Transition management a model for managing sustainability transitions

Transition management: a model for managing sustainability transitions René Kemp Presentation at ADEME, Paris Dec 2, 2011

Dilemmas for steering

A dilemma is a problem offering two solutions, neither of which is acceptable.

On sustainability Sustainability is an elusive concept and beyond the reach of single organizations. n Reguirements are multiple and interconnected n Pursuit of SD hinges on integration: sustainability cannot be achieved through single instruments but requires a framework for making instrument choices and new ways of governing. It needs policies that are positively concerned with change and innovation. n

Sustainable development is something difficult for policy makers because you can’t really measure it n there is no consensus on what exactly should be ‘sustained’ (certain environmental qualities, economic growth, certain capabilities) or achieved n there are different ideas of what sustainable development amounts to in various sectors (energy, transport, agriculture, food systems, waste management) n whatever it is, it can not be achieved in the shortterm, and without some effort n

Dilemma 1: Competing visions and interests

n Solution: adaptive portfolios to learn about multiple visions

The use of adaptive portfolios helps to avoid two possible dangers of sustainable energy policy 1. 2. The promotion of short-term options which comes from the use of technology-blind generic support policies such as carbon taxes or cap and trade systems (which despite being “technology-blind” are not technology neutral at all because they favour low-hanging fruit and regimepreserving change (Jacobsson et al. , 2009), Picking losers (technologies and system configurations which are suboptimal) through technology-specific policies proposed by special interests.

Dilemma 2: Learning versus Action

n Solution: a strategic learning process – Which is reflexive – Which helps to strategically discover, contextually and in an action oriented way, promising dynamics between • Niche experiments (own + others) • regime changes • Landscape developments

Dilemma 3: Partnership versus leadership

n Solution: Special partnerships for transformative innovation (transition platforms for specific innovations) – Combined with regulation of nonsustainable technologies and practices

Dilemma 4: Politics needs quick results (successes) but transitions cannot be created overnight

Dilemma 5: Go for small steps or large steps?

Small steps into strategically chosen direction

Dilemma 6: What options to support, for how long?

n Solution: a mix of short-term and longterm options – with long-term options based on sustainability assessment, public acceptance and market prospects

…high-risk, high reward project vs. low-risk, low achievement project…

Dilemma 6: protection versus selection pressure

n Solution: policies should be based on identified barriers, not on theoretical assumptions – The barriers may be national or technology-specific – Policy may be a source of barriers (regulations creating market entry barriers, failures to internalise external costs, . . ). – In general, the barriers for radical innovation are far greater than those for incremental innovation

Specific versus general support n Why specific support is needed: 1. Specific technologies suffer from specific barriers that no general support scheme can successfully address. 2. This is especially true for radical innovations because of uncertainty, long-term payoff (because of long development time) and problems of appropriating the benefits amongst contributing actors.

Dilemmas n n n How to involve vested interests in a good way? How to deal with political pressures for quick results? How to balance support and selection pressure? How to phase out support? Solutions create their own problems. Can we deal with them proactively?

The Dutch Energy transition approach as a possible model for France

In the NL “transition thinking” entered the minds of policy makers The notion of transition came up in discussions about unsustainable systems in late 90 s and persistent problems n It is used as a concept for policy in the Netherlands (7 transition platforms in the area of energy, interdepartmental cooperation) n In NL we have a big social science programme on system innovation and transitions (20 mln euro) n Transition researchers interacting with practitioners n

Why should we care about transitions? Present systems are in need of change – Science/education: too much supply-oriented and disciplinary fragmented – Health care: supply oriented, rising costs, . . – Energy: dependence on non-sustainable fossil fuels – Mobility: oil dependence, congestion, air pollution problems, noise, … – Agriculture: environment and animal unfriendly, regular disease crises n Problems are persistent n Solution lies in alternative systems transition n

Important distinctions – Improvement innovation vs. radical / transformative innovation – System innovation vs. system improvement

4 types of innovation Source: Kemp (2011)

Transformative innovation n n Is broad in scope and radical in character It is about the implementation of a system-wide novelty It involves a wide diversity of actors and often takes decades to move from margins to mainstream It is dynamic and non-standardised It is disruptive from the viewpoint of incumbent actors (including users) See Fred Steward, Breaking the Boundaries. Transformative change for the Common Good, 2008

Smart grids + plug-in EV

DESERTEC n n n 100 GW Concentrating Solar Thermal Power (CSP) plants in the Sahara-desert Mirrors that heat oil in troughs to 500 C High Voltage Direct Current (HVDC) connector to Europe Heat storage tanks (e. g. , molten salt tanks) Waste heat may be used to desalinate sea water.

