Between vision and implementation: the exclusionary disjuncture of domestic heat decarbonisation in Greater Manchester

ABSTRACT Decarbonising heat is critical for achieving climate change targets and reducing CO2 emissions. The U.K. Government has outlined actions to support the decarbonisation of heat, emphasising the importance of a place-based approach and undertaking action at localised scales. This paper focuses on Greater Manchester, a city region in North West England, with a strategic vision of achieving carbon neutrality by 2038. To support the achievement of this vision, Local Area Energy Plans (LAEPs) have been developed for the city region’s 10 local authorities with this providing a useful case study for understanding the challenges of implementing localised, place-based domestic heat decarbonisation actions. Drawing upon 34 semi-structured interviews with stakeholders associated with Greater Manchester’s low-carbon agenda, this paper discusses the disjuncture between Greater Manchester’s vision for domestic heat decarbonisation and the implementation of the actions outlined. Three sites have been identified where the disjuncture between the strategic vision and its implementation materialises. Each of these sites of disjuncture – priorities and needs, procurement, and shifting heating expectations and practices – are discussed in turn. The disjuncture present is shown to exclude certain members of society from engaging in decarbonisation practices, and acts as a barrier to the achievement of Greater Manchester’s vision for domestic heat decarbonisation. This paper advances understandings on the barriers to achieving place-based decarbonisation visions, and furthers the conceptualisation of ‘just transitions’. The identification of sites of disjuncture can be applied to other strategic visions and their implementation.


Introduction
Decarbonising heat is a key component in achieving climate change targets and reducing CO 2 emissions. In 2019, heating demand contributed to 40% of global CO 2 emissions (IEA 2020). In the U.K., 86% of homes are heated using natural gas central heating, with a further 9% of domestic heating coming from other fossil fuel sources (HM Government 2021a). The U.K. government has acknowledged how decarbonising domestic heat can support progress on climate ambitionsdomestic heat decarbonisation is included in the "Ten Point Plan for a Green Industrial Revolution" (HM Government 2020) and the "Net Zero Strategy" (HM Government 2021b). The U.K. Government's 2021 Heat and Buildings Strategy (HBS) outlines the vision for heat decarbonisation with a focus on improving the energy efficiency of buildings and switching high-carbon sources of heat to lowcarbon alternatives (HM Government 2021a).
The importance of localised action and taking a place-based approach when decarbonising heat is referenced in the U.K. Government's HBS (HM Government 2021a). Re-scaling heat decarbonisation to more localised scales, reflects broader trends that have emerged recently, whereby towns, cities and city regions have outlined ambitions to achieve carbon neutrality ahead of the U.K. Government's 2050 target (Gudde et al. 2021). Adopting a place-based approach enables strategies to be developed, which reflect the local context and the place-specific resources available (Gailing et al. 2020). Decarbonising domestic heat has a direct and disruptive impact on consumers meaning that engagement to generate support is crucial (BEIS 2018). Consequently, when developing policies and initiatives that facilitate heat decarbonisation, the "interpretations, interests, resources, and strategies of different actor groups" need to be considered (Geels et al. 2017, 475). In principle, this consideration of diversity is supported by re-scaling to the local scale as actors have better granularity of knowledge and established relationships to draw upon.
Research on the decarbonisation of domestic heat is of increasing relevance to both academic and policy actors. The significant contribution of domestic heat emissions to global CO 2 emissions demonstrates value in critically examining the approaches developed to decarbonise domestic heat. The achievement of domestic heat decarbonisation is dependent on households actively engaging with approaches, installing new technologies and shifting their practices (Bickerstaff, Hinton, and Bulkeley 2016). Yet, different households experience different opportunities and constraints relating to domestic heat decarbonisation as a result of their particular context, including socioeconomic characteristics (HM Government 2021a). Despite place-based approaches suggesting greater attention is given to the varied contexts of different households, this variation is not always captured in the approaches developed. Failing to consider diversity when developing decarbonisation approaches can lead to disadvantaged sections of the population being excluded from participating; there is the need for cities to improve their plans and initiatives in relation to social equity and sustainability (Hess and McKane 2021).
Greater Manchester, a city region in the North West of England made up of 10 local authorities, has a strategic vision to achieve carbon neutrality by 2038 (GMCA 2019). To support the achievement of this strategic vision, Local Area Energy Plans (LAEPs) have been developed for each of the 10 local authorities. LAEPs outline low-regret technology options for achieving the city region's decarbonisation vision (Energy Systems Catapult 2021), translating the vision into implementable actions. Priority actions in relation to domestic heat decarbonisation outlined in the LAEPs include the installation of domestic heat pumps and domestic retrofit measures (Walters and Line 2022). The development of technology-focused decarbonisation approaches can affect the ability for different stakeholders to engage with the actions outlined, due to a misalignment between the expectations and assumptions within technologies and the contexts of individuals. The barriers to participation experienced by different stakeholders hinders progress on the achievement of strategic decarbonisation visions, as there is the requirement for collective participation (Crowther et al. 2022).
