Agriculture Reference
In-Depth Information
compatible. For example, a niche promoting environmentally friendly farming practices
might find a 'natural ally' in actors from the environmental protection regime (see Diaz
et
al.
, 2013). However, while the niche is highly compatible with one regime, it may well be
radical in relation to another regime, so that building links with that regime may be much
more challenging.
Before analysing the question 'how does the niche link with the regime?' it is
important to assess 'with what regime does the niche link?' Indeed, in some of the case
studies presented in this topic it was less a matter of niche versus regime, and more about a
niche that has linked with one regime and together worked towards transforming a third
regime. Whilst a niche is frequently “informed, initiated and designed in response to
sustainability problems perceived in the regime” (Smith, 2007:436), this sustainability
problem is also perceived by other regimes. These other regimes may make natural allies
who offer resources to the niche. As Smith (2007) points out, the challenge for a niche to
link with a regime is less arduous for niches which are aligned to it. In understanding the
take-off phase of a transition, it might therefore be useful to pay attention to dynamics
between regimes; how actors from one regime might support a niche in its efforts to
transform another regime.
In terms of these dynamics, a number of processes and actor types were explored
during the research process. Elzen
et al.
(2012) identify three types of 'anchoring' to
describe the linking processes between a novelty and existing structures and institutions:
technical, network and institutional. Technological anchoring refers to the further
specification of the technology around which the niche is focused. In studying cases which
were largely based on new practices and ways of working, rather than technologies per se,
technological anchoring involved the development of products for market, new means of
credit access, or other forms of collaboration. Technological anchoring therefore over-
lapped with 'network anchoring': the recruitment of new actors into the niche. Darrot
et al.
(this volume) described these partnerships as
'
niche-tandems': relationships developed
across multiple sub-regimes (e.g. producers working with consumers; processors enrolled
in the tourism industry). These strong bonds between individuals operating in different
regimes were important for creating new spaces for novelties to become niches, and for
niches to develop (e.g. through securing access to markets or state support). Although
anchoring typically occurred, initially, between two interest groups, Vlahos and Schiller
(this volume) found that the order in which this anchoring occurred was not important;
anchoring processes were in any case iterative as the niche developed. This growing
interaction between members of multiple regimes led to what Lošťák
et al.
(this volume)
termed 'regime grafitting', whereby the rules or expectations of one regime were
transposed onto the niche's governance structure (such that during processes of institutional
anchoring, regulations, rules and norms could be transferred from one regime onto another).
It is important to note that whilst a niche might not aim to transform the regime, it may
engage with the regime in such a way as to create conditions that are conducive to its
further development. For example, an initiative might be successful in defining an agri-
environmental measure suited to its needs so as to be able to receive direct payments; a
form of institutional anchoring (see Elzen
et al.
, 2012; Diaz
et al.
, 2013).
With the niche
successfully influencing the selection of environment, it simultaneously favourably affects
the 'opportunity space' for other networks, for other niches and, thus, in effect changes the
regime. Smith and Raven (2012:1030) have labelled this transformation of the selection
environment 'stretch and transform empowerment', where some features of the niche are
Search WWH ::
Custom Search