IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v14y2022i9p5024-d799523.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Phases Model of the Transformation to Sustainability (T2S)—Structuring through the Negotiation Perspective

Author

Listed:
  • Ariel Macaspac Hernandez

    (Deutsches Institut für Entwicklungspolitik/German Development Institute, 53113 Bonn, Germany)

Abstract

The complexity of linking sustainability with transformation necessitates a critical re-evaluation of the ways the actors, processes, issues, structures, and outcomes related to the transformation to sustainability (T2S) can be understood. At the same time, achieving T2S is highly dependent on policies based on technical solutions that can prompt needed behavioural change, whereas these technical solutions are not always compatible with both planetary and societal boundaries. Therefore, achieving T2S also calls for evaluating the normative foundations of policies and actions. This paper contends that T2S is significantly defined by the multiplicity of negotiation processes. This justifies a deeper look at T2S from the perspective of negotiation studies. T2S is composed of different phases, each of which has a different set of actors, resources, and audiences. This paper introduces a theoretical model as an analytical meta-framework to structure how T2S unfolds in an orchestrated manner. This model builds on negotiation theories to focus on the actors’ perspectives on T2S. It proposes the division of the transformation process into phases— entry point , learning , sequencing , disrupting , and fortifying . Each of these phases is analysed to determine the “quality” of cooperation that can help fulfil the tasks required to master the so-called “cognitive games” of T2S ( ripeness game , power game , bargaining game , policy game , scaling game ). Moreover, insights are presented to explain how the designated milestones can be achieved to indicate the advancement to the next phase and eventually entrench the transformation process. The findings resulting from the analysis of the phases of T2S present potential lessons and opportunities for both theorists and practitioners/policymakers.

Suggested Citation

  • Ariel Macaspac Hernandez, 2022. "The Phases Model of the Transformation to Sustainability (T2S)—Structuring through the Negotiation Perspective," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(9), pages 1-20, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:9:p:5024-:d:799523
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/9/5024/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/9/5024/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. William W. Baber, 2018. "Identifying Macro Phases Across the Negotiation Lifecycle," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 27(6), pages 885-903, December.
    2. Jonas Meckling & Thomas Sterner & Gernot Wagner, 2017. "Policy sequencing toward decarbonization," Nature Energy, Nature, vol. 2(12), pages 918-922, December.
    3. Unruh, Gregory C., 2000. "Understanding carbon lock-in," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 28(12), pages 817-830, October.
    4. Sun, Chuanwang & Yuan, Xiang & Yao, Xin, 2016. "Social acceptance towards the air pollution in China: Evidence from public's willingness to pay for smog mitigation," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 92(C), pages 313-324.
    5. Rizzi, Francesco & van Eck, Nees Jan & Frey, Marco, 2014. "The production of scientific knowledge on renewable energies: Worldwide trends, dynamics and challenges and implications for management," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 657-671.
    6. Hernandez, Ariel, 2021. "SDG-aligned futures and the governance of the transformation to sustainability reconsidering governance perspectives on the futures we aspire to," IDOS Discussion Papers 30/2021, German Institute of Development and Sustainability (IDOS).
    7. Galaz, Victor & Biermann, Frank & Folke, Carl & Nilsson, Måns & Olsson, Per, 2012. "Global environmental governance and planetary boundaries: An introduction," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 81(C), pages 1-3.
    8. Michael P. Schlaile & Sophie Urmetzer & Vincent Blok & Allan Dahl Andersen & Job Timmermans & Matthias Mueller & Jan Fagerberg & Andreas Pyka, 2017. "Innovation Systems for Transformations towards Sustainability? Taking the Normative Dimension Seriously," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(12), pages 1-20, December.
    9. Tversky, Amos & Kahneman, Daniel, 1986. "Rational Choice and the Framing of Decisions," The Journal of Business, University of Chicago Press, vol. 59(4), pages 251-278, October.
    10. Thomas Hale, 2020. "Catalytic Cooperation," Global Environmental Politics, MIT Press, vol. 20(4), pages 73-98, Autumn.
    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. Johann M. Majer & Roman Trötschel, 2022. "Negotiating Sustainability Transitions: Why Does It Matter? What Are the Challenges? How to Proceed?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(14), pages 1-5, July.