This paper advances understandings of the barriers to achieving place-based decarbonisation visions, and furthers the conceptualisation of 'just transitions' by considering the disjuncture between strategic visions and their implementation. Focus is placed on the disjuncture between Greater Manchester's vision for domestic heat decarbonisation (as outlined in the LAEPs) and the implementation of the actions outlined. The disjuncture present is shown to exclude certain members of society from engaging in decarbonisation practices. Relational understandings are drawn upon to support the analysis of how Greater Manchester's decarbonisation vision influences, and is influenced by, the contexts in which it is to be implemented. Interviews were conducted with stakeholders associated with Greater Manchester's low-carbon agenda focusing on their experiences and perceptions. These interviews supported the identification of different sites where the disjuncture between Greater Manchester's decarbonisation vision and its implementation materialises.
The structure of the paper is as follows. First, relevant literature which underpins the research is introduced. This is followed by the methodology. The analysis section focuses on three sites of disjuncture associated with Greater Manchester's decarbonisation vision. The paper closes with reflections on the relational nature of the disjuncture identified, the value of adopting place-based approaches and the importance of developing "just" approaches for achieving domestic heat decarbonisation.

Literature review
This section outlines current understandings and debates related to sociotechnical visions and "just" transitions to provide foundational understandings upon which this research builds. The concept of relationality is also outlined as this provides the conceptual framing of the paper.

Developing visions to support action
Sociotechnical visions support the achievement of strategic ambitions, including decarbonisation, by projecting visions of attainable futures (Jasanoff 2015). Such visions can shape decisions and commitments by outlining alternative futures (Longhurst and Chilvers 2019) and help catalyse action by a range of actors (Karvonen 2020).
How a vision is presented impacts the approaches developed to achieve it, with this also influencing who will be able to engage with the visions. Thus, it is necessary to consider the context in which visions are developed and how this influences the outcomes (Felt 2015). The significance attributed by different actors to different issues shapes the sociotechnical visions they develop, including the technologies advocated and the governance frameworks proposed (Longhurst and Chilvers 2019). Within sustainable urban planning and policy, bureaucratic, scientific and technological expertise dominates (Miller 2014) with this shaping the sociotechnical visions developed.
Actors involved with developing sociotechnical visions establish "collectively imagined forms of social life with embedded understandings of how science and technology meet public needs" (Miller 2020, 366). These imagined forms of social life have the power to structure and organise society, by determining the behaviour and relationships of individuals (Sadowski and Levenda 2020). Justifying decisions using technical arguments rather than political ones can obscure power relations (Cantoni and Rignall 2019), and enables existing power dynamics to be reinforced through the decisions made (Sadowski and Levenda 2020). What is often presented as a primarily "technical" transition is simultaneously normative in assuming and advocating desired states of social and political order (Jasanoff 2015).
Considering "just" decarbonisation approaches Proposed visions for supporting decarbonisation have been criticised for not sufficiently considering the population that will be engaging with the technologies and practices outlined, raising questions of equity, vulnerability, fairness and legitimacy (Sovacool, Lipson, and Chard 2019). Current technologies and infrastructures have not fully integrated the varied wants, needs, abilities and behaviours of different end-users due to the dependence on expert views (Calzada 2017;Roelich et al. 2015) with this acting as an obstacle to technological innovation and achieving longer term sustainability (Roelich et al. 2015). The need to consider the needs of end-users is particularly important as the capability to implement policies, programmes and projects is shown to be more influential on outcomes than the design of these policies, programmes and projects themselves (Andrews, Pritchett, and Woolcock 2017).
Decarbonisation requires social and economic transformations, which impact lived experiences and manifest in different opportunities for (and impacts on) individuals (Scott and Powells 2020). Adopting a justice perspective in relation to decarbonisation and low-carbon energy technologies has highlighted the need to acknowledge the different contexts of individuals, as the "development of new energy technology unevenly and disproportionately impacts different cross-sections of society" (Scott and Powells 2020, 3). "Just" approaches to decarbonisation requires the equitable sharing of benefits and burdens of energy systems, as well as ensuring that people and communities are treated fairly in decision-making (Sovacool and Dworkin 2015). Research conducted by Gillard, Snell, and Bevan (2017) discusses the multiple injustices experienced in relation to decarbonisation practices by those particularly vulnerable to fuel poverty, focusing on the experiences of disabled people and low-income families. Their research highlights how the complex situations of these individuals are not capturedthere is little consideration of the heterogeneity within groups, little engagement with stakeholders who have the embodied experience, and structural inequalities embedded within institutions are not sufficiently consideredwith this contributing to injustices (Gillard, Snell, and Bevan 2017).
There is the need to develop a more nuanced understanding of needs and experiences of individuals and households, with this supporting the development of decarbonisation approaches that are more inclusive and accessible (Gillard, Snell, and Bevan 2017). Ensuring this recognition is incorporated into decarbonisation approaches helps move away from simplistic assumptions about the needs and lives of vulnerable households (Fraser and Honneth 2003). When the recognition of the complexities and heterogeneity of households is lacking, injustices can be reinforced through social structures that misrepresent inequalities and social processes which limit the opportunities for vulnerable households to express their views (Fraser and Honneth 2003). For example, macro indicators such as fuel poverty, do not completely capture the dynamism of vulnerability and how it is shaped by structural and institutional factors beyond the influence of individuals or collective households (Middlemiss and Gillard 2015).
