IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/envirc/v31y2013i6p1063-1081.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Innovation Politics Post-Rio+20: Hybrid Pathways to Sustainability?

Author

Listed:
  • Adrian Ely
  • Adrian Smith
  • Andy Stirling
  • Melissa Leach
  • Ian Scoones

Abstract

The ability of innovation—both technical and social—to stretch and redefine ‘limits to growth’ was recognised at Stockholm in 1972, and has been a key feature in debates through to Rio+20 in 2012. Compared with previous major moments of global reflection about human and planetary futures—Stockholm, Rio in 1992, Johannesburg in 2002—we now have a better understanding of how innovation interacts with social, technological, and ecological systems to contribute to transitions at multiple levels. What can this improved understanding offer in terms of governance approaches that might enhance the interaction between local initiatives and global sustainability objectives post-Rio+20? The global political agenda over the last two decades has largely focused on creating economic and regulatory incentives to drive more sustainable industrial development patterns within and between nation-states—resulting most notably in the Convention on Biological Diversity and the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. At the other end of the spectrum, ‘Local Agenda 21’, launched at the first Rio summit, envisaged a community-led response to sustainable development challenges locally. This paper discusses the successes and challenges of globally linked local action through a number of illustrative examples, reflecting on how these have contributed to Rio 1992's original objectives. In doing so, we will draw upon innovation studies and development studies to highlight three key issues in a hybrid politics of innovation for sustainability that links global and local: first, the direction in which innovation and development proceed; second, the distribution of the costs, benefits, and risks associated with such changes; third, the diversity of approaches and forms of innovation that contribute to global transitions to sustainability. Drawing on this analysis, we will also reflect on Rio+20, including the extent to which hybrid innovation politics is already emerging, whether this was reflected in the formal Rio+20 outcomes, and what this suggests for the future of international sustainable development summits.

Suggested Citation

  • Adrian Ely & Adrian Smith & Andy Stirling & Melissa Leach & Ian Scoones, 2013. "Innovation Politics Post-Rio+20: Hybrid Pathways to Sustainability?," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 31(6), pages 1063-1081, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:sae:envirc:v:31:y:2013:i:6:p:1063-1081
    DOI: 10.1068/c12285j
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1068/c12285j
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1068/c12285j?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Andrew Stirling, 1998. "Risk at a turning point?," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 1(2), pages 97-109, April.
    2. Erik Millstone & Patrick Zwanenberg, 2003. "Food and Agricultural Biotechnology Policy: How Much Autonomy Can Developing Countries Exercise?," Development Policy Review, Overseas Development Institute, vol. 21(5-6), pages 655-667, December.
    3. Adenle, Ademola A. & Sowe, Sulayman K. & Parayil, Govindan & Aginam, Obijiofor, 2012. "Analysis of open source biotechnology in developing countries: An emerging framework for sustainable agriculture," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 34(3), pages 256-269.
    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. Huesca-Pérez, María Elena & Sheinbaum-Pardo, Claudia & Köppel, Johann, 2016. "Social implications of siting wind energy in a disadvantaged region – The case of the Isthmus of Tehuantepec, Mexico," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 58(C), pages 952-965.
    2. Poulsen, Thomas & Lema, Rasmus, 2017. "Is the supply chain ready for the green transformation? The case of offshore wind logistics," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 758-771.
    3. Sarkar, Soumodip & Pansera, Mario, 2017. "Sustainability-driven innovation at the bottom: Insights from grassroots ecopreneurs," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 114(C), pages 327-338.
    4. Mario Pansera & Soumodip Sarkar, 2016. "Crafting Sustainable Development Solutions: Frugal Innovations of Grassroots Entrepreneurs," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(1), pages 1-25, January.

