Abstract
In this chapter we present the transitions approach as an integrated perspective to understand and possibly orient our society towards sustainable development. Since the concept of sustainability is inherently normative, subjective and ambiguous, we argue that (unlike some more traditional approaches to sustainable development) we should focus on an open facilitation and stimulation of social processes towards sustainability. The transitions approach and transition management specifically, seek to deal with ongoing changes in society in an evolutionary manner so as to influence these ongoing changes in terms of speed and direction: towards sustainability. A transitions approach to explore sustainability transitions poses novel challenges for research: there are no unequivocal answers, nor it is clear how these processes should be governed. We conclude our analysis by formulating the basic research questions central to the search for governance for sustainability, and by reflecting on the role of science in sustainability transitions.
Keywords
- Sustainable Development
- Transition Management
- Integrate Assessment
- Transition Research
- Complex Adaptive System
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
We perceive governance as a meta-level pattern of societal interactions (intended and unintended) or as Kooiman (1993, p. 2) notes, governance to be interactive as “the pattern that emerges from the governing activities of social, political and administrative actors” that “focuses on the interactions taking place between governing actors within social-political situations.” (Kooiman 2003, p. 7).
- 2.
Transition governance guidelines are process-oriented propositions that relate to the process design towards fundamental change or transformation. Transition governance guidelines are not concerned with the definition of targets, or goals but with the design or the framing of the actions that will take place over the course of a system transition.
References
Arthur, W. B., Durlauf, S. N., & Lane, D. A. (1997). The economy as an evolving complex system. Reading: Addison-Weasly.
Bijker, W., Hughes, T., & Pinch, T. (Eds.). (1987). The social construction of technological systems. Cambridge: MIT Press.
Clark, W. C. (2003). Sustainability, energy use and public participation. In B. Kasemir, J. Jager, C. Jaeger, & M. Gardner (Eds.), Public participation in sustainability science. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Clark, W. C., Crutzen, P. J., & Schellnhuber, H. J. (2005). Science for global sustainability: Toward a new paradigm. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Flyvbjerg, B. (2001). Making social science matter. Why social inquiry fails and how it can succeed again. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Frantzeskaki, N., & de Haan, H. (2009). Transitions: Two steps from theory to policy. Futures, 41, 593–606.
Funtowicz, S. O., & Ravetz, J. R. (1994). The worth of a songbird – ecological economics as a post-normal science. Ecological Economics, 10, 197–207.
Geels, F. (2004). Sectoral systems of innovation to socio-technical systems; Insights about dynamics and change from sociology and institutional theory. Research Policy, 33, 897–920.
Gunderson, L. H., & Holling, C. S. (2002). Understanding transformations in human and natural systems. Washington, DC: Island Press.
Hendriks, C. M., & Grin, J. (2007). Contextualising reflexive governance: The politics of Dutch transitions to sustainability. Journal of Environmental Policy & Planning, 9(3–4), 333–350.
Hisschemöller, M., & Hoppe, R. (1996). Coping with Intractable Controversies: The Case of Problem Structuring in Policy Design and Analysis. Knowledge and Policy: The International Journal of Knowledge Transfer. 8, 40–60.
Hisschemoller, M., Hoppe, R., Dunn, W., & Ravetz, J. (Eds.). (2001). Knowledge, power, and participation in environmental policy analysis. New Brunswick: Transaction Publishing.
Holland, J. H. (1995). Hidden order: How adaptation builds complexity. Cambridge: Helix books/Perseus books.
Jansen, L. (2003). The challenge of sustainable development. Journal of Cleaner Production, 11, 231–245.
Kasemir, B., Jager, J., Jager, C., & Gardner, M. (Eds.). (2003). Public participation in sustainability science. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Kates, R. W., Clark, W. C., Corell, R., Hall, J. M., Jaeger, C. C., Lowe, I., et al. (2001). Environment and development – sustainability science. Science, 292(5517), 641–642.
