The Experts below are selected from a list of 29085 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Edward R Grumbine - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
five steps to inject Transformative Change into the post 2020 global biodiversity framework
BioScience, 2021Co-Authors: Edward R GrumbineAbstract:Accelerating declines in biodiversity and unmet targets in the Convention on Biological Diversity's 2010-2020 Strategic Plan for Biodiversity are stimulating widespread calls for Transformative Change. Such Change includes societal transitions toward sustainability, as well as in specific content of the CBD's draft Post-2020 Global Biodiversity Framework. We summarize research on Transformative Change and its links to biodiversity conservation, and discuss how it may influence the work of the CBD. We identify five steps to inject Transformative Change into the design and implementation of a new post-2020 framework: Pay attention to lessons learned from transitions research, plan for climate Change, reframe area-based conservation, scale up biodiversity mainstreaming, and increase resources. These actions will transform the very nature of work under the CBD; a convention based on voluntary implementation by countries and facilitated by international administrators and experts must now accommodate a broader range of participants including businesses, Indigenous peoples, and multiple nonstate actors.
Harald Rohracher - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
legitimizing research technology and innovation policies for Transformative Change
Research Policy, 2012Co-Authors: Matthias K Weber, Harald RohracherAbstract:The recent policy debates about orientating research, technology and innovation policy towards societal challenges, rather than economic growth objectives only, call for new lines of argumentation to systematically legitimize policy interventions. While the multi-level perspective on long-term transitions has attracted quite some interest over the past years as a framework for dealing with long-term processes of Transformative Change, but the innovation systems approach is still the dominant perspective for devising innovation policy. Innovation systems approaches stress the importance of improving innovation capabilities of firms and the institutional settings to support them, but they are less suited for dealing with the strategic challenges of transforming systems of innovation, production and consumption, and thus with long-term challenges such as climate Change or resource depletion. It is therefore suggested to consider insights from transition studies more prominently in a policy framework that is based on the innovation systems approach and the associated notion of ‘failures’. We propose a comprehensive framework that allows legitimizing and devising policies for Transformative Change that draws on a combination of market failures, structural system failures and transformational system failures.
-
legitimizing research technology and innovation policies for Transformative Change combining insights from innovation systems and multi level perspective in a comprehensive failures framework
Research Policy, 2012Co-Authors: Matthias K Weber, Harald RohracherAbstract:Abstract The recent policy debates about orientating research, technology and innovation policy towards societal challenges, rather than economic growth objectives only, call for new lines of argumentation to systematically legitimize policy interventions. While the multi-level perspective on long-term transitions has attracted quite some interest over the past years as a framework for dealing with long-term processes of Transformative Change, but the innovation systems approach is still the dominant perspective for devising innovation policy. Innovation systems approaches stress the importance of improving innovation capabilities of firms and the institutional settings to support them, but they are less suited for dealing with the strategic challenges of transforming systems of innovation, production and consumption, and thus with long-term challenges such as climate Change or resource depletion. It is therefore suggested to consider insights from transition studies more prominently in a policy framework that is based on the innovation systems approach and the associated notion of ‘failures’. We propose a comprehensive framework that allows legitimizing and devising policies for Transformative Change that draws on a combination of market failures, structural system failures and transformational system failures.
Matthias K Weber - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
legitimizing research technology and innovation policies for Transformative Change
Research Policy, 2012Co-Authors: Matthias K Weber, Harald RohracherAbstract:The recent policy debates about orientating research, technology and innovation policy towards societal challenges, rather than economic growth objectives only, call for new lines of argumentation to systematically legitimize policy interventions. While the multi-level perspective on long-term transitions has attracted quite some interest over the past years as a framework for dealing with long-term processes of Transformative Change, but the innovation systems approach is still the dominant perspective for devising innovation policy. Innovation systems approaches stress the importance of improving innovation capabilities of firms and the institutional settings to support them, but they are less suited for dealing with the strategic challenges of transforming systems of innovation, production and consumption, and thus with long-term challenges such as climate Change or resource depletion. It is therefore suggested to consider insights from transition studies more prominently in a policy framework that is based on the innovation systems approach and the associated notion of ‘failures’. We propose a comprehensive framework that allows legitimizing and devising policies for Transformative Change that draws on a combination of market failures, structural system failures and transformational system failures.
