The Experts below are selected from a list of 34836 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Paula Kivimaa - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
what opportunities could the covid 19 outbreak offer for Sustainability Transitions research on electricity and mobility
Energy research and social science, 2020Co-Authors: Wisdom Kanda, Paula KivimaaAbstract:The COVID-19 pandemic is a major landscape shock that is having pervasive effects across socio-technical systems. Due to its recentness, Sustainability scientists and other researchers have only started to investigate the implications of this crisis. The COVID-19 outbreak presents a unique opportunity to analyze in real time the effects of a protracted landscape-scale perturbation on the trajectories of Sustainability Transitions. In this perspective, we explore the ramifications for Sustainability Transition research on electricity and mobility, drawing from selected examples in Finland and Sweden. The long-term consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic are likely to trigger more permanent changes connected to the digitalization of work and other daily activities, thus reducing mobility needs and overall fossil-energy consumption. The crisis may encourage governance systems to be better prepared for different types of shocks in the future, while it also contains a threat of increasingly populist or undemocratic political responses and increased securitization. These developments can guide research by addressing the reproduction of new practices arising from the COVID-19 outbreak to accelerate Sustainability Transitions, enhancing understanding of the role of governance in Transitions, and bringing to attention the ethical and political implications of landscape shocks.
Frank W Geels - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
opinion why carbon pricing is not sufficient to mitigate climate change and how Sustainability Transition policy can help
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2020Co-Authors: Daniel Rosenbloom, Jochen Markard, Frank W Geels, Lea FuenfschillingAbstract:Carbon pricing is often presented as the primary policy approach to address climate change. We challenge this position and offer “Sustainability Transition policy” (STP) as an alternative. Carbon pricing has weaknesses with regard to five central dimensions: 1) problem framing and solution orientation, 2) policy priorities, 3) innovation approach, 4) contextual considerations, and 5) politics. In order to address the urgency of climate change and to achieve deep decarbonization, climate policy responses need to move beyond market failure reasoning and focus on fundamental changes in existing sociotechnical systems such as energy, mobility, food, and industrial production. The core principles of STP can help tackle this challenge. Many are eager to take more substantive policy steps to address climate change, but pricing carbon pricing alone won’t be sufficient. Image credit: Shutterstock/Shawn Goldberg. Realizing deep decarbonization at the pace necessary to mitigate the worst impacts of climate change has emerged as a pressing challenge for policymakers (1). As a result, the debate about appropriate policy responses has intensified. Many experts and societal actors see carbon pricing as the primary way forward (2⇓–4). Some even use it to argue against other policies, such as fuel efficiency standards. Viewed as the most efficient approach to cut greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, carbon pricing incentivizes actors to seek the lowest-cost abatement options for their specific circumstances. Consequently, many economists argue that carbon pricing should be the cornerstone of a climate policy response. We question this reasoning. Carbon pricing faces five major issues that limit its use for accelerating deep decarbonization. First, carbon pricing frames climate change as a market failure rather than as a fundamental system problem. Second, it places particular weight on efficiency as opposed to effectiveness. Third, it tends to stimulate the optimization of existing systems rather than transformation. Fourth, it … [↵][1]1To whom correspondence may be addressed. Email: daniel.rosenbloom{at}utoronto.ca. [1]: #xref-corresp-1-1
-
opinion why carbon pricing is not sufficient to mitigate climate change and how Sustainability Transition policy can help
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2020Co-Authors: Daniel Rosenbloom, Jochen Markard, Frank W Geels, Lea FuenfschillingAbstract:Carbon pricing is often presented as the primary policy approach to address climate change. We challenge this position and offer “Sustainability Transition policy” (STP) as an alternative. Carbon pricing has weaknesses with regard to five central dimensions: 1) problem framing and solution orientation, 2) policy priorities, 3) innovation approach, 4) contextual considerations, and 5) politics. In order to address the urgency of climate change and to achieve deep decarbonization, climate policy responses need to move beyond market failure reasoning and focus on fundamental changes in existing sociotechnical systems such as energy, mobility, food, and industrial production. The core principles of STP can help tackle this challenge. Realizing deep decarbonization at the pace necessary to mitigate the worst impacts of climate change has emerged as a pressing challenge for policymakers (1). As a result, the debate about appropriate policy responses has intensified. Many experts and societal actors see carbon pricing