Patterns in transitions: Understanding complex chains of change

Innovation futures: new forms of innovation and their implications for innovation policy

“…Such a role is also in line with arguments based on the systems theory which argues that policy should govern the system by assuring the adaptation capabilities of innovation systems and by establishing rules which foster the self-organisation capabilities of different actors (e.g., Rhodes, 1997;De Haan and Rotmans, 2011).…”

“…Policy makers have to understand new innovation phenomena in order to benefit from the potential opportunities and risks for society and economy arising from these changes. In this context, a number of authors has also pointed towards the need for more fundamental changes using notions such as transformative innovation (Steward, 2008) or system transition (De Haan and Rotmans, 2011) which call for transformative visions and roadmaps which can challenge today's paradigms and basic assumptions on innovation and system dynamics (Warnke, 2011). This paper addresses this gap in the literature by presenting results of an international foresight project which analyses and discusses the emergence and diffusion of new innovation patterns and their significance for European policy (Leitner et al, 2012).…”

Societal transformation in response to global environmental change: A review of emerging concepts

“…Some concepts of transformation propose that transformative change follows a sequence of general phases. For example, SoT is a process comprising four phases (i.e., predevelopment, take off, acceleration, and stabilization), for which pathways of transition, e.g., reform, reconfiguration, substitution, and transformation, have been identified (e.g., Geels and Schot 2007;De Haan and Rotmans 2011). RS entails three phases, namely being prepared for or actively preparing the social-ecological systems for change; navigating change by making use of a crisis as a window of opportunity; and building resilience of the new socialecological regime (Olsson et al 2006;Folke et al 2010).…”

“…The former identifies patterns that are considered definitive of transformation, but does not attach value to any specifice.g., sustainable-configuration of these patterns. These perspectives, which include RS, SoT, SeT, and SP, encompass distinct pathways and outcomes of transformation (Geels and Schot 2007;De Haan and Rotmans 2011), including potentially 'non-desirable' consequences , such as changes resulting in greater social inequality or increases in carbon consumption and emissions. On the other hand, prescriptive concepts of transformation, which include DT, PT, and TA2, define transformative change not only as entailing structural change, but also as going specifically in desirable directions, which are differently determined on the basis of such benefits as ''substantial and widely distributed benefits [to] both society and ecosystems''(Marshall et al 2012:2), increased adaptive capacity (e.g., Park et al 2012), or empowerment and agency (O'Brien 2012).…”

“…Some strongly delineate transformation from transition (Pelling 2011;Brown et al 2012), while for others (e.g., Griffith et al 2010;De Haan and Rotmans 2011), the former is seen as a building block or particular type of the latter. Similarly, some scholars draw sharp distinctions between the ideas of 'transformation' and 'resilience' (e.g., Pelling 2011), while for others, transformability is a fundamental characteristic of a resilient system (Walker et al 2004;Folke et al 2010).…”