It's not personal: modelling a downstream household cap and trade scheme for residential energy in the UK

Examination of climate policies such as downstream cap-and-trade brings into sharp focus the tension between environmental and broader social policy aims. This is particularly true in the residential energy sector. Here, policies to reduce general levels of greenhouse gas emissions must be reconciled with ensuring the affordability of energy for vulnerable consumers.This thesis examines the practical application of justice concerns at the nexus of environmental and social policy, specifically in the domain of household energy demand. To tackle issues of justice in this context an understanding of sufficiency is required: the moral distinction between under- and over-consumption. This thesis presents the application of two theories to understand this notion: first, a ‘needs’ interpretation of household energy as a requirement to support wellbeing; and second, a ‘capabilities’ approach for understanding the opportunities and constraints of households in responding to policy incentives. Further, microsimulation modelling provides a comparative analysis of the potential impact on households using different interpretations of justice.The contribution made is the application and integration of a theoretically grounded understanding of justice to the empirical context of household energy demand reduction. A framework is described within which the moral dimension of policy decisions are made more explicit. Thus, policy-makers are provided with a decision-support tool with which to approach energy related justice concerns. More specifically, the findings will be relevant for the public acceptability and political feasibility of downstream carbon trading schemes