as the primary way forward (2⇓–4). Some even use it to argue against other policies, such as fuel efficiency standards. Viewed as the most efficient approach to cut greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, carbon pricing incentivizes actors to seek the lowest-cost abatement options for their specific circumstances. Consequently, many economists argue that carbon pricing should be the cornerstone of a climate policy response. We question this reasoning. Carbon pricing faces five major issues that limit its use for accelerating deep decarbonization. First, carbon pricing frames climate change as a market failure rather than as a fundamental system problem. Second, it places particular weight on efficiency as opposed to effectiveness. Third, it tends to stimulate the optimization of existing systems rather than transformation. Fourth, it suggests a universal instead of context-sensitive policy approach. Fifth, it fails to reflect political realities. Given these limitations, we propose an alternative approach that targets … [↵][1]1To whom correspondence may be addressed. Email: daniel.rosenbloom{at}utoronto.ca. [1]: #xref-corresp-1-1
-
the ongoing energy Transition lessons from a socio technical multi level analysis of the dutch electricity system 1960 2004
Energy Policy, 2007Co-Authors: Gpj Geert Verbong, Frank W GeelsAbstract:Energy Transitions to Sustainability receive much interest in politics and science. Using a socio-technical and multi-level theory on Transitions, this article draws important lessons from a long-term analysis of the Dutch electricity system. The article analyses technical developments, changes in rules and visions, and social networks that support and oppose renewable options. The article is multi-level because it looks at novel renewable energy technologies and structural trends in the existing electricity regime. The analysis shows that an energy Transition, with roots in the 1960s and 1970s, is already occurring, but driven mainly by liberalisation and Europeanisation. Environmental aspects have become part of this ongoing Transition, but do not form its main driver. Many barriers exist for a Sustainability Transition, but there are also some opportunities. A long-term analysis of renewable niche-innovation trajectories (wind, biomass, PV) provides lessons about socio-technical dynamics, problems and windows of opportunity.
Piergiuseppe Morone - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Transitioning towards the bio economy assessing the social dimension through a stakeholder lens
Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 2019Co-Authors: Pasquale Marcello Falcone, Enrica Imbert, Almona Tani, Sara Gonzalez Garcia, Lucia Lijo, Maria Teresa Moreira, Valentina Elena Tartiu, Piergiuseppe MoroneAbstract:The authors are very grateful to the STAR‐ProBio project (Sustainability Transition Assessment and Research of Bio‐based Products) for their financial support. The project is funded by the European Union's Horizon 2020 Research and Innovation Programme under Grant Agreement 727740, Work Programme BB‐01‐2016: Sustainability schemes for the bio‐based economy
-
greening of the financial system and fuelling a Sustainability Transition a discursive approach to assess landscape pressures on the italian financial system
Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 2018Co-Authors: Pasquale Marcello Falcone, Piergiuseppe Morone, Edgardo SicaAbstract:Abstract By examining the use of language and depicting the emerging storylines surrounding the green finance (GF) niche, this study aims to identify actors pushing the Italian financial sector to become increasingly greener. Then, it scrutinizes the narratives used by landscape actors to assess the channels through which such pressure is exerted, as well as its effectiveness. Our findings reveal a high/unbalanced narrative pressure coming from global actors by means of both institutional and informal channels, and from national actors mainly by means of informal channels. If no apposite policy interventions are undertaken, such inadequacy could jeopardize the development of green innovations. More specifically, this study could support decision makers in developing specific strategies to unlock the huge potential of GF in the Transition process towards a greener economy by: (i) supporting a deeper strategic collaboration among informal and institutional actors operating at the national level; (ii) acting as catalysts of green-oriented financial initiatives and related dissemination, and (iii) re-addressing the national-institutional actors towards a more proactive role in fostering finance for green innovation.
-
Transition to a sustainable agro food system the role of innovation policies
2016Co-Authors: Piergiuseppe Morone, L CottoniAbstract:Abstract In this chapter, the key drivers to a Sustainability Transition in the agro-food system are denoted. First, the areas of pressure on the food system stemming mostly from the megatrends occurring at the outset were identified, ie, the demographic growth trend accompanied by the foreseen income and wealth increase expected over the next 35 years. These trends call for a paradigm shift from the current unsustainable production and consumption model toward a new model where climate change, food security, and waste management are conceived unitarily, and are simultaneously confronted. Building on the multilevel perspective and, most notably, on Sustainability Transition theory, the way this paradigmatic change occurs in the agro-food sector is revealed.
