Research Proposal and Plan 05122006

Looking after what shapes transitions Developing a conceptual model to diagnose the dynamics of transitions Niki Frantzeskaki
Policy Analysis Section, Faculty of Technology, Policy and Management Delft University of Technology, The Netherlands
Table of Contents
1. Introduction .................................................................................................................................................... 1 1.1 What is characterized as a transition? ........................................................................................................... 1 1.2 What is the upper goal of the research?........................................................................................................... 3 1.3 What is the question?................................................................................................................................. 3 1.4 What is already there?................................................................................................................................ 3 1.5 Introducing the language of transitions............................................................................................................ 4 1.5.1 Levels of transitions............................................................................................................................ 4 1.5.2 Phases of transitions ........................................................................................................................... 5 1.5.3 Paths of transitions ............................................................................................................................ 6 1.6 Why is it necessary to research transitions?...................................................................................................... 7 2. Research template........................................................................................................................................... 10 2.1 Research questions ................................................................................................................................... 10 2.2 Research objective .................................................................................................................................... 12 2.3 Limitations of the study ............................................................................................................................ 13 3. Researching mechanisms of transitions (Research Question 1) .................................................................................. 15 3.1 Elaboration on the content of research question .............................................................................................. 15 3.2 Complementary research objective ................................................................................................................ 16 3.3 Typology of transitions .............................................................................................................................. 16 3.4 Explaining transitions in a multi-level space ................................................................................................. 16 4. Researching the conditions of transitions (Research Question 2) ................................................................................ 21 4.1 Elaboration on the content of research question .............................................................................................. 21 4.2 Complementary research objective ................................................................................................................ 22 4.3 Refining the concepts of transitions related to factors of transitions ...................................................................... 22 4.3.1 Introducing the multi-segment concept of transitions ................................................................................. 23 4.3.1.1 Environment segment ..................................................................................................................... 27 4.3.1.2 Market segment ............................................................................................................................ 29 4.3.1.3 Technology segment ........................................................................................................................ 30 4.3.1.4 Society segment ............................................................................................................................. 30 4.3.1.5 Institutions segment ....................................................................................................................... 31 4.3.1.6 Culture segment ............................................................................................................................ 32 5. Researching the patterns of transitions (Research Question 3) .................................................................................. 33 5.1 Elaboration on the content of research question .............................................................................................. 33 5.2 Complementary research objective ................................................................................................................ 33 5.3 Refining the concepts of transitions related to mechanisms of transitions ............................................................... 33 5.3.1 Refining the multi-phase concept of transitions ........................................................................................ 33 5.3.2 Introduction of transition patterns........................................................................................................ 35 6. Panorama research plan .................................................................................................................................. 38 6.1 Research strategy ..................................................................................................................................... 38 6.1.1 Analysis of empirical examples ........................................................................................................... 41 6.1.2 Literature review.............................................................................................................................. 43 6.1.3 Case study...................................................................................................................................... 46 6.2 Publications plan.................................................................................................................................... 46 6.3 Preliminary time management plan.............................................................................................................. 48 7. Bibliography............................................................................................................................................. 51
Tuesday 05-12-2006
1. Introduction
There is nothing more difficult to take in hand, more perilous to conduct, or more uncertain in its success than to take the lead in the introduction of a new order of things. (Machiavelli, The Prince)
The road driving our modern society to sustainability is researched extensively the last years by scientists who tried to map the optimum pathway. Wearing specialization blinders, every research looked at a different pathway for sustainability neglecting the interrelations and the linkages with other fields. Bifurcations and cross-roads that actually constitute a complex labyrinth that leads to a sustainable state became visible while the interconnectedness of the various fields, their developments and their effects were recognized. It is a challenge of the new type of researcher to cast a retrospective glance and take a multi-disciplinary point of view when investigating changes that follow or may follow the pathway towards a sustainable state of the society. Putting it in simple words, the Homo scientificus of the twentieth century focused in a specialized field for example the market- trying to investigate, explain and control those factors of the sub-system that contributed to a fixed target for example social welfare-. Adopting a narrow vision, interdependencies and links with other relevant / influenced fields were either neglected referred as aspects out of the scope of analysis- or as externalities or side-effects. The specialized and in depth research of different fields e.g economy, environment, polity, organizations, law, culture- although contributed to the development of fundamental knowledge of those fields and to the discovery of scientific green-fields e.g. economics of networks, econometrics, nano-physics, biotechnology, genetics etc.- it does not explain in depth what are the conditions that actually contribute to a change towards a more sustainable state of the system as a whole.
1.1 What is characterized as a transition?

Transition is a new highlighting term interpreted differently by various researchers. There are some starting definitions clarifying what is perceived as a transition and what is not considered as a transition (Box 1). A definition of transitions that synthesizes in a consistent and systematic way the definitions provided by peer researchers by combining the common concepts and underlying ideas of them is needed.
Box 1: Definitions of transitions by peer researchers. (a) A long-term process of change during which a society or a subsystem of society fundamentally changes Rotmans, J., R. Kemp, M.B.A. Van Asselt, F.W. Geels, G. Verbong and K. Molendijk (2000), Transitions & Transition Management: the case of an emission-poor energy supply, Maastricht: ICIS (International Centre for Integrative Studies) & Rotmans, J., R. Kemp and M.B.A. Van Asselt, (2001), More Evolution than Revolution, Transition Management in Public Policy, Foresight, Vol.3, No.1, pp.15-31 (b) A shift from an initial dynamic equilibrium to a new dynamic equilibrium Kemp, R. and J. Rotmans (2001), The Management of the Co-evolution of Technological, Environmental and Social Systems, paper for the conference Towards Environmental Innovation Systems, Eibsee, 27-29 Sept, 2001 (c) A transition can be described as a set of connected changes which reinforce each other but take place in several different areas such as technology, the economy, institutions, behavior, culture, ecology and belief systems. A transition can be seen as a spiral that reinforces itself; there is multiple causality and co-evolution caused by independent developments. Rotmans, J., R. Kemp and M.B.A. Van Asselt, (2001), More Evolution than Revolution, Transition Management in Public Policy, Research Proposal and plan KSI II.2 Niki Frantzeskaki 1
Tuesday 05-12-2006
Foresight, Vol.3, No.1, pp.16. (d) A transition is a shift from one socio-technical system to another i.e. a system innovation. Geels, F.W., (2005), Processes and patterns in transitions and system innovations: Refining the coevolutionary multi-level perspective, Technological forecasting and social change, Vol.72, p.682 (e) A transition is a structural societal change that is the result of economic, cultural, technological, institutional as well as environmental developments, which both influence and strengthen each other Rotmans, J., (2005a), Societal innovation: between dream and reality lies complexity, Erasmus Research Institute of Management, Erasmus University Rotterdam, p.11.
In societal systems almost everything is subject to change. There are attributes that characterize the types of change. The origins of change may vary significantly. A change may take the form of a market change or an institutional reform and influence other compounds of the system such as the political decisions or the actors consumption patterns and everyday routines. The origins of change are investigated in the different structural components of the societal systems, namely the society, the market, the institutions, the technology, the culture and the environment. These are different segments of the societal system. Another attribute of the change is the impact scale of change translated in a spectrum from reversible to irreversible impact on the segments and/or societal systems functions. The magnitude of change also referred as the extent of change by Rotmans, Kemp, and Van Asselt, (2001, p.18)1 and by Giddens, (1984, p.246)2- captures whether the change has an impact on one segment or has diffuse impacts on more segments. The development time referred as fermentation time or throughput time that is the time period of change by Rotmans, Kemp, and Van Asselt, (2001, p.18)3 and as momentum by Giddens (1984, p.246). The development time of a change is open for argumentation by itself. It is arguable that the time length of a change is not an attribute to define its type but a characteristic to mark its time length and is a subjective and relative to the basis of comparison attribute. However, within the existing literature on the transition field (see Rotmans, Kemp, and Van Asselt, 2001) the time length is considered as an important aspect when discussing transitions. Looking at the attributes that characterize change in societal systems, a transition is a high magnitude change that has diverse origins and it irreversibly changes the function of the structural components of the system. The transition is also perceived as a long-term change that may exceed one generation in time scale. The above definition of a transition incorporates all the common components of the definitions provided among the researchers such as: process of fundamental change, longterm horizon of change, set of connected changes which reinforce each other and the common idea of looking in different fields to sense what causes this change. A transition as a change of societal systems is explained using multiple levels as a common explanatory basis to position the stimulus of change. These levels of transitions are neither levels of aggregation nor ontological levels, but are explanatory levels4 where actors are positioned in the micro level, constellations of actors and their practices in the meso level and aspects out of the influence of the actors are placed at the macro level. Various actors
Rotmans, J., Kemp, R., and Van Asselt, M., (2001), More evolution than revolution: transition management in public policy, The journal of futures studies, strategic thinking and policy. 2 Giddens, A., (1984), The constitution of society, Polity Press. 3 Rotmans, J., Kemp, R., and Van Asselt, M., (2001), More evolution than revolution: transition management in public policy, The journal of futures studies, strategic thinking and policy. 4 See also Rotmans, J., (2005a), Societal innovation: between dream and reality lies complexity, Erasmus Research Institute of Management, Erasmus University Rotterdam.
1
Attributes of change
What is a transition?
Research Proposal and plan KSI II.2 Niki Frantzeskaki
Tuesday 05-12-2006
(multi-actor) influence and are affected by the changes that took place in the societal system. Taking into account that a transition is a change of high magnitude, different types of changes take place in the diverse segments (multi-change concept). Transition is viewed to progress in episodes of change (inspired by Giddens, 1984, p.244 & 374) where significant changes in the system signal the pass of the system from one phase of change to another phase (multi-phase concept).
1.2 What is the upper goal of the research?

The upper goal of the transition research plan is to provide practitioners with the knowledge for understanding and interpreting complex adaptive societal systems that are susceptible to continuous change. These changes need to be foreseen or handled with precautionary measures, it is important to develop a diagnostic tool if not a policy design tool for long term policies for dynamic systems5. The dynamics of transitions as the core of the present research plan aim at capturing the complexity of the societal systems as an outcome of the interdependencies and interconnectedness of their compartments (e.g. the interdependencies between the technology and the societal practices as well as the interconnected character between the diffusion of knowledge and innovation with the existence of economic conditions and adequate infrastructures).
1.3 What is the question?

The scope of the study is to discover what lies beneath the dynamics of societal transitions. The dynamics of transitions seem to be related with the combined impact of drivers of change and processes of change. Taking a managerial perspective, we can distinguish drivers and inhibitors of change as two sets of factors. Drivers are those factors who reveal what stimulate transitions and inhibitors are those who refer to what burdens transitions. Taking a systems perspective as well, we can also distinguish factors that capture what actually changes in the societal system (system properties), and those factors that assess the outcomes of the change (output or performance factors). The processes of change are explained by mechanisms of change. There are different mechanisms to explain the way societal systems change. The patterns of change combine the factors of change with the mechanisms of change so as to draw the picture of the dynamics of transitions.
1.4 What is already there?

So far, there is research done for different types of change in specific dimensions of societal systems. An example is the market and the types of changes or reforms that took place in it (see Nelson, 2004)6. Although there are different types of models and theories explaining market innovations and how they develop, there is no existing theory that captures the interdependence of market reform to other dimensions of the societal system. An interesting point is the linkage between market change and changes in the society at the level of actors interaction, in the every day routines, as well as at the level of decision making in political arenas. An example is the transition from the regulated to deregulated economies (open market economy model) that influenced not only the organization and interaction of the actors within the market but also the everyday transactions and costs of citizens as well as the design principles of monetary and social affairs policies by governments. An illustrative
An elaboration on the current style of public policy analysis and decision making and the promised of transition management and transition policy is given by Rotmans, (2005a, pp.43-60). (Rotmans, J., (2005a), Societal innovation: between dream and reality lies complexity, Erasmus Research Institute of Management, Erasmus University Rotterdam) 6 Nelson, R.R., (2004), The market economy, and the scientific commons, Research Policy, Vol. 33, pp.455471.
5
Tuesday 05-12-2006
example is the given in Germany with the domino effect the opening of the market to the social policy and insurance/ pension policies (period 1999-2005). Changes in the market may also be enforced by a demand for a change in transactions style at actors and organizations interaction. This possible link as well as other similar causes are overlooked by the limited focus on the market related causes and impacts. Our argument however does not aim at criticizing specialized knowledge on various fields that is nonetheless valuable for market assessments and progress- but it aims at revealing the lack of a more comprehensive framework for broader changes and the interdependencies of changes between the different dimensions of societal systems (that the different segments). A set of factors that contemplates what changes took place in the whole system not focusing only on the market will be developed.
1.5 Introducing the language of transitions

