Energy transition policies can be translated into narratives about how energy systems should change (e.g., towards a centralised or decentralised system). These narratives tend to reflect expectations, priorities, and perceptions on feasibility and the social acceptability of different policy options, as well as long-term goals and trade-offs, all of which influence policy criteria. Taking as its case study Portugal and the implementation of European directives there, this study aims to characterise energy transition narratives (e.g. a swift transformation to renewables) and interrelated policy criteria (e.g., participation of local communities), focusing on expectations for a socially engaging and democratic energy transition. The analysis builds on the results of a Delphi survey with 10 expert stakeholders, a citizens’ survey (n=500), and a workshop with 19 participants. It identifies the most relevant criteria to stakeholders, as well as the importance of different underlying expectations, meanings, and attitudes shaping narratives about energy system futures. The findings indicate that criteria interrelated to narratives which highlight a promise of democratic energy governance may be less important for energy transition policies, and therefore undermine energy democracy goals. The conclusion highlights suggestions for policy and future research more likely to foster sociopolitical acceptance.

@en

The proposal for a Program for the requalification of Lisbon's "priority intervention Neighborhoods or Zones" (hereon, BIP/ZIP, original acronym in Portuguese) comes within the scope of the objectives of the Local Housing Program (PLH), approved by the autarchic bodies at the end of 2009. The first task implied the construction of the concept of Priority Intervention Neighborhood, which was worked on the definition of "Critical Neighborhood" (Resolution of the Council of Ministers 142/2005 of August 2), in conjunction with the research of socio- economic, urban and environmental. It was then moved to a finer definition, which includes not only Priority Intervention Districts (BIPs), but also Priority Intervention Zones (ZIP). As a first approach to the BIP / ZIP delimitation, several existing municipal boundaries that could be included in the Priority Neighborhood concept and that had already been identified within the scope of the PLH were transposed to cartographic support. The delimitations considered were as follows: 1.ACRRU - Critical Area of Urban Recovery and Reconversion 2. AUGI - Urban Area of Illegal Genesis 3. Municipal Districts (under GEBALIS management) with special problems 4. Remaining Areas of PIMP and PER (Special Rehabilitation Programs) 5. Neighborhoods ex-SAAL with serious problems pending 6. Area of intervention of the Western SRU - Western Urban Rehabilitation Assistance 7. Area of intervention of the Viver Marvila Program As a second approach to the BIP / ZIP delimitation, the following analytical method was used: several relevant indicators were selected to identify the most critical situations in the socio-economic, urban and environmental dimensions, which allowed the construction of a social index and an urban index with graphic expression at the block scale (statistical subsection). The cartographic analysis was complemented with data to the scale of the parish. It was not possible, with the available data, to build an environmental index. The social index and the urban index were worked together, duly filtered, allowing the creation of a composite index that synthesizes the most critical occurrences in the socioeconomic and urbanistic dimensions. From the cartographic overlap of this composite index with the municipal boundaries already analyzed, it results in the determination of a "spot" in the city that defines its socio-territorial fracture, thus showing the areas of the city where, more likely, are the neighborhoods and zones intervention. On this spot was made an empirical first identification of 50 neighborhoods. The methodology used and the list of neighborhoods identified were subject to three participatory workshops, involving municipal services and companies, permanent committees of the Municipal Housing and Urban Planning Council, parish councils and associations of residents of the identified neighborhoods. in the end, an extension of the initial list to the current 6 61 Districts and Priority Intervention Areas included in the C Letter of the BIP-ZIP approved by the CML for submission to public consultation until September 30.@en