The development of more nuanced understandings of different contexts and experiences can include reflections on the barriers to participation experienced by different individuals and households, as well as how the implementation of actions lands differently across different cross-sections of society (Bouzarovski, Petrova, and Tirad-Herrero 2014). Existing research has highlighted economic injustices related to decarbonisation practices including the inability to afford low-carbon technologies. The installation of low-carbon technologies requires upfront capital investments which can act as a barrier to participation (Abbasi et al. 2021), particularly as low-income households pay proportionally more for energy services which reduces their ability to accumulate the capital necessary to make investments in technologies (Goldthau and Sovacool 2012). Thus, there is the need for financial triggers to facilitate uptake (Abbasi et al. 2021). Yet, current financial support schemes and incentives are not accessible to everyone, and can exacerbate existing inequalities (Sovacool, Lipson, and Chard 2019) particularly when wealthier households are able to benefit from participation in decarbonisation activities, such as retrofit schemes (Gillard, Snell, and Bevan 2017) or the installation of domestic solar PV (Passey et al. 2018).
Research on how to support "just" low-carbon transitions emphasises the importance of engaging with a range of different actors and incorporating different perspectives into decisionmaking (Wang and Lo 2021). Simply inviting different actors into decision-making spaces is not enough, rather there is the need to ensure "representational justice" whereby those included in the decision-making spaces are able to meaningfully "voice their experiences, opinions, hopes and concerns" (Ross et al. 2021(Ross et al. , 1527. Re-scaling decarbonisation practices to more localised scales provides individuals greater opportunities to be more integrated into energy planning and policy (Chmutina et al. 2014). More localised approaches to strategic energy planning and policy also provides flexibility to experiment with solutions that reflect the particular context, including the contexts and challenges of the community (Cervas and Giancatarino 2017).
However, despite arguments in favour of localised approaches supporting the establishment of "just" decarbonisation approaches, issues remain in terms of participation and engagement. Individuals have different capabilities to participate in low-carbon transitions due to a range of psychological, social, technical and economic factors (Mayne, Fawcett, and Hyams 2017). The different contexts and capabilities of individuals highlights the importance of considering who is able to participate in the local initiatives, and why they are able to participate whilst others cannot. Furthermore, individuals have different expectations and experiences of what it means to be "included" with this influencing perceptions of participation and justice (Simcock 2016). As concluded by Walker and Cass (2007, 467), "just as there are inequalities in access to energy consumption, we should equally expect there to be inequalities in access to energy citizenship and the benefits this brings".

Thinking relationally
Considering the different factors which influence the design of decarbonisation approaches, and the varied ways in which these approaches are experienced, it highlights the value in adopting a relational approach. Relational thinking recognises that spaces, relationships and contexts are everchanging, and that all entities are understood through their relations with other entities including across scales (Massey 2005; Bouzarovski and Haarstad 2019). Relational thinking not only captures the relationships within and between entities, but also supports the consideration of how these relations influence and are influenced by politics created (Hall 2019;Massey 2005) Energy geographies research acknowledges how place and relations influence the experience of energy transitions, and how the spatiality of these transitions is dynamic, uneven and contested (Bridge 2018). Within this, the relationality of the social, political, economic and infrastructural aspects of energy systems are considered (Bouzarovski and Haarstad, 2018). Low-carbon transitions can be understood as being "continuously enacted by and contested between a variety of actors" (Geels et al. 2016).
Regarding decarbonisation visions, a relational perspective helps unpack factors which influence the implementation of visions. Different relationships, interconnections and contexts which influence, and are influenced by, the decarbonisation visions developed are identified. For example, the ability for individuals to participate in the decarbonisation approaches developed is often dependent on their access to particular resourcessuch as capital to afford upfront costs and knowledge of how to engage with particular advocated technologies (Abbasi et al. 2021)with the adoption of a relational perspective supporting the identification of broader relations and factors which contribute to certain individuals not having access to these resources.
Relational thinking also facilitates discussions related to "just" decarbonisation approaches. The achievement of a "just" approach to decarbonisation requires consideration to be given to existing injustices, where and how new injustices emerge, what sections of society are excluded, and what actions can be undertaken to address those injustices (Jenkins et al. 2016). Responding to these questions of justice is supported by the inclusion of relational thinking as this supports the identification of structural inequalities (Gillard, Snell, and Bevan 2017) and the impact of existing power relations on outcomes (Sadowski and Levenda 2020).
This research builds upon existing sociotechnical visions and energy justice research to advance understandings on the barriers to achieving place-based decarbonisation visions. A relational framework is adopted to identify sites where the disjuncture between Greater Manchester's decarbonisation vision and its implementation materialises. The disjuncture present is shown to exclude certain members of society from engaging in decarbonisation practices. The next section provides contextual background on Greater Manchester and the city region's decarbonisation vision.

Research context: Greater Manchester and its decarbonisation plan
Greater Manchester is a city region made up of 10 local authorities in the North West of England. The city region has outlined ambitions to achieve carbon neutrality by 2038 (GMCA 2019), 12 years ahead of the U.K. National Government's target of 2050 (HM Government 2021b). To support the achievement of Greater Manchester's carbon neutrality vision, LAEPs for each of the city region's 10 local authorities have been developed by Energy Systems Catapult. 1 Funding for the LAEPs was obtained through Greater Manchester's Local Energy Market project funded by Innovate U.K. (UKRI 2022).
