Dynamics of Societal Transitions Driving Forces and Feedback Loops
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Dynamics of Societal Transitions Driving forces and feedback loops Proefschrift ter verkrijging van de graad van doctor aan de Technische Universiteit Delft, op gezag van de Rector Magnificus prof.ir.K.C.A.M. Luyben, voorzitter van het College voor Promoties, in het openbaar te verdedigen op maandag 14 november 2011 om 10:00 uur door Niki FRANTZESKAKI ingenieur geboren te Chania, Creta, Griekenland Dit proefschrift is goedgekeurd door de promotor: Prof.Dr.Ir.W.A.H. Thissen, Delft University of Technology, the Netherlands Copromotor: Dr.Ir. C. van Daalen, Delft University of Technology, the Netherlands Samenstelling promotiecommissie: Rector Magnificus, voorzitter Prof.Dr.Ir.W.A.H. Thissen, Delft University of Technology, the Netherlands, promotor Dr.Ir. C. van Daalen Delft, University of Technology, the Netherlands, copromotor Prof.Dr M.W. de Jong, Harbin Insitute of Technology, Peoples Republic of China Prof.Dr.Ir.J. Rotmans, Erasmus University Rotterdam, the Netherlands Prof.Dr. J. Grin, Amsterdam University, the Netherlands Prof.Dr.Ir. J. Groenewegen, Delft University of Technology, the Netherlands Dr.J.Jaeger, Sustainable Europe Research Institute, Vienna, Austria Prof.Dr. J. de Bruijn, Delft University of Technology, the Netherlands, reservelid The research resulting in this thesis was supported by the Dutch Knowledge Network on System Innovations (KSI Research Network, www.ksinetwerk.nl). Layout, and graphics by the author Printed by Wohrman Print Services [www.wps.nl] ISBN 9789085705765 Copyright © 2011, Niki Frantzeskaki All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a tetrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without the prior permission in writing from the proprietor. PRINTED IN THE NETHERLANDS Summary To achieve long-term sustainability a fundamental shift or transformation of a societal system is required. Research on how such fundamental transformative change processes –societal transitions- develop is important for understanding their nature and the possibilities to influence them. The research objective of the present thesis is to add to our insights on the dynamics of societal transitions by an overall understanding of how societal systems behave over the course of a transition. As a first step, we conceptualize societal transitions as continuous cyclical processes that shift a societal system between stages of dynamic equilibrium. Driving Forces contribute to the shifting from one dynamic equilibrium to another. We propose a framework of Driving Forces of Transformative Change that include: (a) Formation forces, which represent the innovative potential of the societal system and include: Presence of a niche, Presence of a societal demand; Presence of new practices; (b) Support forces, which depict the actions of empowerment or blockage of change and the actions of settlement and institutionalization within a societal system. Support forces are: Standardization of practices, Provision of resources, and Exercise of power; and (c) Triggers, which shock or perturb the system and include those forces that are highly uncertain and whose appearance is uncontrollable. Triggers include Crises, Systemic Failures and Exogenous Events. The Forces route the system from one stage to another creating evolutionary changes. We conceptualize how a societal system changes over time with the Evolutionary Cycle of the Societal System, which includes three stages that represent the three identified dynamic equilibria: (a) Genesis, (b) Stasis and (c) Metastasis. These dynamic equilibria are characterized by slow dynamics whereas shifting processes to each of these equilibria are characterized by fast dynamics. However, the Forces that contribute to the shifting between stages can also activate feedback loops that keep the system in a particular stage. The Evolutionary Cycle of the Societal System and the Forces Driving Transitional Change. The theoretical exploration of societal transitions and the way they develop, added to our conceptualization that the cyclic development can also take place without the Metastasis stage, when bypass processes are in place shifting the system from a Stasis stage to a Genesis stage. The societal system is conceptualized to consist of different elements that do not change synchronously. Based on this, we propose different types of transitions. By looking at the different types of transitions, we explain how the evolution of a societal system can occur over time. Unfolding of a societal transition as a long-term process with different episodes of change, implies that different aspects of change need to be considered at different times. We propose three types of transitions: institutional transitions, social-ecological transitions and socio-technological transitions. i - We define an institutional transition as a type of societal transition in which the forces at play have an impact on the institutions and civil society or, using a mechanical analogue of a force, the forces at play are exerted at institutions and civil society. In a similar way: - We define a social-ecological transition as a type of societal transition in which the forces at play have an impact on the institutions, civil society and the environment. - We define a socio-technological transition as a type of societal transition in which the forces at play have an impact on the institutions, civil society and technology. In our analysis, we ask the same questions about all the different types of transitions: what are the driving forces? What are patterns that emerge in the evolution of the specific type of transition? We employ an extensive theoretical exploration for grounding the Forces framework and the Evolutionary Cycle in different literature bodies that explain institutional, social-ecological and socio-technological transitions respectively. The theoretical and empirical grounding confirmed that different types of transitions can be distinguished. Understanding that a societal system can undergo different types of transitions, implies that different forces are critical and that different aspects of change have to be taken into account and different instruments need to be devised at different times for facilitating or initiating a societal transition. We devised the conceptual frameworks of Forces and the Evolutionary Cycle to reconstruct and analyze four case studies, following an instrumental case study approach. Our empirical exploration of the four cases (three of which are non-Dutch cases) confirms the usefulness of the conceptual frameworks and the cyclic character of the unfolding of a transition. The first case concerns the institutional transition of the water management sector in the Netherlands (from the 1990s until 2008). This case refers to one regime, the water management regime. Mapping the forces present in the water management transition in the Netherlands on the Evolution Cycle of societal systems, we observe that the water management sector went through two cycles of evolution from 1993 to 2008. It is shown that the institutionalization processes in the water management sector in the Netherlands are lengthy in time. In addition to this, we notice that the 1993 and 1995 floods in combination with the societal demand for flood-safe cities in 1993 initiated the changes in the water management sector in the Netherlands. The Dutch water management case reveals that institutional changes were realized prior to the presence of a societal or socio-political crisis. Provision of resources in the form of research programs to produce input for the policy process on water management as well as frequent adjustments of the main policy on water management with water acts and other legislative actions are prevalent in the water management system. The analysis of the institutional transition showed that in this case, institutional change develops in reaction to anticipated environmental changes. This institutional transition thus is policy driven and science driven. Policy- makers and scientific experts constitute a tightly knit group which makes this anticipation possible. The second case concerns the emergence of an institutional transition in the environmental protection regime in Greece (for the period of 1986 until early 2000s) in the face of the diversion of the Acheloos river project. The Acheloos River case is an institutional transition between five co- evolving and competing regimes: the environmental protection regime, the energy regime, the water management regime, the Acheloos river restoration issue-regime, and the Acheloos diversion issue- regime. The environmental protection transition in Greece was (and remains) a battlefield for both supporters and opponents of the Acheloos Diversion Project. The opponents of the Acheloos Diversion Project use the environmental protection regulation as a manifesto against the diversion project. The supporters of the Acheloos Diversion Project employed the environmental regulation and especially the Environmental Impact Assessment standards as pre-requirements to a large infrastructure project and strategically supported the perception that the Acheloos river is an infrastructure system and not a social-ecological system. We observe that the forces present set in ii motion different feedback loops. These feedback loops reinforce regimes that are in continuous competition; meaning that drivers and counter-drivers (or barriers) are set in place subsequently. The