IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this article

Agricultural nature conservation in the Netherlands: Three lenses on transition pathways


  • Zwartkruis, Joyce V.
  • Berg, Holger
  • Hof, Andries F.
  • Kok, Marcel T.J.


In this paper three approaches on transitions pathways are combined to study the role of agricultural nature conservation in the Dutch land use domain for achieving internationally agreed climate and biodiversity targets. The three perspectives used are the Multilevel Perspective (MLP), Initiative Based Learning (IBL) and Integrated Assessment Modelling (IAM). The analysis provides insights in how the combination of different research approaches can lead to more comprehensive policy advice on how agricultural nature conservation could help to achieve internationally agreed sustainability goals related to climate change and biodiversity. IAM shows under which conditions agricultural nature conservation could be consistent with European and global long-term goals regarding food security, biodiversity and climate. MLP provides insight into the extent in which agricultural nature conservation has affected or changed the existing nature and agricultural regimes. IBL, finally, reveals the challenges of encouraging agricultural nature conservation with policy measures. Our analysis shows that a combined perspective provides a deeper understanding of the underlying processes, reasons and motives of agricultural nature conservation, leading to more comprehensive policy recommendations.

Suggested Citation

  • Zwartkruis, Joyce V. & Berg, Holger & Hof, Andries F. & Kok, Marcel T.J., 2020. "Agricultural nature conservation in the Netherlands: Three lenses on transition pathways," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 151(C).
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:tefoso:v:151:y:2020:i:c:s0040162518304177
    DOI: 10.1016/j.techfore.2018.03.006

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL:
    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

    1. Smith, Adrian & Stirling, Andy & Berkhout, Frans, 2005. "The governance of sustainable socio-technical transitions," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(10), pages 1491-1510, December.
    2. Alexandratos, Nikos & Bruinsma, Jelle, 2012. "World agriculture towards 2030/2050: the 2012 revision," ESA Working Papers 288998, Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Agricultural Development Economics Division (ESA).
    3. 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.
    4. Elzen, Boelie & Geels, Frank W. & Leeuwis, Cees & van Mierlo, Barbara, 2011. "Normative contestation in transitions 'in the making': Animal welfare concerns and system innovation in pig husbandry," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(2), pages 263-275, March.
    5. Foran, Tira & Butler, James R.A. & Williams, Liana J. & Wanjura, Wolf J. & Hall, Andy & Carter, Lucy & Carberry, Peter S., 2014. "Taking Complexity in Food Systems Seriously: An Interdisciplinary Analysis," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 85-101.
    6. Geels, Frank W. & Schot, Johan, 2007. "Typology of sociotechnical transition pathways," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(3), pages 399-417, April.
    7. Franks, Jeremy, 2010. "Boundary organizations for sustainable land management: The example of Dutch Environmental Co-operatives," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(2), pages 283-295, December.
    8. Michael Gibbons, 2000. "Mode 2 society and the emergence of context-sensitive science," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 27(3), pages 159-163, June.
    9. Hermans, Frans & Roep, Dirk & Klerkx, Laurens, 2016. "Scale dynamics of grassroots innovations through parallel pathways of transformative change," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 130(C), pages 285-295.
    10. Julie L. Ozanne & Bige Saatcioglu, 2008. "Participatory Action Research," Journal of Consumer Research, Oxford University Press, vol. 35(3), pages 423-439, March.
    11. 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.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)


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

    Cited by:

    1. Inga C. Melchior & Jens Newig, 2021. "Governing Transitions towards Sustainable Agriculture—Taking Stock of an Emerging Field of Research," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(2), pages 1-27, January.
    2. Susan de Koning & Nathalie Steins & Luc van Hoof, 2021. "Balancing Sustainability Transitions through State-Led Participatory Processes: The Case of the Dutch North Sea Agreement," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(4), pages 1-16, February.

