IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/tefoso/v151y2020ics004016251830564x.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Transformative policy mixes in socio-technical scenarios: The case of the low-carbon transition of the German electricity system (2010–2050)

Author

Listed:
  • Rogge, Karoline S.
  • Pfluger, Benjamin
  • Geels, Frank W.

Abstract

Much research and policy advice for addressing climate change has focused on developing model-based scenarios to identify pathways towards achieving decarbonisation targets. The paper's first aim is to complement such model-based analysis with insights from socio-technical transition analysis to develop socio-technical storylines that show how low-carbon transitions can be implemented. Our second aim is to explore how policymakers could govern such transition processes through transformative policy mixes. We take the example of the transition of the German electricity system towards renewable energies, and elaborate two transition pathways which are assumed to achieve an 80% reduction in greenhouse gas emissions by 2050, but differ in terms of lead actors, depth and scope of change: the first pathway captures the substitution of technological components (pathway A), while the second aims at broader system transformation (pathway B). We find that multi-dimensional socio-technical change (pathway B) requires greater emphasis on societal experimentation and a more proactive role for anticipatory deliberation processes from the outset. In contrast, shifting gear from a new entrant friendly past trajectory to an incumbent dominated pathway (pathway A) requires agency from incumbents and is associated with regime stabilizing instruments defending the old regime while simultaneously fulfilling decarbonisation as additional success criteria.