Even though dealing with change in societal systems is not a newborn idea, the standpoint to research the totality of the phenomenon of transition is an innovative idea. Within the transition management framework (see Rotmans, 2005a; Geels, 2005) a number of concepts have been developed in order to provide the conceptual basis for explaining change. These are the starting points for the development of a conceptual framework but in their infant phase comprise the explanatory language to trace changes. These concepts as also introduced in previous paragraph will be presented briefly but thoroughly in the following paragraphs as well. Looking at the definition of transitions and the attributes of change, it is important to link the values of the attributes to the context where they will be researched and to the existing (and developed) language of transitions (Table 1). More specifically, a transition is driven by changes that took place in different origins (see the first row of Table 1). These different origins are the different segments of transitions that are placed in different levels of transitions. The phase concept is going to provide the explanatory basis of the development time as an attribute of change (see last row of Table 1).
Table 1: Transition characteristics and transition concepts to dissect them. Attributes of change Characteristics Transition concept of a transition to provide explanatory basis Origins of change Diverse Multi-level and multi-segment Impact scale of change Irreversible Multi-actor and multi-change Magnitude of change High-magnitude Multi-segment Development time Long-term Multi-phase (>generation)
1.5.1 Levels of transitions Within the transition field, there are two starting schools of thought (Geels 2005; Rotmans, 2005a). Both of them use the same levels of transitions to explain how transitions develop. These levels though are neither hierarchically layered nor aggregated nor ontological but they comprise the explanatory base for what composes the dynamics of transitions. They are used as explanatory platforms to develop the language of transitions therefore are called functional levels.
Tuesday 05-12-2006
Figure 1: Levels of transitions.
There are three levels where changes take place. Niches are active in the micro level as incumbents of change. The regime as a constellation of actors practices- is located in the meso level and the macro level accommodates the developments and impacts that are external to the actors spectrum of influence (Figure 1). Transitions can be viewed as outcomes of the continuous change of the practices of actors throughout these interactions in different levels. Changes in every level of interaction yield in a combined change that is perceived as a system transition.
Revisiting the concept of transition, it is a long-lasting process of change. Since the phenomena leading to transitional change in the societal system need time to develop and proceed, there are different drivers enabling and/or inhibiting those phenomena in different time periods. The delineation of phases of change is thus essential when attempting to explain the development of long-lasting transitional changes. In every phase different phenomena take place and at the end of every phase, the state of the societal system is significantly different. 1.5.2 Phases of transitions Transition is viewed to progress in episodes of change (inspired by Giddens, 1984, p.244 & 374) where significant changes in the system signal the pass of the system from one phase of change to another phase (multi-phase concept). Phases are used as units to delineate the development time of transitions. The multi-phase concept is important to present when researching factors of transitions since different factors stimulate transition processes in different phases whereas the signaling of the pass from one phase to the other can be realized by assigning dominance to specific factors and by diminishing dominance to others. The multi-phase concept of transitions is rooted in the hypothesis that the dynamics of transitions in time can be described as altering phases of relatively fast and slow dynamics, which together form a strongly non-linear pattern where there is a shift from one dynamic state of equilibrium to the other (adopted by Rotmans, 2005a, p.23)7. The development of a transition in a system can be traced to go along different phases within which mechanisms of change become functional transforming the systems state and driving it to a new state. Martens and Rotmans (2005)8 have described a quad-phase framework of transitions and they are presented below (see also Figure 2): Existing definitions of phases of transitions according to Rotmans (2005a, p.23):
Rotmans, J., (2005a), Societal innovation: between dream and reality lies complexity, Erasmus Research Institute of Management, Erasmus University Rotterdam. 8 Martens, P., and Rotmans, J., (2005), Transitions in a globalizing world, Futures, Vol.37, pp.1133-1144.
7
Tuesday 05-12-2006
(a) The predevelopment phase: from dynamic state of equilibrium in which the status quo of the system changes in the background but these changes are not visible, (b) The take-off phase, the actual point of ignition after which the process of structural changes picks up momentum (c) The acceleration phase in which structural changes become visible (d) The stabilization phase where a new dynamic state of equilibrium is achieved.
Figure 2: Transition phases according to Rotmans et.al., (2000)9.
Additionally, by tracing the development of the system through the different phases, it may be possible to project future developments or to shape current conditions in a way that maneuvers the system along a desirable transition pathway. That seems as a challenge for transition managers therefore fundamental theoretical research on the controllable conditions common to every transition pattern is essential. However, the way phases are defined so far, need to be refined and linked to the state of the system explicitly and consistently. The current phases are delineated the visibility of changes as a criterion. According to this taxonomy criterion, only broad changes in the societal system can be visual. The current criterion seems insufficient since it assess the symptoms of the societal change (that are the visible changes) and overlooks the slow and maybe invisible at initial stages changes that underline A starting idea is every phase to have a specific meaning for the state of the system. The state of the system will be described by the state indicators and the scale of change of it will be the main criterion when placed in the different phases. 1.5.3 Paths of transitions For a transition to evolve it goes through different phases where the prevalent conditions of these phases actually frame and forge the system. A first step to explain transitions is a classification of transitions using the sigmoid curve as an initial mapping of the transition evolution. A transition path is one (form of the sigmoid) curve that maps the transitional evolution of a system (Figure 3). Since every system is viewed as a substantially unique entity, its transition path differs from the transition paths of other systems. As also stated by Rotmans, Kemp and Van Asselt (2001, p.18)10 it is possible to have different paths to the
9 Rotmans J, Kemp R, van Asselt MBA, (2000), Transitions and transition management, the case of an emissionfree energy supply. International Centre for Integrative Studies, Maastricht, The Netherlands 10 Rotmans, J., R. Kemp and M.B.A. van Asselt (2001), More Evolution than Revolution, Transition Management in Public Policy, Foresight, Vol.3, No.1, pp.15-31
Why do we distinguish phases of transitions?
Tuesday 05-12-2006
same equilibrium level as well as it is possible for the same transition pattern to be realized in different ways. Although transition paths lead the systems to their new state, characteristics of the end state of the systems can be used as foundations for a classification scheme.
System state Stabilization
Acceleration
Lock in
Predevelopment Take-off Backlash System breakdown Time
Figure 3: The different transition paths and transitions phases according to Rotmans, (2005a, p.24).
It is important at this point to note, that the Y-axis indicator placed in the transition path plots- should reflect the case specific characteristics related to the system state. Every transition path may map the development of an activity or the adaptive capacity of a new practice in time, whereas the Y-axis may indicate the percentage of actors (or the population size of actors) using the new practice. According to Rotmans (2005a, p.23-24) the manifestation of alternating phases is the socalled S-curve: an aggregation of underlying curves. However other manifestations in time are also possible as given in Figure 3. The S-curve represents an ideal transition, in which the system adjusts itself successfully to the changing internal and external circumstances, while achieving a higher order of organization and complexity. However, non-ideal or even reverse transitions are possible. The transition paths may however take the form of other curves apart from the sigmoid curve. Given the complexity and the uncertainty incorporated in a societal systems transition, the transition paths are just representing the transition of one practice in time and cannot have a predefined form.
1.6 Why is it necessary to research transitions?

The development of a conceptual framework that will be further operationalized into measurable indicators is the objective of the research. The conceptual framework aims at capturing what lies beneath the dynamics of transitions by investigating a breadth of factors and mechanisms of change. The factors will capture what changes in a system under transition and the way the system changes will be captured by the mechanisms. More specifically, it aims at describing, understanding and discovering the way transitions develop (captured by the mechanisms of transitions), the conditions contributing to transition that lie down in multiple segments, multiple phases and multiple levels. The way conditions and mechanisms are linked will incorporate the dynamics of transitions diagnosing how transitions progress. Hence, it is not a pluralism to note that the research project of transitions has the character of theory-design research that aims at providing fundamental knowledge to aspects of societal processes that have been poorly investigated (the inter-connectedness of changes in different segments of societal systems
Tuesday 05-12-2006
when viewing social transformation is not investigated elsewhere) and not linked with decision making practices. Having an in depth understanding of the nature of transitions through the understanding of what contributes to it and how it changes- researchers will not only be able to track changes and gain insight of the structure of the system under transition but also to influence and inhibit/ prohibit changes that are undesirable by shaping those conditions that possibly seem critical in multiple levels, multiple phases and multiple segments. The study of the dynamics of transition is however not only relevant for Dutch practitioners and policy makers but also for a broader audience like policy makers in European Union and managers of public-sector institutes or multinationals. The scientific relevance and importance of the research even though evidential from the demands it serves in the policy spectrum is also presented in brief. The knowledge gained from the research of transition dynamics will give rise to: Scholarly research and literature in the field: - understand the way transitional change takes place in a broad perspective (looking not only at societal systems and social change potential but also in technology dynamics and environmental change) - a theory of multifold concepts (multi-level, multi-phase, multi-change, multi-actor and multi-segment) Practice relevance: - recognize, evaluate and monitor the processes that stimulate desired transitions (KSI Knowledge Project Business Plan 2005, p.7) - stimulate innovations to handle changes in society that may seem unfeasible to heal at present due to the complexities and the uncertainties attached to them Policy relevance: - provide the insights of long-term transition processes essential to know when designing long-term policies - Transitions are multi-actor processes that not only denote interactions between actors within a societal group but also interactions between societal groups (Elzen, Geels and Green, 2004b, p.5) - The developed conceptual framework can comprise the platform for bouncecasting11 since the patterns of transitions indicate the space of potential system developments. At the same time, the nature of transition management that aims at driven change asks for a bouncecasting platform that will provide insight knowledge on which preconditions are essential for a desirable transition and which are the inhibiting conditions of change. The research objective of this study is to provide policy makers, organizations and decision makers in general with a tool not only to understand why and how transitions happen but also to indicate what action may be effective in dealing with on-going transitions. It aids practitioners to understand and diagnose transitions. The conceptual model will comprise a monitoring tool aiding decision makers at understanding of the dynamics of transitions. Even though the understanding of the dynamics of transitions is what contributes to transitions theoretical framework, the translation of this knowledge into a conceptual model (control panel) will be more useful and applicable for practitioners such as decision
Inspired by the presentation of James Kahan, APPAM Fall 2004 Conference, Atlanta, Georgia USA, Bouncecasting: Combining forecasting and backcasting to achieve policy consensus.
11
Tuesday 05-12-2006
makers, industrial actors, and researchers. Decision makers may take action to strive for a different type of transitions towards a more desirable state e.g from an open economy to a distributive economy, from an oil-dependent market to an autonomous market. Industrial actors along with other market actors may decide on what products or technologies to launch and when, reading the transition pathways and forecasting their potential gains and losses. Research centers and institutes may look under the failed-practices or not-adapted artifacts to learn how to design-under-demand and further use the control panel to sense societal needs so as to design breakthrough technologies.
Tuesday 05-12-2006
2. Research template
The current chapter includes the research questions that are the compass of the researcher in the research labyrinth (Section 2.1). The research objective is more extensively presented in Section 2.2. The limitations of the ambitious research study will be also presented (Sections 2.3).
2.1 Research questions

The starting point to our research focus is found in the research questions proposed in the KSI Knowledge Project Business Plan 2005 (p.24-25). The following scheme presents the operationalization step when moving from the KSI-Subprogram II global research questions towards research questions and sub-questions. The research questions comprise the backbone of the research study giving in simple words the field of transitions that we aim to shed some light. These questions will be used to frame the analysis. KSI-II global question: Can we identify and position the driving forces of transitions in terms of the multi-level concept for the current transitions that are the object of the study? Research Question 1: What are the (social) mechanisms contributing to societal transitions? Focus: Multi-level perspective to capture multi-change - The mechanisms have been developed by Hans de Haan have a metalevel conceptualization (working document of De Haan, 2006). Taking them as a starting point and investigate in depth their link with transition dynamics is a part of the research. The mechanisms aim at explaining the processes of transitions in a multi-level context. More specifically, we use mechanisms as a conceptual language to capture processes that brought about societal transitions. Mechanisms have the characteristic that they can reproduce the same output if they set functional. Hence they comprise a consistent conceptual representation of processes of societal change. Research Question 2: What are the factors that influence the dynamics of societal transitions? Focus: Multi-segment perspective - Try to develop a conceptual hierarchy of factors influencing societal transitions - Different types of factors exist that influence the progress of transitions Looking for the genesis of transitions, the seeds of change need to be investigated. These are not else than the factors present when transitional change is initiated and is progressing. These factors influencing the dynamics of transitions have their roots in diverse segments of the system under transition. The factors comprise either the preconditions or the existing conditions giving rise to mechanisms. However, the operation/ function of some mechanisms may yield some new factors as results of their functioning. The two concepts (factors and mechanisms) will be used as vehicles to explore the dynamics of transitions.
How do we reach to the research questions?
What is the question?
10
Tuesday 05-12-2006
KSI-II global question: Using the transition concepts12, are we able to recognize the seeds of changes as forebodings for future transitions? And to what extent can we project the future dynamic behavior of transitions? Research Question 3: Are there patterns of transitions that comprise the common ground for the development of a transition? Focus: Multi-phase perspective to capture multi-change - Link between the factors and the mechanisms in an operational level. Can a set of factors precede a specific pattern of transitions? If so, a control panel of transitions can be conceptualized - Essential factors/conditions for a transition - Dominant factors for every transition pattern: Sets of factors common to a specific transition pattern The synthesis of mechanisms and factors of transitions will make it possible to understand the transition processes taking place in every phase of transition progress while the variation of transition patterns present in every phase will explain the different types of transition changes (multi-change). In a diagrammatic way (Figure 4), the research framework includes the following steps in consistency with the research questions: understand the mechanisms of transitions; define the factors and then synthesize towards a pattern of transitions that will be set as a conceptual model (control panel). The conceptual model will comprise the core of the research plan and its main outcome. The knowledge gained from this three-step process will contribute to the understanding of the nature of transitions.
Figure 4: Research framework for researching the dynamics of transitions that shows the links with research questions.
12 As transition concepts are labeled the transition management terminology as developed by Rotmans and Geels. The multi-level, multi-phase and multi-change perspectives of transitions are the cornerstones of transitions research (see Rotmans, J., (2005a), Societal innovation: between dream and reality lies complexity, Erasmus Research Institute of Management, Erasmus University Rotterdam).
11
Tuesday 05-12-2006
2.2 Research objective

