This paper provides a simplified analysis of possible sequences of transition pathways to deepen understanding of transition scenarios. The pathways exhibit a ranking of succession in which the transformation pathway (T) is first in the sequence in terms of both landscape pressure (P_{L}) and niche maturity levels (γ_{n}). The next pathway along the sequence in terms of the two variables of P_{L} and γ_{n} is the reconfiguration pathway (R). Beyond R, the substitution pathway (S) is significantly higher in terms of γ_{n} whereas the de-alignment/re-alignment pathway (D/R) is significantly higher in terms of P_{L}. The next pathway on the sequence among the two pathways, namely S and D/R depends on the difference in the rates of change of P_{L} (i.e. P_{L}/t) and γ_{n} (i.e. γ_{n}/t) and the P_{L} difference of D/R to R (P_{L.D/R} – P_{L.R}) and the γ_{n} difference of S to R (γ_{n.S} – γ_{n.R}). A higher P_{L}/t to γ_{n}/t and/or a shorter P_{L.D/R} – P_{L.R} to γ_{n.S} – γ_{n.R} support the sequence T-R-D/R-S whereas a lower P_{L}/t to γ_{n}/t and/or a larger P_{L.D/R} – P_{L.R} to γ_{n.S} – γ_{n.R} favours T-R-S-D/R sequence. In the case of equivalent P_{L.D/R} – P_{L.R} and γ_{n.S} – γ_{n.R}, and also P_{L}/t and γ_{n}/t, then beyond R, a fifth scenario (X) which combines part characteristics of both D/R and S has been discussed. In view of deviations from this assumption in theory, changes in P_{L} and γ_{n} (and hence X) might not be linear and is determined by the slope δP_{L}/δγ_{n} while the status of X with respect to D/R and S at any time depends on its parametric proximity with respect to D/R and S at that time. Moreover, P_{L}/t in turn depends on the pathway history of a transition whereas niche maturity γ_{n} is affected by transition policy action which improves the overall performance-cost ratios of niche (γ_{n}) and regime (γ_{r}) technologies, γ_{n}/γ_{r}. However, in all the case, there is the need to establish accurate measurements for P_{L} and γ_{n} and for the pathways to enhance the certainty of the pathway sequence.
Published in | International Journal of Systems Engineering (Volume 5, Issue 2) |
DOI | 10.11648/j.ijse.20210502.14 |
Page(s) | 79-89 |
Creative Commons |
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, provided the original work is properly cited. |
Copyright |
Copyright © The Author(s), 2021. Published by Science Publishing Group |
Graphical Presentation, Landscape Pressure, Multi-level Perspective, Niche Technology, Pathway Sequence, Regime
[1] | Geels, F. W. (2002). Technological transitions as evolutionary reconﬁguration processes: a multi-level perspective and a case-study. Research Policy, 31 (8-9). |
[2] | Genus, A. and Coles, A. (2008). Rethinking the multi-level perspective of technological transitions. Research Policy, 37 (9). |
[3] | Geels, F. W. and Schot, J. (2007). Typology of sociotechnical transition pathways.’ Research Policy, 36 (3). |
[4] | Rotmans, J., Kemp, R. and Van Asselt, M. (2001). More evolution than revolution: transition management in public policy. The journal of futures studies, strategic thinking and policy, 3 (1). |
[5] | Geels, F. W. (2004). From sectoral systems of innovation to socio-technical systems Insights about dynamics and change from sociology and institutional theory. Research Policy, 33 (6-7). |
[6] | Geels, F. W. (2012). A socio-technical analysis of low-carbon transitions: introducing the multi-level perspective into transport studies. Journal of Transport Geography, 24. |
[7] | Kemp, R. (2010). The Dutch Energy transition approach. International Economics and Economic Policy, 7 (2-3). |
[8] | Chappin, E. J. L. and Dijkema, G. P. J. (2008). On the design of system transitions Is Transition Management in the energy domain feasible? In proceeding of Engineering Management Conference, 2008: IEMC Europe 2008. IEEE International. |
[9] | Fairweather, J., Lambert, S., Rinne, T. and Steel, G. (2009). Why do builders innovate? A review of the international literature on home-builder innovation. Technology Users’ Innovation (TUI) research programme. |
