Policy design without democracy? Making democratic sense of transition management

Hendriks, Carolyn M.

doi:10.1007/s11077-009-9095-1

Cited by 176 publications

(143 citation statements)

References 65 publications

(77 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

140

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Adopting this more relational approach has proved valuable in opening up the notion of participation in transitions, extending it beyond sites of deliberative fora (e.g. Einsiedel, Boyd, Medlock, & Ashworth, 2013;Hendriks, 2009) to multiple forms of public engagement across low carbon energy systems (Smith, 2012) including activism, grassroots innovation, and interactions with more mundane technologies in everyday life. An important advance of our approach has been to introduce a framework that allows the sort of symmetrical and comparative analysis across diverse cases of engagement that has not been evident in the sustainability transitions or participation literatures hitherto.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Participation in Transition(s): Reconceiving Public Engagements in Energy Transitions as Co-Produced, Emergent and Diverse

Chilvers

Longhurst

2016

Journal of Environmental Policy & Planning

236

213

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper brings the transitions literature into conversation with constructivist Science and Technology Studies (STS) perspectives on participation for the first time.In doing so we put forward a conception of public and civil society engagement in sustainability transitions as co-produced, relational, and emergent. Through paying close attention to the ways in which the subjects, objects, and procedural formats of public engagement are constructed through the performance of participatory collectives, our approach offers a framework to open up to and symmetrically compare diverse and interconnected forms of participation that make up wider socio-technical systems. We apply this framework in a comparative analysis of four diverse cases of civil society involvement in UK low carbon energy transitions. This highlights similarities and differences in how these distinct participatory collectives are orchestrated, mediated, and subject to exclusions, as well as their effects in producing particular visions of the issue at stake and implicit models of participation and 'the public'. In conclusion we reflect on the value of this approach for opening up the politics of societal engagement in transitions, building systemic perspectives of interconnected 'ecologies of participation', and better accounting for the emergence, inherent uncertainties, and indeterminacies of all forms of participation in transitions.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…One of the few existing studies of participation and deliberation in sustainability transitions is Hendriks' (2008Hendriks' ( , 2009Hendriks & Grin, 2007) analysis of democratic and inclusionary processes in Dutch TM experiments. The democratic criteria of inclusion (who is involved/participates?…”

Section: Participation In Transition(s) 587mentioning

confidence: 99%

Participation in Transition(s): Reconceiving Public Engagements in Energy Transitions as Co-Produced, Emergent and Diverse

Chilvers

Longhurst

2016

Journal of Environmental Policy & Planning

236

213

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…So, though it raises potentially profound issues for conventional theoretical approaches to sociotechnical change, the present case study seems in good company in these debates (Hendriks, 2009;Hess & Mai, 2014;Jhagroe & Loorbach, 2014;Shove & Walker, 2007). What seems to be needed, are alternative frameworks for understanding and action.…”

Section: Implications Of -And For -'Democracy'mentioning

confidence: 83%

“…Although well addressed in the earlier literatures sketched above, these issues are relatively neglected in conventional regime theory. Indeed, some emerging concerns coming out of the Dutch transitions experience have involved recognition that the TM approach reveals potential democratic tensions over who decides the course a particular transitions pathway takes, and the means through which such decisions are reached (Hendriks & Grin, 2007;Hendriks, 2009;Shove & Walker, 2007). In putting forward a countervailing case for the democratic potential of TM, Jhagroe & Loorbach (2014) confirm a gap in the literature focussed on democratic issues in the field of sustainable transitions.…”

Section: The Present 'Abductive' Approachmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparing Nuclear Power Trajectories in Germany and the UK: From 'Regimes' to 'Democracies' in Sociotechnical Transitions and Discontinuities