Suggested Citation

  • Rogge, Karoline S. & Pfluger, Benjamin & Geels, Frank W., 2020. "Transformative policy mixes in socio-technical scenarios: The case of the low-carbon transition of the German electricity system (2010–2050)," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 151(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:tefoso:v:151:y:2020:i:c:s004016251830564x
    DOI: 10.1016/j.techfore.2018.04.002
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S004016251830564X
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.techfore.2018.04.002?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. Frank W. Geels & Frans Berkhout & Detlef P. van Vuuren, 2016. "Bridging analytical approaches for low-carbon transitions," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 6(6), pages 576-583, June.
    2. Weber, K. Matthias & Rohracher, Harald, 2012. "Legitimizing research, technology and innovation policies for transformative change," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(6), pages 1037-1047.
    3. Fortes, Patrícia & Alvarenga, António & Seixas, Júlia & Rodrigues, Sofia, 2015. "Long-term energy scenarios: Bridging the gap between socio-economic storylines and energy modeling," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 91(C), pages 161-178.
    4. Reichardt, Kristin & Negro, Simona O. & Rogge, Karoline S. & Hekkert, Marko P., 2016. "Analyzing interdependencies between policy mixes and technological innovation systems: The case of offshore wind in Germany," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 106(C), pages 11-21.
    5. Geels, Frank W. & Schot, Johan, 2007. "Typology of sociotechnical transition pathways," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(3), pages 399-417, April.
    6. Fuenfschilling, Lea & Truffer, Bernhard, 2014. "The structuration of socio-technical regimes—Conceptual foundations from institutional theory," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(4), pages 772-791.
    7. Foxon, Timothy J., 2013. "Transition pathways for a UK low carbon electricity future," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 10-24.
    8. Peters, Michael & Schneider, Malte & Griesshaber, Tobias & Hoffmann, Volker H., 2012. "The impact of technology-push and demand-pull policies on technical change – Does the locus of policies matter?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(8), pages 1296-1308.
    9. Rogge, Karoline S. & Reichardt, Kristin, 2016. "Policy mixes for sustainability transitions: An extended concept and framework for analysis," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(8), pages 1620-1635.
    10. 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.
    11. Fuenfschilling, Lea & Truffer, Bernhard, 2016. "The interplay of institutions, actors and technologies in socio-technical systems — An analysis of transformations in the Australian urban water sector," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 103(C), pages 298-312.
    12. Borrás, Susana & Edquist, Charles, 2013. "The choice of innovation policy instruments," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 80(8), pages 1513-1522.
    13. 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.
    14. Anna J. Wieczorek & Marko P. Hekkert, 2012. "Systemic instruments for systemic innovation problems: A framework for policy makers and innovation scholars," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 39(1), pages 74-87, February.
    15. Lindner, Ralf & Daimer, Stephanie & Beckert, Bernd & Heyen, Nils & Koehler, Jonathan & Teufel, Benjamin & Warnke, Philine & Wydra, Sven, 2016. "Addressing directionality: Orientation failure and the systems of innovation heuristic. Towards reflexive governance," Discussion Papers "Innovation Systems and Policy Analysis" 52, Fraunhofer Institute for Systems and Innovation Research (ISI).
    16. Richter, Mario, 2013. "Business model innovation for sustainable energy: German utilities and renewable energy," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 1226-1237.
    17. Niki Frantzeskaki & Derk Loorbach & James Meadowcroft, 2012. "Governing societal transitions to sustainability," International Journal of Sustainable Development, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 15(1/2), pages 19-36.
    18. Smith, Adrian & Stirling, Andy & Berkhout, Frans, 2005. "The governance of sustainable socio-technical transitions," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(10), pages 1491-1510, December.
    19. Erik Laes & Leen Gorissen & Frank Nevens, 2014. "A Comparison of Energy Transition Governance in Germany, The Netherlands and the United Kingdom," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 6(3), pages 1-24, February.
    20. Geels, Frank W. & Kern, Florian & Fuchs, Gerhard & Hinderer, Nele & Kungl, Gregor & Mylan, Josephine & Neukirch, Mario & Wassermann, Sandra, 2016. "The enactment of socio-technical transition pathways: A reformulated typology and a comparative multi-level analysis of the German and UK low-carbon electricity transitions (1990–2014)," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(4), pages 896-913.
    21. Anna J. Wieczorek & Marko P. Hekkert, 2012. "Corrigendum to 'Systemic instruments for systemic innovation problems: A framework for policy makers and innovation scholars'," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 39(6), pages 842-842, December.
    22. Quitzow, Rainer, 2015. "Assessing policy strategies for the promotion of environmental technologies: A review of India's National Solar Mission," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(1), pages 233-243.
    23. Strunz, Sebastian, 2014. "The German energy transition as a regime shift," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 100(C), pages 150-158.
    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. Flanagan, Kieron & Uyarra, Elvira & Laranja, Manuel, 2011. "Reconceptualising the 'policy mix' for innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(5), pages 702-713, June.
    26. Costantini, Valeria & Crespi, Francesco & Martini, Chiara & Pennacchio, Luca, 2015. "Demand-pull and technology-push public support for eco-innovation: The case of the biofuels sector," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(3), pages 577-595.
    27. Carayannis, Elias & Grebeniuk, Anna & Meissner, Dirk, 2016. "Smart roadmapping for STI policy," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 110(C), pages 109-116.
    28. Felix Christian Matthes, 2017. "Energy transition in Germany: a case study on a policy-driven structural change of the energy system," Evolutionary and Institutional Economics Review, Springer, vol. 14(1), pages 141-169, June.
    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. Jordi Molas-Gallart & Alejandra Boni & Sandro Giachi & Johan Schot, 2021. "A formative approach to the evaluation of Transformative Innovation Policies [The Need for Reflexive Evaluation Approaches in Development Cooperation]," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 30(4), pages 431-442.
    2. Maria Rabadjieva & Judith Terstriep, 2020. "Ambition Meets Reality: Mission-Oriented Innovation Policy as a Driver for Participative Governance," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(1), pages 1-23, December.
    3. Jarosław Kaczmarek, 2022. "The Balance of Outlays and Effects of Restructuring Hard Coal Mining Companies in Terms of Energy Policy of Poland PEP 2040," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(5), pages 1-30, March.
    4. Thimet, P.J. & Mavromatidis, G., 2022. "Review of model-based electricity system transition scenarios: An analysis for Switzerland, Germany, France, and Italy," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 159(C).
    5. Nikas, A. & Koasidis, K. & Köberle, A.C. & Kourtesi, G. & Doukas, H., 2022. "A comparative study of biodiesel in Brazil and Argentina: An integrated systems of innovation perspective," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 156(C).
    6. Lee, Chuan-Kai & Yu, Limeng, 2022. "A multi-level perspective on 5G transition: The China case," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 182(C).
    7. Razmjoo, Armin & Mirjalili, Seyedali & Aliehyaei, Mehdi & Østergaard, Poul Alberg & Ahmadi, Abolfazl & Majidi Nezhad, Meysam, 2022. "Development of smart energy systems for communities: technologies, policies and applications," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 248(C).
    8. Jarosław Kaczmarek & Konrad Kolegowicz & Wojciech Szymla, 2022. "Restructuring of the Coal Mining Industry and the Challenges of Energy Transition in Poland (1990–2020)," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(10), pages 1-48, May.
    9. Hoffart, Franziska, 2022. "What is a feasible and 1.5°C-aligned hydrogen infrastructure for Germany? A multi-criteria economic study based on socio-technical energy scenarios," Ruhr Economic Papers 979, RWI - Leibniz-Institut für Wirtschaftsforschung, Ruhr-University Bochum, TU Dortmund University, University of Duisburg-Essen.
    10. Song, Yuegang & Zhang, Bicheng & Wang, Jianhua & Kwek, Keh, 2022. "The impact of climate change on China's agricultural green total factor productivity," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 185(C).
    11. Verónica Robert & Gabriel Yoguel, 2022. "Exploration of trending concepts in innovation policy," Review of Evolutionary Political Economy, Springer, vol. 3(2), pages 259-292, July.
    12. 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.
    13. 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).
    14. Johanna Leväsluoto & Johanna Kohl & Anton Sigfrids & Jussi Pihlajamäki & Janne Martikainen, 2021. "Digitalization as an Engine for Change? Building a Vision Pathway towards a Sustainable Health Care System by Using the MLP and Health Economic Decision Modelling," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(23), pages 1-24, November.
    15. Su, Chi-Wei & Yuan, Xi & Tao, Ran & Shao, Xuefeng, 2022. "Time and frequency domain connectedness analysis of the energy transformation under climate policy," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 184(C).
    16. Shojaei, Reyhaneh S. & Burgess, Gemma, 2022. "Non-technical inhibitors: Exploring the adoption of digital innovation in the UK construction industry," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 185(C).