Possemarré (Germany) n n n n Passive homes with heat exchange system (100 m deep) New destination of old factory Located near public transport hubs to Dusseldorf and Wuppertal Urban element in green environment (Neadertal) Different age groups Working and living KFW loans for eco-houses

Intermodality

The Dutch transition approach for sustainable energy The energy transition approach is one of the pillars of the programme “Clean and energy-efficient” for achieving carbon reductions, air quality benefits and energy savings. In total the following sums of money have been allocated for cleaner energy and energy saving: 1. 747 million euro in 2009, 1. 898 million euro in 2010 and 1. 898 in 2011. n The Dutch energy transition approach covers the entire energy supply system (including clean coal) with the exception of nuclear energy. n The energy innovation agenda formulated in 2008 is oriented towards the 7 themes of the energy transition. For each theme, the government has formulated specific activities. n

At the heart of the energy transition project are the activities of 7 transition platforms. n In these platforms individuals from the private and the public sector, academia and civil society come together to develop a common ambition for particular areas, develop pathways and suggest transition experiments. n The 7 platforms are: n – – – – New gas Green resources Chain efficiency Sustainable electricity supply Sustainable mobility Built environment Energy-producing greenhouse

Green Resources Goal: to replace 30% of fossil fuels by green resources by 2030 n n n Sustainable biomass production Biomass import chain Co-production of chemicals, transport fuels, electricity and heat Production of SNG Innovative use of biobased raw materials for nonfood/non-energy applications and making existing chemical products and processes more sustainable

More than technology support The transition approach goes beyond technology support. It is oriented at creation capabilities, networks and institutions for transitional change through the creation of agendas, partnerships, new instruments, and vertical and policy coordination are part of it. n The IPE (Interdepartmental Project directorate Energy transition) plays an important role in “taking initiatives”, “connecting and strengthening initiatives”, “evaluate existing policy and to act upon the policy advice from the Regieorgaan and transition platforms”, to “stimulate interdepartmental coordination” and to “make the overall transition approach more coherent” n

Vehicle for policy change n The whole approach is set up as a vehicle for sociotechnical change and policy change in a coordinated manner through: – the (programming) activities of transition platforms and taskforces – a frontrunners desk – specially commissioned research into the development of transition paths – the transitions knowledge center (KCT) – the competence center for transitions (CCT) – and transition experiments. n There also regular interactions between transition researchers, practitioners and government.

Front runners desk 59% of the cases, the problems were solved thanks to the intervention of the desk, in 12% of the cases the companies could not be helped, and in the remaining cases (29%) the desk was still dealing with the issue at the time of the evaluation.

Platform Planned activities in 2009 Regieorgaan Production of an official advice on policy, in which they make recommendation for instrument choices Green resources To follow the implementation of sustainability criteria for biomass Position paper on CO 2 allowances for biomass To launch an explorative study into the macroeconomic effects of biomass production and use in the Netherlands. To develop a systematique for measuring green resources Sustainable Electricity Production Formulate platform positions on off shore energy, rules for co-burning of biomass, cogeneration, and conditions for coal-fired plants Implementation the earlier formulated action plan Decentralised infrastructure (smart nets) To examine and utilise opportunities in blue energy

The philosophy behind TM: Perspektivischer Inkrementalismus n n n Multiple visions Experience-based learning Adaptive portfolios Top-down and bottom-up Government as facilitator A corporatist industrial policy approach

Policy making Regieraad Energietransit ie Nederland IPE Demand side Policies Supply driven policies RTD EOS ECN WBSO Omnibus Smartmix Sociotechnical alignment policies Frontrunners desk TEMA Criteria for sustainable biofuels Technopartner Clusters Demo and Pilots UKR ESO-Demo ETS Env. covenants EZ+VROM SDE (production subsidies) EZ Green procurement VROM Support startup firms EZ Innovation policy executive 7 Transition platforms with business, gov. , academia, CSO

Provisional Evaluation Positive n In the eyes of the Dutch government, the energy approach so far is a success, by being able to exploit latent business interests in sustainable energy. n Alternative energy (use) systems are supported through special learning projects and programmes. Policies for innovation are combined with policies to achieve immediate carbon reductions, through carbon trading, covenants about energy savings and a support scheme for sustainable energy production. Negative n Incumbents have a strong influence Unclear n Will it bring forward system innovations? Will it create new business?

As of 2011 n The Dutch transition approach was abandoned in 2011 by the new conservative government in favour of a top-sector approach for innovation – Energy is one of the top-sectors – Green resources is part of the top-sector Chemistry – Green deals

Policy as a trajectory of its own n n Optimal policies only exist in economic text books, agencies must find ways of using instruments, adjust them to new technologies and circumstance. Policy is about taking steps in the right direction Policy learning should be maximised. Analysing the interaction effects of different policies may help to remove policy inconsistencies Unpopular but necessary policies must be introduced in strategic, step-wise manner – to gain experience, build acceptance and sharpen them.