Unpacking the Formation of Favourable Environments for Urban Experimentation: The Case of the Bristol Energy Scene

Abstract

Urban experimentation with sustainability has been gaining prominence in policy and academic discourses about urban transformations, spurring the creation of urban living laboratories and transition arenas. However, the academic literature has only begun examining why experimentation flourishes in particular cities, and why it conforms to place-specific styles. Meanwhile, the strategic niche management (SNM) tradition has extensively explored how protective spaces for experimentation emerge but has dealt only tangentially with why this happens in particular places. In this paper, we develop an approach for unpacking the formation of favourable environments for experimentation in specific places. We adopt an abductive research design to create a dialogue between distinct theoretical positions and one in-depth case study. Our case examines the formation of the Bristol energy scene, which hosts a variety of experimental initiatives concerning civic energy alternatives. Based on our findings, we refine the understanding of the processes shaping this experimental setting. There is value in characterising the 'genealogy' of experimental spaces and acknowledging their antecedents, path-dependencies and place-specificities. Efforts to foster urban transformation demand nuanced accounts of how places become experimental because they are not static backgrounds for experimentation.

Seedbeds, harbours, and battlegrounds: On the origins of favourable environments for urban experimentation with sustainability

“…We also contend that understanding urban contexts as behaving primarily as protective spaces could obscure other potentially relevant dynamics and politics (see also Bulkeley et al, 2014a, 2014b, Torrens et al, 2018. Other strands of work also suggest a more plural approach is necessary.…”

“…Even without formally established laboratories, some places concentrate and sustain much experimentation in various domains of sustainability, infrastructure, and governance, playing a disproportional role in shaping distinct urban imaginaries (e.g. Longhurst, 2015, van den Heiligenberg et al, 2017, Raven et al, 2017Torrens et al, 2018). Nevertheless, there is considerable fragmentation in explanations of how this happens.…”

“…Nevens et al, 2013, van den Bosch andRotmans, 2008). However recent contributions took on place-based approaches, revealing complex journeys through which places become favourable environments for experimentation emerge and develop path-dependant styles of experimentation (Longhurst, 2015;Raven et al, 2017;van den Heiligenberg et al, 2017;Torrens et al, 2018).…”

Transformative Outcomes: Assessing and Reorienting Experimentation with Transformative Innovation Policy

“…EPEs differ from how experiments are considered in transitions theory, as primarily centred on creating a novelty and building niches in early stages. EPEs seek to capture the role of different forms of experimentation in the expansion of niches and destabilisation of dominant practices or regimes (Torrens et al, 2018). This insight builds on the recognition that various forms of experimentation are always interventions in a larger transformation process that involve many actors, which almost never is met solely by a policy intervention from an STI agent or other government agencies.…”

“…Rather than foregrounding the transformational failures, we focus on the transformation dynamics that can be engendered through experimentation, despite those failures. For that, drawing on Torrens et al, 2018) we introduce the notion of transformative outcomes (TOs) which encompasses three macro-processes and twelve outcomes that can guide the conduct and evaluation of TIP towards more transformative aims. We further introduce the notion of experimental policy engagements (EPEs), which refers to the various forms of experimental action which can be mobilised for achieving transformative outcomes.…”