Summary
Required literature summary - 0EM150 Sustainability transitions and responsible innovation
- Course
- Institution
The most important points of the required literature for the exam.
[Show more]
Seller
Follow
KM15
Reviews received
Content preview
0EM150 SUSTAINABILITY TRANSITIONS AND RESPONSIBLE INNOVATIONACADEMIC YEAR 2020/2021 - QUARTILE 3
REQUIRED LITERATURE - SUMMARY
L1. Sustainability and global context (MLP and SNM)
Raven, R., Schot, J., & Berkhout, F. (2012). Space and scale in socio-technical transitions. Environmental
Innovation and Societal Transitions, 4, 63–78. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eist.2012.08.001
Wieczorek, A. J. (2018). Sustainability transitions in developing countries: major insights and their implications
for research and policy. Environmental Science and Policy, 84, 204–216.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2017.08.008
Wieczorek, A., Raven, R., Berkhout, F. 2015. Transnational linkages in sustainability experiments: A typology
and the case of solar photovoltaic energy in India. Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions, 17,
149–165. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eist.2015.01.001
L2. Sustainable Entrepreneurship (Business Ethics)
Goodpaster, K. E. (2006). Conscience as a Mindset: Personal and Organizational (Chapter 3). In: K. E.
Goodpaster (2006). Conscience and Corporate Culture. US: Wiley-Blackwell, pp. 50-53, pp. 56-59, and pp.
69-85.
McMahon, Ch. (1981). Morality and the Invisible Hand. Philosophy & Public Affairs, Vol. 10, No. 3 (Summer,
1981), pp. 247-277
L3. Participation & Co-creation (Fung Typology)
Arnstein, S.R. (1969) “A Ladder Of Citizen Participation.” Journal of the American Institute of Planners, 35:4,
216-224
Fung, A. (2006). Varieties of Participation in Complex Governance. Public Administration Review, 66(s1),
66–75. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6210.2006.00667.x
L4. Institutional Entrepreneurship (SNM)
Garud R., C., Hardy, S., Maguire, (2007) Institutional Entrepreneurship as Embedded Agency: An Introduction
to the Special Issue. Organisation Studies 28(7)
L5. User Innovation (MLP)
Kanger, L., & Schot, J. (2016). User-made immobilities: a transition perspective. Mobilities, 11(4), 598–613.
https://doi.org/10.1080/17450101.2016.1211827
Verbong, G. P. J., Wieczorek, A. J., & Verhees, B. (2019). The role of users in sustainable innovation. In F.
Boons, & A. McMeekin (Eds.), Handbook of sustainable innovation Edward Elgar – available via Canvas in
folder 'User Innovation'.
L6. Justice (EJF)
Breukers, S., Mourik, R., van Summeren, L., & Verbong, G. (2017). Institutional ‘lock-out’ towards local
self-governance? Environmental justice and sustainable transformations in Dutch social housing
neighbourhoods. Energy Research & Social Science, 23, 148–158. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2016.10.007
Williams, S., & Doyon, A. (2019). Justice in energy transitions. Environmental Innovation and Societal
Transitions, 31, 144–153. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eist.2018.12.001
L7. Responsible Research & Innovation
Stilgoe, J., Owen, R., & Macnaghten, P. (2013). Developing a framework for responsible innovation. Research
Policy, 42(9), 1568–1580. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2013.05.008
,L1. Sustainability and global context (MLP and SNM)
Raven, R., Schot, J., & Berkhout, F. (2012). Space and scale in socio-technical transitions.
Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions, 4, 63–78.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eist.2012.08.001
Raven et al. (2012, p. 69)
(Raven et al., 2012, p. 69)
– A consideration of space introduces a number of new dimensions to the analysis of socio-technical
systems:
● distance (or proximity) as a factor in innovative activity;
● spatial differentiation, from the observation that different places, however defined, exhibit
niches, regimes and landscapes with different characteristics; and
● reach, the observation that ‘action at a distance’ operates in social systems across scales and
levels.
Developing a multi-scalar model of socio-technical transitions
– A second-generation, multi-scalar MLP envisages the addition of a spatial scale to the MLP
complementing time and structure.