LAEPs use modelling techniques to identify potential transition pathways, focusing on how energy could be generated, distributed, and used in the future (Energy Systems Catapult 2021). Through the LAEPs, the optimal technologies for achieving decarbonisation in each of the local authorities are identified, with consideration being given to the different geographical and socio-economic characteristics of places as well as the perceptions of residents (Centre for Sustainable Energy and Energy Systems Catapult 2020).
Within the LAEPs, five key areas of action are identified: (1) Fabric Retrofit (2) Heating Systems (3) Transport and EV Charging (4) Local Energy Generation and Storage, and (5) Energy Networks (Walters and Line 2022). Through the LAEPs, near-term, low-regret options are identified meaning they are "relatively low cost and provide relatively large benefits under predicted future climates" (Martin 2012: i). Based upon the analysis undertaken, Greater Manchester has outlined targets to retrofit 140,000 homes, connect 8000 homes to heat networks, and install 116,000 heat pumps in homes by 2027 (Walters and Line 2022). The actions outlined within the decarbonisation vision highlights how the achievement of carbon neutrality in Greater Manchester is dependent on the engagement of multiple actors across multiple scales, including the city region, local authorities and individual households.
This research draws upon stakeholder interviews to unpack the disjuncture between Greater Manchester's decarbonisation vision (as outlined through the LAEPs) and the implementation of this vision. These insights are supported by the analysis of relevant strategic documents. Focus is placed on the decarbonisation of domestic heat, including the installation of heat pumps. The identification of sites where this disjuncture materialises draws upon, and contributes to, understandings of "just" transitions as conditions which affect the (in)ability for certain groups to participate are considered.
The following section details the methodology of this research.

Methodology
Interviews were conducted with a range of stakeholders associated with Greater Manchester's decarbonisation to understand the different ways in which the city region's strategic vision is perceived, interpreted and experienced (Palinkas et al. 2015). A total of 34 semi-structured interviews were conducted online between October 2019 and July 2021. Interview participants were obtained through purposive sampling, supported by a social network analysis which was undertaken to identify the key stakeholders engaging with decarbonisation in Greater Manchester. Social network analysis (SNA) has been drawn upon in previous research focusing on the implementation of visions as it provides insight into the position and role of individual actors in the network as well as their connections (Fliervoet et al. 2016;Borg, Toikka, and Primmer 2015). Through SNA understandings of the relational characteristics of social phenomena and behavioural patterns are developed (Borg, Toikka, and Primmer 2015). When completing the SNA, different resources including strategic documents, websites, press releases and meeting minutes from relevant GMCA committees (including the Green City Region Partnership, GMCA and scrutiny committees) were analysed with key stakeholders identified and their relationships with each other noted and mapped visually (Scott 2015). The individuals identified through the SNA informed the interview recruitment. Snowball sampling also occurred whereby interview participants recommended other individuals that would be of interest to speak to, and at times facilitated the initial communication. Through snowball sampling, "natural and organic social networks" are drawn upon (Noy 2008, 329). The sampling method adopted in this research enabled interviews to be conducted with a range of stakeholders including academics, government representatives, NGOs and activist groups, as well as those with a more national perspective on low-carbon transitions including asset owners and research organisations ( Table 1). The interviews did not include members of the public, meaning that insights on individual experiences of domestic heat decarbonisation approaches were not obtained, with the paper's focus on implementation processes justifying the sample. Public experiences as they relate to implementation challenges were referenced in the responses of participants, including community groups and NGOs, as well as being incorporated through reference to existing research. There is the opportunity to conduct complementary research that explicitly focuses on embodied experiences of consumers relating to the technologies advocated by Greater Manchester to support domestic heat decarbonisation, mobilising different theoretical and methodological approaches.
The intention of the interviews was to provide insight on how Greater Manchester's overarching decarbonisation visions and specific actions outlined in the LAEPs are experienced and implemented in practice. Interviews are frequently used in research focusing on localised energy transitions and processes of decarbonisation as they help identify the perspectives of individuals embedded within these actions (Mattes, Huber, and Koehrsen 2015;Kinzer 2018;Sperling and Arler 2020). Through the interviews conducted, the disjuncture between Manchester's strategic decarbonisation vision and its implementation were highlighted. The stakeholders interviewed for this research provided insights of how Greater Manchester's decarbonisation vision and associated plan are received "on the ground" in different contexts as a result of the diverse characteristics of the stakeholders interviewed.
During the interviews, a range of topics were discussed including participants' perceptions and experiences of Greater Manchester's decarbonisation ambitions, the scale at which decarbonisation approaches are to be undertaken and the expectations of individuals in relation to Greater Manchester's decarbonisation ambitions. An interview guide was developed, which included questions related to these topics. The semi-structured nature of the interviews meant that follow-up questions were used to obtain further participant reflections on specific points and topics, particularly those which relate to the research question.
