Reflexive Governance for Sustainable Development

The model of transition management

René Kemp

Presentation for School of Global Governance, 13 march 2008, Maastricht

                            

In the past decades we have seen a move from government to governance in the sense that authority and control of social relations is increasingly exercised through quasi- and non-government entities than formal governments and government institutions and through a reliance on self-regulation

From government to governance

                            

Definitions of Governance

Manner in which power is exercised in the management of a country’s economic and social resources for development

– World Bank

A broader notion than government, involving interaction between the formal institutions and those in civil society. Governance refers to a process whereby elements in society wield power, authority and influence and enact policies and decisions concerning public life and social upliftment.

– British Council

                            

The structured ways and means in which the divergent preferences of inter-dependent actors are translated into policy choices to allocate values, so that the plurality of interests is transformed into co-ordinated action and the compliance of actors is achieved (Eising and Kohler-Koch, 2000, p.5)

A political science definition

                            

Governance is everywhere

In local government In environmental policies Water management In innovation policy In EU policy In companies (corporate governance

about reporting, dealing with shareholder issues, ..)

                            

We have governance

Wherever there is a common good issue requiring collective action that is not dealt with in an authoritarian manner by government

Which brings into play issues of defining the issue, allocating responsibilities and resources, defining policies/action, the implementation of (policy) action and enforcement of rules

                            

What does governance do?

Governance structures organize negotiation processes, set standards, perform allocative functions, monitor compliance, reduce conflict, and resolve disputes among actors (Eden and Hampson 1997: 362)

Governance involves political and managerial elements

                            

European Commission’s Principles of Good Governance

• Openness

• Participation

• Accountability

• Effectiveness

• Coherence

• Proportionality and subsidiarity

                            

Different views of sustainable development

It is seen variously as

something ecological or broader (wellbeing, happiness, justice)

something that can be defined (for instance when you talk about sustainable housing or sustainable technologies) and managed and something that never can be reached

                            

sustainability “refers to a process and a standard—and not to an end state—each generation must take up the challenge anew, determining in what directions their development objectives lie, what constitutes the boundaries of the environmentally possible and the environmentally desirable, and what is their understanding of the requirements of social justice” (Meadowcroft 1997, p. 37).

This is a reflexive view which may or may not be adhered too in society

                            

The Brundtland definition of SD

“meeting the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs” (WCED, 1987)

                            

Governance for sustainable development is

About how existing governance arrangements (in local government, water management, etc.) deal with sustainable development issues

And how they may be changed to foster sustainable development goals or concerns

                            

Sustainable development is difficult for policy makers because

It is an elusive concept and beyond the reach of single organizations.

There is no consensus on what exactly should be ‘sustained’ (certain environmental qualities, economic growth, certain capabilities)

There are different ideas of what sustainable development amounts to in various sectors (cleaner cars or less automobility?)

Whatever it is, it can not be achieved in the short-term, and without some effort

                            

We have sustainable development as perspective for thinking and a perspective for action

Governance comes into play at both levels … through existing systems of governance

(which are multiple)

                            

Different types of GoSD

Source: van Zeijl et al, 2008

                            

The Dutch “transition approach”

Led by the Ministry of Economic Affairs (responsible for business, energy and innovation)

Goal: to achieve a transition to a low-carbon economy

In a bottom-up, top-down manner moving from programmes & experiments to

alternative systems of energy, agriculture and mobility

                            

Top-down elements

30 transition paths 6 platforms for energy transition Government support for

experiments (35 million euro) Policy change

                            

Official platforms

Green resources

Sustainable mobility

Sustainable electricity supply

New gas

Built environment

Chain efficiency

Selected transition paths

                            

Bottom-up elements

Business alliances Experiments Identification of barriers / opportunities

informing private action and policy

                            

How serious is all this?

Platform for “green resources” (one of official 6 platforms)

5 transition paths: synthetic natural gas, sustainable chemistry, chains for biomass import, biomass production & coproduction

60 million euro for biofuels In 2007 2% blending requirement for gasoline and

diesel Certification system (criteria for sustainable biofuels)

                            

Why is NL interested in biomass?