[10] | Rebecca M. Henderson and Kim B. Clark (1990). Architectural Innovation: The Reconfiguration of Existing Product Technologies and the Failure of Established Firms. Administrative Science Quarterly, 35 (1), Special Issue: Technology, Organisations, and Innovation (Mar., 1990), pp. 9-30. |
[11] | Vaibmu (2013). Classifying innovations. http://www.extremefactories.eu/classifying-innovations/. |
[12] | Bleischwitz, R., Giljum S., Kuhndt M. and Schmidt-Bleek F. (2009). Eco-innovation – putting the EU on the path to a resource and energy efficient economy. Munich Personal RePEc Archive (MPRA), Wuppertal Institute for Climate, Environment and Energy 38: iv-81, paper No. 19939. |
[13] | Christensen, C. M. and Rosenbloom, R. S. (1995). Explaining the attacker's advantage: Technological paradigms, organisational dynamics, and the value network. Research Policy, 24 (2). |
[14] | Bolton, R. and Foxon, T. J. (2010). Governing Infrastructure Networks for a Low Carbon Economy: the case of the smart grid in the UK, In: Third Annual Conference of the Competition and Regulation in Network Industries Journal, 2010: Brussels, Belgium, 19^{th} November, 2010. |
[15] | Chappin, E. J. L. (2011). Simulating energy transitions. Published and distributed by: Next Generation Infrastructures Foundation P. O. Box 5015, 2600 GA Delft, The Netherlands. |
[16] | Kamp, LM, Vernay, A. and Ravesteijn, W. (2010). Exploring energy transition pathways: insights from Denmark and Sweden. In: Knowledge Collaboration & Learning for Sustainable Innovation: ERSCP-EMSU Conference, 25-29 October 2010, Delft, The Netherlands. |
[17] | Avadikyan, A. and Llerena, P. (2009). Socio-technical transition processes: A real option based reasoning. PEGE/BETA (Université de Strasbourg, UMR 7522 CNRS). http://www.beta-umr7522.fr/productions/publications/2009/2009-21.pdf. |
[18] | Verbong, G. P. J., and Geels, F. W. (2010). Exploring sustainability transitions in the electricity sector with socio-technical pathways. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 77 (8). |
[19] | Haxeltine, A., Whitmarsh, L., Bergman, N., Rotmans, J., Schilperoord, M. and Köhler, J. (2008). A Conceptual Framework for transition modelling. International Journal of Innovation and Sustainable Development, 3 (1-2). |
[20] | Geels, F. W. (2005). Processes and patterns in transitions and system innovations: Refining the co-evolutionary multi-level perspective. Technological Forecasting & Social Change, 72 (6). |
[21] | Shackley, S. and Green, K. (2006). A conceptual framework for exploring transitions to decarbonised energy systems in the United Kingdom. Energy, 32 (3). |
[22] | Verbong, G. P. J, and Geels, F. W. (2008). Pathways for sustainability transitions in the electricity sector: Multi-level analysis and empirical illustration. In: Infrastructure Systems and Services: Building Networks for a Brighter Future (INFRA), 2008, First International Conference, Rotterdam. |
APA Style
Mohammed Hussaini, Miklas Scholz. (2021). A Natural Sequence of Socio-Technical Transition Pathways. International Journal of Systems Engineering, 5(2), 79-89. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijse.20210502.14
ACS Style
Mohammed Hussaini; Miklas Scholz. A Natural Sequence of Socio-Technical Transition Pathways. Int. J. Syst. Eng. 2021, 5(2), 79-89. doi: 10.11648/j.ijse.20210502.14
AMA Style
Mohammed Hussaini, Miklas Scholz. A Natural Sequence of Socio-Technical Transition Pathways. Int J Syst Eng. 2021;5(2):79-89. doi: 10.11648/j.ijse.20210502.14
@article{10.11648/j.ijse.20210502.14, author = {Mohammed Hussaini and Miklas Scholz}, title = {A Natural Sequence of Socio-Technical Transition Pathways}, journal = {International Journal of Systems Engineering}, volume = {5}, number = {2}, pages = {79-89}, doi = {10.11648/j.ijse.20210502.14}, url = {https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijse.20210502.14}, eprint = {https://article.sciencepublishinggroup.com/pdf/10.11648.j.ijse.20210502.14}, abstract = {This paper provides a simplified analysis of possible sequences of transition pathways to deepen understanding of transition scenarios. The pathways exhibit a ranking of succession in which the transformation pathway (T) is first in the sequence in terms of