Interviews were conducted online via zoom due to Covid-19 restrictions. Research conducted by Krouwel, Jolly, and Greenfield (2019, 1) compares the quantity and quality of data generated through face-to-face and online interviews, with face-to-face interviews being "marginally superior to video calls in that interviewees said more, although this was on a similar range of topics" suggesting that the need to shift to online interviews in response to the Covid-19 pandemic will have minimal impact on the insights developed. Each interview was recorded and later transcribed. The software nVivo was used to support the coding of the transcripts.
When analysing the interviews an abductive approach to analysis was adopted as this enabled empirical materials to be analysed with appreciation of and consideration to existing research and understandings (Timmermans and Tavory 2012). An abductive analysis approach was used as the researchers' understandings of existing research informed the interview questions developed and the analysis undertaken. Being mindful of existing research, understandings and concepts when developing the interview guide meant that the questions developed were able to reflect the research focus more deeply and that questions were not addressing topics which are already well-researched and understood. Abductive coding of interview transcripts was undertaken in two stagesthe first stage involved the identification of broader "index" codes which focused on higher-level concepts whilst the second stage involved deeper "analytic" coding which focused on lower-level emergent themes (Timmermans and Tavory 2012). The "index" codes identified reflected the research questions and the research insights drawn upon when developing these questions (Timmermans and Tavory 2012), and included "barriers", "scale", "actors" and "expectations". When undertaking the deeper "analytic" coding, consideration was given to the relationship between the decarbonisation vision developed and the experience of implementing actions to its achievement. By focusing on this relationship between the strategic plans of visions and their implementation, it helped question the data in particular ways. "Analytic" codes identified include "alignment", "priorities", "roles" and "cost".
Interviews were supported by the analysis of documents related to Greater Manchester's decarbonisation vision, including presentations, strategies, policies and meeting minutes. The LAEPs developed for each of Greater Manchester's 10 local authorities (Walters and Line 2022), and the Greater Manchester 5 Year Environment Plan (GMCA 2019) were key documents analysed. The documents analysed provide insight into the intended approaches, outputs, and outcomes of Greater Manchester's decarbonisation vision. By considering how the city region's decarbonisation vision was outlined in the strategic documents, and the realities of implementing the actions outlined as articulated through the interview's areas of alignment and contention between intended and actual processes and outcomes were identified. These sources of contention supported the identification of sites of disjuncture.
The following section focuses on the disjuncture between Greater Manchester's vision for domestic heat decarbonisation ambitions (as outlined in the LAEPs) and the implementation of the actions outlined.

Discussion
Insights from the analysis undertaken were combined to develop the idea of disjuncture and how it materialises in relation to Greater Manchester's decarbonisation. As reflected by a policy officer within a local authority, when considering "the stated ambition and what's possible on the ground, sometimes there's not enough of a connection there" (LA1). Focusing on the (domestic heat) decarbonisation vision as outlined in the LAEPs developed for the city region, three distinct, but often interrelated, sites of disjuncture have been highlightedthe priorities and needs of individuals, the financing of technologies, and the need to shift heating practices and expectations of heating systems. This section will discuss each of these sites of disjuncture, reflecting on how they act as a barrier to the achievement of Greater Manchester's decarbonisation vision, and associated questions of justice.

Misalignment between technologies advocated and the priorities and needs of individuals
Greater Manchester's LAEPs outline a technology-oriented pathway for achieving the city region's 2038 carbon neutrality vision. Within this pathway, actions to support the decarbonisation of domestic heat are identified. However, there is a misalignment between the technological approaches advocated and the needs of individuals within the city region, with this becoming a site of disjuncture.
The achievement of Greater Manchester's technology-focused decarbonisation plan is dependent on individuals engaging with the approaches outlined and the initiatives developed. An overarching aspect of Greater Manchester's decarbonisation ambitions is that "everybody has a role to play", as outlined in Greater Manchester's 5 Year Environment Plan (5YEP), a strategy document outlining actions to support decarbonisation in the city region (GMCA 2019). The importance of individual's engaging with decarbonisation is also referenced in the LAEPs, "the decarbonisation of any local energy system will require considerable co-ordination, planning and investment as well as consumer and social engagement" (Walters and Line 2022). As reflected by someone working in a non-profit climate change organisation, "individual and organisational responsibility is really important … everybody has a responsibility to do things in their day to day lives" (C2). Yet, the ability for individuals to undertake the (technological) actions outlined in the LAEPs differs, and it is influenced by their socio-economic contexts.
Research conducted by Tarhan (2022) highlights the exclusionary nature of community renewable energy ownership in Ontario, Canada whereby these local energy activities are dominated by more affluent, professional class groups. The development of community renewable energy initiatives is dependent on initial preparatory activities being undertaken, including legal and regulatory approvals, feasibility studies, fundraising, and the deployment of technology. These preparatory activities coupled with insufficient policy support are cited as barriers to the participation from marginalised group in community renewable energy initiatives, and contribute to the exacerbation of existing inequalities between and within communities. Similarly, for Park and Jin (2012) the concentration of community renewable energy in more affluent communities is due to their access to the required "practical capacity", namely time, finance, and expertise. Thus, the circumstances and contexts of individuals influences their ability to engage with decarbonisation practices.
