IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/climat/v160y2020i4d10.1007_s10584-020-02726-1.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Enabling environments for regime destabilization towards sustainable urban transitions in megacities: comparing Shanghai and Istanbul

Author

Listed:
  • Mahir Yazar

    (Environmental Social Science Program, Arizona State University)

  • Dina Hestad

    (Environmental Change Institute, University of Oxford)

  • Diana Mangalagiu

    (NEOMA Business School)

  • Yuge Ma

    (Environmental Change Institute, University of Oxford)

  • Thomas F Thornton

    (Environmental Change Institute, University of Oxford)

  • Ali Kerem Saysel

    (Boğaziçi University)

  • Dajian Zhu

    (Tongji University)

Abstract

Sustainable urban transitions promise high mitigation and adaptation potential to address the effects of anthropogenic climate change. The two coastal megacities studied in this paper, Shanghai and Istanbul, have the potential for low-carbon urban transitions that can destabilize existing regimes. The destabilization is brought about by the disruptive business model innovations of the sharing economy in Shanghai’s mobility sector and by the energy-efficient practices developed alongside the intensification of the building sector through the process of urban renewal in Istanbul. However, the emergence of such urban transitions through the actions of agents relies on the existence of enabling environments for regime destabilization. In a comparative case study of Shanghai and Istanbul, we assess the challenges of realizing regime destabilization opportunities through an enabling environment framework. We find that without adequate enabling environments for regime destabilization, urban transitions to sustainability may fail to achieve effective low-carbon action and make progress towards meeting the sustainable development goals. We also show that while deliberate and collective efforts are underway from multiple agents within and beyond the two megacities, the environments for regime destabilization in the building and transport sectors considered remain insufficient primarily due to conflicting priorities among key agents in the underlying urban systems.

Suggested Citation

  • Mahir Yazar & Dina Hestad & Diana Mangalagiu & Yuge Ma & Thomas F Thornton & Ali Kerem Saysel & Dajian Zhu, 2020. "Enabling environments for regime destabilization towards sustainable urban transitions in megacities: comparing Shanghai and Istanbul," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 160(4), pages 727-752, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:climat:v:160:y:2020:i:4:d:10.1007_s10584-020-02726-1
    DOI: 10.1007/s10584-020-02726-1
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10584-020-02726-1
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10584-020-02726-1?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Seyfang, Gill, 2010. "Community action for sustainable housing: Building a low-carbon future," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(12), pages 7624-7633, December.
    2. Anna Kuokkanen & Mahir Yazar, 2018. "Cities in Sustainability Transitions: Comparing Helsinki and Istanbul," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(5), pages 1-18, May.
    3. Garud, Raghu & Karnoe, Peter, 2003. "Bricolage versus breakthrough: distributed and embedded agency in technology entrepreneurship," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(2), pages 277-300, February.
    4. John Lovering & Yigit Evren, 2011. "Urban Development and Planning in Istanbul," International Planning Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 16(1), pages 1-4, February.
    5. Geels, Frank W., 2010. "Ontologies, socio-technical transitions (to sustainability), and the multi-level perspective," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(4), pages 495-510, May.
    6. Geels, Frank W. & Schot, Johan, 2007. "Typology of sociotechnical transition pathways," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(3), pages 399-417, April.
    7. Jing Lan & Yuge Ma & Dajian Zhu & Diana Mangalagiu & Thomas F. Thornton, 2017. "Enabling Value Co-Creation in the Sharing Economy: The Case of Mobike," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(9), pages 1-20, August.
    8. Turnheim, Bruno & Geels, Frank W., 2013. "The destabilisation of existing regimes: Confronting a multi-dimensional framework with a case study of the British coal industry (1913–1967)," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(10), pages 1749-1767.
    9. Alexander Bisaro & Jochen Hinkel, 2016. "Governance of social dilemmas in climate change adaptation," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 6(4), pages 354-359, April.
    10. Stephanie Pincetl & Mikhail Chester & Giovanni Circella & Andrew Fraser & Caroline Mini & Sinnott Murphy & Janet Reyna & Deepak Sivaraman, 2014. "Enabling Future Sustainability Transitions," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 18(6), pages 871-882, December.
    11. Clewlow, Regina R. & Mishra, Gouri S., 2017. "Disruptive Transportation: The Adoption, Utilization, and Impacts of Ride-Hailing in the United States," Institute of Transportation Studies, Working Paper Series qt82w2z91j, Institute of Transportation Studies, UC Davis.
    12. Bergek, Anna & Berggren, Christian & Magnusson, Thomas & Hobday, Michael, 2013. "Technological discontinuities and the challenge for incumbent firms: Destruction, disruption or creative accumulation?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(6), pages 1210-1224.
    13. Geels, Frank W., 2002. "Technological transitions as evolutionary reconfiguration processes: a multi-level perspective and a case-study," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 31(8-9), pages 1257-1274, December.
    14. Kivimaa, Paula & Kern, Florian, 2016. "Creative destruction or mere niche support? Innovation policy mixes for sustainability transitions," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(1), pages 205-217.
    15. World Bank, 2015. "Republic of Turkey," World Bank Publications - Reports 21776, The World Bank Group.
    16. Laurel Evans & Gregory R. Maio & Adam Corner & Carl J. Hodgetts & Sameera Ahmed & Ulrike Hahn, 2013. "Self-interest and pro-environmental behaviour," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 3(2), pages 122-125, February.
    17. René Kemp & Jan Rotmans, 2009. "Transitioning policy: co-production of a new strategic framework for energy innovation policy in the Netherlands," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 42(4), pages 303-322, November.
    18. Farla, Jacco & Markard, Jochen & Raven, Rob & Coenen, Lars, 2012. "Sustainability transitions in the making: A closer look at actors, strategies and resources," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 79(6), pages 991-998.
    19. Späth, Philipp & Rohracher, Harald, 2015. "Conflicting strategies towards sustainable heating at an urban junction of heat infrastructure and building standards," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 273-280.
    20. Kuokkanen, A. & Nurmi, A. & Mikkilä, M. & Kuisma, M. & Kahiluoto, H. & Linnanen, L., 2018. "Agency in regime destabilization through the selection environment: The Finnish food system’s sustainability transition," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(8), pages 1513-1522.
    21. Hodson, Mike & Marvin, Simon, 2010. "Can cities shape socio-technical transitions and how would we know if they were?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(4), pages 477-485, May.
    22. Katja Brundiers & Hallie C. Eakin, 2018. "Leveraging Post-Disaster Windows of Opportunities for Change towards Sustainability: A Framework," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(5), pages 1-18, May.
    23. Marc Wolfram & Niki Frantzeskaki, 2016. "Cities and Systemic Change for Sustainability: Prevailing Epistemologies and an Emerging Research Agenda," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(2), pages 1-18, February.
    24. Markard, Jochen & Raven, Rob & Truffer, Bernhard, 2012. "Sustainability transitions: An emerging field of research and its prospects," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(6), pages 955-967.
    25. Eva Heiskanen & Sirkku Kivisaari & Raimo Lovio & Per Mickwitz, 2009. "Designed to travel? Transition management encounters environmental and innovation policy histories in Finland," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 42(4), pages 409-427, November.
