Philip J. Vergragt

Learning for Sustainability Transition through Bounded Socio-technical Experiments in Personal Mobility

Abstract A bounded socio-technical experiment (BSTE) attempts to introduce a new technology, service, or a social arrangement on a small scale. Many such experiments in personal mobility are ongoing worldwide. They are carried out by coalitions of diverse actors, and are driven by long term and large scale visions of advancing society’s sustainability agenda. This paper focuses on the processes of higher-order learning that occur through BSTEs. Based on the conceptual frameworks from theories of organizational learning, policy-oriented learning, and diffusion of innovation, we identify two types of learning: the first type occurs among the participants in the experiment and their immediate professional networks; the second type occurs in the society at large. Both types play a key role in the societal transition towards sustainable mobility systems. Two case studies, in which the Design for Sustainability Group at Technical University of Delft has participated, provide empirical data for the analysis. One case consists of development of a three-wheeled bike-plus vehicle (Mitka); the second case seeks to solve mobility problems on the Dutch island of Texel. We find that higher order learning of the first type occurs among the BSTE participants and beyond. Learning can be facilitated by deployment of structured visioning exercises, by diffusion of ideas among related BSTEs, by innovative couplings of problems and solutions, and by creating links among related experiments. Government agencies, universities and other intellectual entrepreneurs have key roles to play in making that happen. The cases provide much less insights about the second type of learning. Research on the latter is necessary.

Traditional and Modern Technology Assessment: Toward a Toolkit

Abstract Technology assessment (TA) as a discipline includes rather different approaches and methods. Traditionally, the discipline has focused on forecasting, impact assessment, and policy studies. Later more process-oriented approaches, such as constructive technology assessment (CTA), were developed that were aimed explicitly at influencing the shape of new technologies. Although the new approaches have enriched the field of technology assessment, the scope and variety of the field has increased, particularly concerning its methods. These range from trend extrapolation and Delphis to interventions in innovation networks and consensus conferences. This article aims to classify the approaches and methods of TA into a common framework. Distinctions are made between methods of analysis and intervention methods, and between methods functioning as project layout and mere tools. Some criteria are formulated for the choice of methods. In this way, the article attempts to increase the coherence of the field of TA, and to make it more transparent to nonpractitioners such as scientists and engineers, government employees, and members of civil movements.

Social experiments in the development of environmental technology: a bottom-up perspective

In the development implementation of environmental technologies, many initiatives are taken by citizen groups and non-governmental organizations, outside the institutional structures of firms and governments. These initiatives are calied social experiments. Based on three case studies, this paper explores the emergence, organizational structure and innovation processes of these social experiments, and their contribution to the development of environmental technologies as a whole.

The social management of environmental change

While environmental change and policy responses to environmental threat have attracted considerable attention from government and industry over the past decade, conventional approaches have tended to be individualistic, naturalistic and government-led in orientation. This article considers a perspective on ‘sustainable development’ which emphasizes citizen-led initiatives. In particular, the possibilities for ‘bridging the gap’ between innovation processes and the implementation of technology are discussed. Three European case-studies are presented of a constructive and citizen-led ‘social management’ of environmental change—urban ecology, wind energy and science shops. Conclusions are then reached about the policy and theoretical significance of these social experiments.

The challenge of energy retrofitting the residential housing stock: grassroots innovations and socio-technical system change in Worcester, MA

This paper addresses an intractable problem: how to energy-upgrade the existing residential housing stock on a large scale, potentially saving up to 30% of all greenhouse gas emissions? The paper focuses on the USA, with a case study in Worcester, Massachusetts. To address this problem we conceptualise the residential housing stock as a socio-technical system, with as main elements technology, professional knowledge and know-how, formal institutions, markets and the key actors within each. The analysis demonstrates the interconnectedness of the elements and sub-elements of the system, the need to affect change in all of them, identifies homeowners (consumers) and local authorities as the most difficult to change, and suggests that both technological and social innovation – including grassroots activism and multistakeholder collaboration – is needed. We conceptualise housing retrofitting projects as small-scale niche experiments and as grassroots innovations. In this paper we describe an experiment in Worcester, Massachusetts, in which the vision of the project – as community development – was produced by a coalition (WoHEC) of many local actors. This project illustrates both the potentials of our proposed framework in terms of grassroots innovations and socio-technical experiments and its limitations: learning among stakeholders is often slow and ineffective. More research is needed to refine the conceptual framework and to make it applicable to both grassroots innovations and municipal projects.