The technological approaches outlined in the ten LAEPsincluding retrofitting homes and installing heat pumpsdo not always align with the needs and priorities of different households in Greater Manchester. The misalignment between the actions outlined and the priorities of individuals can lead to less essential decarbonisation actions being undertaken, reducing the effectiveness of actions as heat pumps, for example, perform more efficiently in well insulated homes (Lowe et al. 2017). As commented by a home energy advisor that supports vulnerable households: people in the community aren't being asked what they want … they might have got an air source heat pump when actually what they needed wasn't an air source heat pump it was external wall insulation and loft installation or pay for a new roof or get some new windows. (C3) Ensuring that the priorities and needs of individuals are addressed when developing and implementing decarbonisation visions is critical to support engagement. As highlighted in research conducted by Crowther et al. (2022), the shifting priorities of individuals during the Covid-19 pandemic saw the de-prioritisation of and reduced engagement with decarbonisation initiatives. Thus, it could be argued that within the LAEPs developed there is the need to prioritise not only the "low-regret" technological decarbonisation practices, but also those which simultaneously address the needs and priorities of individuals and support the achievement of decarbonisation ambitions. Thus, we posit that the achievement of decarbonisation plans is dependent on the actions outlined aligning with the needs and priorities of individuals, or at least ensuring support is provided to enable this.
If the different needs and priorities of households are not considered, then the visions of decarbonisation developed can become exclusionary. Consideration needs to be given to how decarbonisation approaches are framed as "different business models and legal structures have different impacts on participation in local energy initiatives and the distribution of their benefits" (Knox et al. 2022). For less affluent households, financial benefits, opportunities for energy saving and local regeneration are cited as key drivers for participation in local energy projects (Lacey-Barnacle 2020; Knox et al. 2022). Thus, there is the opportunity to support participation from these groups by framing decarbonisation in ways which contribute to the achievement of these motivations.
Yet, ensuring that the decarbonisation technologies and practices outlined in Greater Manchester's decarbonisation plan reflect and align with the needs and priorities of individuals to support participation is not enough to overcome the disjuncture between vision and implementation. Rather, another site of disjuncture is identified when considering the financing of technologies outlined in the LAEPs.

Financing the installation of technologies to support decarbonisation
Despite Greater Manchester's decarbonisation vision being framed at the scale of the city region, and LAEPs being developed for each of the local authorities, the low-regret technology options identified to support domestic heat decarbonisation typically require the engagement of households. Within the plans outlined there is the need for households to install particular technologies, including heat pumps (Walters and Line 2022). However, the installation of technologies can become a site of disjuncture when considering the financial costs of participationif households cannot afford to install the technologies outlined in the LAEPs, and are not provided appropriate financial support, this can be a barrier to the achievement of decarbonisation visions.
It is estimated that the achievement of Greater Manchester's decarbonisation plan requires an average investment of £18,000 per household (Walters and Line 2022). Research has shown that the high upfront costs of low-carbon heat technologies, such as heat pumps, acts as a barrier to the uptake of these technologies by some households (Gaur, Fitiwi, and Curtis 2021). These sentiments are shared by an interview participant that works for a social housing company in Greater Manchester, "it's not for a lack of interest in becoming more carbon neutral, the bottom line is the cost to residents, end of story" (AO1). Within this, it highlights how the socio-economic circumstances of households affects their ability to participate in decarbonisation ambitions (Sovacool, Lipson, and Chard 2019;Abbasi et al. 2021). A participant in consumer protection elaborated on this further, when discussing how those in debt and with a poor credit score will struggle even more to participate in actions to support decarbonisation visions (C6). The misalignment of the decarbonisation visions outlined and the ability of less affluent households to participate was articulated by a participant that supports fuel poor households in relation domestic solar PV installations, "asking them [fuel poor households], you know, have you ever considered solar panels it's laughable for them because they can't even put £10 in the meter, let alone consider thousands of pounds for a solar panel" (C3).
There is a need to ensure appropriate support is provided to enable households with different socio-economic contexts to install the technologies outlined in the LAEPs. Within the LAEPs developed reference is made to the importance of considering how "the roll out of new technologies can be planned and financed such that costs are shared fairly and particularly so that those in fuel poverty are not unfairly disadvantaged" (Walters and Line 2022). However, no mechanisms have yet been outlined to support this.
Ensuring a "fair" roll-out of new technologies, with appropriate financial support, is particularly pertinent in the context of the current energy and cost of living crisis in the U.K. (Cotton et al. 2022), as there are economic benefits associated with the installation of domestic renewable energy technologies (Gillard, Snell, and Bevan 2017;Passey et al. 2018). The energy price cap, which outlines a maximum amount energy companies can charge customers for a unit of energy, was increased in response to rising cost of gas in October 2022 to £3549 annually, with this leading to an average annual increase in energy bills of £693 for those on default tariffs and £708 for pre-payment consumers (Ofgem 2022a). Research suggests that this may triple the number of homes experiencing "fuel stress" (Corlett, Judge, and Marshall 2022). 2 Some households are more vulnerable to the rising energy prices than others, such as those who consume a greater amount of energy to achieve the same level of energy services (such as thermal comfort, cooking, indoor lighting) (Walker, Simcock, and Day 2016;Gillard, Snell, and Bevan 2017). For example, those with circulatory problems or a family with young children may require more energy to keep warm and comfortable than the average (Gillard, Snell, and Bevan 2017). There is the need to establish appropriate financial mechanisms to support all households to install the energy technologies, not only because collective participation is required to achieve Greater Manchester's decarbonisation ambitions but also due to the benefits associated with installing these technologies.