The research objective of the present study is to understand the nature of transitions by looking at the dynamics of transitions. The object of inquiry is the dynamics of transitions. The dynamics of transitions are viewed as manifestations of the interplay between mechanisms of change and different factors. Those factors along with the mechanisms of transitions incorporate the dynamics of transitions and comprise the aspects of the object of inquiry. In order to visualize the different aspects and the contribution of the research within them to understand the dynamics of transitions, we present the following research framework (inspired by the work of Verschuren and Doorewaard, 1999, p.1813) (Figure 5 and 6). Factors and mechanisms of transitions are the first aspects to be researched thoroughly and explicitly. An operationalization towards transition patterns that are not different than combinations of factors linked up to mechanisms of change is the first step of a build-up of the conceptual model. The conceptual model will be tested, and verified through the analysis of case studies of historical transitions (these are empirical examples). Given that the existing cases of historical transitions (as given by DRIFT and Eidhoven group of KSI research) are rich in data and information, they will provide a basis to calibrate the conceptual model by re-writing the transition stories using the conceptual model. The next step is to translate the conceptual model to a simulation model (e.g. agent-based model or else). At this state, concepts, linkages between concepts and other relevant aspects of the conceptual model are translated into mathematical formulas. The final step concerns the double-checking of the consistency between the conceptual model and the applied schema of it (that is the simulation model). To build trust of the developed conceptual model, the last but not least step is to use it for on-going transitions to test its capacity in diagnosing potential transitional paths.
Object of inquiry: Dynamics of Transitions
Link between the aspects of the object of inquiry and the object of inquiry
Aspects of the object of inquiry: Mechanisms and factors
Figure 5: Research framework that maps the road between factors and mechanisms towards fulfilling the research goal.
13
Verschuren, P., and Doorewaard, H., (1999), Designing a research project, LEMMA, Utrecht.
12
Tuesday 05-12-2006
Research framework that highlights the steps you need to take to realize the research objective
OPERATIONALIZE Factors ANALYZE SYNTHESIZE VERIFY Mechanisms APPLY Patterns of transitions Understand (what lies beneath) the dynamics of transitions
CONCEPTUAL MODEL BUILD-UP
CONCEPTUAL MODEL LAUNCING
CONCEPTUAL MODEL UPGRADING
OPERATIONALIZE towards Transition Patterns
ENRICHING BY ITERATING
Modeling (APPLY)
Case Studies (ANALYZE& VERIFY)
CONCEPTUAL MODEL CALIBRATION
Figure 6: Unfolding the control panel of transitions.
2.3 Limitations of the study

We do not aim at conceptualizing reality when dissecting transitions. We aim at providing and developing a simple, comprehensive and consistent with observed reality representation of a complex inquiry such as transitions.
Research Proposal and plan KSI II.2 Niki Frantzeskaki 13
VI SU
AL IZ
IN G
ST TE G IN
Tuesday 05-12-2006
When researching transitions, we adopt a systems perspective to investigate the different factors and the different mechanisms in place. Having a systems perspective contributes to systematically present the ideas and outcomes of the research since it provides a structure and an existing theoretical spectrum when investigating societal phenomena. However, we are aware of the limitations of such a view, since it implicitly asks for phenomena that are linked with each other with causality net. Phenomena that it is not possible to indicate using implicitly or explicitly causal explanations will not neglected.
14
Tuesday 05-12-2006
3. Researching mechanisms of transitions (Research Question 1)

The third chapter provides an elaboration on the content of the first research question and the concepts of transitions required as a basis for the research on it. More specifically, Section 3.1 provides an elaboration on the content of the research question by analyzing what a transition is, the typology developed and the multi-level concept of transitions. Section 3.2 presents in a simple way the research objective that the research on the mechanisms of transitions has. Section 3.3 provides the existing typology of transitions and in Section 3.4 the application of the multi-level concept when explaining how transitions come about.
3.1 Elaboration on the content of research question

The first research question casts an eye on the mechanisms of transitions. The answer of the first research question will make us understand how a regime changes given the assumption that our system is located in the micro and meso level. Research Question 1: What are the (social) mechanisms contributing to societal transitions? Focus: Multi-level perspective to capture multi-change Research sub-questions: R.S.Q.1.1 What characterizes the adaptation mechanism? R.S.Q.1.2 What characterizes the assemblation mechanism? R.S.Q.1.3 What characterizes the reconstellation mechanism? Expected research outcomes related to RQ1: - Transition mechanisms present in multi-level space - Insightful conceptualization on transition mechanisms Mechanism is an important conceptual aspect since it will provide the handles to explain how changes in social system proceed. It is important to specify that by a social mechanism we define a constellation of entities and activities that are linked to one another in such a way that they regularly bring about a particular type of outcome (adopted by Hedstrom, 2005, p.11)14. At this point, my argumentation line rests on the research for analytical sociology performed by Hedstrom that signifies mechanism-based explanations on social phenomena due to the fact that they can cope and specify how phenomena are brought about15. Both mechanisms and drivers of change will build up to understand and diagnose how transitions happen. Mechanisms are initially conceptualized as processes that bring about divergent types of social change. An example may be that the learning within a regime concerning a new idea
14
Why are mechanisms important?
Hedstrom, P., (2005), Dissecting the social, on the principles of analytical sociology, Cambridge University Press. 15 Hedstrom (2005, p.28) specifies the reasons of dealing with mechanisms: One important reason for insisting on a detailed specification of mechanisms is that it tends to produce more precise and intelligible explanations. Another important reason is that a focus on mechanisms tends to reduce theoretical fragmentation. () Focusing on mechanisms as such avoids unnecessary proliferation of theoretical concepts and may help to bring out structural similarities between seemingly disparate processes. Finally it is the knowledge about the mechanisms as such that is knowledge about why the constellation of entities and activities referred to in the explanation can be expected to regularly bring about the type of outcome we seek to explain, that gives us reason to believe that there indeed is a genuine causal relationship between a proposed cause and its effect, and not simply a correlation. Research Proposal and plan KSI II.2 Niki Frantzeskaki 15
Tuesday 05-12-2006
e.g. relocation of dikes in the Rhine river banks so as to return space to the river in form of riparian recreational areas, in addition to the decentralization of decision making process constellate the mechanism of adaptation of new practices from a larger part of civil society that yielded a policy change in the water management regime in the Netherlands. Adaptation takes place through learning and through other activities as well that need to be investigated. The mechanisms however aim at describing the multiple changes in a multi-level space.
3.2 Complementary research objective

By looking at the mechanisms we aim at describing the multiple changes in a multi-level space. There can be different transition mechanisms clustered in different categories producing transitions. Hence, when investigating the mechanisms of transitions we first look at the different mechanisms present in different levels and second at how their operation steers and changes the system.
3.3 Typology of transitions

It is important to provide the developed typology of transitions since we aim at connecting mechanisms of transitions with meta-patterns of transitions that are actually determinants of the types of transitions. Starting form the typology of transformation processes of Boulding (197016; cited by Rotmans 2005a, p.15-1617), there have been already defined two different types of transitions: (a) emergent transitions that do not need much coordination among actors and (b) targeted transitions that is characterized by a great deal of coordination of actors (Rotmans, 2005a, p.16).
Emergent versus driven transitions
3.4 Explaining transitions in a multi-level space

At this point an elaboration of the two dominant schools of thought concerning transitions is provided. They both use the same levels as an explanatory basis to develop their streams of thought on how transitions proceed. Geels (2005)18 views transitions from a technologically centered spectrum. He views transitions initiated in technological niches that change current practices through learning processes. Niches are essential and core to transitions since they accommodate the seeds of change. In a nutshell, Geels (2005) views transitions as a bottom-up process where actors being active in niches dominate and replace what exists in the regime level. The prevailing research contribution of Geels is the dynamic multi-level perspective and the application of evolution theory for the explanation of the success or failure of technological artifacts/innovations (Figure 7). The multi-level concept has a valuable function in the structuring and framing research findings and questions. According to Berkhout, Smith, and Stirling, (2004, p.52)19 the multi level model () has helped to move forward notions of the wider institutional adjustments that are associated with major technical discontinuities. According to Rotmans (2005a, pp.25-26)20 transition is a multi-change process that is regime centered. The regime is placed
Boulding, K.E., (1970), A primer on social dynamics: history as dialectics and development, New York: Free Press. 17 Rotmans, J., (2005a), Societal innovation: between dream and reality lies complexity, Erasmus Research Institute of Management, Erasmus University Rotterdam. 18 Geels, F.W., (2005), Processes and patterns in transitions and system innovations: Refining the co-evolutionary multi-level perspective, Technological forecasting and social change, Vol.72, pp.681-696. 19 Berkhout, F., Smith, A., and Stirling, A., (2004), Socio-technical regimes and transition contexts, as Chapter 3 in Elzen, B., Geels, F.W., and Green, K., System innovation and the transition to sustainability, Edward Elgar Publishing. 20 Rotmans, J., (2005a), Societal innovation: between dream and reality lies complexity, Erasmus Research Institute of Management, Erasmus University Rotterdam
16
Overview of different standpoints on multi-level concept of transitions
16
Tuesday 05-12-2006
in the eye of the transition cyclone according to Rotmans (2005a). Drivers from different levels with different characteristics pose an influence to the regime towards transition. These drivers are rooted in multiple levels, multiple sectors and differ in tendency, frequency and strength. Viewing the transition system as a complex open system, the nature of transitions falls into the research spectrum.
Adopting a technological niche standpoint

According to Geels (2004b, p.33)21 the levels described and defined are not ontological descriptions of reality but analytical and heuristic concepts to understand the complex dynamics of socio-technical change. Geels (2004b, p.26)22 views innovation as the outcome of the marriage between market and technology: if a number of market-related conditions are present, innovation is feasible.23 He does not however search in depth for those conditions leaving space for our research idea to complement his findings.
Figure 7: Multi-level concept as pictured by Geels and Kemp (2000)24.
Macro level: According to Geels (2005, p.684)25 the macro-level is formed by the socio-technical landscape, which refers to aspects of the wider exogenous environment, which affect socio-technical development (e.g. globalizations, environmental problems, cultural changes). The metaphor landscape is used because of the literal connotation of relative hardness and to include the material aspects of society, e.g. the material and spatial arrangements of cities, highways, and electricity infrastructures. Landscapes are beyond the direct influence of actors and cannot be changed at will.
21 Geels, F.W., (2004), Understanding system innovations: a critical literature review and a conceptual synthesis, as Chapter 2 in Elzen, B., Geels, F.W., and Green, K., (2004), System innovation and the transition to sustainability, Edward Elgar Publishing, Inc. 22 Geels, F.W., (2004b), Understanding system innovations: a critical literature review and a conceptual synthesis, as Chapter 2 in Elzen, B., Geels, F.W., and Green, K., System innovation and the transition to sustainability, Edward Elgar Publishing. 23 System innovations are defined as large-scale transformations in the way societal functions such as transportation, communication, housing, feeding are fulfilled (Geels, 2004b, p.19) 24 Geels, F.W., and Kemp, R. (2000), Transities vanuit sociotechnisch perspectief, Report for the Dutch Ministry of Environment, Enschede: Universiteit Twente, and Maastricht: MERIT 25 Geels, F.W., (2005), Processes and patterns in transitions and system innovations: Refining the co-evolutionary multi-level perspective, Technological forecasting and social change, Vol.72, pp.681-696.
17
Tuesday 05-12-2006
Based on Geels (2004b, p.34) the socio-technical landscape contains a set of heterogeneous, slow-changing factors such as cultural and normative values, broad political coalitions long term economic developments, accumulating environmental problems growth, and emigration. But also contains shocks and surprises, such as wars, rapidly changing oil prices. The main point is that the landscape is an external context for actors in nices and regimes. Landscape factors are more difficult to change. Meso level: According to Geels (2005, p.683) the meso-level is formed by sociotechnical regimes. This concept builds upon the concepts of technological regimes but it is wider in two respects. () (a) As addressed by Rip and Kemp (1998, p.340)26, a technological regime is the rule-set or grammar embedded in a complex of engineering practices, production process technologies, product characteristics, skills and procedures, ways of handling relevant artifacts and persons, ways of defining problems, all of them embedded in institutions and infrastructures. (b) As argued by Geels (2005, p.683) socio-technical regimes not only refer to the social group of engineers and firms, but also to other social groups. Socio-technical systems are actively created and maintained by several social groups. Micro level: According to Geels (2005, p.684) the micro-level is formed by technological niches, the locus for radical innovations (variation). () Niches are important because they provide locations for learning processes and space to build the social networks which support innovations. Niches also provide space to build the social networks which support innovations, like supply chains and userproduction relationships. (Geels, 2004b, p.35). Niches are protected experimental settings where norms and practices are developed which depart from those of an incumbent technological regime. According to niche-based understandings, regime changes begin when practices and norms developed in the niche become adopted more widely. (Berkhout, Smith, and Stirling, 2004, p.48) Inter-level interaction: Based on Geels (2004a, p.913-914)27, the changes within the regime changes that take place in the meso level having a meso-to-meso direction- are viewed as tensions. In response to this, Geels (2004a, p.914) argued that if tensions and mis-matches occur in the activities of social groups and in socio-technical regimes. This creates windows of opportunity for the breakthrough of radical novelties. The causes of these tensions are rooted to internal inertia of the regime (internal restructuring), inefficiencies of current technology, negative externalities and effects on other systems, perceptions change (change in user preferences) and market conditions (strategic and competitive games between firms).
Why the niche bottom-up approach to regime transformation is incomplete?