Because NL is a gas country (biomass can be turned into a gas)

Because agriculture business and the logistic sector (Rotterdam harbour) are interested in it

Because the chemical industry thinks it may obtain an competitive edge from knowledge-intensive, green materials

Because ECN is a world leader in biomass gassification

Because of EU obligation for biofuels

                            

2050 Biomass 20-40% of primary energy supply ‘Vision’

2020‘Strategic goals’10-15% in power prod. 15-20% in traffic

2003 2 à 3 %

‘Transition Paths’

C. Biofuels

B. Pyrolysis

A. Gasification

ExpvE

OS

Exp

Exp EOS: experiments : R&D

The biomass vision

                            

The philosophy behind TM

The use of multiple visions (because visions create better world together rather than apart) as a top-down element of guidance

The use of societal experiments as a bottom–up mechanism

Adaptive portfolios: each option has to prove its worth

Policy orientation to system innovation and transitions Government as a facilitator of change instead of a

steerer

Transition Management bifocal instead of myopic

Political margins for

change

State of development of solutions

Societal goals

Sustainability visions

Transition management: oriented towards long-term sustainability goals and visions, iterative and reflexive (bifocal)

Existing policy process: short-term goals (myopic)

                            

Circular elements

            

  

 

 Evaluating, monitoring and learning

 

Developing

sustainability

visions and

transition-agendas

Organising multi-actor networks

Mobilizing actors and executing projects and

experiments

 

Source: Loorbach (2004)

Portfolio of official transition paths

Transition experiments

Instrument choices

Policy coordination

                            

The use of science and knowledge

Science, technology and innovation more oriented towards transition goals

Visioning Sustainability assessment Discussions about transition management

                            

Transition management is a reflexive form of steering

building on business interests, and societal normative concerns (to reduce

emissions, create a better world) in an adaptive, forward looking manner

(reflexive governance) Altering the ways in which things are

organised (de-alignment and re-alignment)

                            

TM exploits

The business interest in innovation The societal interest in growth and well-being The government interest in both In a reflexive manner (avoiding the pitfalls of

planning and the myopia of markets)

                            

Members of platform “green resources” Paul Hamm (formerly at DSM, chair) Dhr. G.G. Bemer (Koninklijke Nedalco)  Dhr. A. van den Biggelaar (Stichting Natuur en Milieu) Mevr.dr.ir. M.J.P. Botman (Ministerie van Economische Zaken) Prof.dr. A. Bruggink (NWO-ACTS / Universiteit Nijmegen / DSM) Ir. K.W. Kwant (SenterNovem) Dhr. P. Lednor (Shell Global Solutions) Dr. Peter M. Bruinenberg (AVEBE) Prof.dr. E.M. Meijer (Unilever) Prof.dr. J.P.M. Sanders (Agrotechnology & Food Innovations) Prof.dr. W.P.M. van Swaaij (Universiteit Twente) Prof.dr. H. Veringa (ECN) Dr. J. Vanhemelrijck (EuropaBio) Prof.dr.ir. L.A.M. van der Wielen (Technische Universiteit Delft)  

                            

  Incrementalism TM as a model of reflexive governance

Planning

Key actors Private and public actors

Private and public actors

Bureaucrats and experts

Steering philosophy

Partisan mutual adaptation

Modulation of developments to collectively chosen goals, government is facilitator & mediator

Hierarchy

Mechanism for coordination

Markets and emergent institutionalisation

Markets, network management, institutionalisation (both designed and emergent) 

Hierarchy (top-down)

Role for anticipation

Limited (no long-term goals)

Dynamic anticipation of desired futures as basis for interaction

Future is anticipated and implemented

Type of learning

First-order: learning about quick fixes for remedying immediate ills

Second-order and first-order (rethink following problem structuring)

First-order (instrumental)

                            

Incrementalism TM as a model of reflexive governance

Planning

Degree of adaptivity

Adaptive Highly adaptive thanks to especially created adaptive capacity

Hardly adaptive

Role for strategy and plans

Limited role Important role for goals and strategic experiments for exploring social trajectories, as apart of adaptive programmes for system innovation.

Plans with steps

Interest mediation/ conflict resolution

Individual gains for everyone

Rewards for innovators, phase out of non-sustainable practices through markets and politics

Little mediation (implementation and enforcement)

Type of change that is sought

Incremental, non-disruptive change

System innovation and system improvement

Predetermined outcome

                            

Newspaper attention for transitions in the Netherlands