Contributing to debates about transitions and system changes, this article has two aims. First, it uses criticisms on the multi-level perspective as stepping stones for further conceptual refinements. Second, it develops a typology of four transition pathways: transformation, reconfiguration, technological substitution, and de-alignment and re-alignment. These pathways differ in combinations of timing and nature of multi-level interactions. They are illustrated with historical examples.

The unsustainabikp of the present trajctories of technical change in sectors such as transport and agriculture is wide& recognized. It is far3om clear, however, how a transition to more sustainable modes of development may be achieved. Sustainable technologies that &&I important user requirements in terms ofperfomance and price are most often not available on the market. Ideas of what might be more sustainable technologies exist, but the long development times, uncertain9 about market demand and social gains, and the need for change at dflerent l e v e l s i n organization, technology, inzastructure and the wider social and institutional context-provide a great barrier. This raises the question ofhow the potential of more sustainable technologies and modes of development may be exploited. In this article we describe how technical change is locked into dominant technological regimes, and present a perspective, called strategzc niche management, on how to expedite a transition into a new regime. The perspective consists of the creation and/or management of nichesfor promising technologies.Every new car show features the glorious introduction of environmentally benign vehicles. Examples are electric vehicles powered by batteries, hybrid-electric vehicles with small petrol or diesel engines generating electricity on-board, natural gas vehicles; lightweight vehicles built with composite materials instead of metal and vehicles for public individual transport ~ysterns.~ Only very few of the vehicles are for sale. This raises the question of why such technologies are not introduced into the market-place when their benefits to society are so evident. Is there no market for these technologies? This is what the automobile manufacturers tell us. But why is there no market? Is it because consumers do not want to pay extra for environmental benefits? O r are the reasons political, namely the failure of policy-makers to make environmental benefits an integral part of the structure of incentives and constraints in which people trade and interact? O r is it that manufacturers think that there is no market or find the market for environmentally desirable automobiles less attractive than the market for gasoline automobiles? As we will argue, there is not just one barrier to the introduction of alternative vehicles but a whole range of factors that work against the introduction and diffusion of alternative

and-conditions-of-access.pdf This article may be used for research, teaching and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution , reselling , loan or sub-licensing, systematic supply or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. The publisher does not give any warranty express or implied or make any representation that the contents will be complete or accurate or up to date. The accuracy of any instructions, formulae and drug doses should be independently verified with primary sources. The publisher shall not be liable for any loss, actions, claims, proceedings, demand or costs or damages whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with or arising out of the use of this material.

Constructive technology assessment (C-f A) is a member of the family of technology assessment approaches, developed in particular in the Netherlands and Denmark. CTA shifts the focus away from assessing impacts of new technologies to broadening design, development, and implementation processes. Explicit CTA has concentrated on dialogue among and early interaction with new actors. The idea has been taken up by actors other than governments (consumers, producers). CTA implies a modulation of ongoing technological developments, and an understanding of the dynamics of such modulation is used to identify and briefly discuss three generic strategies for CTA: technology forcing, strategic niche management, and loci for alignmenl. Modulation activities are to be located in the broader issue of how our societies handle new technology at all. The established division of labor between promotion and control should be mitigated by sociotechnical criticism. This underlines the need for reflection on role and value profile of CTA agents. © 1997 Elsevier Science Inc.

No abstract