Mapping and navigating transitions—The multi-level perspective compared with arenas of development
TL;DR: In this article, the authors compare the two approaches based on three concerns in relation to transition studies: conflicts are important elements of change helping actors to navigate, and actors engage at all levels in society including visions, institutions, and innovations.
About: This article is published in Research Policy.The article was published on 2012-07-01. It has received 255 citations till now.
Citations
More filters
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors identify the intellectual contours of this emerging field by conducting a review of basic conceptual frameworks, together with bibliographical analysis of 540 journal articles in the field.
2,406 citations
Jonathan Köhler1, Frank W. Geels2, Florian Kern, Jochen Markard3, Anna J. Wieczorek4, Floortje Alkemade4, Flor Avelino5, Anna Bergek6, Frank Boons2, Lea Fünfschilling7, David J. Hess8, Georg Holtz, Sampsa Hyysalo9, Kirsten Jenkins10, Paula Kivimaa11, Mari Martiskainen11, Andrew McMeekin2, Marie Susan Mühlemeier12, Björn Nykvist13, Elsie Onsongo5, Bonno Pel14, Rob Raven15, Harald Rohracher16, Björn A. Sandén6, Johan Schot11, Benjamin K. Sovacool11, Bruno Turnheim17, Daniel Welch2, Peter Erskine Wells18 •
Fraunhofer Society1, University of Manchester2, ETH Zurich3, Eindhoven University of Technology4, Erasmus University Rotterdam5, Chalmers University of Technology6, Lund University7, Vanderbilt University8, Aalto University9, University of Brighton10, University of Sussex11, École Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne12, Stockholm Environment Institute13, Université libre de Bruxelles14, Monash University15, Linköping University16, King's College London17, Cardiff University18
TL;DR: In this article, the authors provide an extensive review and an updated research agenda for the field, classified into nine main themes: understanding transitions; power, agency and politics; governing transitions; civil society, culture and social movements; businesses and industries; transitions in practice and everyday life; geography of transitions; ethical aspects; and methodologies.
Abstract: Research on sustainability transitions has expanded rapidly in the last ten years, diversified in terms of topics and geographical applications, and deepened with respect to theories and methods. This article provides an extensive review and an updated research agenda for the field, classified into nine main themes: understanding transitions; power, agency and politics; governing transitions; civil society, culture and social movements; businesses and industries; transitions in practice and everyday life; geography of transitions; ethical aspects; and methodologies. The review shows that the scope of sustainability transitions research has broadened and connections to established disciplines have grown stronger. At the same time, we see that the grand challenges related to sustainability remain unsolved, calling for continued efforts and an acceleration of ongoing transitions. Transition studies can play a key role in this regard by creating new perspectives, approaches and understanding and helping to move society in the direction of sustainability.
1,099 citations
Cites background from "Mapping and navigating transitions—..."
...…role of institutions in shaping transition policies (Kern, 2011), how institutional logics shape transition processes (Fuenfschilling and Truffer, 2014) and have applied practice-oriented perspectives drawing on actornetwork theory that investigate the role of transition arenas (Jørgensen, 2012)....
[...]
TL;DR: In this article, the authors propose a comprehensive framework that allows legitimizing and devising policies for transformative change that draws on a combination of market failures, structural system failures and transformational system failures.
783 citations
TL;DR: The field of sustainability transitions research has emerged in the past two decades in the context of a growing scientific and public interest in large-scale societal transformation toward sustainability as discussed by the authors, which has led three different types of approaches to dealing with agency in transitions: analytical, evaluative, and experimental.
Abstract: The article describes the field of sustainability transitions research, which emerged in the past two decades in the context of a growing scientific and public interest in large-scale societal transformation toward sustainability. We describe how different scientific approaches and methodological positions explore diverse types of transitions and provide the basis for multiple theories and models for governance of sustainability transitions. We distinguish three perspectives in studying transitions: socio-technical, socio-institutional, and socio-ecological. Although the field as a whole is very heterogeneous, commonalities can be characterized in notions such as path dependencies, regimes, niches, experiments, and governance. These more generic concepts have been adopted within the analytical perspective of transitions, which has led three different types of approaches to dealing with agency in transitions: analytical, evaluative, and experimental. The field has by now produced a broad theoretical and em...
667 citations
Cites background from "Mapping and navigating transitions—..."
...A related perspective that has a more explicit focus on innovation policy is that of TIS (48), which understands (technological) innovation as a systemic process in which technologies coevolve with an emerging market structure, a governance context, and user preferences (49, 50)....
[...]
TL;DR: In this article, a Multi-actor Perspective (MaP) framework is proposed for specifying shifting power relations between actors at different levels of aggregation, such as sectors, market, community, and individual actors.