Viewing transitions as processes initialized in niches and building up to a regime erosion and replacement is narrowed and monolithic as a view (see also the
26 Rip, A., and Kemp, R., (1998), Technological change in human choice and climate change, in S.Rayner, El. Malone Eds., Battele Press, Columbus, OH., pp.327-399. 27 Geels, F.W., (2004a), From sectoral systems of innovation to socio-technical systems, insights about dynamics and change from sociology and institutional theory, Research policy, Vol.33, pp.897-920.
18
Tuesday 05-12-2006
elaboration of Berkhout, Smith and Stirling, 2003, p.19)28. It actually neglects changes imposed by the external to the regime level such as landscape pressures.
Adopting a regime centered standpoint

The multi-level concept of transitions is rooted in the hypotheses that the dynamics of transitions in spatial terms can be described as the interactions between three different functional scale levels: the macro, the meso and the micro levels, in which transitions only take place when trends, developments on the three scale levels strengthen each other in one and the same direction (adopted by Rotmans, 2005a, p.25). It is made transparent that the mechanisms of change that aim at explaining multi-change aspect of the dynamics of transitions, have to be researched taking a multi-level perspective. Each of the levels accommodates different kind of changes and constellations having a functional and not spatial aggregation among them. In the macro level the so-called landscape changes take place; trends have relatively slow progress and developments with a high autonomous character. At this level we find global trends as globalization, individualizations, changes in the political arena, culture, paradigms and transnational actors such as the United Nations and the World Trade Organization and global governments. (adopted by Rotmans, 2005a, p.25). Changes at the macro level comprise relatively slow political or societal trends and developments that can play a role in speeding up or slowing down a transition. (Berkhout, Smith and Stirling, 200329; Rotmans, 2003; Caron-Flinterman, Broerse, and Bunders, 2006-working paper30). Operating at the meso level, are regimes, systems of dominant practices, regulations and interests that are shared by groups of actors. At this level there is much resistance to change and innovation, because existing organizations, institutions and networks want to maintain the status quo. Niches develop at the micro level within which non-conformism can develop, such as new initiatives, new techniques and new forms of culture and management. At this level short term developments can follow each other in rapid succession and then disappear again quickly. (adopted by Rotmans, 2005a, p.25). Changes in the micro level concern the development of innovations within niches, such as new technologies, new initiatives and new forms of policy, which could gradually transform dominant network and their regimes in a bottom up way. Only when changes coincide at all three levels, a transition may occur. (Berkhout, Smith and Stirling, 2003; Rotmans, 2003; Caron-Flinterman, Broerse, and Bunders, 2006-working paper). There is a key difference between the two conceptualizations: Rotmans views the changes to be directed to the regime level working with a societal system as the
Highlighting the differences Link between multi-level concept and mechanisms
28 Berkhout, F., Smith, A., and Stirling, A. (2003), Socio-technological regimes and transition contexts, SPRU Electronic Working Paper, SPRU Science & Technology Policy Research, University of Sussex, Brighton BN1 9RF, United Kingdom.
Berkhout, F., Smith, A., and Stirling, A., (2003), Socio-technological regimes and transition contexts, SPRU Electronic working paper series nr. 160, Brighton, UK: The Freeman Centre, University of Sussex. 30 Caron-Flinterman, J.F., Broerse J.E.W., and Bunders, J.F.G., (2006-working paper), Patient partnership in decision-making on biomedical research: changing the network, Resubmitted to Science, Technology and Human Resources Journal. Research Proposal and plan KSI II.2 Niki Frantzeskaki 19
29
Tuesday 05-12-2006
reference unit at the meso regime level while Geels and Kemp31 start from the niche (micro level) using technique, technologies or a technological selections environment as the reference unit. However, both the conceptualizations take into account the complexity of changes and the interconnectness of them.
Criticism on multi-level concept

Hedstrom (2005, p.74) comments on the multiple level conceptualizations for explaining social phenomena. His conclusion recalls that social stratification has a methodological rather than an ontological nature.32 Taking a methodological point when investigating social phenomena, it seems conceptually more plausible to link mechanisms with levels putting activities that constellate mechanisms in the interplay between levels as well. Although the differences of the two pioneer transition frames are important, the integration potential of them is not negligible. Working towards a consistent theoretical framework for transition dynamics, an integration and enhancement of the two existing frames comprises an essential research task. A first step is the presentation and elaboration of the two frames. A second step may be the integration of the two by linking the similarities and reflecting on the differences.
Geels, F.W., and Kemp, R., (2000), Transities vanuit sociotechnisch perspectief, Maastricht, MERIT. 32 More specifically, Hedstrom (2005, p.74) argues that instead of making ontological distinctions between different levels of reality, it appears more useful and certainly much less problematic to view level distinctions as purely methodological. Thus rather than assuming that the social world is ontologically stratified, one makes a methodological distinction between different mechanism levels. () But it also means, somewhat more counter intuitively that social phenomena can be said to be at a lower level than actions or beliefs if such phenomena are components of the mechanism for these actions or beliefs. Notions of levels are always relative to the mechanism under consideration. Research Proposal and plan KSI II.2 Niki Frantzeskaki 20
31
Tuesday 05-12-2006
4. Researching the conditions of transitions (Research Question 2)

The fourth chapter provides an elaboration on the content of the second research question and the concepts of transitions required as a basis for the research on it. More specifically, Section 4.1 provides an elaboration on the content of the research question and Section 4.2 presents in a simple way the research objective that the research on the factors/drivers of transitions has. Section 4.3 introduces the multi-segment concept on transitions.

The second research question casts an eye on the factors influencing the route of transitions. The answer of the second research question will make us understand what actually is needed for a transition to start and what drives transitions given the assumption that our system is a regime positioned in the meso level. The factors of transitions are newly introduced concepts therefore an explicit introduction of them is needed. The factors are rooted in different grounds of the system and its context. To capture this variety of springs, the multisegment concept of transition is introduced. Research Question 2: What are the factors that influence the dynamics of systems transitions? Focus: Multi-segment perspective Research sub-questions: R.S.Q.2.1 What are the different types of factors influencing transitions? R.S.Q.2.2 Which factors are rooted to every segment of the system? Expected research outcomes related to RQ2: - Drivers of transitions in a multi-segmented ground - Consistent and comprehensive categorization and clustering of factors Towards a conceptual hierarchy - List of factors (that are quantifiable or quantified or statistically measured) The current monolithic view is not adequate to explain the societal transitions development. Take for example the way innovation is explained and assessed. Innovation is strongly linked with economic output. Other factors influencing the way innovation proceeds and the impact of innovation on other segments of society (e.g. culture, institutional organization and settings) are neglected. A great example is the monitoring of European Union on innovation. As Rifkin (2004, p.70)33 notes the European Innovation Scoreboard is an effort to monitor progress listing () seventeen main economic indicators divided into four categories: human resources for innovation, the creation of new knowledge, the transmission and application of knowledge, and innovation finance, outputs and markets. By conceptualizing transition patterns, it is also important to investigate the significance of every factor to the occurrence of the mechanisms of change and visa versa. The drawing of the conceptual model will follow several case studies of societal transitions. The case studies analysis will improve the conceptual model since they are going to be testing grounds for the developed framework. In order to assess the significance of every factor to the development of a transition, simulation modeling is needed.
Rifkin, J., (2004), The European Dream, How Europes vision of the future is quietly eclipsing the American dream, Tarcher Penguin Publishers. Research Proposal and plan KSI II.2 Niki Frantzeskaki 21
33
Tuesday 05-12-2006

By looking at the factors of transitions we aim at describing the origins of transitions having defined their drivers in a multi-segment space. There can be different and diverse factors paving the ground for or inhibiting transitional change. Hence, when investigating the origins of transitions we first look at the different grounds (sectors) to find the seeds of change and second at how they influence (inhibit or precede) changes of the system.
4.3 Refining the concepts of transitions related to factors of transitions

Factors - as the operationalized form of the conditions- is a newly introduced concept in transitions research. In an attempt to be internally consistent when developing a theory of the dynamics of transitions, we have defined three levels of aggregation. The factors are the measures of change, namely the indicators of change. They can be clustered in facets that are categories of factors indicating similar attributes of the factors. The facets function as directions to the systems development into a multi-dimensional transition space. The facets may be easier to observe than abstract conditions. A clustering of facets may also form a condition. The conditions are the higher layer in a conceptual hierarchy and are multifaceted. A tentative definition of condition is the descriptive property either of the state of a system (state-condition) or of the forces driving change (drivers of change). For example, one can state that a transition is driven by a societal unease. Elaborating on the societal unease as a condition, it drives us to define two facets: imposed societal unease and emerging societal unease. Moving further, the imposed societal unease may be a war while an emerging societal unease may be a revolution, a dictatorship, a civil war, a recession or an inquisition. A critical condition may be the existence of a passionate youth that drives the revolution or the dominance of a visionary politician. In a lower level of operationalization, this may be a critical factor as the percentage of young people (younger than 29 years old) in the total population. The properties of the system may be the constitutional rules that are reluctant to change if the political regime changes and/or the market configuration (e.g. regulated versus deregulated economy). The factors here are those indicators that measure the characteristics of a dictatorship or autocracy e.g. Number of political refugees, Number of press publications restricted from release etc. According to Geels (2005, p.685)34 there are two key drivers for breakthroughs and innovations: (a) internal drivers e.g. price/performance improvements, increasing returns to adoption, and actors with interests that push for further expansion of the technology and (b) external circumstances and windows of opportunities . The internal drivers are captured as internal mechanisms of the system that mobilize transitions. The external drivers can be further characterized as macro-conditions that either belong to the macro-level or are external uncertain drivers. Based again on Geels argumentation (2005, p.685)35 changes in the regime level are results of changes within the regime level and/or of pressures from the landscape level. When generating the facets describing transition phases, it is important to reflect on the three attributes describing consistently the three system dimensions of transitions: intensity dimension (speed of change), extent dimension (the size of change) and fermentation time (or throughput time that is the time period of
34
Introducing factors, facets and conditions
To what should we foster attention when generating and researching factors?
Geels, F.W., (2005), Processes and patterns in transitions and system innovations: Refining the co-evolutionary multi-level perspective, Technological forecasting and social change, Vol.72, pp.681-696. 35 Geels, F.W., (2005), Processes and patterns in transitions and system innovations: Refining the co-evolutionary multi-level perspective, Technological forecasting and social change, Vol.72, pp.681-696.
22
Tuesday 05-12-2006
change) (Rotmans, Kemp, and Van Asselt, 2001, p.18)36. Hence, these dimensions should be researched in every condition that is further operationalized into facets (Figure 8).
Figure 8: The three system-dimensions of transitions (adopted by Rotmans, J., Kemp, R., and Van Asselt, M., (2001), p. 105).
Several conceptual problems arise when aggregating indicators in general and in the case of transitions in specific since the goal is comparability of systemic states within and between transitions. Two conceptual problems that have to be dealt with through making difficult and even value-laden choices are the method of aggregation and the recognition or definition of the transition end states. (De Haan, 2005)37.
Conditions and facets to be researched in different levels
4.3.1 Introducing the multi-segment concept of transitions

If we draw a systems diagram in every phase of transitions, what drives change will be distinguished as drivers of change, and what is observed as output variables will be the stateconditions describing the state of the system at the end of the phase. The process of transformation taking place is captured by both mechanisms and drivers of change.
Figure 9: Systems dependent and independent factors.

36 Rotmans, J., Kemp, R., and Van Asselt, M., (2001), More evolution than revolution: transition management in public policy, The journal of futures studies, strategic thinking and policy.
37
De Haan, H., (2005), A method to aggregate transition indicators or :what will there be on the Yaxis?, DRIFT, Erasmus University Rotterdam. 23
Tuesday 05-12-2006
When looking at the societal system, there are different functional units forming it that are interconnected but can be defined as segments of it. These structural components of the societal system will be used to delineate various types of change and various roots of change. This has mostly practical implications and since it is feasible to indicate the different types of change that can take place and the factors leading to them and resulting of these changes. By looking at the outcomes of recent research on segment-rooted changes and indicating the common factors between them (e.g. high unemployment rate may be the initiative for a reform in the market segment as well as for a reform in the society (in the form of educational institutions or societal policy change). By this way, the framework to be developed will be grounded in existing theories and research and will also synthesize them and provide the conceptual language to deal with societal systems facing a breadth of changes. It is however important to clarify here that the links and the interdependence among the segments is not overlooked. It will be taken into account and captured by factors rooted in one sector but influencing change in a different one and by overlapping factors. The properties of the system are linked with its structure and they change values in every phase as a result of the change of the state of the system. Existing (or lacking) conditions pave the ground for changes to be initialized. What we actually observe are drivers of change that are measured/captured by the factors. The factors are researched in six different segments of the system given the assumption that their origins are diverge. The environment, the market (economy), the society, the institutions, the technology (science) and the culture are the sectors where factors will be investigated. Searching for evidence concerning the milestones paving the ground for economic growth as being a core objective of specific societies-, Freeman and Louca (2001, p.125-126)38 attempted to draw the history of economic growth by looking at five historical paths simultaneously: the history of science, the history of technology, economic history, political history and cultural history39. Unfolding the history of each of those segments, the factors preceding or inhibiting changes / transitions are accessible for further research and investigation. Freeman and Louca (2001, p.125-126) narrowed their focus when specifying the content of the histories and argued that people make only one history while recognizing that in real life the five streams overlap and intermingle. This actually implies that in a rainbow history stream the segment histories are not else that color streams synthesizing the human history. Freeman and Louca (2001, p.126-127) argued that these five subdivisions have a justified reason to be researched. The strongest argument that also stands for transition dynamics research is that the five subdivisions are proposed because each one has been shown to have some semi-autonomous and certainly not insignificant, influence on the process of economic growth, varying in different periods and different parts of the world. The most important of all, it is precisely the relative autonomy of each of these five processes that can give rise to problems of lack of synchronicity and harmony or, alternatively of harmonious integration and virtuous circle effects on economic growth. It is thus essential to study both the relatively independent development of each stream of history and their interdependencies, their loss of integration and their reintegration. Dealing with self-
Why to deal with all those different segments and their interdependencies?
Origins of change
Freeman, C., and Louca, F., (2001), As time goes by, From the industrial revolutions to the information revolution, pp.123-135 Conclusions to part I: A theory of reasoned history, Oxford University Press, ISBN 0-19924107-4 39 This actually coincides with the argument launched by the European Environmental Agency that any revolutionary technological change is accompanied by fundamental social, institutional and economic changes which create both opportunities and risks. (EEA, 2005a, p.13)
38
24
Tuesday 05-12-2006
reinforcing cumulative changes in all the segments, the complementarities of the segments discussed are further warranted by the above argument. Given that the multi-segment concept is a newly introduced one, internal consistency and linkages with the other concepts of transitions are equally important. The environment, the market (economy), the society, the institutions, the technology (science) and the culture are the segments where factors will be investigated. As presented in Figure 10, the segments where the interactive factors are rooted are colored in blue and the segments where the reflective facets are rooted are colored in green. Environment is given a yellow color to illustrate its special function as segment: all external factors are fruits of environment and resources essential to the establishment and progress of human societies (and sciences of the environment will provide us the base language and paradigms to explain complexity and mechanisms of transitions). The institutions segment lies in between the reflexive and interactive categorization due to its dual functionality.
INSTITUTIONS MARKET
SOCIETY CULTURE
Environment
SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY
Figure 10: Segments of transitions.
A simplification of the different segments can be made when taking the institutionalism perspective. Distinguishing between formal institutions and informal institutions (see De Jong, 1999, p.44)40 the market, society and institutions fit in the formal dimension whereas the culture, practices and tradition fit in the informal dimension. However, the initial delineation of those segments is functional since it provides a basis for researching factors. Interlinkages between them are not neglected and an argumentation line backing the selection and the importance of every one of the segments is provided in the following paragraphs (Paragraphs 4.3.1.1 and on). It is observed that segments of society are interdependently linked. A revolution in one segment of society stimulates if not reinforces changes on other segments of it. The factors diagnosing the impact of this type of inter-linkage are not explicitly developed. Take for example the broad and large-scale impacts of the communication revolution in institutions. Communication revolution actually comprised a stimulus to a network economy where communication as the new norm dilutes the nation-state boundaries and creates new ones that are diffuse and spreading. Communication revolution is perceived a push towards institutional rearrangements by Rifkin (2004, p.182): Software, computers, the digitalization of media, the
40 De Jong, W.M., (1999), Institutional transplantation, How to adopt good transport infrastructure decision-making ideas from other countries?, Eburon Publishers, The Netherlands. Research Proposal and plan KSI II.2 Niki Frantzeskaki 25
Tuesday 05-12-2006
Internet, and mobile and wireless communications have, in less than two decades, connected the central nervous system of nearly 20% of the human race, at the speed of light, twenty-four hours a day, seven days a week. Look in the box: Another missing point so far, concerns the factors revealing what takes place in the system. The majority of the indicators schema includes input and output factors eliminating the importance of the in-the-box processes.
26
Tuesday 05-12-2006
Table 2: What does each segment include? Segment What lies beneath? What does it include? Environment Nature Institutions Parliament, Governmental bodies and organizations, Legislative organizations, National economic institutions, Industry, Infrastructure, Universities, Research centers/institutes, R&D departments of industries Informal institutions, Religion Citizens, Un-represented body of society, NGOs
Mediums to influence Nature forces Natural resources Laws Policies Contracts
Processes within Mass circulation Heat transfer processes Policy learning Policy change Institutional learning Organizational practices Modes of coordination Utilization of resources Trading/ Circulating of commodities
Market
Economic policy
Science and Technology
Technology policy
Culture Society
Unwritten codes of coordination (ethics), Norms Social policy
Learning Routines maintaining
4.3.1.1 Environment segment