Johnstone

Stirling

2015

SSRN Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

SWPS 2015-18 ( June) DisclaimerThe works available here are the responsibility of the individual author(s) and do not necessarily represent the views of other SPRU researchers. As matters of policy and practice, SPRU does not endorse individual research contributions. Guidelines for authorsPapers shall be submitted in pdf or Word format. They should contain a title, an abstract, and keywords. Papers should be submitted to one of the Editors, who will process them and send them to the appropriate Associate Editor. Two members of SPRU will be asked to provide a short written review within three weeks. The revised versions of the paper, together with a reply to the reviewers, should be sent to the Associate Editor, who will propose to the Editors its publication on the series. When submitting the authors should indicate if the paper has already undergone peer-reviewing, in which case the Associate Editors may decide to skip internal review process. AbstractThis paper focuses on arguably the single most striking contrast in contemporary major energy politics in Europe (and even the developed world as a whole): the starkly differing civil nuclear policies of Germany and the UK. Germany is seeking entirely to phase out nuclear power by 2022. Yet the UK advocates a 'nuclear renaissance', promoting the most ambitious new nuclear construction programme in Western Europe. Here, this paper poses a simple yet quite fundamental question: what are the particular divergent conditions most strongly implicated in the contrasting developments in these two countries. With nuclear playing such an iconic role in historical discussions over technological continuity and transformation, answering this may assist in wider understandings of sociotechnical incumbency and discontinuity in the burgeoning field of 'sustainability transitions'. To this end, an 'abductive' approach is taken: deploying nine potentially relevant criteria for understanding the different directions pursued in Germany and the UK. Together constituted by 30 parameters spanning literatures related to socio-technical regimes in general as well as nuclear technology in particular, the criteria are divided into those that are 'internal' and 'external' to the 'focal regime configuration' of nuclear power and associated 'challenger technologies' like renewables. It is 'internal' criteria that are emphasised in conventional sociotechnical regime theory, with 'external' criteria relatively less well explored. Asking under each criterion whether attempted discontinuation of nuclear power would be more likely in Germany or the UK, a clear picture emerges. 'Internal' criteria suggest attempted nuclear discontinuation should be more likely in the UK than in Germany -the reverse of what is occurring. 'External' criteria are more aligned with observed dynamics -especially those relating to military nuclear commitments and broader 'qualities of democracy'. Despite many differences of framing concerning exactly what constitutes 'democracy', a rich political science literature on t...

show abstract

“…Some particular points of critique were: (1) a managerial approach of establishing a new social order that is implicit in transition management, ignoring a diversity of publicly relevant views, values and concerns , (2) the simplicity and selectivity of the general framing of socio-technical change and sustainability that underlie the model of transition management (Smith et al 2005, Smith and Stirling 2007, Smith and Stirling 2010, (3) a democratic deficit in conceptualising and conducting the policy (Hendriks and Grin 2007, Hendriks 2008, Hendriks 2009), (4) naivety with respect to the politics of learning and experimenting for socio-technical change (Meadowcroft 2005, Meadowcroft 2007, Meadowcroft 2009, Smith and Stirling 2010, Voß and Bornemann 2011) and a neglect of political dynamics that interfere with the process of policy design and implementation (Kern and Smith 2008, Kern and Howlett 2009, Voß et al 2009, and (5), especially with regard to the Dutch energy transition, a widespread critical assessment referring to capture by incumbent industrial interests and a competing neoliberal discourse coalition Smith 2008, Smith and). …”

Section: Transition Management and The Fourth National Environmental mentioning

confidence: 99%

Performative policy studies: realizing “transition management”

Voß

2014

Innovation: The European Journal of Social Science Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The paper analyses the relations between policy studies and public policy. It traces how they are constitutively entangled. Conceptually, this builds on a notion of performativity that has been developed in science studies. The performativity of policy studies is explored in a case study of the innovation journey of 'transition management' as a model for governing sociotechnical change. The paper shows how practices of knowledge production and policy-making take shape in interaction with the model and how a specialised research field co-evolves with political alliances and policy programmes. They interact in the process of realising transition management, both by establishing the model as collective knowledge and by materially enacting it. In this interweaving with public policy policy studies contribute to creating the reality that they describe. The conclusions discuss 'realising' as a mode of governance.

show abstract

Policy design without democracy? Making democratic sense of transition management

Abstract: Long-term policy design, Sustainability, Energy, Democracy, Transition management, Legitimacy, Participation, Network governance, Representative, Accountability,

Cited by 176 publications

References 65 publications

Participation in Transition(s): Reconceiving Public Engagements in Energy Transitions as Co-Produced, Emergent and Diverse

Participation in Transition(s): Reconceiving Public Engagements in Energy Transitions as Co-Produced, Emergent and Diverse

Comparing Nuclear Power Trajectories in Germany and the UK: From 'Regimes' to 'Democracies' in Sociotechnical Transitions and Discontinuities

Performative policy studies: realizing “transition management”

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About