The Politics of Social-ecological Resilience and Sustainable Socio-technical Transitions

Smith, Adrian; Stirling, Andy

doi:10.5751/es-03218-150111

Cited by 641 publications

(448 citation statements)

References 35 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

437

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Of course, as has been discussed, there does exist a considerable subset of literature acknowledging the general importance to large scale sociotechnical change of wider political and cultural dynamics (F. W. Geels, 2014;Geels & Verhees, 2011;Kern, Smith, Shaw, Raven, & Verhees, 2014;Meadowcroft, 2009;Smith, Kern, Raven, & Verhees, 2013;Smith & Stirling, 2010). And in other areas of literature, the issues raised here might be referred to as features of a notionally singular overarching 'landscape', that helps to condition processes at the level of 'the' regime (Rotmans, Kemp, & Asselt, 2001).…”

Section: Implications Of -And For -'Democracy'mentioning

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

Self Cite

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

Section: Implications Of -And For -'Democracy'mentioning

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

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This emphasis on agency and the politics of transitions has been advanced in recent transition literature (Smith et al 2005;Kern 2011;Smith and Stirling 2010;Bakker 2014;Geels 2014;Markard et al 2015). In the context of niche protection, Ulmanen et al (2009) adduced the notion of agency and politics by showing that protection is produced by a wide range of actors rather than public authorities alone.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

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

“…Sensitivity to cross-scalar dynamics is designed to link TM with a general account of complex systems and to facilitate sustainability by fitting socio-technical systems of governance to complex social-ecological systems (van der Brugge and van Raak 2007;Rotmans and Loorbach 2009). Achieving normative legitimacy is key to TM because how stakeholders frame the problems, processes and solutions affecting socio-technical systems affects the role of knowledge within them (Meadowcroft, 2007;Loorbach 2010;Smith and Stirling 2010;Voß and Bornemann 2011). In water management, the highly interconnected nature of water across different levels of government, social customs and legal histories further complicates transitions due to the number and nature of participants affected by changes (Pahl-Wostl et al 2010;Pahl-Wostl et al 2011).…”

Section: Wostl 2002; Priscoli 2004)mentioning

confidence: 99%

Water Management and the Procedural Turn: Norms and Transitions in Alberta

Schmidt

2014

Water Resour Manage

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Politics of Social-ecological Resilience and Sustainable Socio-technical Transitions

Cited by 641 publications

References 35 publications

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

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

Learning to shield – Policy learning in socio-technical transitions

Water Management and the Procedural Turn: Norms and Transitions in Alberta

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About