Values

results from the online survey show that residents trust the municipality more than grid providers and housing associations. Residents believe grid operators can make a difference in the energy transition but that it is important to watch them closely so that they do not take advantage of people like them. Building upon the work of Midden & Huijts (2009), the low levels of trust in commercial stakeholders found could be related to low acceptance of the energy transition.

The explanations given by respondents for the New Ecological Paradigm (Harraway et al., 2012) statements provide some nuance in interpreting the abovementioned results. For example, respondents argued that whether adjustments to nature are acceptable depends on the extent to which they are harmful to nature. The fact that mankind makes adjustments to nature was argued to be inevitable. One of the respondents that agreed that the climate crisis is exaggerated explained that it is ‘not actually a crisis’ because there are great opportunities for the future.

The respondent showed an anti-government attitude and was critical towards current government spending in the light of ‘green’ policies.

R5surveyTW: “In fact, there are unprecedented opportunities to build a better future for us. Without government, without coercion, without slavery. It is interesting to see the increasing government debt of countries that pretend to adhere to "green" policies. In fact, that is precisely what looting is: borrowing resources from the future to spend them here. A more withdrawing government would lead to more opportunities for self-innovation.”

The majority of survey respondents seem to be aware that there is limited ecospace and acknowledges that mankind disturbs the balance in nature. These two insights are important explanations that legitimize the call for an energy transition. The consensus on ecological values was confirmed by residents who were interviewed. All respondents showed concern for climate change and acknowledged that the current use of ecospace by mankind is unsustainable.

All in all, the call for an energy transition is embedded in the ecological values held by residents.

A code that emerged in the data analysis was ‘freedom of choice’, which was defined as ‘the wish from residents to be able to choose their energy and/or heat provider’. An example of this code is present in the comment from R1surveyST shown in section 6.2. Prioritizing freedom of choice fits within neo-liberal thinking that highly values individual freedom. The current private energy market largely functions according to these ideals but now faces government interference. So far, the energy market has failed to deliver sustainable and scalable energy alternatives in a timely manner. Thus, governments are now interfering hoping to accelerate the process. However, this is where the consequences of the transition can collide with values of individual freedom. SR1 explains that this was an important reason to start with the project

SR1: “We did not want a monopolist such as in Eneco to control a heat network in our neighbourhood without us having a say in it, because then you will encounter problems that always come with a standard monopolist: too little transparency, perhaps too high costs for the residents, and the feeling that everything happens outside of your control.”

To conclude, the results show that the ecological values held by respondents increase understanding and acceptance of the need for an energy transition. However, when energy alternatives constrain residents’ freedom of choice, this negatively affects their acceptance of this energy alternative.

6.2.2. Priorities

Within the participation process, there is a volunteer bias as most actively involved residents are either very concerned about climate change, very socially involved in the neighbourhood, or interested because of personal circumstances. For example, when people are planning to rebuild their house they want to know what kind of investments they should or should not make to make their house ready for the energy transition. The majority of residents do not belong to either of these groups, making it difficult to get a representative sample of residents to participate. Thus, not only values but also personal circumstances and interests or ‘priorities’

are important to consider when reaching out to residents. Residents in Twekkelerveld brought up unrelated issues during community meetings about the energy transition. In this instance, participation was hindered because residents felt more urgency for other issues.

TR5: “Some neighbourhoods suffer from a rat plague as a result of our household waste system. So, when the municipality is here, this problem is brought to the table as it is more urgent than the heat network. But the people from the municipality who are there for Twekkelerveld Aardgasvij have nothing to do with that. So sometimes they’re having a hard time.”

SR5 explained that dealing with personal interests is a continuous process for the municipality because new people ‘wake up’ with every step that is being made.

SR5: “I think a lot of people wait-and-see, until the moment that is affects them, when they think ‘hé, this is going to cost me money’ or something will actually happen. Only then, a large share of the neighbourhood will wake up.”

Following the comment by SR5, an important code that emerged from the data was the ‘silent majority’. The silent majority refers to the group of residents that do not partake in participation as long as they do not consider it a personal priority. The moment residents feel that the activities will affect them personally, they ‘wake up’ and get more actively involved. The rung in the participation ladder that lists ‘informing’ is the most important one to reach this group and is a prerequisite for any higher rung on the participation ladder (Arnstein, 1969).

When trying to get residents to participate in the energy transition process, the results show that most residents become interested when it concerns issues that affect them personally. The most striking example in which participation increased greatly as a result of ‘personalizing’

information was the distribution of the flyer from Aardgasblij in The Hague. The flyer was posted on Facebook on September the 30^th and distributed door to door on October the 3^rd. The title of the flyer (appendix 9) reads ‘don’t be fooled¹²’ which personalizes the message in a cautioning tone. As a result of the flyer, many more residents started to participate in the opinion poll (appendix 8).

The fact that the majority does not participate does not have to impede successful citizen participation. However, the volunteer bias does urge policymakers to not overestimate the representativeness of participation. When the silent majority is ‘forgotten’ and representativeness is overestimated, the urban energy transition can suddenly lose a lot of support that it thought it had. The volunteer bias was tried to overcome in Statenkwartier by including a workgroup called ‘critical residents’. This workgroup was comprised of residents who were critical -if not against- the urban energy transition. SR6 choose not to take part in the workgroup ‘critical residents’ because he could simply not adhere to the starting point of Statenwarmte of being natural gas free in 2030.

SR6: “If I were to join that club I would have to push the brakes all the time. Then you're the pariah, then you don't get the working group any further. And for those who have

the dissenting opinion, that is demotivating. I already saw then that the atmosphere in which it was set up, that there would be no room for anyone who thinks otherwise. That was my personal reason for not wanting to participate.”

Thus, the starting point of being natural gas free in 2030 might have prevented opponents from participating in the project. Either way, the inclusion of other residents with a different view could not predict the outcome of the last opinion poll in which the option ‘wait and decide later’

was chosen by a majority of the respondents (appendix 8). Clearly, a majority of the residents still felt many uncertainties in regard to the proposed energy alternatives.

Furthermore, the majority of the residents do not participate and will only do so when it is made a personal priority. The representativeness of participation and also citizen initiatives should be evaluated with care in order to not misjudge public opinion.