Socio-technical transitions in farming: key concepts - Transition Pathways towards Sustainability in Agriculture: Case Studies from Europe - page 18

Socio-technical transitions to sustainability
Characteristics of transition studies
Transition studies build on a wide range of theoretical backgrounds (Geels and Schot,
2010). These include evolutionary economics, which focuses on long-term processes and
developed the concept of technological regime to understand coordination within a
population of firms. They also include sociology, especially structuration theory (Giddens,
1984), which assumes knowledgeable, interpretive actors that enact rules and structures,
and where structures guide but do not determine action. Furthermore, they draw heavily on
innovation studies and on science and technology studies (STS) which have shown the
complexity, fluidity and contingency of technological change (Elzen et al ., 2004b).
The concept of co-evolution denotes the interaction between societal subsystems which
influence the dynamics of the societal system under study. Indeed, as economic, cultural,
technological, ecological and institutional subsystems interact, they respond to changes in
each other and adapt. Understanding transitions thus means that structures, cultures and
practices of a societal system are analysed in an integrative manner (de Haan and Rotmans,
2011). Structures include the formal, physical, legal and economic aspects that enable or
restrict practices. Cultures include the cognitive, discursive and ideological aspects
involved in sense-making. Finally, practices include the routines, habits and procedures
through which actors (individuals, organizations) maintain the functioning of the societal
system. Since structures, cultures and practices co-evolve, it implies that in a transition,
they are fundamentally changed so that the way the societal system functions is profoundly
altered (de Haan and Rotmans, 2011).
Within studies of socio-technical transitions, two broad approaches can be
distinguished. First, there are historical studies of completed socio-technical transitions
(e.g. the shift from sailboats to steamships, Geels, 2002 or from horse-drawn carriages to
automobiles, Geels, 2005). They were driven by the commercial motivation of pioneers and
entrepreneurs who developed the technology. They were not planned or managed by policy.
Their objectives were not determined beforehand, but the transitions and their directions
emerged as a result of co-evolutionary processes involving a variety of societal influences
(Slingerland and Rabbinge, 2009). Thus, while normative changes were often involved,
they were not the main drivers.
Second, there are studies of current societal changes . These often explicitly focus on
'transitions to sustainability', which is a normative goal and thus there is an (implicit)
intention to steer them in the 'right' direction (Grin et al. , 2010). As these are ongoing
processes and future developments cannot be predicted, it is uncertain whether the outcome
will be limited to incremental change or whether there will be a radical transformation.
Whilst for historical studies it is clear what changes were brought about, for studies of
ongoing processes it remains a challenge to distinguish incremental change processes
which are ongoing in any regime, from those change processes which will - eventually -
lead to systemic, radical change and thus qualify as 'transition'.
The multi-level perspective
The MLP views transitions as non-linear processes that result from the interplay of
developments at three analytical levels: niches (the locus of radical innovations);