Before elaborating on the importance of the environmental segment for transition dynamics, it is crucial to clearly state the configurations of the sub-system. The term environment encompasses both the anthropogenic environment meaning the infrastructures, the cities and artificial components of human societies- and the natural environment or nature, meaning the physical elements of natural environment i.e. the water bodies, atmosphere, soil surface, flora and fauna-. Interested in both of them but adopting this trivial distinction, when referring to environmental issues or aspects, the focus will be on the natural environment, its drivers and mechanisms. The environment as segment will give us the landscape drivers from one point and the ecosystem theory will give us the basis to structure the language to map and understand transition patterns and mechanisms from the other point of view. Additionally, there are more reasons that lead us to search for drivers and mechanisms in the environment when unraveling the nature of transitions: (a) Environmental drivers are lying in the landscape: Following Geels (2005, p.684)41 environmental drivers (e.g. climate change) and environmental externalities (e.g. pollution, environmental impacts) belong to the macro-level of transitions stressing the current regime for changes and action (macro-to-meso drivers). (b) The virtuous cycle of imitation: The functions, mechanisms and dynamics of environmental systems inspired and constituted the basis for scientists to explain social, economic and behavioral systems i.e. evolutionary economics, industrial ecology approach, social ecosystem approach etc. These implications bring us to the point to include
What is the role of environment as a segment?
41
Geels, F.W., (2005), Processes and patterns in transitions and system innovations: Refining the co-evolutionary multi-level perspective, Technological forecasting and social change, Vol.72, pp.681-696.
27
Tuesday 05-12-2006
environment as a subsystem while researching relevant interdisciplinary theories and approaches to enhance our views of transition dynamics. (c) Control over nature was and still is one of the humanitys great challenges: Scientific innovations, technology and everyday practices are focusing on coping with elimination of pressures of nature over societies i.e. flood prevention, heating and cooling facilities, soil fertilization, etc. (d) Environmental pressures externally impose changes to the system: Inspired by Winsemius (1986, p.17)42 and Tomich et.al. (2004, p.11)43, environmental issues linked with environmental externalities influence the way public perceptions evolve over time through social interaction and scientific inquiry. For example, when the depletion of the ozone layer was linked to the Freon consumption, the awareness of people towards ozone-friendly methods and products lead to the replacement (abatement) of Freon with other substances. The frequent heat waves in Europe and Canada that period enlightened the awareness. That is nonetheless an example where environmental pressures (perceived as externalities) storm up changes in public perceptions and practices. The environmental issue life cycle developed by Winsemius (1986, p.17)44 can easily fit in the multi-level space of transition while being conceptually compatible with the transitions framework as well (Figure 8). That actually reveals the adaptive capacity of the multi-level concept of transitions as well as the compatibility of different conceptual frameworks with the transitions theory. (e) Environment and its power/sources/resources constitute the basis for development and rise of human societies the cradle of development and inspiration (f) At the same time the environment serves as a sink of human activities and their respective impacts. But since we are dependent on the environment, effects on natural resources (g) Freeman and Louca (2001, p.126) neglected the environment as a division arguing that the natural environment has its own history and largely independent evolution. Studied by natural scientists, the history of natural environment it is nevertheless an important influence on human history and is certainly reciprocally influenced by industrialization and economic growth.
Winsemius, P., (1986), Guest in ones own house, Thoughts on environmental management, in Dutch, Samon H.D. Tjeek Wilink, Alphen aan den Rijn, The Netherlands. 43 Tomich, T.P., Chomitz, K., Fransisco, H., Izac, A.M.N., Murdiyarso, D., Ratner, B.D., Thomas, D.E., and Van Noordwijk, M., (2004), Policy analysis and environmental problems at different scales: asking the right questions, Agriculture, ecosystems and environment, Vol.104, pp.5-18. 44 Winsemius, P., (1986), Guest in ones own house, Thoughts on environmental management, in Dutch, Samon H.D. Tjeek Wilink, Alphen aan den Rijn, The Netherlands.
42
28
Tuesday 05-12-2006
MACRO
Environmental driver External pressure
MESO
Environmental policy design process Debate for cause-effect of environmental issue PRESENT ENVPOLICY REGIME
New env-policy implimentattion/ enforcing
Realization of problem / impacts made explicit
NEW ENV-POLICY REGIME
Pressure for action
MICRO
Bolster of awareness Lobbying

(PIONEERs NICHE)
Environmental issue perceived by pioneers
Figure 11 Environmental issue life cycle (interpretation of Winsemius45 framework) embedded in transitions multi-level framework.
Looking at the DPSIR framework (Drivers-Pressure-State-Impact-Response framework, EEA, 2005a, p.10)46 it is concluded that the drivers spring from other sectors (mainly the market and the society e.g. population growth, consumption patterns, trade demand and flows) and the properties of the environment as a system are mainly described by the state indicators of the scheme. Hence the factors actually belong to the environment sector that will aid to unravel transition dynamics cannot be provided by the DPSIR framework logic.
4.3.1.2 Market segment

The market as a segment is the testing ground for all the different types of transformations. In an econocratic mode as the one our society is into, market induced indicators are used to assess the effectiveness of changes both imposed and emergent. However, the market as the field where economic activities and trade of commodities takes place comprises also a starting point for reforms, and broad societal transformations.
Winsemius, P., (1986), Guest in ones own house, Thoughts on environmental management, in Dutch, Samon H.D. Tjeek Wilink, Alphen aan den Rijn, The Netherlands. 46 EEA, (2005), Sustainable use and management of natural resources, European Environment Agency, EEA Report 9, Copenhagen.
45
29
Tuesday 05-12-2006
4.3.1.3 Technology segment

Looking at the innovation systems literature (Jacobbson and Johnson, 2000; cited by Berkhout, Smith, and Stirling, 2004, p.64-65)47 and more specifically at the functions of the technological systems, the main arguments on the importance of the technology stream (segment) in discovering the factors capturing societal transformations are derived. Using every function of the technological system (as derived from the literature) as a starting point, we convey our argumentation line linked to what we conceptualize as regime and as a transition so far. (a) Function: creation of new knowledge The new knowledge may not only lead to changes in the technological system as such but also steam changes in practices of actors by adopting technological artifacts/products, in organization of institutions see for example the changes after the communication revolution and the expansion of the use of the personal computer to public services and in the market since new insights may re-orient assumptions of the economic models leading to new ones. (b) Function: Influence over the direction of search processes among users and suppliers of technology Having a transaction mode of development in technological progress, the new practices developed aim at efficiency and effectiveness (specifically in the economic dimension) hence resulting in transformations in transactional and communication processes within the regime. Technology is then perceived as the link between the demands of society (users of technology) and the knowledge producing suppliers (suppliers of technology). (c) Function: Supply of resources. Apart form the trivial function of technology to transform natural resources to supplies for industry or even consumer needs, the technology helps in providing resources used as stimulus for market, government and social care systems (e.g. health care). Technology here plays the role of the input energy into segments of the regime that may direct slow transformation processes. (d) Function: Creation of positive external economies An example given by the literature (Jacobbson and Johnson, 2000; cited by Berkhout, Smith, and Stirling, 2004, p.64-65) is the formation of socio-technical networks that provide spillover effects by reducing uncertainty, reducing the costs of information , accessing tacit knowledge and sharing costs. New modes of interaction and communication due to the function of technology systems yield unexpected positive results for societal systems. Here technology is the spectacle of societal system. (e) Function: Formation of markets New technologies need new market constellations as grounds to transfer knowledge and products. The entrants in the system create their own new space changing irreversibly (the function of) the regime due to the change of the operation of the market segment.
What is the role of technology as a segment?
4.3.1.4 Society segment

As introduced in structuration theory the term system refers to patterns of relations in groupings of all kinds, from small intimate groups to social networks, to large organizations (Turner, 2000, p.94). According to Giddens (Giddens, 1984, p.83& 377) social systems are organized as regularized social practices, sustained in encounters dispersed across timespace. () Social systems only exist in and through the continuity of social practices, fading
47
Berkhout, F., Smith, A., and Stirling, A., (2004), Socio-technical regimes and transition contexts, as Chapter 3 in Elzen, B., Geels, F.W., and Green, K., System innovation and the transition to sustainability, Edward Elgar Publishing.
30
Tuesday 05-12-2006
away in time. Societies however are both social systems and at the same time are constituted by the intersection of multiple social systems. Such multiple social systems may be wholly internal to societies or they may cross-cut the inside the outside forming a diversity of possible modes of connections between societal totalities and intersocietal systems.() Societies are then in sum social systems which stand out in bas-relief from a background of a range of other systemic relationships in which they are embedded. They stand out because definite structural principles serve to produce a specifiable overall clustering of institutions across time and space. (Giddens, 1984, p.164). Social systems are empty in substance without the presence of human agent. The actions and interactions of agents (actors) actually produce social systems and transform social systems so as to reflect their needs and engulfing their routinized practices (Giddens, 1984, p.171). Given that the focus of our study is to unravel the dynamics of societal transitions, it is unquestionable the need to investigate the factors influencing the actors practices and actions.
4.3.1.5 Institutions segment

Institutions comprise the structure of societal context and assign the society and the economy with various services and background rules. As defined by Scharpf (1997, p.38)48 institutions are systems or rules that structure the courses of actions that a set of actors may choose that structure human interaction by allowing a restricted set of options for thought and behaviour as De Jong (1999, p.44)49 complemented. The key characteristics of institutions are that they are patterns of norms and behaviours which persist because they are valued and useful (Merrey 199350; Bandagora, 2000, p.4 51). Institutions serve as the frame to human action and interaction. They constraint human action while at the same time provide humans with freedom in other aspects. Undesirable action in the basis of social welfare is alleviated by the institutions and the protection of social and natural capital is at the same time maintained (Bromley 198752). As Bandaragoda (2000, p.5) specified some water-related institutions, such as those governing water user associations, are designed to promote organized behaviour and equity and provide various opportunities for individual and group advancement, thereby serving to liberate human action. Thus, the institutional framework serves as a filter of human action that makes it more stabilized, efficient and purposeful. Collective actors such as political parties, labor unions, governmental ministries, international organizations, transnational organizations are institutionally constituted meaning trivially that they were created according to pre-existing rules and that they depend on rules for their continuing existence and operation. These collective actors exist only to the extent that the individuals acting within and for them are able to coordinate their choices within a common frame of reference that is constituted by institutional rules (Scharpf, 1997, p.39). Following Scharpf (1997, p.39), institutions have an important role
48 Scharpf, F.W., (1997), Games real actors play, Actor-centered institutionalism in policy research, Westview Press. 49 De Jong, W.M., (1999), Institutional transplantation, How to adopt good transport infrastructure decisionmaking ideas from other countries?, Eburon Publishers, The Netherlands. 50 Merrey, D.J., (1993), Institutional contexts for managing irrigated agriculture. In The institutional framework for irrigation, 1996, ed. C. Abernethy, 722. Proceedings of a Workshop held in Chiang Mai, Thailand, 1-5 November 1993. Colombo, Sri Lanka: International Irrigation Management Institute. 51 Bandaragoda, D. J., (2000), A framework for institutional analysis for water resources management in a river basin context. Working Paper 5, Colombo, Sri Lanka, International Water Management Institute. 52 Bromley, D.W., (1987), Irrigation institutions: The myth of management. In Water and water policy in the world food supplies, ed. Wayne R. Jordan. College Station, USA: Texas University Press.
What is the function of institutions and why to include them as a sector?
31
Tuesday 05-12-2006
since they not only facilitate and constraint a range of choices but also define the way decisions are made and the evaluation that may be done after them. Hence institutions determine actors preferences towards the available feasible alternatives and influence perceptions. Power redistribution can be realized and power-supported social friction can be resolved within institutionalized interactions. Some pre-political endowments of actors may be neutralized by the assignment of institutionalized competencies (Scharpf, 1997, p.51) and the established rights of free actions such as veto rights. Additionally, general elections on the basis of equal votes give the opportunity to less powerful actors to be active in society and express the interests of the less powerful or minority groups. By this way, preexisting power differences may be reduced and social cohesion can be achieved. It is not trivial to say that societal functions need a legitimate ground to breed. For actors to interact, institutionalized rules have been formed and set by the actors themselves. Institutions may also comprise the starting step for large-scale societal transformations. An example concerns the institutional arrangement of property rights that stimulated the formation of market transactions and the broad change from feudal society to market society. More specifically, Rifkin notes (2004, p.136-137) that without a common law and legal code, the only way to trust the authenticity and a peaceful transfer of ownership of property was for the seller and the buyer to know each other and to be part of a tightly bound social community. For this reason, markets were always local and limited in their reach and importance. A mature private property regime, by contrast, substitutes subjective criteria like trust, with objective criteria like ownership titles and provides enforcement mechanisms the police and the courtsto make sure that sellers and buyers abide by their contractual agreements. Only when such a legal regime is in place and basked by the full coercive authority of the state can markets be extended in space and time to include large number of players in the exchange of property.
4.3.1.6 Culture segment