Kauffman, S. (1995). At home in the universe: The search for laws of complexity. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Kooiman, J. (Ed.). (1993). Modern governance. Newbury Park: Sage.
Kooiman, J. (2003). Governing as governance. Newbury Park: Sage.
Litfin, K. T. (1994). Ozone discourses: Science and politics in global environmental cooperation. New York: Columbia University Press.
Loorbach, D. (2007). Transition management: New mode of governance for sustainable development. Utrecht: International Books.
Loorbach, D., & Rotmans, J. (2010). The practice of transition management: Examples and lessons from four distinct cases. Futures, 42(3), 237–246.
Martens, P., & Rotmans, J. (2002). Transition in a globalizing world. Lisse: Swets & Zeitlinger B.V.
Meadowcroft, J. (1997). Planning for sustainable development: Insights from the literatures of political science. European Journal of Political Research, 31, 427–454.
Meadowcroft, J. (2000). Sustainable development: A New(ish) idea for a new century? Political Studies, 48, 370–387.
Michaels, S. (2009). Matching knowledge brokering strategies to environmental policy problems. Environmental Science and Policy, Volume 12, Issue 7, November 2009, pp. 994–1011.
Mulder, K. (Ed.). (2006). Sustainable development for engineers: A handbook and resource guide. Sheffield: Greenleaf Publishing.
Pezzoli, K. (1997). Sustainable development: A transdisciplinary overview of the literature. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, 40(5), 549–574.
Ravetz, J. R. (1999). What is post-normal science. Futures, 31, 647–653.
Rotmans, J. (1994). Transitions on the move; Global Dynamics and Sustainable Development, Bilthoven, The Netherlands: Rijksinstituut voor Volksgezondheid en Milieu (RIVM)
Rotmans, J. (1998). Methods for IA: The challenges and opportunities ahead. Environmental Modeling and Assessment, 3, 155–179.
Rotmans, J., Kemp, R., & Van Asselt, M. (2001). More evolution than revolution: Transition management in public policy. Foresight, 3(1), 17.
Schumpeter, J. A. (1934). The theory of economic development. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Scott, W., & Gough, S. (Eds.). (2004). Key issues in sustainable development and learning: A critical review. London: Routledge.
Shove, E., & Walker, G. (2007). CAUTION! Transitions ahead: Politics, practice and sustainable transition management. Environment and Planning A, 39(4), 763–770.
Teisman, G. R., & Klijn, E.-H. (2008). Complexity theory and public management. Public Management Review, 10(3), 287–297.
UN. (1997). Global change and sustainable development: Critical trends. New York: United Nations, Department for Policy Coordination and Sustainable Development.
UN. (2005). The millennium development goals report. New York: United Nations.
Van Asselt, M., & Rijkens-Klomp, N. (2002). A look in the mirror: Reflection on participation in integrated assessment from a methodological perspective. Global Environmental Change: Human and Policy Dimensions, 12, 167–184.
Van de Kerkhof, M. (2006). Making a difference: On the constraints of concensus building and the relevance of deliberation in stakeholder dialogues. Policy Sciences, 39(3), 279–299.
WCED. (1987). Our common future. Oxford: University Press.
Wildavsky, A. (1979). Speaking truth to power. The art and craft of policy analysis. Boston: Little, Brown & Co.
Acknowledgements
The present paper is a product of research that has been conducted with the support of the KSI II.2 Research Subprogram “The dynamics of transitions” (www.ksinetwork.nl). An earlier version of the present paper had been presented in the EU Conference, Sustainable Development: A challenge for European Research, 28–29 May 2009, Brussels, Belgium.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2011 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg and European Union
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Loorbach, D., Frantzeskaki, N., Thissen, W. (2011). A Transition Research Perspective on Governance for Sustainability. In: Jaeger, C., Tàbara, J., Jaeger, J. (eds) European Research on Sustainable Development. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-19202-9_7
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-19202-9_7
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-642-19201-2
Online ISBN: 978-3-642-19202-9
eBook Packages: Earth and Environmental ScienceEarth and Environmental Science (R0)