Abstract: This paper contributes to understanding transition politics by conceptualizing (shifting) power relations between actors in sustainability transitions. The authors introduce a Multi-actor Perspective as a heuristic framework for specifying (shifting) power relations between different categories of actors at different levels of aggregation. First, an overview is provided of how power and empowerment have been treated in transition research, and remaining questions are identified on who exercises power and who is empowered by and with whom. It is argued that theoretical frameworks and empirical analyses in transition studies lack precision when it comes to distinguishing between different types and levels of actors. In response, a Multi-actor Perspective (MaP) is developed, which distinguishes among four sectors (state, market, community, third sector), and between actors at different levels of aggregation: (1) sectors, (2) organizational actors, and (3) individual actors. The paper moves on to spec...
489 citations
Cites background from "Mapping and navigating transitions—..."
...niche or regime actors; Geels, 2011) engaged in numerous activities at different structuration levels (Jørgensen, 2012)....
[...]
...We see actors from varied backgrounds and from multiple levels of structuration (i.e. niche or regime actors; Geels, 2011) engaged in numerous activities at different structuration levels (Jørgensen, 2012)....
[...]
References
More filters
Posted Content•
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors developed an evolutionary theory of the capabilities and behavior of business firms operating in a market environment, including both general discussion and the manipulation of specific simulation models consistent with that theory.
Abstract: This study develops an evolutionary theory of the capabilities and behavior of business firms operating in a market environment. It includes both general discussion and the manipulation of specific simulation models consistent with that theory. The analysis outlines the differences between an evolutionary theory of organizational and industrial change and a neoclassical microeconomic theory. The antecedents to the former are studies by economists like Schumpeter (1934) and Alchian (1950). It is contrasted with the orthodox theory in the following aspects: while the evolutionary theory views firms as motivated by profit, their actions are not assumed to be profit maximizing, as in orthodox theory; the evolutionary theory stresses the tendency of most profitable firms to drive other firms out of business, but, in contrast to orthodox theory, does not concentrate on the state of industry equilibrium; and evolutionary theory is related to behavioral theory: it views firms, at any given time, as having certain capabilities and decision rules, as well as engaging in various ‘search' operations, which determines their behavior; while orthodox theory views firm behavior as relying on the use of the usual calculus maximization techniques. The theory is then made operational by the use of simulation methods. These models use Markov processes and analyze selection equilibrium, responses to changing factor prices, economic growth with endogenous technical change, Schumpeterian competition, and Schumpeterian tradeoff between static Pareto-efficiency and innovation. The study's discussion of search behavior complicates the evolutionary theory. With search, the decision making process in a firm relies as much on past experience as on innovative alternatives to past behavior. This view combines Darwinian and Lamarkian views on evolution; firms are seen as both passive with regard to their environment, and actively seeking alternatives that affect their environment. The simulation techniques used to model Schumpeterian competition reveal that there are usually winners and losers in industries, and that the high productivity and profitability of winners confer advantages that make further success more likely, while decline breeds further decline. This process creates a tendency for concentration to develop even in an industry initially composed of many equal-sized firms. However, the experiments conducted reveal that the growth of concentration is not inevitable; for example, it tends to be smaller when firms focus their searches on imitating rather than innovating. At the same time, industries with rapid technological change tend to grow more concentrated than those with slower progress. The abstract model of Schumpeterian competition presented in the study also allows to see more clearly the public policy issues concerning the relationship between technical progress and market structure. The analysis addresses the pervasive question of whether industry concentration, with its associated monopoly profits and reduced social welfare, is a necessary cost if societies are to obtain the benefits of technological innovation. (AT)
22,566 citations
01 Sep 1985
TL;DR: In this article, a continuously conveyed series of uniformly dimensioned panels of thin sheet material are counted and stacked from the bottom against an abutment edge of a stationary but rotatable cam plate.
Abstract: A continuously conveyed series of uniformly dimensioned panels of thin sheet material are counted and stacked from the bottom against an abutment edge of a stationary but rotatable cam plate. When a predetermined number of panels is collected in the stack, the cam plate is rotated to lift the stack into a rotating roll nip for conveyance to a second roll nip. Removal of the stack from the proximity of the collecting cam plate is completed by the second roll nip after the collecting cam has resumed a stationary, collecting position.
8,604 citations
TL;DR: In this article, the authors propose a model to account for both continuous changes and discontinuities in technological innovation, and define the process of selection of new technological paradigms among a greater set of notionally possible ones.
5,460 citations
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors address the question of how technological transitions (TT) come about and identify particular patterns and mechanisms in transition processes, defined as major, long-term technological changes in the way societal functions are fulfilled.
5,020 citations