The research focus casts an eye only at the Netherlands and the EU (in a higher level) hence research on cross-cultural space and conceptualization is out of the scope of the study. It is important however to investigate on the factors relying on the culture such as those factors linked with the unwritten rules of coordination within the society and the norms / ethics bounded with the cultural background of the state. Culture is perceived as part of informal institutions and has an impact on the practices of actors and on the way actors respond to change hence it is included as a segment.
32
Tuesday 05-12-2006
5. Researching the patterns of transitions (Research Question 3)

The fifth chapter provides an elaboration on the content of the third research question, the concepts of transitions required as a basis for the research on it and the approach to give an answer to the rising research sub-questions. More specifically, Section 5.1 provides an elaboration on the content of the research question. Section 5.2 presents in a simple way the research objective that the research on the patterns of transitions has. Section 5.3 presents the refined multi-phase concept and the concept of transition patterns.

This step of the research will take place after factors and mechanisms of transitions will have been researched thoroughly and explicitly. The operationalization towards transition patterns that are not different than combinations of factors linked up to mechanisms of change is the first step of a build-up of the conceptual model. Research Question 3: Are there patterns of transitions that have common ground to step up or common drivers to maneuver them? Focus: Multi-phase perspective to capture multi-change concept Research sub-questions: R.S.Q.3.1 Are there patterns of transitions? R.S.Q.3.2 What are the essential factors for every transition pattern? R.S.Q.3.3 What are the dominant factors of every transition patterns? Expected research outcomes related to RQ3: - Link between the factors and the patterns in an operational level to form a conceptual model of the dynamics of transitions

The link of mechanisms and drivers (factors) of transitions in a conceptual model will comprise a tool to unravel (and understand) the dynamics of transitions. It is the third (and last) step reaching the research objective. The conceptual model as a synthesis of the two aspects of inquiry composes a control panel of transitions. The control panel incorporates the knowledge and the insights that are needed for a researcher and a practitioner to understand (what lies beneath) the dynamics of transitions.
5.3 Refining the concepts of transitions related to mechanisms of transitions 5.3.1 Refining the multi-phase concept of transitions
Four new phases of transitions have been conceptualized as products of an elaboration and interpretation of existing definitions of transition phases. The existing three phases of transitions seem to delineate the transitional development of the societal system using unclear criteria to assess in which phase specific phenomena of change took place. Since the purpose of delineating the development time of transitional change into phases is to describe consistently and concisely what processes of changes (mechanisms) take place in every phase and what enables/inhibits these processes. The characteristics of the state of the system (described by state factors and having different values for every phase) are the criteria to be used to define the phases. Throughout the research plan and the research study, I will use the following four defined phases of transitions: A valuable contribution to this point comes from the research on transition images. Transition images are the projections of the desirable state of the system at the end of the
Research Proposal and plan KSI II.2 Niki Frantzeskaki 33 Transition images versus transition milestones
Tuesday 05-12-2006
transition cycle. Taking into account that transition management is a goal-seeking process, these transition images can be operationalized in transition goals and their respective necessary but not necessarily sufficient conditions. These conditions foreseen as important in order to achieve a sustainable systems state underpin the post-development transition milestone.53 Moving backwards, transition images are likely to comprise the desirable-state descriptions helping us to define goals and outcomes of the system. By this way, factors contributing to the desirable system state may be easier to distinguish and focus on.
Predevelopment phase: For this phase the definition provided by Martens and
Rotmans (2005, p.1137) is adopted. The predevelopment phase is a phase of dynamic balance in which the status quo is subject to no visible change. During the predevelopment phase the effects of the changes that take place do not exceed the carrying capacity of the system54. It can be also assumed that the changes have a passive mode within the systems operation. The system remains in its initial equilibrium state where the rate of changes is respectively low so as to cause any visible change to the system.
Upheaval phase: The upheaval phase actually encompass the acceleration and the
take-off phases as defined by Martens and Rotmans (2005, p.1137). During this phase, the synergy of the changes decomposes the structure of the system causing structural changes. The system is now continuously changing where the defining conditions direct the forthcoming developments.
Legend: I: Predevelopment phase, II: Upheaval phase, III: Development phase, IV: Post-development phase. Transition milestone, _____ Backlash path, _ _ _ _ Stabilization path
Figure 12: Transition phases mapping backlash and stabilization paths.

53
Carrying capacity of the system: The level up to which the system can incorporate changes of its structural elements without influencing its structure itself. For natural systems it depicts the ability of the system to degrade or accumulate pollutants concentration without symptoms of pollution. If the concentration of the chemicals/pollutants exceeds the carrying capacity of the system, the system faces pollution and reacts. It is wise to conclude that the carrying capacity of the system comprises the strength (or the resistance) of the system to accommodate changes without effecting it fundamental characteristics. The notion of carrying capacity was introduced by Thomas Malthus in 1812 (Silver and DeFries, (1992), p.79). Research Proposal and plan KSI II.2 Niki Frantzeskaki 34
54
Loorbach, D., and Rotmans, J., (?), Managing transitions for sustainable development, Chapter, International Center for Integrative Studies, Maastricht University, www.icis.nu
Tuesday 05-12-2006
Development phase: During the development phase the system drives to its dynamic equilibrium. It is an intermediate phase where fermentation takes place: reactive changes take place in a sequence where the process with the lower transition velocity or tempo (extent of change divided by fermentation time) dominates and constrains the overall development (Martens and Rotmans, 2005, p.1136)55. An equivalent paradigm can be found in process operations of chemical reactors (especially in PFR reactors) where the slowest chemical reaction of a chain reaction pathway dominates and constraints the development towards the stabilization of the chemical system. Post-development phase: The post-development phase of the system reflects the phase in which the system reaches its dynamic equilibrium (that is the end state of the system). Whether a transition led to either an upgrade or to stagnation or to a collapse in the system, it is shown by its post-development milestone.
Every transition milestone signals the pass among the different transition phases while encompasses the characteristics of the five different states along which the system moves. Each transition path has five transition milestones: initiation milestone, predevelopment milestone, acceleration milestone, development milestone, and post-development milestone. The factors describe the defining characteristics of the transitions, the different values of which pre-define (or pave) the ground for different transition pathways. Hence, the factors are milestone-related. In every phase, different conditions and factors respectively- and different drivers are present. Given that a transition milestone signals the start and the end of every phase, the facets come to describe these conditions that shape the transition pathway moving the transition along the phases.
How are factors linked with transition phases and pathways?
5.3.2 Introduction of transition patterns

Moving towards the second step, we define transition patterns as a family of transition paths. Every transition pattern is distinguished by the others from the post-development state of the system. As presented in Figure 13, three transition patterns have been identified. Transition paths lie in the first pattern describe the systems transition from an initial state to a systems upgrade. In face of the changes in its sectors / subsystems, the system assimilated these changes in a way that revolved / drastically changed its structure towards a new system state. It is normative to characterize the transitions mapped with this transition family as proper or successful transitions therefore we neglect such entitlements. The first pattern of transitions is characterized by the arrival at an increased system state. The second pattern accommodates transition paths that move the system to a marginally different or indifferent state in comparison to its initial state. The system adapts the changes in a way that their cumulative impacts pose marginal if not untraceable- changes to the system. In addition, there may not be changes hence the system remains stable. The reactive response of the system in view of changes that results in an abortion of the imposed or emerged changes and in a further devolution is mapped by the third transition pattern. The third transition pattern is addressed as a transition towards a declined system state (Table 3).
55
Martens, P., and Rotmans, J., (2005), Transitions in a globalizing world, Futures, Vol.37, pp.1133-1144.
35
Tuesday 05-12-2006
For an initial categorization of the drivers of change and the changes respectively, we adopt a systems perspective. The changes of the system may originate from inside the system and its components whereas impacts originating from external forces are addressed as imposed changes.
Table 3: What a transition pattern reveals for systems state and resilience. Transition pattern Systems state after the post-development phase I Upgrade II Stagnation III Collapse / Devolution
A B C
Pattern I
D E
Pattern II
Pattern III
G
Time
Legend: A, B, C, ., G: Transition Paths e.g. Transition path A = Stabilization, Transition path D = System lock in, Transition path F = System breakdown I, II, III: Transition patterns
Figure 13: Transition patterns and paths.
According to Rammel and Van den Bergh (2003, p.129)56 lock-in is an effect of unpredictable historical events named historical accidents combined with mechanisms that create increasing returns to scale, while include economies of scale and scope, cumulative technological change, learning, network externalities, and complementary production factors. Hence, economists view the causes of lock-in effect situated in the market. In our attempt to unravel the conditions that contribute to every transition path, it is an essential addition to our research.57
56 Rammel, C., and Van den Bergh, J.C.J.M., (2003), Evolutionary policies for sustainable development: adaptive flexibility and risk minimizing, Ecological economics, Vol.47, pp.121-133. 57 It is important to review different researchers that investigate the causes of transition paths so as not only to show the contribution of transition research in current limited scope of peers but also to learn from their conceptual or empirical studies and (if possible) to integrate their views with ours.
36
Tuesday 05-12-2006
The transition patterns incorporate the notion of multiphase development of transitions and its link with the multilevel dimension remains embodied in their aspects. More particularly, the similar factors that pave the transition pathways are found in multiple levels.
How are transition patterns linked with transition levels?
How to distinguish which factors are the important ones when looking at historical transitions?
A starting idea is to compare two historical case studies of transitions that end-up in the same system state. It can be for an example that both systems under research changes in a radical way (can follow an upheaval pathway). After the factors contributing/ inhibiting the transition processes are indicated, the two sets of factors can be compared so as to distinguish the common factors and the different ones. By this way, it may be possible to distinguish which factors are the determinants for the rise of a transition pattern, which are the critical factors that stimulated transition processes and which are the different ones that assign uniqueness to the case study. An analogous example of checking similarities and differences when drawing patterns is the gene patterns in genetics. As Dawkins (1986, p.54)58 notes geneticists do not know the exact and complete genetic formula of any animal but by comparing the bodies of two adult animals that are known to differ according to a single gene, they can see what effects that single gene has (have been put in simple words).
58
Dawkins, R., (1986), The blind watchmaker, Penguin Books.
37
Tuesday 05-12-2006
6. Panorama research plan

6.1 Research strategy
The research approach for the fulfillment of the research objective is the grounded theory approach. The grounded theory approach can be used as a research approach when aiming at a theory development. In order to perform every one of the steps of the grounded theory approach, a set of research methods is employed. We will initially present the grounded theory approach (See also Box 2) schematically as an outcome of the study of Verschuren and Doorewaard, (1999) and our interpretation given in blue coloured boxes (Figure 14).
Box 2: An introduction to grounded theory approach (adapted by Verschuren and Doorewaard, 1999)
It seems suitable for research oriented to theory development. If you intent to make your personal contribution to the development of a theory in the field of social renewal movements in the western world, you are engaged in a theory oriented thesis. In this case the approach known as grounded theory approach offers interesting possibilities. This purely qualitative approach has much in common with the case study approach. Characteristic of the grounded theory approach is that in order to find out what views are underlying the similarities and differences, you are constantly comparing the various items you are observing in reality both with each other and with theoretical starting points. (Verschuren and Doorewaard, 1999, p.147) Grounded theory approach encompasses a process of continuous comparison. During an exploratory expedition, the researcher is incessantly engaged in a process of comparing finding with previously found phenomena or interpretations, or with the ideas and notions others before him have published on the subject. The researcher investigates whether the newly found phenomenon has the same characteristics as a similar phenomenon previously found or whether on the contrary it shows differing characteristics. In the latter case, the researcher is to investigate whether the new phenomenon is an exception or an adjustment to the rule or whether it refers to a so far underexposed aspect of the theoretical concept he is working on. (Verschuren and Doorewaard, 1999, p.172) Advantages and disadvantages of grounded theory approach A major advantage of the grounded theory approach is that it can be used to develop a theory that is despite its abstraction, very recognizable for the persons referred to in this theory. It is also a method that enables the researcher to obtain an overall picture of a complex situation. There is a risk of getting lost in this complexity and letting the imagination take over. (Verschuren and Doorewaard, 1999, p.172) Why to use it? Suitability check The grounded theory approach is suitable if a theory is to be developed in a new area, or in an area that has not yet or hardly been studied. This is especially the case if the aim is not so much to develop abstract general theories but to develop practical theories. () By using albeit on a modest scale- the procedures and techniques of the grounded theory approach, the researcher is able to further elaborate on the research issue in a scientific way. It is therefore recommended to try to find out whether the theoretical concepts formulated in the research issue require a more solid foundation. In this case you would be combining the grounded theory approach with one or more variants of the case study, the experiment, the survey or the literature study. (Verschuren and Doorewaard, 1999, p.177)
38
Tuesday 05-12-2006
HOW TO PERFORM GTA?

