Strategic niche management and sustainable innovation journeys: theory, findings, research agenda, and policy

Schot, JW Johan; Geels, Frank W.

doi:10.1080/09537320802292651

Cited by 1,571 publications

(1,439 citation statements)

References 47 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

1,340

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Transition management can be conceptualised as top-down through altering the landscape and socio-technical regimes to open up windows of opportunity, and/or bottom-up in encouraging innovation and development from the niche level (Meadowcroft, 2005). The multi-level perspective suggests that alignment between pressures and opportunities at all three levels facilitate regime shifts (Geels, 2002;Geels and Schot, 2007;Schot and Geels, 2008).This paper focuses empirically on the production and mobilisation of cycling policy knowledge as an illustrative case study for the development of sustainable urban transport regimes. Kenworthy (2006) cites encouraging cycling and walking in favour of motorised modes as a crucial policy in the push for a more sustainable urban form.…”

Section: Figure 2 Herementioning

confidence: 99%

Policy learning and sustainable urban transitions: Mobilising Berlin’s cycling renaissance

2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Cities are increasingly seeking to learn from experiences elsewhere when planning programmes of sustainable transition management, and the contingencies of policy-learning arrangements in this field are beginning to receive greater attention. This paper applies insights from the field of policy mobilities to the burgeoning field of transition management to critically explore a proposed ‘learning relationship’ between Berlin (Germany) and Manchester (UK) around cycling policy. Drawing on qualitative data, the paper casts doubt over the existing consensus attributing recent growth in bicycle use in Berlin to concerted governmental interventions. A multi-actor analysis suggests that contextual factors caused the growth in cycling and that policy has been largely reactive. The emergence and circulation of the Berlin cycling renaissance as a policy model is then traced through policy documents and interviews with actors in Manchester, UK, to understand why and how it has become a model for action elsewhere. It is concluded that Berlin’s cycling renaissance has been simplified and mobilised to demonstrate the requisite ambition and proficiency to secure competitive funds for sustainable urban transport. The paper develops an original study of the role policy knowledge and learning play in sustainable urban transition management, and argues that attending to the dynamics of policy learning can enhance our understanding of its successes and failures.

show abstract

Section: Figure 2 Herementioning

confidence: 99%

Policy learning and sustainable urban transitions: Mobilising Berlin’s cycling renaissance

2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In this perspective, protection is organised at the local scale and mainly by local actors. When studying these local experiments SNM scholars have mostly focused on niche-internal dynamics Schot and Geels 2008). More recently, attention has shifted to broader conceptions of technological niches (Geels and Raven 2006) that views niche protection as more dispersed across locations and groups of actors.…”

Section: Niche Protectionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Several dimensions of these technologies are still to be fleshed out and developed in order to meet the level needed to fight off competition from incumbent technologies (Rip 1995). Literature on socio-technical transitions describes these dynamics by examining niches in which these early-stage technologies are protected, creating room for experimentation and maturation Schot and Geels 2008).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Most attention has been paid to the activities taking place inside these niches, i.e. the way in which learning, articulating expectations and network building strengthen technology development in protective spaces Schot and Geels 2008). These studies explicitly included an analysis of the policies that support individual pilot projects (e.g.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Learning to shield – Policy learning in socio-technical transitions

Boon

Bakker

2016

Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The dynamics of protection in the context of socio-technical niches have remained underresearched. In this paper we conceptualise the process of policy learning in the context of transitions. We show that a variety of actors inside and outside a technological niche have to learn about the implications and effects of regulations aimed at protection of niches. We analyse this process of policy learning in two cases: high-need drugs and electric vehicles. We conclude that both regulators and the regulated need to learn about the width and depth of protection measures, their duration, the specific set of tools used, and their legitimisation. A crucial issue of implementing protective regulation is the question on what level of aggregation protection measures need to be applied. Learning is often part of the negotiation process between the protector and the protected, but in many cases learning only takes place after policies have been implemented.

show abstract

“…This is the area this paper contributes towards. This paper speaks to literature that is focussed on understanding the dynamics of 'innovation journeys' (Geels & Verhees, 2011;Geels et al, 2008;Schot & Geels, 2008;Verbong, Geels, & Raven, 2008), and why certain technological trajectories evolve in the way they do. The comparison between the UK and Germany is also of importance in terms of understanding energy policy more generally.…”

Section: Case Study Background: Nuclear Power In the Uk And Germanymentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparing Nuclear Power Trajectories in Germany and the UK: From 'Regimes' to 'Democracies' in Sociotechnical Transitions and Discontinuities

Johnstone

Stirling

2015

SSRN Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

SWPS 2015-18 ( June) DisclaimerThe works available here are the responsibility of the individual author(s) and do not necessarily represent the views of other SPRU researchers. As matters of policy and practice, SPRU does not endorse individual research contributions. Guidelines for authorsPapers shall be submitted in pdf or Word format. They should contain a title, an abstract, and keywords. Papers should be submitted to one of the Editors, who will process them and send them to the appropriate Associate Editor. Two members of SPRU will be asked to provide a short written review within three weeks. The revised versions of the paper, together with a reply to the reviewers, should be sent to the Associate Editor, who will propose to the Editors its publication on the series. When submitting the authors should indicate if the paper has already undergone peer-reviewing, in which case the Associate Editors may decide to skip internal review process. AbstractThis paper focuses on arguably the single most striking contrast in contemporary major energy politics in Europe (and even the developed world as a whole): the starkly differing civil nuclear policies of Germany and the UK. Germany is seeking entirely to phase out nuclear power by 2022. Yet the UK advocates a 'nuclear renaissance', promoting the most ambitious new nuclear construction programme in Western Europe. Here, this paper poses a simple yet quite fundamental question: what are the particular divergent conditions most strongly implicated in the contrasting developments in these two countries. With nuclear playing such an iconic role in historical discussions over technological continuity and transformation, answering this may assist in wider understandings of sociotechnical incumbency and discontinuity in the burgeoning field of 'sustainability transitions'. To this end, an 'abductive' approach is taken: deploying nine potentially relevant criteria for understanding the different directions pursued in Germany and the UK. Together constituted by 30 parameters spanning literatures related to socio-technical regimes in general as well as nuclear technology in particular, the criteria are divided into those that are 'internal' and 'external' to the 'focal regime configuration' of nuclear power and associated 'challenger technologies' like renewables. It is 'internal' criteria that are emphasised in conventional sociotechnical regime theory, with 'external' criteria relatively less well explored. Asking under each criterion whether attempted discontinuation of nuclear power would be more likely in Germany or the UK, a clear picture emerges. 'Internal' criteria suggest attempted nuclear discontinuation should be more likely in the UK than in Germany -the reverse of what is occurring. 'External' criteria are more aligned with observed dynamics -especially those relating to military nuclear commitments and broader 'qualities of democracy'. Despite many differences of framing concerning exactly what constitutes 'democracy', a rich political science literature on t...

show abstract

Strategic niche management and sustainable innovation journeys: theory, findings, research agenda, and policy

Cited by 1,571 publications

References 47 publications

Policy learning and sustainable urban transitions: Mobilising Berlin’s cycling renaissance

Policy learning and sustainable urban transitions: Mobilising Berlin’s cycling renaissance

Learning to shield – Policy learning in socio-technical transitions

Comparing Nuclear Power Trajectories in Germany and the UK: From 'Regimes' to 'Democracies' in Sociotechnical Transitions and Discontinuities

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About