Flor Avelino

Power in Transition: An Interdisciplinary Framework to Study Power in Relation to Structural Change

This article conceptualizes power in the context of long-term process of structural change. First, it discusses the field of transition studies, which deals with processes of structural change in societal systems on the basis of certain presumptions about power relations, but still lacks an explicit conceptualization of power. Then the article discusses some prevailing points of contestation in debates on power. It is argued that for the context of transition studies, it is necessary to develop an interdisciplinary framework in which power is explicitly conceptualized in relation to change. Subsequently, such a framework is presented, with reference to existing literature on power. Starting with a philosophical and operational definition of power, a typology is developed of the different ways in which power can be exercised, explicitly including innovative power and transformative power. Finally, the presented power framework is applied to transition studies, redefining pivotal transition concepts in terms of power and formulating hypotheses on the role of power in transitions. By doing so, the article not only offers an interdisciplinary framework to study power in the context of transition studies, but also contributes to power debates more generally by including innovation and transformation as acts of power, and thereby proposes a re-conceptualization of the relation between power and structural change.

Shifting Power Relations in Sustainability Transitions: A Multi-actor Perspective

Abstract This paper contributes to understanding transition politics by conceptualizing (shifting) power relations between actors in sustainability transitions. The authors introduce a Multi-actor Perspective as a heuristic framework for specifying (shifting) power relations between different categories of actors at different levels of aggregation. First, an overview is provided of how power and empowerment have been treated in transition research, and remaining questions are identified on who exercises power and who is empowered by and with whom. It is argued that theoretical frameworks and empirical analyses in transition studies lack precision when it comes to distinguishing between different types and levels of actors. In response, a Multi-actor Perspective (MaP) is developed, which distinguishes among four sectors (state, market, community, third sector), and between actors at different levels of aggregation: (1) sectors, (2) organizational actors, and (3) individual actors. The paper moves on to specify how the MaP contributes to understanding transition politics specifically in conceptualizing shifting power relations. Throughout the paper, empirical illustrations are used regarding public debates on welfare state reform, civil society and ‘Big Society’, as well as more specific empirical examples of community energy initiatives.

The politics of sustainability transitions

Sustainability transitions are processes of fundamental social change in response to societal challenges (Grin, Rotmans, & Schot, 2010; Markard, Raven, & Truffer, 2012). They reflect a particular diagnosis of persistent social problems, in which persistence is attributed to the path dependency of dominant practices and structures (i.e. ‘regimes’), whose resolution requires structural and long-term change. By their nature, transitions involve politics in the broadest sense of the word, that is, as

Outliers or Frontrunners? Exploring the (Self-) Governance of Community- Owned Sustainable Energy in Scotland and the Netherlands

Community owned renewable energy initiatives are the emergent and self-organized arrangements where communities become both producers and suppliers of energy. Cases of community energy developments form Texel (Netherlands), and Undy and Urgha (UK) are the empirical grounds that demonstrate this capacity. As highly desirable community owned renewable initiatives may seem, they face many enablers. However, they are also confronted with various tensions, as identified in this chapter. A closer look of the governance space in which these community initiatives operate, reveals that tensions and opportunities span from socio-cultural, political, and technological axes. These initiatives are both outliers and frontrunners of a sustainable energy transition: they create new forms of institutions, challenge even benefiting to them instruments, dare to uptake risks and seize opportunities, and operate outside demarcated institutional space. Community owned energy initiatives constitute a new form of local renewable energy governance that deserves to be explored.

Game-changers and transformative social innovation

This editorial introduces the special feature on the role of game-changers, broadly conceptualized as macro-trends that change the “rules of the game,” in processes of transformative social innovation. First, the key concepts are introduced together with the academic workshop that brought together 25 scholars, from across a wide range of disciplines, to discuss the role of game-changers in transformative social innovation, resulting in the 9 contributions in this special feature. Second, the differing conceptualizations of the role of game-changers in transformative social innovation across the set of articles are discussed. Third, an overview is provided of the different empirical examples of game-changers and transformative social innovations addressed; examples were drawn from different geographical contexts across Europe, North America, South America, Africa, and Asia. Fourth, the differing epistemological approaches used to explain social change are noted, and lessons for interdisciplinary and transdisciplinary research on social change discussed. Finally, a synthesis is provided of the main insights and contributions to the literature.

Introducing Sustainability Transitions’ Thinking in Urban Contexts

This chapter describes the basics of transitions thinking, its rationale and relation to sustainability transitions. We outline the fundamental conceptual models and frameworks (multi-phase model, multi-level perspective, multi-path, power and agency) and make a quick introduction to the relation of the sustainability transitions field to environmental governance.

Empowering Actors in Transition Management in and for Cities

The multi-actor nature of urban sustainability transitions challenges existing social fabrics and local governance settings, and raises questions about who takes decisions, with which agenda and to what end. It demands close attention to who are actors involved in transition processes and what are the implications for (changing) roles, responsibilities and relations of actors and networks. This chapter provides an overview of different understandings of actors and roles in transition management in and for cities and how actors are empowered through transition management interventions to advance urban sustainability transitions. We first review different approaches and heuristics to understand actors and roles in transition management and in relation to the underlying goal to influence urban sustainability transitions. These enable to analyse actors and (changing) roles, support the actor selection and enhance reflexivity in transition management processes. We then discuss what the notion of ‘empowerment’ captures in terms of how actors (re-)define, develop and enact roles and relationships in the pursuit of urban sustainability transitions as a result of transition management interventions in cities. We exemplify our reflections with insights from our empirical experiences with transition management processes.

Transition Management in and for Cities: Introducing a New Governance Approach to Address Urban Challenges

For introducing our book, this chapter provides the arguments on why transition management as a governance approach is suitable for cities, as a new strategic planning approach. It also includes a thorough literature review of transition management applications from 2001 to 2017 that shows its spread as a heuristic, operational and theoretical model for transition governance in multiple sectors and across local, regional and national levels. From the literature review and the book contributions we derive ten directions for future research and development of transition management that can benefit not only its operational applications as a process methodology but also its theoretical and heuristic strengths, pointing at theoretical and conceptual deepening and broadening of its tenets and principles. Next, the chapter provides an overview of the book, its four parts and summaries of all chapter contributions. Last, we provide a ‘guide’ on how to read this book, and how to best use the knowledge and experience shared in readers’ research and urban practice.

Critical Approaches to Transitions Theory

Since its emergence as a theory of sustainability transformation, transitions theory has started to gain currency with both policymakers and researchers. As transitions approaches become established in research and policy, a process of institutionalization can be witnessed. Yet notwithstanding this mainstreaming, transitions theory continues to be controversial. Questions have been raised about its theorization of agency and transformation dynamics, and especially about the normative assumptions underlying its intervention strategies. Arguably, these recurring questions call for ‘critical approaches’ to transitions theory. This contribution explores these, guided by a constructive attitude. The argument starts from the consideration that transitions theory harboursdistinctly ‘critical’ elements, and that polemical juxtapositions between critical and uncritical transitions approaches are unnecessary: What are the critical contents of transitions theory? How can the critical contents of transitions theory be retained and developed further? These questions are answered through a historical comparison with the critical-theoretical project as initiated by Marx, Horkheimer and Adorno, amongst others.As with transitions studies, this project was meant to diagnose the social problems of its time, and to articulate corresponding remedial strategies. It ran into various internal contradictions, however, and these provide useful insights for the further development of critical transitions. The main conclusion is that transitions theory is well equipped to deal with these critical-theoretical paradoxes, but also displays tendencies towards relapsing into the pitfalls.