    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. Ruth E Alcock & Jerry Busby, 2006. "Risk Migration and Scientific Advance: The Case of Flame‐Retardant Compounds," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 26(2), pages 369-381, April.
    2. Kvakkestad, Valborg & Vatn, Arild, 2011. "Governing uncertain and unknown effects of genetically modified crops," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(3), pages 524-532, January.
    3. Terje Aven, 2012. "Foundational Issues in Risk Assessment and Risk Management," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 32(10), pages 1647-1656, October.
    4. Yanwei Li & Araz Taeihagh & Martin de Jong & Andreas Klinke, 2021. "Toward a Commonly Shared Public Policy Perspective for Analyzing Risk Coping Strategies," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 41(3), pages 519-532, March.
    5. Aven, Terje, 2018. "How the integration of System 1-System 2 thinking and recent risk perspectives can improve risk assessment and management," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 180(C), pages 237-244.
    6. Watson, Jim & Gross, Rob & Ketsopoulou, Ioanna & Winskel, Mark, 2015. "The impact of uncertainties on the UK's medium-term climate change targets," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 87(C), pages 685-695.
    7. Dennis Anderson, 1998. "On the Effects of Social and Economic Policies on Future Carbon Emissions," Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, Springer, vol. 3(2), pages 419-453, December.
    8. Hopkins, Michael M. & Nightingale, Paul, 2006. "Strategic risk management using complementary assets: Organizational capabilities and the commercialization of human genetic testing in the UK," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(3), pages 355-374, April.
    9. Jeremy Hall & Stelvia Matos & Cooper Langford, 2008. "Social Exclusion and Transgenic Technology: The Case of Brazilian Agriculture," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 77(1), pages 45-63, January.
    10. Dimitriou, Harry T. & Ward, E. John & Dean, Marco, 2016. "Presenting the case for the application of multi-criteria analysis to mega transport infrastructure project appraisal," Research in Transportation Economics, Elsevier, vol. 58(C), pages 7-20.
    11. Esquivel-Sada, Daphne, 2022. "Responsible intellectual property rights? Untangling open-source biotech adherence to intellectual property rights through DIYbio," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 70(C).
    12. Sarah Hartley & Adam Kokotovich & Caroline McCalman, 2023. "Prescribing engagement in environmental risk assessment for gene drive technology," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 17(2), pages 411-424, April.
    13. Andy Stirling & Sue Mayer, 2001. "A Novel Approach to the Appraisal of Technological Risk: A Multicriteria Mapping Study of a Genetically Modified Crop," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 19(4), pages 529-555, August.
    14. Terje Aven, 2020. "Risk Science Contributions: Three Illustrating Examples," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 40(10), pages 1889-1899, October.
    15. Daiki Kishishita & Susumu Sato, 2021. "Optimal risk regulation of monopolists with subjective risk assessment," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 59(3), pages 251-279, June.
    16. Larsen, Katarina & Svane, Örjan, 2005. "Routines and Communities of Practice in Public Environmental Procurement Processes," Working Paper Series in Economics and Institutions of Innovation 44, Royal Institute of Technology, CESIS - Centre of Excellence for Science and Innovation Studies.
    17. Joan Nymand Larsen & Peter Schweitzer & Khaled Abass & Natalia Doloisio & Susanna Gartler & Thomas Ingeman-Nielsen & Jón Haukur Ingimundarson & Leneisja Jungsberg & Alexandra Meyer & Arja Rautio & Joh, 2021. "Thawing Permafrost in Arctic Coastal Communities: A Framework for Studying Risks from Climate Change," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(5), pages 1-17, March.
    18. Cuesta, M.A. & Castillo-Calzadilla, T. & Borges, C.E., 2020. "A critical analysis on hybrid renewable energy modeling tools: An emerging opportunity to include social indicators to optimise systems in small communities," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 122(C).
    19. Whittingham, Jennifer & Wynberg, Rachel, 2021. "Is the Feminist Ethics of Care framework a useful lens for GM crop risk appraisal in the global south?," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 64(C).
    20. Zuo, Fei & Zio, Enrico & Xu, Yue, 2023. "Bi-objective optimization of the scheduling of risk-related resources for risk response," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 237(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:sae:envirc:v:31:y:2013:i:6:p:1063-1081. 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: SAGE Publications (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. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.