Showing papers by "Frank W. Geels published in 2017"
TL;DR: This work presents a “sociotechnical” framework to address the multidimensionality of the deep decarbonization challenge and shows how coevolutionary interactions between technologies and societal groups can accelerate low-carbon transitions.
Abstract: Rapid and deep reductions in greenhouse gas emission are needed to avoid dangerous climate change. This will necessitate low-carbon transitions across electricity, transport, heat, industrial, forestry, and agricultural systems. But despite recent rapid growth in renewable electricity generation, the rate of progress toward this wider goal of deep decarbonization remains slow. Moreover, many policy-oriented energy and climate researchers and models remain wedded to disciplinary approaches that focus on a single piece of the low-carbon transition puzzle, yet avoid many crucial real-world elements for accelerated transitions ( 1 ). We present a “sociotechnical” framework to address the multidimensionality of the deep decarbonization challenge and show how coevolutionary interactions between technologies and societal groups can accelerate low-carbon transitions.
520 citations
TL;DR: In this article, the authors describe insights from a complementary socio-technical approach that addresses the interdependent social, political, cultural, and technical processes of transitions, and articulates four lessons for managing low-carbon transitions.
317 citations
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors assess the usefulness of Christensen's disruptive innovation framework for low-carbon system change, identifying three conceptual limitations with regard to the unit of analysis (products rather than systems), limited multi-dimensionality, and a simplistic (point source) conception of change.
Abstract: This paper firstly assesses the usefulness of Christensen’s disruptive innovation framework for low-carbon system change, identifying three conceptual limitations with regard to the unit of analysis (products rather than systems), limited multi-dimensionality, and a simplistic (‘point source’) conception of change. Secondly, it shows that the Multi-Level Perspective (MLP) offers a more comprehensive framework on all three dimensions. Thirdly, it reviews progress in socio-technical transition research and the MLP on these three dimensions and identifies new challenges, including ‘whole system’ reconfiguration, multi-dimensional struggles, bi-directional niche-regime interactions, and an alignment conception of change. To address these challenges, transition research should further deepen and broaden its engagement with the social sciences.
240 citations
TL;DR: In this article, the authors argue that urban transitions are not about technological or social innovation per se, but about how multiple innovations are experimented with, combined and reconfigured in existing urban contexts and how such processes are governed.
Abstract: Cities, and the networked infrastructures that sustain urban life, are seen as crucial sites for creating more sustainable futures. Yet, although there are many plans, the realisation of sustainable urban infrastructures on the ground is uneven. To develop better ways of understanding why this is the case, the paper makes a conceptual contribution by engaging with current understanding of urban sustainability transitions, using urban sustainable mobility as a reference point. It extends these insights to argue that urban transitions are not about technological or social innovation per se, but about how multiple innovations are experimented with, combined and reconfigured in existing urban contexts and how such processes are governed. There are potentially many ways in which urban sustainable mobility can be reconfigured contextually. Innovation is in the particular form of reconfiguration rather than individual technologies. To make analytical sense of this multiplicity, a preliminary framework is developed that offers the potential to think about urban transitions as contextual and reconfigurational. We argue that there is a need to embrace multiplicity and to understand its relationships to forms of reconfiguration, through empirical exploration and further theoretical and conceptual development. The preliminary framework is a contribution to doing so and we set out future directions for research.
149 citations
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors analyse the role of multiple external pressures in industry destabilisation, focusing in particular on their sequence and alignment, and inductively identify patterns such as the masking effect of highly visible macro-shocks, the perfect storm pattern, a ‘killer blow' effect, and spillover dynamics between external environments.
Abstract: This article makes two contributions to the emerging research stream on regime and industry destabilisation in the transition literature. First, we replicate the multi-dimensional framework developed by Turnheim and Geels with a more contemporary study that has closer links to sustainability transitions. Drawing on a wide range of primary and secondary sources, we analyse the destabilisation of the German electricity industry, which faced multiple external pressures: renewable energy technologies, nuclear phase-out policy, the financial-economic crisis, and negative public debates. Second, we elaborate the role of multiple pressures in industry destabilisation, focusing in particular on their sequence and alignment. We inductively identify patterns such as the ‘masking effect’ of highly visible macro-shocks, ‘perfect storm’ pattern, a ‘killer blow’ effect, and spillover dynamics between external environments.
95 citations
TL;DR: In this article, the authors of a recent paper in EIST (Holtz et al., 2015) build on their position paper in two ways: first, they reflect on some of the ways in which modelling in other areas of sustainability science has sometimes fallen short of the strengths articulated.
Abstract: The emergence of a dedicated modelling community within the transitions field is to be welcomed, and the authors of a recent paper in EIST (Holtz et al., 2015) make many valuable points. We build on their position paper in two ways. First, we reflect on some of the ways in which modelling in other areas of ‘sustainability science’ has sometimes fallen short of the strengths articulated. Second, we extend some of Holtz et al.’s discussion of the epistemological and ontological challenges for modelling transitions. We suggest ten challenges in response to the more optimistic claims made by Holtz et al., and we provide some additional suggestions for ways forward. In particular, we suggest that seeking closer integration of qualitative, socio-technical analysis with models may not always be the best strategy. Rather, pluralist ‘bridging strategies’ and dialogue between analytic approaches may be more productive.
52 citations
01 Dec 2017
TL;DR: A submitted manuscript is the version of the article upon submission and before peer-review as discussed by the authors, while a published version is the final layout of the paper including the volume, issue and page numbers.
Abstract: • A submitted manuscript is the version of the article upon submission and before peer-review. There can be important differences between the submitted version and the official published version of record. People interested in the research are advised to contact the author for the final version of the publication, or visit the DOI to the publisher's website. • The final author version and the galley proof are versions of the publication after peer review. • The final published version features the final layout of the paper including the volume, issue and page numbers.
45 citations
Posted Content•
TL;DR: In this article, the authors propose two transition pathways to achieve an 80% reduction in GHG emissions by 2050, but differ in terms of lead actors, depth of change and scope of change.
Abstract: Global climate change represents one of the grand societal challenges which policy makers around the world have agreed to jointly tackle it under the Paris Agreement. Henceforth, much research and policy advice has focused on de-veloping model-based scenarios to identify pathways towards achieving corre-sponding decarbonisation targets. In this paper, we complement such model-based analysis (based on IMAGE and Enertile) with insights from socio-technical transition analysis (MLP) to develop socio-technical storylines that plausibly show how low-carbon transitions can be implemented. We take the example of the transition of the German electricity system towards renewable energies, and elaborate two transition pathways which are assumed to achieve an 80% reduction in GHG emissions by 2050, but differ in terms of lead actors, depth of change and scope of change: the first pathway captures the substitu-tion of technological components (pathway A) and assumes incumbents as lead actors and focuses on radical technological change while leaving other system elements intact; in contrast, pathway B (broader system transformation) postu-lates new entrants as lead actors, which rests on the assumption that trans-formative change occurs in the whole system, i.e. affecting the architecture of the system, technologies but also practises. For both pathways, we focus on how policy makers could govern such transition processes through transforma-tive policy mixes, and compare the requirements of such policy mixes depend-ing on the pathway pursued. We find that multi-dimensional socio-technical change going beyond technological substitution (pathway B) requires much greater emphasis on societal experimentation and a more proactive role for an-ticipatory deliberation processes from the outset. In contrast, shifting gear from a new entrant friendly past trajectory to an incumbent dominated pathway (pathway A) requires active agency from incumbents and is associated with what we have called regime stabilizing instruments which defend core principles of the old regime while simultaneously fulfilling decarbonisation as additional success criteria.
4 citations