Nurturing Technologies for Sustainability Transitions
- 189 Downloads
This paper is a commentary to a paper by Erik Paredis (2011). It is firstly argued that the theories of technology, as distinguished by Feenberg, cannot adequately explain the different interpretations of the role of technology in the transition towards sustainability, as Paredis argues. Secondly, the basic argument of Paredis is countered that transition research is fundamentally handicapped by its constructivists roots to discriminate between options. Finally it is argued that a third strand of transition research exists that is explicitly interventionist, and that nurtures specific technology in context.
KeywordsTechnology Sustainability Constructivism Substantivism Transition research Transition management
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- Banuri T., Weyant J., Akuma G., Najam A., Pinguelli R. L., Rayner S. et al (2001) Setting the stage: Climate change and sustainable development. In: Metz B., Davidson O., Swart R., Pan J. (eds) Climate change 2001: Mitigation, contribution of working III to the third assessment report of the intergovernmental panel on climate change. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
- Bos A. P., Groot Koerkamp P. W. G. (2009) Synthesizing needs in system innovation through methodical design. A methodical outline on the role of needs in reflexive interactive design (RIO). In: Poppe K. J., Termeer C., Slingerland M. (eds) Transitions towards sustainable agriculture, food chains and peri-urban areas. Wageningen Academic Publishers, WageningenGoogle Scholar
- Feenberg A. (1999) Questioning technology. Routledge, LondonGoogle Scholar
- Goeminne, G., & Paredis, E. (2011). The concept of ecological debt: Challenging established science-policy frameworks in the transition to sustainable development. In E. Techera (Ed.), Frontiers of environment and citizenship. Oxford: Inter-Disciplinary Press (in print).Google Scholar
- Loorbach D (2007) Transition management. New mode of governance for sustainable development. International Books, UtrechtGoogle Scholar
- Paredis, E. (2011). Sustainability transitions and the nature of technology. Foundations of Science, 16(2–3), 195–225.Google Scholar
- Peeters J. (1996) Leven naar menselijke maat. Otto Ulrichs antwoord op moderne schaarste. In: Janssens F., Melle U. (eds) Voeten in de aarde. Radicale groene denkers. Hadewijch/Van Arkel, Antwerpen/UtrechtGoogle Scholar
- Rotmans J., Loorbach D. (2007) Transition management: Reflexive steering of societal complexity through searching, learning and experimenting. In: Van den Bergh J., Bruinsma F. R. (eds) The transition to renewable energy: Theory and practcie. Edward Elgar, CheltenhamGoogle Scholar
- Sachs W. (1999) Planet dialectics. Explorations in environment and development. Zed Books, London/New YorkGoogle Scholar
- Ulrich O. (1992) Technology. In: Sachs W. (eds) The development dictionary. A guide to knowledge as power. Zed Books, LondonGoogle Scholar
- Von Weiszäcker E., Lovins A. B., Lovins L. H. (1997) Factor four. Doubling wealth, halving resource use. Earthscan Publications, LondonGoogle Scholar