Russia as a landscape factor in the energy transition of small European countries

This paper will draw on the sustainability transitions literature to analyse how Russia is depicted as a factor influencing the energy transition of small Nordic European countries – Estonia, Finland and Norway – with differing energy profiles and relationship with Russia. The aims are (1) to conceptualise and operationalise landscape more closely in sustainability transitions research, (2) to explore how global energy super-power Russia can form a landscape pressure for smaller countries in the interface of energy and security, and (3) how this pressure interlinks with the decarbonisation of the energy system. Landscape is a central concept in sustainability transition studies, by being one of the three core elements of the multi-level perspective. It is the selection environment for niches and socio-technical regimes, determining the conditions for their operation (Berkhout et al., 2009). Landscape can be understood in a metaphorical sense, as something that sustains us and we are part of, for example as a society, and in a literal sense, such as geography and economics (Rip and Kemp, 1998). It is often described as a slow-moving and a relatively stable heterogenous grouping of things, such as environmental problems, demographical trends, political ideologies and macro-economic patterns, while it can also comprise rapid shocks, such as wars and pandemics (Kanda and Kivimaa, 2020). It has been criticised as difficult to operationalise (Rock et al., 2009). Smith et al. (2010) have described landscapes as “spatially distributed across policy jurisdictions at different scales”, while “the boundaries of a socio-technical regime are not necessarily identical with those of a geographical landscape”. Thus, the landscape for low-carbon energy transitions looks different from the perspective of different countries. Based on literature review, we will create a framework to explore Russia as a landscape factor. Due to this context, we omit natural events without direct human intervention as an element. Instead, we explore (a) concrete developments based on the performance of vast groups of actors, i.e., social and institutional constructions, (b) geographical location and overall scale, i.e., the spatial element, and (c) perceptions of actors regarding these developments and the value and importance assigned to these pressures, i.e., the actor element. The research method is an analysis of 46 interviews of expert actors in energy and security domains of the three countries, and how they construct Russia as a landscape pressure in relation to zero-carbon energy transitions. We compare both the three case countries and the perceptions of energy and security experts. Russia is portrayed as a geopolitical entity with large influence on other states, and hence a landscape pressure. Tentative insights indicate that despite all three countries sharing a border with Russia, it is depicted differently as a direct security threat involving caution (Estonia, and security actors more generally), or a desecuritised energy market actor (Finland, and many energy sector actors). Norway faces less direct landscape pressure from Russia due to its significant energy resources.