Process Task Task description
WHAT TECHNIQUES?
Primary emprirical comparison
compare one phenomenon with another. Is there a link?
1. Sensitizing concepts & Open coding exploration of the field of the study, observe phenomena and formulate tentative definitions of concepts that could interpret these phenomena
Secondary empirical comparison
compare the phenomenon with phenomena described by others
Expected research outcome:
Clear description of what the phenomenon Starting ideas on characteristics (aspects) of phenomenon
Primary theoretical comparison compare the phenomenon with theoretical insights Secondary theoretical comparison
2. Axial coding process aiming at improving the concepts and insights with a new more specific meaning. Conditions and context associated with the phenomenon as well as the strategies for action that bring out the phenomenon.
Crystallized description of characteristics of the phenomenon Theoretical concepts under development
Comparison of theories
comparison of theoretical concepts developed with other theoretical concepts
(Deep) Insights on existing theoretical concepts related with phenomenon Derived prevalence of a characteristic of the phenomenon
Deductive comparison
set out to look for similar characteristics
3. Selective coding the multitude of phenomena described and the formulated concepts and key words are reduced to a concise description of the theory that is to be developed. Establish a core cateogory in a selective way by indicating the reasoning behind the correlation of the phenomena.
Inductive comparison
the researcher establishes a characteristic of a phenomenon and searches in existing theories to find an explanation for this characteristic
(interpretation of Verschuren and Doorewaard, 1999, p.172-175)
Figure 14: An introduction to grounded theory approach (interpretation of Vershuren and Doorenward, 1999, p.172-175).
The steps of the grounded theory approach and the coding techniques have been illustrated in a diagram where insights on the method are also integrated (Figure 15). On the first column on the left there is a presentation of the different steps and what these steps include
Tuesday 05-12-2006
(tasks). The techniques to process data and information derived by each of the performed steps is linked to them and given in the middle column (colored in light green). Taking a step further and having in mind the research field of transitions, the approaches linked to every step are also presented in the third column (in light blue). In order to perform every step of grounded theory approach, a set of different research approaches will be used. The outcomes of every approach will be processed by another method (chain of approaches) and different approaches will provide information as complements for one step. These are methods of data gathering and other methods follow to process the data are discussed in detail in the following paragraphs (Paragraph 6.1.1 and on).
HOW TO PERFORM GTA?
CODING TECHNIQUES
APPROACHES
1. Sensitizing concepts & Open coding exploration of the field of the study, observe phenomena and formulate tentative definitions of concepts that could interpret these phenomena
Analysis of empirical examples
2. Axial coding process aiming at improving the concepts and insights with a new more specific meaning. Conditions and context associated with the phenomenon as well as the strategies for action that bring out the phenomenon.
Extensive and in depth literature review
Conceptual analysis
Synthesis of findings
3. Selective coding the multitude of phenomena described and the formulated concepts and key words are reduced to a concise description of the theory that is to be developed. Establish a core cateogory in a selective way by indicating the reasoning behind the correlation of the phenomena.
Clustering (Group creating)
Early verification of results: Case Study
Figure 15: Grounded theory approach and complementary research approaches for transition research.
40
Tuesday 05-12-2006
The grounded theory approach includes empirical sampling as a first step. The data pool is divided in slices (see also Glaser and Strauss, 1967, p.65-69)59 that are the segments. The investigation of data from al the different segments is needed so as to understand the mechanisms taking place in every segment and what factors are linked to it, as well as to develop the conceptual basis for the characteristics (properties) of each segment. The variety of segments breeds more quality to the outcomes of it. According to Glaser and Strauss (1967, p.66) for generating theory this variety is highly beneficial because it yields more information on categories than any one mode of knowing (technique of collection). According to Glaser and Strauss (1967, p.69) the depth of theoretical sampling refers to the amounts of data collected on a group and on a category. Theoretical sampling does not require the fullest possible coverage on the whole group except at the very beginning of research when the main categories are emerging and these tend to emerge very fast. We maintain the depth of the theoretical sampling by looking at more than one theory to explain change in every segment. The criterion on adequate depth is the confidence of the analyst that a category (and/or slice, hence for us segment) is saturated60. Empirical sampling: Theoretical Sampling: Empirical examples Case studies Slices: Segments Different theories to analyze every segment (see Table 4)
6.1.1 Analysis of empirical examples

When interpreting historical transitions or finalized transitions, it is feasible to distinguish two set of factors: factors that block or burden transitions and factors that pave the ground accommodating transitions. In historical transitions, this distinction is objective since the end point of the transition development is known. However, such a distinction will only be used when elaborating on historical transitions in our attempt to derive drivers of change and their respective factors. At this point, we actually need documented cases of transformations either as broad as transitions or as specialized as segment-rooted transformations. As empirical examples are considered the published case studies from peer researchers that have been interpreted and analyzed under a different conceptual basis, hence do not comprise raw data but empirical data. The sequence of the empirical sampling includes the search of such empirical examples, the listing of the factors and mechanisms per phase of transition and the construction of categories of factors to be used for continuing the theoretical sampling. The criteria to select among divergent and different empirical examples are listed below: (a) Content relevance: Empirical examples should report on transformation either in a broad context (maybe can be called transition) or in a specific segment e.g. institutional reforms. (b) Source validity: Published material is only included so as to be able to cross check the source of information. Cases reported in journal papers, books, conference papers or doctoral dissertations are acceptable since their validity can be checked.
Glaser, B., and Strauss, A.L., (1967), The discovery of grounded theory, strategies for qualitative research, Aldine de Gruyter, New York
59 60
According to Glaser and Strauss (1967, p.61) the criterion for judging when to stop sampling the different groups pertinent to a category is the categorys theoretical saturation. Saturation means that no additional data are being found whereby the sociologist can develop properties of the category. Research Proposal and plan KSI II.2 Niki Frantzeskaki 41
Tuesday 05-12-2006
(c) Indifference on space and time: The empirical examples can refer to transformations in any country hence indifference on space and to transformation that proceed within 5 or more years hence time-span indifferent-. (d) Finalized transition: The end-state of the system under transformation should be clearly described and demarcated so as to be considered as a finalized transition in the give time horizon. For example, if we study the transition from conventional to unleaded gasoline for automobile sector, the demarcated end-state of the system is the use of unleaded gasoline by the majority (estimating a target value percentage) of the target population. By analyzing empirical examples, the common characteristics and factors that inhibit or force transitions up will be revealed. The method to classify the set of factors will be the synectics61 where the recognition of similarities between the transition stories will result in the construction (if not corroboration) of conceptual analogies that demarcate the transition patterns62. Which empirical examples? Historical transitions (DRIFT case study pool) De Bruins book63 Geels technological transitions64 Other empirical cases65 Derive drivers of change and specific factors of change (Research question 2) Description of mechanisms (Research question 1) Up-scaling processes for analysis: (a) Conceptual analysis (b) Delphi-method or experts panel After deriving a promising set of drivers of change, an evaluation of findings and further interpretation will be realized by either Delphimethod or experts panel. (c) Operationalization of drivers and factors by creating a conceptual hierarchy per case + Synthesis of similarities and differences Integration of different indicators schemes e.g. DPSIR, European Innovation Scoreboard, Sustainability Dashboard Indicators, etc. Conference paper + Journal paper
What is the purpose of analyzing empirical examples? Which method will be used when analyzing empirical examples?
Means of communication research outcomes

61 62
Dunn, W., N., (1981), Public policy analysis, An introduction, Prentice-Hall Inc., p.120. According to Dunn (1981, p.127) synectics is a method designed to promote the recognition of analogous problems. In the policy analysis literature and research, synectics are used to provide the analysts with equivalents to structure their problems. The underlying assumption that an awareness of identical or similar relationships among problems will greatly increase the problem solving capacities of the analysts can be reformulated to meet the transitions theory needs such as: the realization of similarities between the transition pathways will greatly increase the learning and understanding capabilities of analysts. 63 De Bruijn, H., et.al., (2004), Creating system innovation, how large scale transitions emerge, Balekam Publishers 64 Geels, F., (2002), Understanding the dynamics of technological transitions, A co-evolutionary and socio technical analysis, Twente University Press 65 Other empirical examples are also important to be reviewed so as to include different perspectives on what influences change (departing from other school of thoughts). By searching in the literature (mainly journal publications), cases that analyze and present change in one or more segments (e.g institutional reform cases) are also part of the empirical examples research pool.
42
Tuesday 05-12-2006
Initial short-report on findings
6.1.2 Literature review

The second step includes an extensive literature review and data collection phase where literature surveys and elaboration on findings. At this step the research will adopt an inductive mode (Creswell, 1994). Different theories are needed to support our research with the foundations to indicate the fundamental aspects of the system and its context that are tolerant or/and vulnerable to change as well as to explain potential change of the systems itself. Given the multi-segmented concept that is fundamental when researching factors of transitions, a research map of the literature is presented in Figure 16 that gives a thorough presentation of theories and approaches relevant with transitions research. The segments will provide not only the backbone for the structural characteristics of the system thus for the behaviour of the system in transitions- as well as the yeast for multifaceted factors that precede or inhibit transitions towards an understanding of the dynamics of transitions. The binding link between the current research and the existing larger body of literature is given by the research map of the literature. The theoretical spectacles to pore over every segment are presented in Figure 16 and Table 4. These theoretical underpinnings will constitute the elements for integration towards a foundation of a transition theory. The inner layer includes all the different segments where changes emerge and ferment. The inter-segment interference is also taken into account with the two-directional arrows. The theories that will provide the grounds to understand and investigate factors of transitions and structural properties of the system are numbered in the middle-layer linked with each segment and the inter-segment interdependence consistently (See Table 4). The outer layer includes the theoretical frameworks that provide us with the theoretical frameworks that comprise the basis for understanding transitions focusing on substantive and vital aspects of transitions: their complex character (thus complexity theory and complex adaptive systems theory), their interconnected interdependence (thus social indicators theory and integration theory and systems theory). In order to conceptualize the dynamics of the system and more specifically the mechanisms of transitions, ecosystem theory and evolution theory are also useful. To understand the mechanisms of transitions and find equivalent paradigms, evolution theory and ecosystems theory are the most promising (and appropriate). To specify and conceptualize the transition archetypes (emergent or driven), complex adaptive systems theory and complexity theory are the starting points. Actually the outer layer is the first layer to be researched when looking at the mechanisms of transitions.
43
Tuesday 05-12-2006
System Dynamics
6
ory
5 4
7
s m ste osy ies Ec heor T
Co mp le
xit y
the
9 3
10 2 1 11
Legend: 1, 2, 3, 11 theories applicable to explain transitions in every sector of the pie. Figure 16: Research map of the literature for transition dynamics.
44
Tuesday 05-12-2006
Table 4: Theories to provide the basis either for drivers of change or for understanding changes in every segment and between the segments.
Segment Template - MechanismsEnvironment Environment vs. Technology Technology Technology vs. Market Market Market vs. Society
# in General Theory map Outer Complexity theory layer 1 2 3 4 5 6 Sustainable development theory
Theories to explain change Evolution theory Ecosystems theories System Dynamics Holland for complex adaptive systems Environmental change theory Innovation theory Evolutionary economics Innovation economics Institutional economics Economic institutionalism (Douglas North, Jeffrey Hodgson, Nelson & Winter, Rutherford, Oliver Williamson, Masahiko Aoki) Social indicators theory Societal monitoring Social change theory Learning theories - social learning (Leeuwis, 2003) Regime formation theory Policy change (Sabatier) Institutional change theory Ostrom for Institutional diversity Not researched
Technology dynamics (Giovanni, Dosi) Technology assessment Economic models Political theory
Society Society vs. Institutions
7 8
Social theory on social change (Giddens) Autopoiesis and configuration theory (Maturana & Varela) Cognitive theory Networks theory Institutional theory (Powel &DiMaggio) Organizational theory Not researched Technology policy theory Institutional change (Nelson & Winter)
Institutions Institutions vs. Culture Culture Society vs. Technology Institutions vs. Technology
9 10 11 12 13 14
45
Tuesday 05-12-2006
6.1.3 Case study After having the initial conceptual propositions towards a formulation of a conceptual model case studies will help in testing those conceptual formulations. The case studies to be conducted need to fulfill the following selection criteria: (a) Content relevance: A transformation in one or more segments has impacts on (almost) all the segments. (b) A case study should be focused on a Dutch-context transformation or/end European context related (c) Data availability: Since we refer to case studies where we will search for the data, the availability of statistical data on properties describing the system under investigation is an important prerequisite. (d) Finalized or on-going transitions are both welcomed.
Why to conduct a case study?
- a real case study will give us a clear system (with existing data) - factors can be derived and defined - by using two different models (system dynamics and agent based modeling) for different purposes it will provide insights on: (a) applicability of methods (drawbacks on the two different methods) (b) which clusters of factors appear more influential to the pattern for which model (some factors may seem dominant in one model but not in the other) (c) if both models create the same type of behavioral patterns, then we can try to map agent-level changes to the system-level parameters. A combination of the two methods may be promising. - link which method/model to use depending on the research angle (research question).
6.2 Publications plan