    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. 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).
    2. Subtil Lacerda, Juliana & van den Bergh, Jeroen C.J.M., 2020. "Effectiveness of an ‘open innovation’ approach in renewable energy: Empirical evidence from a survey on solar and wind power," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 118(C).
    3. Johan Miörner, 2019. "Contextualizing system agency in new path development: What factors shape regional reconfiguration capacity?," PEGIS geo-disc-2019_13, Institute for Economic Geography and GIScience, Department of Socioeconomics, Vienna University of Economics and Business.
    4. Diercks, Gijs & Larsen, Henrik & Steward, Fred, 2019. "Transformative innovation policy: Addressing variety in an emerging policy paradigm," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(4), pages 880-894.
    5. Urmetzer, Sophie & Lask, Jan & Vargas-Carpintero, Ricardo & Pyka, Andreas, 2020. "Learning to change: Transformative knowledge for building a sustainable bioeconomy," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 167(C).
    6. Foxon, T. J. & Gross, R. & Chase, A. & Howes, J. & Arnall, A. & Anderson, D., 2005. "UK innovation systems for new and renewable energy technologies: drivers, barriers and systems failures," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(16), pages 2123-2137, November.
    7. Güth, W., 1997. "Boundedly Rational Decision Emergence -A General Perspective and Some Selective Illustrations-," SFB 373 Discussion Papers 1997,29, Humboldt University of Berlin, Interdisciplinary Research Project 373: Quantification and Simulation of Economic Processes.
    8. Rohan Best & Paul J. Burke, 2020. "Energy mix persistence and the effect of carbon pricing," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 64(3), pages 555-574, July.
    9. Piotr Lis & Zuzanna Rataj & Katarzyna Suszyńska, 2022. "Implementation Risk Factors of Collaborative Housing in Poland: The Case of ‘Nowe Żerniki’ in Wrocław," JRFM, MDPI, vol. 15(3), pages 1-12, February.
    10. Natalie Slawinski & Jonatan Pinkse & Timo Busch & Subhabrata Bobby Banerjeed, 2014. "The role of short-termism and uncertainty in organizational inaction on climate change: multilevel framework," Working Papers hal-00961226, HAL.
    11. Freeman, Steven F., 1997. "Good decisions : reconciling human rationality, evolution, and ethics," Working papers WP 3962-97., Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), Sloan School of Management.
    12. Alexandra Rausch & Alexander Brauneis, 2015. "It’s about how the task is set: the inclusion–exclusion effect and accountability in preprocessing management information," Central European Journal of Operations Research, Springer;Slovak Society for Operations Research;Hungarian Operational Research Society;Czech Society for Operations Research;Österr. Gesellschaft für Operations Research (ÖGOR);Slovenian Society Informatika - Section for Operational Research;Croatian Operational Research Society, vol. 23(2), pages 313-344, June.
    13. Johannes Urpelainen, 2012. "How do electoral competition and special interests shape the stringency of renewable energy standards?," Environmental Economics and Policy Studies, Springer;Society for Environmental Economics and Policy Studies - SEEPS, vol. 14(1), pages 23-34, January.
    14. Francesco Lamperti & Giovanni Dosi & Mauro Napoletano & Andrea Roventini & Alessandro Sapio, 2018. "And then he wasn't a she : Climate change and green transitions in an agent-based integrated assessment model," Working Papers hal-03443464, HAL.
    15. Kumar, Alok, 2007. "Do the diversification choices of individual investors influence stock returns?," Journal of Financial Markets, Elsevier, vol. 10(4), pages 362-390, November.
    16. Jensen, Robert & Lleras-Muney, Adriana, 2012. "Does staying in school (and not working) prevent teen smoking and drinking?," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 31(4), pages 644-657.
    17. Curci, Ylenia & Mongeau Ospina, Christian A., 2016. "Investigating biofuels through network analysis," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 97(C), pages 60-72.
    18. Bessi, Alessandro & Guidolin, Mariangela & Manfredi, Piero, 2021. "The role of gas on future perspectives of renewable energy diffusion: Bridging technology or lock-in?," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 152(C).
    19. Mattauch, Linus & Hepburn, Cameron & Stern, Nicholas, 2018. "Pigou pushes preferences: decarbonisation and endogenous values," INET Oxford Working Papers 2018-16, Institute for New Economic Thinking at the Oxford Martin School, University of Oxford.
    20. Zhang, Hui & Cao, Libin & Zhang, Bing, 2017. "Emissions trading and technology adoption: An adaptive agent-based analysis of thermal power plants in China," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 121(C), pages 23-32.

    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:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:9:p:5024-:d:799523. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.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.