Lea Fuenfschilling - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
opinion why carbon pricing is not sufficient to mitigate climate change and how Sustainability Transition policy can help
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2020Co-Authors: Daniel Rosenbloom, Jochen Markard, Frank W Geels, Lea FuenfschillingAbstract:Carbon pricing is often presented as the primary policy approach to address climate change. We challenge this position and offer “Sustainability Transition policy” (STP) as an alternative. Carbon pricing has weaknesses with regard to five central dimensions: 1) problem framing and solution orientation, 2) policy priorities, 3) innovation approach, 4) contextual considerations, and 5) politics. In order to address the urgency of climate change and to achieve deep decarbonization, climate policy responses need to move beyond market failure reasoning and focus on fundamental changes in existing sociotechnical systems such as energy, mobility, food, and industrial production. The core principles of STP can help tackle this challenge. Many are eager to take more substantive policy steps to address climate change, but pricing carbon pricing alone won’t be sufficient. Image credit: Shutterstock/Shawn Goldberg. Realizing deep decarbonization at the pace necessary to mitigate the worst impacts of climate change has emerged as a pressing challenge for policymakers (1). As a result, the debate about appropriate policy responses has intensified. Many experts and societal actors see carbon pricing as the primary way forward (2⇓–4). Some even use it to argue against other policies, such as fuel efficiency standards. Viewed as the most efficient approach to cut greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, carbon pricing incentivizes actors to seek the lowest-cost abatement options for their specific circumstances. Consequently, many economists argue that carbon pricing should be the cornerstone of a climate policy response. We question this reasoning. Carbon pricing faces five major issues that limit its use for accelerating deep decarbonization. First, carbon pricing frames climate change as a market failure rather than as a fundamental system problem. Second, it places particular weight on efficiency as opposed to effectiveness. Third, it tends to stimulate the optimization of existing systems rather than transformation. Fourth, it … [↵][1]1To whom correspondence may be addressed. Email: daniel.rosenbloom{at}utoronto.ca. [1]: #xref-corresp-1-1
-
opinion why carbon pricing is not sufficient to mitigate climate change and how Sustainability Transition policy can help
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2020Co-Authors: Daniel Rosenbloom, Jochen Markard, Frank W Geels, Lea FuenfschillingAbstract:Carbon pricing is often presented as the primary policy approach to address climate change. We challenge this position and offer “Sustainability Transition policy” (STP) as an alternative. Carbon pricing has weaknesses with regard to five central dimensions: 1) problem framing and solution orientation, 2) policy priorities, 3) innovation approach, 4) contextual considerations, and 5) politics. In order to address the urgency of climate change and to achieve deep decarbonization, climate policy responses need to move beyond market failure reasoning and focus on fundamental changes in existing sociotechnical systems such as energy, mobility, food, and industrial production. The core principles of STP can help tackle this challenge. Realizing deep decarbonization at the pace necessary to mitigate the worst impacts of climate change has emerged as a pressing challenge for policymakers (1). As a result, the debate about appropriate policy responses has intensified. Many experts and societal actors see carbon pricing as the primary way forward (2⇓–4). Some even use it to argue against other policies, such as fuel efficiency standards. Viewed as the most efficient approach to cut greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, carbon pricing incentivizes actors to seek the lowest-cost abatement options for their specific circumstances. Consequently, many economists argue that carbon pricing should be the cornerstone of a climate policy response. We question this reasoning. Carbon pricing faces five major issues that limit its use for accelerating deep decarbonization. First, carbon pricing frames climate change as a market failure rather than as a fundamental system problem. Second, it places particular weight on efficiency as opposed to effectiveness. Third, it tends to stimulate the optimization of existing systems rather than transformation. Fourth, it suggests a universal instead of context-sensitive policy approach. Fifth, it fails to reflect political realities. Given these limitations, we propose an alternative approach that targets … [↵][1]1To whom correspondence may be addressed. Email: daniel.rosenbloom{at}utoronto.ca. [1]: #xref-corresp-1-1
Linjun Xie - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
governance of the circular economy a comparative examination of the use of standards by china and the united kingdom
Environmental innovation and societal transitions, 2019Co-Authors: Andrew Flynn, Nicholas Hacking, Linjun XieAbstract:Wastes, like other materials, have become increasingly global in their flows. The circular economy (CE) is a multi-level Sustainability Transition linked to the global trade in waste. China has long been a key trading partner for the West’s waste materials. However, its rethinking of the quality of traded recyclable materials has triggered a crisis in the global governance of waste flows. We utilise a Sociology of Knowledge approach to undertake comparative work to better understand how different governance arrangements may facilitate or constrain the unfolding of a CE Transition. The UK and China were selected as models of liberal and authoritarian environmental governance respectively. A mixed-method approach was pursued using qualitative interviews with key stakeholders and analysis of quantitative and qualitative data from secondary sources. Thematic analysis is organised around: perceptions of the circular economy, meanings of standards, and perspectives on trade and materials.