Research Question 1: What are the (social) mechanisms contributing to societal transitions? Focus: Multi-level perspective PAPER 1 Paper with Hans: How regime changes?
Research Question 2: What are the factors that influence the dynamics of societal transitions? Focus: Multi-segment perspective
PAPER 2: Paper with Martin de Jong: Factors rooted in societyinstitutions-market (formal institutions) PAPER 3: Paper on factors and mechanisms Presentation of conceptual model using the two building blocks first
46
Tuesday 05-12-2006
Research Question 3: Are there patterns of transitions that have common ground to step up or common drivers to maneuver them? Focus: Multi-phase perspective to capture multi-change - Link between the factors and the patterns. Can a set of factors precede a specific pattern of transitions? If so, a control panel of transitions can be conceptualized - Determinants of transition patterns: Essential factors/conditions for a transition - Dominant factors for every transition pattern: Sets of factors common to a specific transition pattern
PAPER 4: Paper on patterns Launching of complete conceptual model and case studies and outcomes of simulation
47
Tuesday 05-12-2006
6.3 Preliminary time management plan

What has been performed so far? Results of the first iteration diagrammatically:
Application to transition research HOW TO PERFORM GTA? First Iteration
What is a transition? What are the subjects of transformation? Where to distillate information?
Empirical examples
System transition: Change of the way the structural components of the system are organized and function
Aspects of object of inquiry: mechanisms of transition (processes) and factors & drivers for change Where to distillate information?
Literature review Theories studied so far: 1. Evolution theory 2. Sustainable development theory 3. Environmental change theories 4. Structuration theory 5. Autopoeisis theory 6. Regime formation theory 7. Cognitive theory
- Factors (operationalized conditions) will be used to trace societal transformation. - Set of factors: Stimulating, Inhibiting, Accidental (crisis) - Mechanisms capture processes of change. - Factors+Mechanisms = Patterns of transitions - Segments of regime / niche/ landscape
Figure 17: Grounded theory approach and completed tasks of the first iteration (February- August 2006).
48
Tuesday 05-12-2006 Table 5: Future tasks as parts of the first iteration and more.
Task:
Comparison of theories: How to? Paper with Hans: - state of the art on what is a regime and what characterizes a regime Theories to look at: (a) Regime formation theory (b) Structuration theory (c) Institutional theory (d) Economic institutionalism (e) Theories on innovation - state of the art on indicators Theories to look at: (a) Social change theory (b) Social indicators theory (c) Societal monitoring (d) Technical change theories Expected outcomes: Tentative list with factors Verification of outcomes: Analyzing empirical examples Deductive comparison: Clustering of factors Reify mechanisms Theories to look at for reifying mechanisms: (a) Hedstrom, Analytical sociology (b) Path-dependency theories (Diffusion theories) Inductive comparison: Theories to look at: (a) Technology policy theory (b) Kodratiev-Freeman long wave theory (c) Network theory (d) Learning theories OTHER TASKS: Integrated approach reader by DRIFT Geels technological transitions conceptualization Nego-paper 1 Start-up nego-paper 2 Paper on institutional change CASE STUDY EPA 1111 - workshops Dutch course Library seminar
August 06
Sept 06
Oct 06
Nov 06
Dec 06
FIRST ITERATION OF GROUNDED THEORY APPROACH STEPS
49
Tuesday 05-12-2006
For every new theory to be researched, it is estimated a two-week time period that includes also time needed for interpretation and summarizing of the theory.
Table 6: Future tasks and deliverables. Time Tasks Research Proposal Tentative list with factors Paper on institutional change (Paper 2) Empirical examples Paper on regime change (Paper 1) Short case study First draft of conceptual framework Focus on factors and mechanisms Case study 1 Second draft of conceptual framework Focus on factors and mechanisms Simulation exercise Third version of conceptual model Improving part of factors and mechanisms & Drawing of patterns Paper 3: Factors and mechanisms paper Case study 2 Simulation using data of case study 2 Fourth version of conceptual model Improving patterns Paper 4: Paper for patterns Dissertation writing First draft Final dissertation Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4
50
Tuesday 05-12-2006
7. Bibliography
Bandaragoda, D. J., (2000), A framework for institutional analysis for water resources management in a river basin context. Working Paper 5, Colombo, Sri Lanka, International Water Management Institute. Berkhout, F., Smith, A., and Stirling, A., (2003), Socio-technological regimes and transition contexts, SPRU Electronic working paper series nr. 160, Brighton, UK: The Freeman Centre, University of Sussex. Berkhout, F., Smith, A., and Stirling, A., (2004), Socio-technical regimes and transition contexts, as Chapter 3 in Elzen, B., Geels, F.W., and Green, K., System innovation and the transition to sustainability, Edward Elgar Publishing. Boulding, K.E., (1970), A primer on social dynamics: history as dialectics and development, New York: Free Press. Bromley, D.W., (1987), Irrigation institutions: The myth of management. In Water and water policy in the world food supplies, ed. Wayne R. Jordan. College Station, USA: Texas University Press. Caron-Flinterman, J.F., Broerse J.E.W., and Bunders, J.F.G., (2005), The experiential knowledge of patients: A new resource for biomedical research, Social science and medicine, Article in press. Caron-Flinterman, J.F., Broerse J.E.W., and Bunders, J.F.G., (2006-working paper), Patient partnership in decision-making on biomedical research: changing the network, Resubmitted to Science, Technology and Human Resources Journal. Dawkins, R., (1986), The blind watchmaker, Penguin Books. De Jong, W.M., (1999), Institutional transplantation, How to adopt good transport infrastructure decision-making ideas from other countries?, Eburon Publishers, The Netherlands. Dunn, W., N., (1981), Public policy analysis, An introduction, Prentice-Hall Inc. EEA, (2005), Sustainable use and management of natural resources, European Environment Agency, EEA Report 9, Copenhagen. Elzen, B., Geels, F.W., and Green, K., (2004), System innovation and the transition to sustainability, Edward Elgar Publishing, Inc Freeman, C., and Louca, F., (2001), As time goes by, From the industrial revolutions to the information revolution, pp.123-135 Conclusions to part I: A theory of reasoned history, Oxford University Press, ISBN 0-19-924107-4 Geels, F., (2002), Understanding the dynamics of technological transitions, A co-evolutionary and socio-technical analysis, Twente University Press Geels, F.W., (2004a), From sectoral systems of innovation to socio-technical systems, insights about dynamics and change from sociology and institutional theory, Research policy, Vol.33, pp.897-920. Geels, F.W., (2004b), Understanding system innovations: a critical literature review and a conceptual synthesis, as Chapter 2 in Elzen, B., Geels, F.W., and Green, K., (2004), System innovation and the transition to sustainability, Edward Elgar Publishing. Geels, F.W., (2005), Processes and patterns in transitions and system innovations: Refining the coevolutionary multi-level perspective, Technological forecasting and social change, Vol.72, p.681-696 Geels, F.W., and Kemp, R. (2000), Transities vanuit sociotechnisch perspectief, Report for the Dutch Ministry of Environment, Enschede: Universiteit Twente, and Maastricht: MERIT Glaser, B., and Strauss, A.L., (1967), The discovery of grounded theory, strategies for qualitative research, Aldine de Gruyter, New York Hedstrom, P., (2005), Dissecting the social, on the principles of analytical sociology, Cambridge Kahan, J., (2004), Bouncecasting: Combining forecasting and backcasting to achieve policy consensus APPAM Fall 2004 Conference, Atlanta, Georgia USA. Kemp, R. and J. Rotmans (2001), The Management of the Co-evolution of Technological, Environmental and Social Systems, paper for the conference Towards Environmental Innovation Systems, Eibsee, 27-29 Sept, 2001 KSI Knowledge Project Business Plan 2005 (p.24-25)
Tuesday 05-12-2006
Loorbach, D., and Rotmans, J., (?), Managing transitions for sustainable development, Chapter, International Center for Integrative Studies, Maastricht University, www.icis.nu Martens, P., and Rotmans, J., (2005), Transitions in a globalizing world, Futures, Vol.37, pp.11331144 Merrey, D.J., (1993), Institutional contexts for managing irrigated agriculture. In The institutional framework for irrigation, 1996, ed. C. Abernethy, 722. Proceedings of a Workshop held in Chiang Mai, Thailand, 1-5 November 1993. Colombo, Sri Lanka: International Irrigation Management Institute. Rammel, C., and Van den Bergh, J.C.J.M., (2003), Evolutionary policies for sustainable development: adaptive flexibility and risk minimizing, Ecological economics, Vol.47, pp.121-133. Rifkin, J., (2004), The European Dream, How Europes vision of the future is quietly eclipsing the American dream, Tarcher Penguin Publishers. Rip, A., and Kemp, R., (1998), Technological change in human choice and climate change, in S.Rayner, El. Malone Eds., Battele Press, Columbus, OH., pp.327-399. Rotmans, J., (2005a), Societal innovation: between dream and reality lies complexity, Erasmus Research Institute of Management, Erasmus University Rotterdam Rotmans J, Kemp R, van Asselt MBA, (2000), Transitions and transition management, the case of an emission-free energy supply. International Centre for Integrative Studies, Maastricht, The Netherlands Rotmans, J., R. Kemp, M.B.A. Van Asselt, F.W. Geels, G. Verbong and K. Molendijk (2000), Transitions & Transition Management: the case of an emission-poor energy supply, Maastricht: ICIS (International Centre for Integrative Studies) Rotmans, J., R. Kemp and M.B.A. Van Asselt, (2001), More Evolution than Revolution, Transition Management in Public Policy, Foresight, Vol.3, No.1, pp.15-31 Scharpf, F.W., (1997), Games real actors play, Actor-centered institutionalism in policy research, Westview Press Silver, C.S., and DeFries, R.S., (1992) One earth, one future, Our changing global environment, National Academy of Sciences,Washington, D.C. Tomich, T.P., Chomitz, K., Fransisco, H., Izac, A.M.N., Murdiyarso, D., Ratner, B.D., Thomas, D.E., and Van Noordwijk, M., (2004), Policy analysis and environmental problems at different scales: asking the right questions, Agriculture, ecosystems and environment, Vol.104, pp.5-18. Turner, B.S., (2000), The blackwell companion to social theory, Second Edition, Blackwell Publishing. Verschuren, P., and Doorewaard, H., (1999), Designing a research project, LEMMA, Utrecht. Winsemius, P., (1986), Guest in ones own house, Thoughts on environmental management, in Dutch, Samon H.D. Tjeek Wilink, Alphen aan den Rijn, The Netherlands
Websites
(1) The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition. Houghton Mifflin Company, 2004. Answers.com 16 Mar. 2006. http://www.answers.com/topic/synergism)
52

Research Proposal and Plan 05122006

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Research Proposal and Plan 05122006

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Looking after what shapes transitions Developing a conceptual model to diagnose the dynamics of transitions Niki Frantzeskaki

1.1 What is characterized as a transition?

Research Proposal and plan KSI II.2 Niki Frantzeskaki

1.2 What is the upper goal of the research?

1.3 What is the question?

1.4 What is already there?

Research Proposal and plan KSI II.2 Niki Frantzeskaki

1.5 Introducing the language of transitions

Research Proposal and plan KSI II.2 Niki Frantzeskaki

Figure 1: Levels of transitions.

Research Proposal and plan KSI II.2 Niki Frantzeskaki

Figure 2: Transition phases according to Rotmans et.al., (2000)9.

Why do we distinguish phases of transitions?

Research Proposal and plan KSI II.2 Niki Frantzeskaki

Predevelopment Take-off Backlash System breakdown Time

1.6 Why is it necessary to research transitions?

Research Proposal and plan KSI II.2 Niki Frantzeskaki

Research Proposal and plan KSI II.2 Niki Frantzeskaki

Research Proposal and plan KSI II.2 Niki Frantzeskaki

2.1 Research questions

What is the question?

Research Proposal and plan KSI II.2 Niki Frantzeskaki

Research Proposal and plan KSI II.2 Niki Frantzeskaki

2.2 Research objective

Aspects of the object of inquiry: Mechanisms and factors

Research Proposal and plan KSI II.2 Niki Frantzeskaki

CONCEPTUAL MODEL BUILD-UP

CONCEPTUAL MODEL LAUNCING

CONCEPTUAL MODEL UPGRADING

OPERATIONALIZE towards Transition Patterns

Case Studies (ANALYZE& VERIFY)

CONCEPTUAL MODEL CALIBRATION

Figure 6: Unfolding the control panel of transitions.

2.3 Limitations of the study

Research Proposal and plan KSI II.2 Niki Frantzeskaki

3. Researching mechanisms of transitions (Research Question 1)

3.1 Elaboration on the content of research question

Why are mechanisms important?

3.2 Complementary research objective

3.3 Typology of transitions

3.4 Explaining transitions in a multi-level space

Overview of different standpoints on multi-level concept of transitions

Research Proposal and plan KSI II.2 Niki Frantzeskaki

Adopting a technological niche standpoint

Figure 7: Multi-level concept as pictured by Geels and Kemp (2000)24.

Research Proposal and plan KSI II.2 Niki Frantzeskaki

Why the niche bottom-up approach to regime transformation is incomplete?

Research Proposal and plan KSI II.2 Niki Frantzeskaki

Adopting a regime centered standpoint

Criticism on multi-level concept

4. Researching the conditions of transitions (Research Question 2)

4.1 Elaboration on the content of research question

4.2 Complementary research objective

4.3 Refining the concepts of transitions related to factors of transitions

Introducing factors, facets and conditions

To what should we foster attention when generating and researching factors?

Research Proposal and plan KSI II.2 Niki Frantzeskaki

Conditions and facets to be researched in different levels

4.3.1 Introducing the multi-segment concept of transitions

Figure 9: Systems dependent and independent factors.

Research Proposal and plan KSI II.2 Niki Frantzeskaki

Research Proposal and plan KSI II.2 Niki Frantzeskaki

SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY