The information, practices and views in this article are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the opinion of the Royal Geographical Society (with IBG). © 2018 the Authors. The Geographical Journal published by John Wiley. &. Sons Ltd on behalf of Royal Geographical Society (with the Institute of British Geographers). Grand societal challenges such as climate change, poverty and biodiversity loss call for rapid and radical changes to systems of production and consumption. Consequently, there is a growing interest in the dynamics of innovation, both social and technical, to accelerate innovation diffusion so as to increase the possibility of a step-change or large-scale transition. Research on the water–energy–food nexus adds an additional dimension to existing discussions, calling for transitions that recognise the sustainability challenges facing three major resource domains, and the synergies and tensions involved in their management. This paper examines anaerobic digestion (AD) – an example of innovation with potential benefits across the water–energy–food nexus – to understand the conditions that influence the rate of AD implementation and the achievement of its potential multi-sectoral benefits across the water–energy–food nexus. Interview data regarding 15 AD plants are examined alongside complementary data from interviews and workshops using the Technological Innovation Systems framework. This framework provides an analytical structure through which the processes that enable and constrain the implementation of AD in the UK can be examined, enabling the identification of potential mechanisms to support AD's wider and more effective deployment. The findings call for recognition of the unintended consequences of sectoral support mechanisms for technological adaptation, and consequent performance of AD in other resource domains and call for greater integration between policy mechanisms to enable AD to perform across the nexus. They also highlight a need to assimilate knowledge from multiple sources (including site-specific understanding gained from experimentation) to enhance the base on which policy and decision-making occurs. These findings contribute to existing literature on sustainable transitions by examining the complexities of multi-sectoral resource management in the context of nexus research.

'Energy decentralisation' means many things to many people. Among the confusion of definitions and practices that may be characterised as decentralisation, three broad causal narratives are commonly (implicitly or explicitly) invoked. These narratives imply that the process of decentralisation: i) will result in appropriate changes to rules and institutions, ii) will be more democratic and iii) is directly and causally linked to energy system decarbonisation. The principal aim of this paper is to critically examine these narratives. By conceptualising energy decentralisation as a distinct class of sociotechnical transition pathway, we present a comparative analysis of energy decentralisation in Cornwall, South West UK, the French island of Ushant and the National Electricity Market in Australia. We show that, while energy decentralisation is often strongly correlated with institutional change, increasing citizen agency in the energy system, and enhanced environmental performance, these trends cannot be assumed as given. Indeed, some decentralisation pathways may entrench incumbent actors' interests or block rapid decarbonisation. In particular, we show how institutional context is a key determinant of the link between energy decentralisation and normative goals such as democratisation and decarbonisation. While institutional theory suggests that changes in rules and institutions are often incremental and path-dependent, the dense legal and regulatory arrangements that develop around the electricity sector seem particularly resistant to adaptive change. Consequently, policymakers seeking to pursue normative goals such as democratisation or decarbonisation through energy decentralisation need to look beyond technology towards the rules, norms and laws that constitute the energy governance system.

© 2018, the Author(s). The water–energy–food (WEF) nexus has become a popular, and potentially powerful, frame through which to analyse interactions and interdependencies between these three systems. Though the case for transdisciplinary research in this space has been made, the extent of stakeholder engagement in research remains limited with stakeholders most commonly incorporated in research as end-users. Yet, stakeholders interact with nexus issues in a variety of ways, consequently there is much that collaboration might offer to develop nexus research and enhance its application. This paper outlines four aspects of nexus research and considers the value and potential challenges for transdisciplinary research in each. We focus on assessing and visualising nexus systems; understanding governance and capacity building; the importance of scale; and the implications of future change. The paper then proceeds to describe a novel mixed-method study that deeply integrates stakeholder knowledge with insights from multiple disciplines. We argue that mixed-method research designs—in this case orientated around a number of cases studies—are best suited to understanding and addressing real-world nexus challenges, with their inevitable complex, non-linear system characteristics. Moreover, integrating multiple forms of knowledge in the manner described in this paper enables research to assess the potential for, and processes of, scaling-up innovations in the nexus space, to contribute insights to policy and decision making.

© 2017 Elsevier Ltd Issues of societal engagement in the energy system pervade both the study and the doing of energy policy. In both realms, narratives as persuasive ‘vehicles of meaning’ help us both to make sense of society's role in past and current energy systems, and shape these roles in future energy systems. However, our eagerness to simplify complex histories and unwritten futures means that the narratives we create are often reliant on assumptions. This has implications for the degree to which narratives can find pragmatism, and thus be valuable, to a wide range of stakeholders. Drawing both on historic accounts of societal engagement in energy systems alongside emerging discourses around future energy systems, this paper offers several points of caution for the use of narratives of engagement. In terms of historic narratives, these relate to hindsight bias, predictability, and normative positioning, the combination of which depict histories of engagement as retrospectively obvious, and falsely suggest a controllability of past events. In terms of forward-looking narratives, while optimism and ambiguity play key roles in garnering interest in visions among stakeholders, they also mean that narratives vary in their relevance, and thus value to, different stakeholders. Fundamentally, narratives must find legitimacy in the actors they purport to recruit, and must thus simultaneously attend to regulative, normative and cognitive aspects of energy system engagement.