To help mitigate the impact of financial barriers on the installation of low-carbon technologies in the past, Greater Manchester has established different support schemes, differentiating these between those who are "able to pay" and "unable to pay". Previous schemes to support those who are "unable to pay" have focused on households with social housing tenures, "It's working with the social landlords to ensure that the landlord provider is installing these items wherever possible so that those that are less well-off, less fortunate can still benefit" (RG1). The collective action undertaken by social housing providers has supported progress on domestic heat decarbonisation (Cauvain and Karvonen 2018). As discussed by an academic working on low-carbon transitions: social housing, it's been a massive investor in solar and now they're the biggest sort of the leaders in terms of like heat pumps and that's because they have that that management and that control over large number of properties which means the cost of installation is, you know, there's a reducing cost per household that they get involved and there's also that level of trust there with properties. (A4) Social housing providers are able to support low-carbon transitions as they are a trusted actor that is able to directly engage with a number of individuals, whilst being able to benefit from economies of scale due to owning a number of assets (McCabe, Pojani, and Broese van Groenou 2018).
However, not all of those who are "unable to pay" for technologies to support domestic heat decarbonisation have social housing tenure. As reflected by an academic, "there are people living in cold, damp houses who won't be connected to specific projects because they're not in social housing … they won't gain the benefit of those households that are more connected" (A4). Thus, there is the need to ensure that support schemes are accessible and a range of individuals with different tenure types are eligible for the support they need. If these different tenures are not supported through appropriate schemes, it could contribute to the exacerbation of existing socio-economic inequalities and constrain progress on the achievement of Greater Manchester's decarbonisation vision.
The financial aspects of implementing actions outlined in strategic visions is a site of disjuncture, if individuals are unable to afford the installation of particular technologies or adoption of certain practices then the collective action required to support the achievement of decarbonisation visions will not occur. Although financial barriers have been acknowledged and support has been provided in the past, there is the need to ensure that this is accessible across the city region to achieve outlined ambitions. However, not only do technologies need to be accessible financially, individuals also need to be able to use the technologies highlighting another site of disjuncture associated with Greater Manchester's heat decarbonisation vision.
Heat pumps: shifting heating practices and expectations As already outlined, the (domestic heat) decarbonisation pathway outlined in the LAEPs is predicated on the installation of particular technologies. Embedded within these technologies are assumptions about the context in which technologies are to be situated and how they are going to be used (Sadowski and Levenda 2020;Akrich 1992). A site of disjuncture emerges when there is a misalignment between the expected and actual use of technologies.
Within the LAEPs, heat pumps are highlighted as a critical, low-regret technology to support the achievement of domestic heat decarbonisation in Greater Manchester. Between 2022 and 2027, there is the target of installing 116,000 heat pumps across the city region (Walters and Line 2022). The optimised performance of heat pumps is dependent on households shifting their expectations of their heating system and altering their heating practices. Compared to gas-powered central heating (which heats 86% of U.K. homes (HM Government 2021a)), heat pumps run most efficiently at more sustained ambient temperatures and have a less immediate response at high temperatures (Abbasi et al. 2021). To reduce financial shocks and disruption when transitioning to a heat pump, consumers need to adopt holistic planning and management techniques (BEIS 2018), with social and behavioural actions (such as particular actions like using an electric aga) affecting the performance of the heat pump, thermal comfort, and user satisfaction (Lowe et al. 2017). Thus, there is the need for individuals to learn how to use heat pumps (Sweetnam et al. 2019) otherwise the modelled impact of these technologies will not be achieved, affecting the achievement of decarbonisation ambitions.
The process of households learning how to use optimally use a heat pump and reframe their expectations of their heating system takes time, and in some cases may not happen at all, as reflected by a social housing organisation's sustainability officer when discussing a recent heat pump pilot: what happens in reality with some of our residents is they like full control, they don't necessarily engage with smart technology as much as we'd hoped they would, they prefer to physically control systems themselves and when they do that, they override all the benefits of allowing something to be intuitive. (AO1) The uptake of heat pumps in Greater Manchester and the process of learning how to use the technology requires access to the physical infrastructure itself, as well as relevant socially communicated background knowledge and general acceptance (Foley and Miller 2020). As commented by a participant working in consumer protection, information on how to use the technologies advocated in the LAEPs developed (including heat pumps) needs to be made "available and accessible" (C6). If this information is not provided then it can constrain progress on achieving decarbonisation visions. Research conducted by Calver, Mander, and Ghanem (2022) highlighted that households participating in a heat pump pilot showed low levels of understanding about how the system worked and the benefits it would bring to them, as the information provided was not appropriately packaged (Calver, Mander, and Ghanem 2022). If households have low levels of understanding about a technology, the performance of the technology itself will likely not be optimised which reduces its contribution to the achievement of decarbonisation.