-
legitimizing research technology and innovation policies for Transformative Change combining insights from innovation systems and multi level perspective in a comprehensive failures framework
Research Policy, 2012Co-Authors: Matthias K Weber, Harald RohracherAbstract:Abstract The recent policy debates about orientating research, technology and innovation policy towards societal challenges, rather than economic growth objectives only, call for new lines of argumentation to systematically legitimize policy interventions. While the multi-level perspective on long-term transitions has attracted quite some interest over the past years as a framework for dealing with long-term processes of Transformative Change, but the innovation systems approach is still the dominant perspective for devising innovation policy. Innovation systems approaches stress the importance of improving innovation capabilities of firms and the institutional settings to support them, but they are less suited for dealing with the strategic challenges of transforming systems of innovation, production and consumption, and thus with long-term challenges such as climate Change or resource depletion. It is therefore suggested to consider insights from transition studies more prominently in a policy framework that is based on the innovation systems approach and the associated notion of ‘failures’. We propose a comprehensive framework that allows legitimizing and devising policies for Transformative Change that draws on a combination of market failures, structural system failures and transformational system failures.
Darren Mccauley - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
humanizing sociotechnical transitions through energy justice an ethical framework for global Transformative Change
Energy Policy, 2018Co-Authors: Kirsten Jenkins, Benjamin K Sovacool, Darren MccauleyAbstract:Poverty, climate Change and energy security demand awareness about the interlinkages between energy systems and social justice. Amidst these challenges, energy justice has emerged to conceptualize a world where all individuals, across all areas, have safe, affordable and sustainable energy that is, essentially, socially just. Simultaneously, new social and technological solutions to energy problems continually evolve, and interest in the concept of sociotechnical transitions has grown. However, an element often missing from such transitions frameworks is explicit engagement with energy justice frameworks. Despite the development of an embryonic set of literature around these themes, an obvious research gap has emerged: can energy justice and transitions frameworks be combined? This paper argues that they can. It does so through an exploration of the multi-level perspective on sociotechnical systems and an integration of energy justice at the model’s niche, regime and landscape level. It presents the argument that it is within the overarching process of sociotechnical Change that issues of energy justice emerge. Here, inattention to social justice issues can cause injustices, whereas attention to them can provide a means to examine and potential resolve them.
Benjamin K Sovacool - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
humanizing sociotechnical transitions through energy justice an ethical framework for global Transformative Change
Energy Policy, 2018Co-Authors: Kirsten Jenkins, Benjamin K Sovacool, Darren MccauleyAbstract:Poverty, climate Change and energy security demand awareness about the interlinkages between energy systems and social justice. Amidst these challenges, energy justice has emerged to conceptualize a world where all individuals, across all areas, have safe, affordable and sustainable energy that is, essentially, socially just. Simultaneously, new social and technological solutions to energy problems continually evolve, and interest in the concept of sociotechnical transitions has grown. However, an element often missing from such transitions frameworks is explicit engagement with energy justice frameworks. Despite the development of an embryonic set of literature around these themes, an obvious research gap has emerged: can energy justice and transitions frameworks be combined? This paper argues that they can. It does so through an exploration of the multi-level perspective on sociotechnical systems and an integration of energy justice at the model’s niche, regime and landscape level. It presents the argument that it is within the overarching process of sociotechnical Change that issues of energy justice emerge. Here, inattention to social justice issues can cause injustices, whereas attention to them can provide a means to examine and potential resolve them.