    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. Rogge, Karoline S. & Pfluger, Benjamin & Geels, Frank, 2017. "Transformative policy mixes in socio-technical scenarios: The case of the low-carbon transition of the German electricity system (2010-2050)," Working Papers "Sustainability and Innovation" S11/2017, Fraunhofer Institute for Systems and Innovation Research (ISI).
    2. Edmondson, Duncan L. & Kern, Florian & Rogge, Karoline S., 2019. "The co-evolution of policy mixes and socio-technical systems: Towards a conceptual framework of policy mix feedback in sustainability transitions," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(10).
    3. Rogge, Karoline S. & Schleich, Joachim, 2018. "Do policy mix characteristics matter for low-carbon innovation? A survey-based exploration of renewable power generation technologies in Germany," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(9), pages 1639-1654.
    4. Karoline S. Rogge & Elisabeth Dütschke, 2017. "Exploring Perceptions of the Credibility of Policy Mixes: The Case of German Manufacturers of Renewable Power Generation Technologies," SPRU Working Paper Series 2017-23, SPRU - Science Policy Research Unit, University of Sussex Business School.
    5. Lindberg, Marie Byskov & Markard, Jochen & Andersen, Allan Dahl, 2019. "Policies, actors and sustainability transition pathways: A study of the EU’s energy policy mix," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(10).
    6. Rogge, Karoline S. & Reichardt, Kristin, 2016. "Policy mixes for sustainability transitions: An extended concept and framework for analysis," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(8), pages 1620-1635.
    7. Turnheim, Bruno & Nykvist, Björn, 2019. "Opening up the feasibility of sustainability transitions pathways (STPs): Representations, potentials, and conditions," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(3), pages 775-788.
    8. Fuenfschilling, Lea & Binz, Christian, 2018. "Global socio-technical regimes," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(4), pages 735-749.
    9. Raven, Rob & Walrave, Bob, 2020. "Overcoming transformational failures through policy mixes in the dynamics of technological innovation systems," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 153(C).
    10. 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).
    11. Falcone, Pasquale Marcello & Lopolito, Antonio & Sica, Edgardo, 2019. "Instrument mix for energy transition: A method for policy formulation," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 148(C).
    12. Kern, Florian & Rogge, Karoline S. & Howlett, Michael, 2019. "Policy mixes for sustainability transitions: New approaches and insights through bridging innovation and policy studies," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(10).
    13. 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.
    14. 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).
    15. Hilde Nykamp, 2020. "Policy Mix for a Transition to Sustainability: Green Buildings in Norway," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(2), pages 1-17, January.
    16. 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).
    17. Costantini, Valeria & Crespi, Francesco & Palma, Alessandro, 2017. "Characterizing the policy mix and its impact on eco-innovation: A patent analysis of energy-efficient technologies," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(4), pages 799-819.
    18. Jonas Heiberg & Christian Binz & Bernhard Truffer, 2020. "Assessing transitions through socio-technical network analysis – a methodological framework and a case study from the water sector," Papers in Evolutionary Economic Geography (PEEG) 2035, Utrecht University, Department of Human Geography and Spatial Planning, Group Economic Geography, revised Aug 2020.
    19. 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.
    20. Walrave, Bob & Raven, Rob, 2016. "Modelling the dynamics of technological innovation systems," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(9), pages 1833-1844.

    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:eee:tefoso:v:151:y:2020:i:c:s004016251830564x. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/00401625 .

    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.