Information and support on how to use a low-carbon technology, such as heat pumps, and the benefits they provide needs to be sustained as learning how to shift heating practices and expectations is an iterative process. As reflected by an individual involved with social housing, what we have seen from past schemes where we've installed renewable technologies is that once you step away the message starts to unravel a little bit and then maybe a year down the line you have to do another kind of push on 'right, this is a reminder of how you use the system, how you get the best use out of it'. (AO1) The importance of giving individuals resources to understand technologies and the time to learn how to interact with them is highlighted in research on Electric Vehicle (EV) charging practices, whereby EV owners were shown to become more confident with the technology, and better optimised their charging practices, over time (Burgess et al. 2013). The provision of appropriate support, through resources and highlighting best practice can facilitate individuals to shift their heating practices and expectations of heating systems, thus helping to address the disjuncture between decarbonisation visions and their implementation.

Conclusion
Greater Manchester's LAEPs were created to support the achievement of decarbonisation ambitions by highlighting no-regret technological actions which can be undertaken. The development of these LAEPs acts as a resource which supports the shift from planning decarbonisation ambitions to implementing the actions required. Yet, as argued, there is a disjuncture between the stated ambitions and the ability to implement the actions required to achieve these ambitions. This disjuncture acts as a barrier to the achievement of the city region's decarbonisation vision. Based upon the interviews and document analysis conducted, three sites were identified where the disjuncture between Greater Manchester's decarbonisation ambition and its implementation materialises. These three sites of disjuncture intersect different stages of the implementation process, from the initial presentation of ideas (aligning with needs and priorities), the installation of technologies (financing technologies), and the use of the technologies once installed (shifting heating practices and expectations).
The sites of disjuncture identified are the product of particular contexts, highlighting the agency of place and influence of circumstances on the implementation of decarbonisation visions. The influence of different contexts and circumstances on the achievement of decarbonisation ambitions demonstrates the value of considering decarbonisation visions, and their implementation, relationally. Relational thinking focuses on the relationships between different components of a system, and how the entities involved in these dynamic relationships influence and are influenced by each other. The adoption of a relational framing supports the analysis of governance configurations, power relations and politics. To support the achievement of domestic heat decarbonisation, there is a need for those developing strategic visions and implementation plans to acknowledge and account for the diversity of contexts in which technologies are installed, the varied ways in which they are used and how these may differ from expected contexts and behaviours, thus impacting outcomes (Calzada 2017).
The need to consider the diverse contexts in which (domestic heat) decarbonisation is to occur is particularly pertinent in the case of Greater Manchester (and other large towns, cities and city regions with strategic decarbonisation ambitions) due to the scales at which actions are to be undertaken. Although Greater Manchester's decarbonisation vision is framed at the scale of the city region and LAEPs have been developed for each local authority, the implementation of these visions and plans often requires action and engagement at the household level. As shown through the installation of heat pumps to support domestic heat decarbonisation, households are required to participate and engage with new technologies. The variation in contexts and circumstances within the city region highlight why sites of disjuncture materialise, and provides insight into areas where additional support and resources are required to achieve ambitions. For example, in the case of domestic heat pumps providing guidance on how to engage with the technology, emphasising the benefits which can be obtained when shifting expectations of the heating system and ensuring that information provided is accessible will support households to engage with heat pumps and shift their practices.
The achievement of Greater Manchester's decarbonisation vision is dependent on collective participation, highlighting the importance of developing actions which are socially inclusive with this also facilitating a "just" approach to decarbonisation. If the varied ability to participate in domestic heat decarbonisation approaches is not addressed, then existing inequalities may be exacerbated. Research has highlighted how meaningful engagement with different stakeholders can support the development of more considerate strategies and approaches which reduce the emergence of injustices (Ross et al. 2021).
The re-scaling of decarbonisation ambitions, and establishment of place-based approaches, can support the establishment of approachesor support mechanismswhich are more attuned to the particular contexts in which actions to support the achievement of strategic visions are to be implemented. Despite the LAEPs grounding actions in the specifics of the geographical place, there is the need to extend these plans to incorporate greater insight on characteristics of individual householdsensuring they are provided the support and information required. Within this, engaging with key intermediaries who interact with households and understand their circumstances will be critical.
We believe that this research can provide the foundation for establishing alternative visions for domestic heat decarbonisation that are sensitive to the diversity of household contexts, and support the development of more inclusive approaches for achieving decarbonisation ambitions. The identification of sites of disjuncture between strategic visions and their implementation can be applied to other contexts beyond decarbonisation, particularly where individuals across society are expected to contribute to the achievement of strategic visions.
Future research could focus on the three sites of disjuncture identified in more detail, highlighting where the disjuncture materialises and whom, with what characteristics, are more affected by them. There is also the opportunity to conduct research which identifies mechanisms to address the sites of disjuncture through a collaborative approach with individuals and households whose experiences and practices do not align with the decarbonisation vision outlined. This research could focus on the extent to which individuals perceive the decarbonisation visions align with their reality, drawing upon these insights to develop. Notes 1. Energy Systems Catapult is an independent research centre, funded by Innovate UK to support and accelerate the low-carbon transition of the UK's energy system (Energy Systems Catapult 2022). 2. The energy price cap has increased further to an annual level of £4279 from January 2023, however under the UK Government's Energy Price Guarantee introduced in October 2022, prices are capped at £2500 annually with this increasing to £3000 from April 2023 (Ofgem 2022b).

Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).