both landscape pressure (PL) and niche maturity levels (γn). The next pathway along the sequence in terms of the two variables of PL and γn is the reconfiguration pathway (R). Beyond R, the substitution pathway (S) is significantly higher in terms of γn whereas the de-alignment/re-alignment pathway (D/R) is significantly higher in terms of PL. The next pathway on the sequence among the two pathways, namely S and D/R depends on the difference in the rates of change of PL (i.e. PL/t) and γn (i.e. γn/t) and the PL difference of D/R to R (PL.D/R – PL.R) and the γn difference of S to R (γn.S – γn.R). A higher PL/t to γn/t and/or a shorter PL.D/R – PL.R to γn.S – γn.R support the sequence T-R-D/R-S whereas a lower PL/t to γn/t and/or a larger PL.D/R – PL.R to γn.S – γn.R favours T-R-S-D/R sequence. In the case of equivalent PL.D/R – PL.R and γn.S – γn.R, and also PL/t and γn/t, then beyond R, a fifth scenario (X) which combines part characteristics of both D/R and S has been discussed. In view of deviations from this assumption in theory, changes in PL and γn (and hence X) might not be linear and is determined by the slope δPL/δγn while the status of X with respect to D/R and S at any time depends on its parametric proximity with respect to D/R and S at that time. Moreover, PL/t in turn depends on the pathway history of a transition whereas niche maturity γn is affected by transition policy action which improves the overall performance-cost ratios of niche (γn) and regime (γr) technologies, γn/γr. However, in all the case, there is the need to establish accurate measurements for PL and γn and for the pathways to enhance the certainty of the pathway sequence.}, year = {2021} }
TY - JOUR T1 - A Natural Sequence of Socio-Technical Transition Pathways AU - Mohammed Hussaini AU - Miklas Scholz Y1 - 2021/12/24 PY - 2021 N1 - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijse.20210502.14 DO - 10.11648/j.ijse.20210502.14 T2 - International Journal of Systems Engineering JF - International Journal of Systems Engineering JO - International Journal of Systems Engineering SP - 79 EP - 89 PB - Science Publishing Group SN - 2640-4230 UR - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijse.20210502.14 AB - This paper provides a simplified analysis of possible sequences of transition pathways to deepen understanding of transition scenarios. The pathways exhibit a ranking of succession in which the transformation pathway (T) is first in the sequence in terms of both landscape pressure (PL) and niche maturity levels (γn). The next pathway along the sequence in terms of the two variables of PL and γn is the reconfiguration pathway (R). Beyond R, the substitution pathway (S) is significantly higher in terms of γn whereas the de-alignment/re-alignment pathway (D/R) is significantly higher in terms of PL. The next pathway on the sequence among the two pathways, namely S and D/R depends on the difference in the rates of change of PL (i.e. PL/t) and γn (i.e. γn/t) and the PL difference of D/R to R (PL.D/R – PL.R) and the γn difference of S to R (γn.S – γn.R). A higher PL/t to γn/t and/or a shorter PL.D/R – PL.R to γn.S – γn.R support the sequence T-R-D/R-S whereas a lower PL/t to γn/t and/or a larger PL.D/R – PL.R to γn.S – γn.R favours T-R-S-D/R sequence. In the case of equivalent PL.D/R – PL.R and γn.S – γn.R, and also PL/t and γn/t, then beyond R, a fifth scenario (X) which combines part characteristics of both D/R and S has been discussed. In view of deviations from this assumption in theory, changes in PL and γn (and hence X) might not be linear and is determined by the slope δPL/δγn while the status of X with respect to D/R and S at any time depends on its parametric proximity with respect to D/R and S at that time. Moreover, PL/t in turn depends on the pathway history of a transition whereas niche maturity γn is affected by transition policy action which improves the overall performance-cost ratios of niche (γn) and regime (γr) technologies, γn/γr. However, in all the case, there is the need to establish accurate measurements for PL and γn and for the pathways to enhance the certainty of the pathway sequence. VL - 5 IS - 2 ER -