    26. Duzgun, B. & Komurgoz, G., 2014. "Turkey's energy efficiency assessment: White Certificates Systems and their applicability in Turkey," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 65(C), pages 465-474.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Jochen Hinkel & Diana Mangalagiu & Alexander Bisaro & J. David Tàbara, 2020. "Transformative narratives for climate action," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 160(4), pages 495-506, June.
    2. Ram, Manish & Gulagi, Ashish & Aghahosseini, Arman & Bogdanov, Dmitrii & Breyer, Christian, 2022. "Energy transition in megacities towards 100% renewable energy: A case for Delhi," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 195(C), pages 578-589.
    3. Chaoyu Mo & Lin Wang & Fujie Rao, 2022. "Typology, Preservation, and Regeneration of the Post-1949 Industrial Heritage in China: A Case Study of Shanghai," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(9), pages 1-16, September.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Kivimaa, Paula & Kern, Florian, 2016. "Creative destruction or mere niche support? Innovation policy mixes for sustainability transitions," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(1), pages 205-217.
    2. Cheng Wang & Tao Lv & Rongjiang Cai & Jianfeng Xu & Liya Wang, 2022. "Bibliometric Analysis of Multi-Level Perspective on Sustainability Transition Research," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(7), pages 1-31, March.
    3. Steen, Markus & Weaver, Tyson, 2017. "Incumbents’ diversification and cross-sectorial energy industry dynamics," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(6), pages 1071-1086.
    4. Kuokkanen, A. & Nurmi, A. & Mikkilä, M. & Kuisma, M. & Kahiluoto, H. & Linnanen, L., 2018. "Agency in regime destabilization through the selection environment: The Finnish food system’s sustainability transition," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(8), pages 1513-1522.
    5. Weigelt, Carmen & Lu, Shaohua & Verhaal, J. Cameron, 2021. "Blinded by the sun: The role of prosumers as niche actors in incumbent firms’ adoption of solar power during sustainability transitions," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(9).
    6. Luis Felipe Cândido & Jose Carlos Lazaro & Adriano Olivier de Freitas e Silva & José de Paula Barros Neto, 2023. "Sustainability Transitions in the Construction Sector: A Bibliometric Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(17), pages 1-26, August.
    7. Aditi Khodke & Atsushi Watabe & Nigel Mehdi, 2021. "Implementation of Accelerated Policy-Driven Sustainability Transitions: Case of Bharat Stage 4 to 6 Leapfrogs in India," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(8), pages 1-25, April.
    8. Lisa-Britt Fischer & Jens Newig, 2016. "Importance of Actors and Agency in Sustainability Transitions: A Systematic Exploration of the Literature," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(5), pages 1-21, May.
    9. Kanger, Laur & Sovacool, Benjamin K. & Noorkõiv, Martin, 2020. "Six policy intervention points for sustainability transitions: A conceptual framework and a systematic literature review," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(7).
    10. Nhat Strøm-Andersen, 2019. "Incumbents in the Transition Towards the Bioeconomy: The Role of Dynamic Capabilities and Innovation Strategies," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(18), pages 1-20, September.
    11. Jonas Torrens & Phillip Johnstone & Johan Schot, 2018. "Unpacking the Formation of Favourable Environments for Urban Experimentation: The Case of the Bristol Energy Scene," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(3), pages 1-28, March.
    12. Attila Havas & Doris Schartinger & K. Matthias Weber, 2022. "Innovation Studies, Social Innovation, and Sustainability Transitions Research: From mutual ignorance towards an integrative perspective?," CERS-IE WORKING PAPERS 2227, Institute of Economics, Centre for Economic and Regional Studies.
    13. Kejia Yang & Johan Schot & Bernhard Truffer, 2020. "Shaping the Directionality of Sustainability Transitions: The Diverging Development Patterns of Solar PV in Two Chinese Provinces," SPRU Working Paper Series 2020-14, SPRU - Science Policy Research Unit, University of Sussex Business School.
    14. Yuge Ma & Thomas F. Thornton & Diana Mangalagiu & Jing Lan & Dina Hestad & Elena Apostoli Cappello & Sander Leeuw, 2020. "Co-creation, co-evolution and co-governance: understanding green businesses and urban transformations," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 160(4), pages 621-636, June.
    15. Kompella, Lakshminarayana, 2017. "E-Governance systems as socio-technical transitions using multi-level perspective with case studies," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 123(C), pages 80-94.
    16. Heiberg, Jonas & Truffer, Bernhard & Binz, Christian, 2022. "Assessing transitions through socio-technical configuration analysis – a methodological framework and a case study in the water sector," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(1).
    17. G. Marletto, 2013. "Car and the city: Socio-technical pathways to 2030," Working Paper CRENoS 201306, Centre for North South Economic Research, University of Cagliari and Sassari, Sardinia.
    18. Hamid El Bilali, 2019. "The Multi-Level Perspective in Research on Sustainability Transitions in Agriculture and Food Systems: A Systematic Review," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 9(4), pages 1-24, April.
    19. Rosenbloom, Daniel & Berton, Harris & Meadowcroft, James, 2016. "Framing the sun: A discursive approach to understanding multi-dimensional interactions within socio-technical transitions through the case of solar electricity in Ontario, Canada," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(6), pages 1275-1290.
    20. Contesse, Maria & Duncan, Jessica & Legun, Katharine & Klerkx, Laurens, 2021. "Unravelling non-human agency in sustainability transitions," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 166(C).

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:climat:v:160:y:2020:i:4:d:10.1007_s10584-020-02726-1. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.