Re-thinging the relationship between enviromental regulation and industrial innovation: The social negotiation of technical change

This paper draws attention to the current political and acdemic dislocation between regulation and innovation as activities and aims to emphasize the significance of the interrelationship both in terms of academic analysis and of policy approaches. The notion that innovation and regulation are both facets of the same overall process of technical change is explored, and accordingly, it becomes important to analyse them together as well as seperately. A conceptual approach is advocated which draws upon the notion of ‘social and institution negotiations’ in coming to terms with the nature of innovatory and regulatory processes.

Flexibility strategies for sustainable technology development

This article discusses strategies and options for enhancing the flexibility of technological systems. Flexibility of technological systems is increasingly required because of uncertainties and fast developments, for example regarding environmental issues. The central questions of this paper are: how can actors create the possibility of change with regard to technological systems that are deeply embedded in society, and how should they take flexibility into account in the development and implementation of new technologies? PVC technology is taken as a case study. Because of its embeddedness in society and in industrial structures PVC technology is highly inflexible. The uncertainties that underlie the ongoing debate between protagonists of PVC and protagonists of alternative technological options underline the need for taking flexibility into account.

Individual consumption and systemic societal transformation: introduction to the special issue

Maurie J. Cohen, Halina Szejnwald Brown, & Philip J. Vergragt Graduate Program in Environmental Policy Studies, New Jersey Institute of Technology, University Heights, Newark, NJ 07102 USA (email: mcohen@adm.njit.edu) Department of International Development, Community, and Environment, Clark University, 950 Main Street, Worcester, MA 01610 USA (email: hbrown@clarku.edu) Tellus Institute, 11 Arlington Street, Boston, MA 02116 USA (email: pvergragt@tellus.org) Marsh Institute, Clark University, 950 Main Street, Worcester, MA 01610 USA (email: pvergragt@clarku.edu)

Sustainable consumption as a systemic challenge: inter- and transdisciplinary research and research questions

Present consumption patterns in developed countries are unsustainable. We consume too many raw materials and use too much energy, create too much hazardous waste and even consume renewables at an unsustainable rate. In addition research has shown that more material consumption does not make us happier; it appears that above a certain level individual wellbeing is ‘decoupled’ from material throughput and energy use (Abdallah et al. 2009; Jackson 2009). Moreover there are strong indications that unsustainable consumption patterns contribute to greater inequity; and conversely, that inequities contribute to unsustainable consumption patterns (Vergragt 2013; Wilkinson and Picket 2009). Developing countries are quickly following the same path of material over consumption and greater inequality. Onequarter of humanity – 1.7 billion people worldwide – now belongs to the ‘global consumer class’, having adopting the diets, transportation systems and lifestyles that were once mostly limited to the ‘global North’. Today, the BRIC countries (Brazil, Russia, India and China) and other developing countries are home to growing numbers of these consumers. Sustainable consumption is defined at the Oslo Roundtable (1994) as: ‘the use of goods and services that respond to basic needs and bring a better quality of life, while minimizing the use of natural resources, toxic materials and emissions of waste and pollutants over the life cycle, so as not to jeopardize the needs of future generations’. It is thus a broad concept with a wide variety of meanings, for instance: consuming differently using less resourceintensive products; moving from material products to immaterial services; energy conservation; sharing the use of products; and using higherquality products with longer life spans (Lebel and Lorek 2008). More generally it means a cultural shift away from the prevalent consumerist culture towards a culture which values sustainable lifestyles (Brown and Vergragt forthcoming). From an economic perspective, it means that the economy needs to move away from producing too many unsustainable consumer products, towards producing more sustainable services and infrastructures. However the present market economy is dominated by the economic growth paradigm which results in increasingly unsustainable production and consumption patterns (Jackson 2009). Consumption is part of a larger system of investments, production, trade, consumption and waste; it has material, economic, cultural, institutional and power aspects. Changing consumption thus entails changing the entire system: it encompasses changing the economic system, the infrastructures, the dominant culture and lifestyles, and changing institutions and power relationships (Vergragt et al. 2014).

Why achieving the Paris Agreement requires reduced overall consumption and production

Abstract Technological solutions to the challenge of dangerous climate change are urgent and necessary but to be effective they need to be accompanied by reductions in the total level of consumption and production of goods and services. This is for three reasons. First, private consumption and its associated production are among the key drivers of greenhouse-gas (GHG) emissions, especially among highly emitting industrialized economies. There is no evidence that decoupling of the economy from GHG emissions is possible at the scale and speed needed. Second, investments in more sustainable infrastructure, including renewable energy, needed in coming decades will require extensive amounts of energy, largely from fossil sources, which will use up a significant share of the two-degree carbon budget. Third, improving the standard of living of the world’s poor will consume a major portion of the available carbon allowance. The scholarly community has a responsibility to put the issue of consumption and the associated production on the research and policy agenda.