kind of Local Smart Grids that address climate change and represent a supported, just energy transition. Graphical Abstract

•We are concerned about JEVP's decision not to accept pure qualitative research.•Qualitative research provides important insights for environmental psychology.•Excluding this method limits opportunities for research with minority populations.•The decision may negatively impact scholars from minoritised backgrounds.•It may also limit interdisciplinary approaches to environmental psychology.

Where host communities are marginalized by industry practices, energy social science researchers must ensure that their research does not doubly exacerbate extractive practices. Place-based reflexivity provides a set of principles and concrete practices for researchers to avoid extractive relations with host communities and promote contextually relevant and democratic processes in pursuit of a just transition.

AbstractDecarbonizing industrial sectors is a critical global challenge, involving the creation of new industrial spaces—‘net zero industrial clusters’—co‐locating energy sectors and ‘hard‐to‐abate’ industries such as oil refining and steelmaking. This paper provides the first empirically grounded geographical investigation of these emerging spaces. It employs a place‐based research agenda to unpack how UK net zero industrial clusters (ICs) are imagined and emplaced in policy and industry discourses through place‐based naming, spatial configuring and mapping activities. By conducting document analysis, 33 in‐depth stakeholder interviews and five field trips to three UK case studies, we show how cluster imaginaries vary across cases and policy contexts in terms of constituents, focus and purpose. Ontological complexity is compounded by different rationales among stakeholders in configuring clusters and by contested cluster naming and boundary setting. This ambiguous, evolving spatiality raises important political and justice concerns over who and where is excluded in cluster building. These findings advance the geographies of low‐carbon transitions by showing: (1) ways that ICs' spatial embeddedness, which underlies cluster spatial configurations, helps increase industry actors' recognition of their economic, social and cultural ties with the places of their making, even if this risks path dependency; (2) how fluid cluster boundaries, reflected in cluster names and maps, emphasize the value of a network topology of scale to enable spatially inclusive, multi‐scalar climate mitigation. Finally, we argue that a place‐sensitive net zero policy mindset is vital for fulfilling ICs and the UK's decarbonization potential in a manner that is both fair and locally grounded.