Transition Regions: Green Innovation and Economic Development

Abstract

This paper has three main aims. The first of these is to discuss and critique the main spatial and non-spatial theories that address methods by which societies may transition from a hydrocarbon to a post-hydrocarbon technological regime. It is argued that the first approach, which combines urban regime theory of politics with ecological modernization theory, is ultimately contradictory and rooted in an inadequate sustainability discourse. The second approach is more interesting, not least because it adopts an evolutionary rather than a conflict perspective. It allows the strategist to progress from the potential of building a green market niche that includes the urban governance stimulus but is not limited by it. Then it facilitates thinking about how such niches may coalesce to form an intervening green technological paradigm Schumpeter-style. Finally, it opens out a co-evolutionary process by which all social, political and economic sub-systems become synchronised long-term into a post-hydrocarbon socio-technical landscape of a kind that would mitigate anthropogenic global warming. Its weakness is a lack of spatial sensibility regarding how this process would work, an underdeveloped notion of the role of governance in niche, regime and landscape co-evolution, and an inadequate appreciation of how innovation operates in facilitating these processes. To overcome this we propose the theoretical and practical concept of Transition Regions. Second, the paper seeks to demonstrate how a more theoretically informed framework based in regional innovation systems thinking, allied to evolutionary economic geography JEL -codes: L, -, - Transition regions: green innovation and economic development Philip CookeCentre for Advanced Studies, Cardiff University, Wales (UK) Abstract This paper has three main aims. The first of these is to discuss and critique the main spatial and non-spatial theories that address methods by which societies may transition from a hydrocarbon to a post-hydrocarbon technological paradigm. It is argued that the first approach, which combines urban regime theory of politics with ecological modernization theory, is ultimately contradictory and rooted in an inadequate 'sustainability' discourse. The second approach is more interesting, not least because it adopts an evolutionary rather than a conflict perspective, it visualises the problem as 'climate change' rather than 'sustainability' and it conceptualises change beyond the level of mere technological regimes of a Schumpeterian kind. To overcome problems with both main approaches we propose the theoretical and practical concept of Transition Regions. Second, the paper seeks to demonstrate how a more theoretically informed framework based in regional innovation systems thinking, allied to evolutionary economic geography and development analysis produces a superior transition model. This is particularly in reference to its basic idea of economic development caused by interactions between elements in regional economies displaying related varie...

The contribution of innovation policy criteria to the development of local renewable energy systems

“…The results of our study partly reinforce the findings of prior work (Cooke, 2013;Rösler et al, 2013;Schönberger, 2013;Watanabe, 1999). When pursuing a transition towards a RES, policymakers play an essential role by routing R&D efforts and creating an adequate environment that motivates investments and interaction between public and private sectors (Foxon et al, 2005;Jacobsson and Bergek, 2004;Späth and Rohracher, 2012).…”

“…Furthermore, our results demonstrate quantitatively that it is crucial for municipalities to focus first on strengthen local knowledge about RES [KNOW] to improve their performance in RES development (Hypothesis H3). Prior qualitative research already suggested this argument (Cooke, 2013;Jacobsson and Bergek, 2004;Smit et al, 2007;Späth and Rohracher, 2012). Municipalities can generate this specific knowledge by developing policy instruments with focus on renewable energy R&D (Hildén, 2011;Paraskevopoulou, 2012), R&D subsidies (Cantner et al, 2016;Noailly and Smeets, 2015), scientific education in public research institutes and universities (Mowery et al, 2010;Paraskevopoulou, 2012) or municipally-owned companies for the development of renewable energy projects (Gustafsson et al, 2015;Howells, 2005).…”

Understanding Transition—Periphery Dynamics: Renewable Energy in the Highlands and Islands of Scotland

“…A number of scholars have argued that innovation research including the MLP is enhanced through dialogue with geography and vice versa (Bulkeley et al, 2010;Cooke, 2009;Coenen et al, 2011;Marvin, 2009, 2010;Truffer, 2008). For example, Truffer and Coenen (2011, page 18) This leads to a call for 'geographies of (sustainable) transition', which, we believe, can be generated using resource peripheries research.…”

Toward a spatial perspective on sustainability transitions

“…Geographers at large have already made constructive comments, contributions and critiques on transition studies (e.g. Cooke, 2009;Hodson and Marvin, 2009;Shove and Walker, 2007;Truffer, 2008) but to date none of these have specifically juxtaposed insights on the geography of innovation with that of socio-technical transitions (with some very recent exceptions like Lawhon and Murphy, press;Coenen and Truffer, 2012). At the same time we should acknowledge that environmental economic geography, i.e.…”