    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. Paula Kivimaa & Wouter Boon & Sampsa Hyysalo & Laurens Klerkx, 2017. "Towards a Typology of Intermediaries in Transitions: a Systematic Review," SPRU Working Paper Series 2017-17, SPRU - Science Policy Research Unit, University of Sussex Business School.
    2. 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.
    3. Sorrell, Steve, 2018. "Explaining sociotechnical transitions: A critical realist perspective," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(7), pages 1267-1282.
    4. Steen, Markus & Weaver, Tyson, 2017. "Incumbents’ diversification and cross-sectorial energy industry dynamics," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(6), pages 1071-1086.
    5. Johan Schot & Laur Kanger, 2016. "Deep Transitions: Emergence, Acceleration, Stabilization and Directionality," SPRU Working Paper Series 2016-15, SPRU - Science Policy Research Unit, University of Sussex Business School.
    6. Edsand, Hans-Erik, 2019. "Technological innovation system and the wider context: A framework for developing countries," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 58(C).
    7. Edler, Jakob & Köhler, Jonathan Hugh & Wydra, Sven & Salas-Gironés, Edgar & Schiller, Katharina & Braun, Annette, 2021. "Dimensions of systems and transformations: Towards an integrated framework for system transformations," Working Papers "Sustainability and Innovation" S03/2021, Fraunhofer Institute for Systems and Innovation Research (ISI).
    8. Mock, Mirijam & Omann, Ines & Polzin, Christine & Spekkink, Wouter & Schuler, Julia & Pandur, Vlad & Brizi, Ambra & Panno, Angelo, 2019. "“Something inside me has been set in motion”: Exploring the psychological wellbeing of people engaged in sustainability initiatives," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 160(C), pages 1-11.
    9. 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.
    10. Erlinghagen, Sabine & Markard, Jochen, 2012. "Smart grids and the transformation of the electricity sector: ICT firms as potential catalysts for sectoral change," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 895-906.
    11. Schot, Johan & Kanger, Laur, 2018. "Deep transitions: Emergence, acceleration, stabilization and directionality," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(6), pages 1045-1059.
    12. Rakas, Marija & Hain, Daniel S., 2019. "The state of innovation system research: What happens beneath the surface?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(9), pages 1-1.
    13. Roberts, Cameron & Geels, Frank W., 2019. "Conditions for politically accelerated transitions: Historical institutionalism, the multi-level perspective, and two historical case studies in transport and agriculture," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 140(C), pages 221-240.
    14. Hamid El Bilali, 2020. "Transition heuristic frameworks in research on agro-food sustainability transitions," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 22(3), pages 1693-1728, March.
    15. Capellán-Pérez, Iñigo & Campos-Celador, Álvaro & Terés-Zubiaga, Jon, 2018. "Renewable Energy Cooperatives as an instrument towards the energy transition in Spain," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 123(C), pages 215-229.
    16. Funcke, Simon & Bauknecht, Dierk, 2016. "Typology of centralised and decentralised visions for electricity infrastructure," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(C), pages 67-74.
    17. Pigford, Ashlee-Ann E. & Hickey, Gordon M. & Klerkx, Laurens, 2018. "Beyond agricultural innovation systems? Exploring an agricultural innovation ecosystems approach for niche design and development in sustainability transitions," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 164(C), pages 116-121.
    18. Colvin, John & Blackmore, Chris & Chimbuya, Sam & Collins, Kevin & Dent, Mark & Goss, John & Ison, Ray & Roggero, Pier Paolo & Seddaiu, Giovanna, 2014. "In search of systemic innovation for sustainable development: A design praxis emerging from a decade of social learning inquiry," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(4), pages 760-771.
    19. Canitez, Fatih, 2019. "Pathways to sustainable urban mobility in developing megacities: A socio-technical transition perspective," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 141(C), pages 319-329.
    20. Fjalar J. De Haan & Briony C. Rogers, 2019. "The Multi-Pattern Approach for Systematic Analysis of Transition Pathways," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(2), pages 1-30, January.


    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:eee:tefoso:v:151:y:2020:i:c:s0040162518304177. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: . General contact details of provider: .

    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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.