The Role of Scientists in Lithuanian Energy Security Discourse Formation

• Authors: Dainius Genys
• Languages of publication: EN

Abstracts

EN

The aim of the article is to investigate the participation of scientists in the energy security discourse. The empirical research was carried out on the basis of qualitative access while conducting semi-structured interviews with representatives from different branches of science. As the results of the analysis show, despite the strained relations between scientific knowledge and power, Lithuanian scientists do not succeed in converting scientific knowledge into power. Even though scientists have enough knowledge, it is not transformed into power relations due to an existing specific context and the passive role of scientists themselves. Emerging decision-makers’ efforts to eliminate scientists from Lithuanian energy security discourse formation pushes the latter into the vague situation in which it is difficult to expand their share of expectations. Analyses of the scientific discourse show that scientists interpret the energy events in a broader context: while analysing the processes and specific projects that seek to improve energy security, they notice a more comprehensive view and manage to identify advantages, disadvantages and uncertainties of the latter. While marking out the peculiarities of energy security discourse, it may be claimed that the role of the scientists is not significant; realizing the development of energy system there has not created an institutional mechanism for scientific expertise; scientists are not being involved and they do not rush to participate in the formation of energy security discourse. They equate the distribution of information with the publishing of knowledge in the scientific world.

Keywords

EN

Scientific research; Lithuania’s energy security; discourse formation; discourse representation

• Publisher: Sciendo
• Journal: Baltic Journal of Law & Politics
• Year: 2013
• Volume: 6
• Issue: 1
• Pages: 163-180

Dates

published

2013-06-01

online

2013-09-05

Contributors

author

Dainius Genys

• Associate Professor; Researcher Energy Security Research Centre, Vytautas Magnus University (Lithuania)

References

• 1. Adam, Barbara, and Joost Loon. “Repositioning Risk; the Challenge for Social Theory”: 1-31. In: Barbara Adam, Ulrich Beck, and Joost Loon, eds. The RiskSociety and Beyond. Sage Publications, 2005.
• 2. Apklausa: VAI šalininkų ir priešininkų yra beveik po lygiai (Survey: VNPPSupporters and Opponents Are Almost Equal)) // http://klaipeda.diena.lt/naujienos/ekonomika/apklausa-vae-salininku-irpriesininku- yra-beveik-po-lygiai-428441#axzz2AJ7Ld26A (accessed June 12, 2013).
• 3. Augutis, Juozas, Ričardas Krikštolaitis, Dainius Genys, and Giedrius Česnakas, eds. Lietuvos energetinis saugumas. Metinė apžvalga. 2011-2012 (LithuanianEnergy Security. Annual Review. 2011-2012.). Kaunas: Vytautas Magnus University, 2013.
• 4. Baločkaitė, Rasa, and Leonardas Rinkevičius. “Branduolinės energetikos diskursai Lietuvos žiniasklaidoje ir viešojoje nuomonėje: nuostatų takoskyros ir ‘kalbančiųjų klasės’ formavimasis rizikos visuomenėje” (“Nuclear Power Discourse in Lithuanian Mass Media and Public Opinion: Attitudinal Divergences and the Emerging Talking and Acting Classes in the Risk Society”). Filosofija. Sociologija Vol. 20, No. 4 (2009): 259-270.
• 5. Balžekienė, Aistė. Socialinis branduolinės rizikos suvokimas: teorinės įžvalgosir jų refleksija Lietuvos visuomenės požiūriuose į Ignalinos AE (SocialPerception of Nuclear Risk: Theoretical Insights and its Reflection inLithuanian Society Perception Towards Ignalina NPP). Ph.D. thesis. Kaunas: Kaunas University of Technology, 2006.
• 6. Beck, Ulrich. “Living in the World Risk Society.” Economy and Society Vol. 35, No. 3 (2006): 329-345.
• 7. Bourdieu, Pierre. “Social Space and Symbolic Power.” Sociological Theory Vol. 7, No. 1 (1989): 14-25.
• 8. Česnakas, Giedrius. “Energy Security Challenges, Concepts and Controversy of Energy Nationalism in Lithuanian Energy Politics.” Baltic Journal of Law andPolitics 6:1 (2013) [forthcoming].
• 9. Foucault, Michel. Diskurso tvarka (The Order of Discourse). Vilnius: Baltos lankos, 1998.
• 10. Foucault, Michel. Disciplinuoti ir bausti. Kalėjimo gimimas (To Discipline andto Punish: The Birth of the Prison). Vilnius: Baltos lankos, 1998.
• 11. Gaidys, Vladas, and Leonardas Rinkevičius. “Černobylio baimė, pigios energijos nauda ar kai kas daugiau? Dvidešimties metų visuomenės nuomonės apie Ignalinos AE sociologiniai tyrimai Lietuvoje” (“The Scares of Chernobyl, the Favoring of Cheap Energy or Something More? Twenty Years of Sociological Public Opinion Polls in Lithuania on the Ignalina Nuclear Power Plant”). Filosofija. Sociologija Vol. 19, No. 4 (2008): 102-111.
• 12. Genys, Dainius, and Eigintas Aleksandravičius. “Bendro vardiklio beieškant - Lietuvos energetinio saugumo orientyrai ekspertiniu požiūriu” (“Searching for Common Denominator - The Guidlines of Lithuania’s Energy Security in Expert Point of View”). Politikos mokslų almanachas No. 12 (2012): 63-84.
• 13. Janeliūnas, Tomas. “Lithuanian Energy Strategy and its Implications on Regional Cooperation”: 190-222. In: Andris Sprūds and Toms Rostoks, eds. Energy: Pulling the Baltic Sea Region together or apart? Riga: Zinatne, 2009.
• 14. Lyotard, J. Francois. Postmodernus būvis (Postmodern State). Vilnius: Baltos lankos, 1993.
• 15. Molis, Arūnas. Lietuvos geoenergetinio saugumo politikos gairės ir Lietuvosgeoenergetinių alternatyvų paieškos trumpuoju ir vidutiniu laikotarpiu (TheGuidelines of Lithuanian Geo-Energetic Security and Search for LithuanianGeo-Energetic Alternatives in Short-term and Medium Periods). Vilnius: Centre for Strategic Studies, 2006.
• 16. Ministry of Energy of the Republic of Lithuania. The National EnergyIndependence Strategy. Vilnius, 2012.
• 17. Telešienė, Audronė. “Kritiškosios diskurso analizės metodologinių principų taikymas sociologiniuose tyrimuose” (“Application of the Methodological Principles of Critical Discourse Analysis to Sociological Research”). Filosofija. Sociologija Vol. 16, No. 2 (2005): 1-6.
• 18. Van Dijk, Teun A. Discourse and Power. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2008.
• 19. Van Dijk, Teun A. “Discourse, Ideology and Context.” Paper for the 7th International Conference of Pragmatics. Budapest (July 2000). FoliaLinguistica XXX/1-2 (2001): 11-40.

Identifiers

DOI

10.2478/bjlp-2013-0008