– Other forms of proximity (co-location is important for learning, knowledge creation and innovation):
● Cognitive proximity refers to the shared knowledge base between actors
● Organisational proximity refers to a similar organisational background of actors
● Social proximity refers to levels of trust, friendship, kinship and experiences between actors
● Institutional proximity refers to the extent at which actors have similar broader cultural
backgrounds such as societal norms and values
Scales in a multi-scalar MLP
Landscape – (international features) typical landscape networks exhibit high proximity and power
across incumbents
Regime – (national features) typical regime networks exhibit high proximity and power within
incumbents
Niche – (national or local features) typical niche networks exhibit low proximity and power within niches
Wieczorek, A. J. (2018). Sustainability transitions in developing countries: major insights and
their implications for research and policy. Environmental Science and Policy, 84, 204–216.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2017.08.008
(Wieczorek, 2018, p. 210)
Wieczorek (2018, p. 210)
Experiments and upscaling
– While technology is important, institutional and political aspects form the major barriers to transition
and upscaling
– How it can enrich the definition of experiment by giving more attention to the way projects are set up,
and whether they actually meet peoples’ needs and help to build problem-solving capacities.
Transnational linkages
– The linkages are the means for actors to complement lacking resources and constitute thereby a
major source of socio-technical innovation.
, – The associated national innovation policies and institutions remain highly significant due to various
path dependencies and their key role in harnessing the power of transnational linkages to create new
paths.
Regime uniformity
– In the developing world, regimes show a much higher degree of non-uniformity and internal tensions
than in Western contexts.
Normative orientation
– Emphasise the strong disagreement about what exactly is sustainable and how to achieve this.
Discussion
– The historical and contemporary reality of the developing and developed world differs significantly.
– Developing environments seem to amplify the transnational nature of regimes, the important role of
institutions in the upscaling of experiments, difficulties with demarcation and operationalisation of
landscape forces or the contested nature of sustainability as a normative orientation of transitions.
These issues however are also relevant for the Western world transitions
– The classical technology transfer mechanisms are no longer effective and projects created by
international organisations fail to even survive beyond their official duration. The main reason for this
failure is the lack of meaningful engagement with place-specific cultures, power relations and
infrastructures.
Wieczorek, A., Raven, R., Berkhout, F. 2015. Transnational linkages in sustainability
experiments: A typology and the case of solar photovoltaic energy in India. Environmental
Innovation and Societal Transitions, 17, 149–165. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eist.2015.01.001
(Wieczorek et al., 2015, p. 164)
Wieczorek et al. (2015, p. 164)
– Explores transnational linkages in sustainability experiments.
– Technological innovation systems, or regimes and niches are not confined to one spatial level, but cut
across territorial boundaries through networks and infrastructures.
– How local practices are shaped by power relationships embedded in a wider political ecology.
– In the context of globalisation, many sustainability experiments are embedded in transnational
networks and flows. These networks and flows operate across spatial scales.
Experimentation
– Experiment for sustainability transition: An inclusive, practice-based and challenge-led initiative
designed to promote system innovation through social learning under conditions of deep uncertainty
and ambiguity
Actor-related transnational linkages
● refer to the movement of people – important carriers of technology, knowledge, capital and
institutions
● mobility of people as a key mechanism (not neutral), as actors translate rather than simply
transfer skills and knowledge when they travel between places (foreign actor involvement may
privilege corporate interests at the expense of local social or environmental interests)
● ex. academic networks
Knowledge-related transnational linkages
● knowledge held by people -> are connected to actor flows
The benefits of buying summaries with Stuvia:
Guaranteed quality through customer reviews
Stuvia customers have reviewed more than 700,000 summaries. This how you know that you are buying the best documents.
Quick and easy check-out
You can quickly pay through credit card or Stuvia-credit for the summaries. There is no membership needed.
Focus on what matters
Your fellow students write the study notes themselves, which is why the documents are always reliable and up-to-date. This ensures you quickly get to the core!
Frequently asked questions
What do I get when I buy this document?
You get a PDF, available immediately after your purchase. The purchased document is accessible anytime, anywhere and indefinitely through your profile.
Satisfaction guarantee: how does it work?
Our satisfaction guarantee ensures that you always find a study document that suits you well. You fill out a form, and our customer service team takes care of the rest.
Who am I buying these notes from?
Stuvia is a marketplace, so you are not buying this document from us, but from seller KM15. Stuvia facilitates payment to the seller.
Will I be stuck with a subscription?
No, you only buy these notes for $7.56. You're not tied to anything after your purchase.
Can Stuvia be trusted?
4.6 stars on Google & Trustpilot (+1000 reviews)
58993 documents were sold in the last 30 days
Founded in 2010, the go-to place to buy study notes for 14 years now