Pub Date : 2025-07-12DOI: 10.1016/j.eist.2025.101026
Alessia Lombardi , Antonio Paparella , Massimiliano Borrello , Francesco Caracciolo , Luigi Cembalo
This study highlights sufficiency principles and utilizes the consumption corridors (CC) framework to examine meat consumption. Conducted through a scenario-based experimental study with 901 participants representative of the Italian population, the research aimed to: explore perceptions of the CC concept, evaluate acceptance of a meat consumption reduction policy within CC standards, and identify factors influencing policy support. Findings showed moderate acceptance of the CC concept. The proposed policy received notable support (64 % of respondents), particularly for immediate implementation. Favourable individuals were predominantly altruistic, women, aged 55–70, with low meat consumption frequency and minimal association of meat with essential needs satisfaction. The study underscores the utility of the CC framework for designing and evaluating policies focused on reducing consumption. It offers valuable guidance for researchers and policymakers addressing Anthropocene challenges by fostering transitions toward sustainable consumption practices.
{"title":"Exploring sufficiency in meat diets: are consumers ready for consumption corridors?","authors":"Alessia Lombardi , Antonio Paparella , Massimiliano Borrello , Francesco Caracciolo , Luigi Cembalo","doi":"10.1016/j.eist.2025.101026","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.eist.2025.101026","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>This study highlights sufficiency principles and utilizes the consumption corridors (CC) framework to examine meat consumption. Conducted through a scenario-based experimental study with 901 participants representative of the Italian population, the research aimed to: explore perceptions of the CC concept, evaluate acceptance of a meat consumption reduction policy within CC standards, and identify factors influencing policy support. Findings showed moderate acceptance of the CC concept. The proposed policy received notable support (64 % of respondents), particularly for immediate implementation. Favourable individuals were predominantly altruistic, women, aged 55–70, with low meat consumption frequency and minimal association of meat with essential needs satisfaction. The study underscores the utility of the CC framework for designing and evaluating policies focused on reducing consumption. It offers valuable guidance for researchers and policymakers addressing Anthropocene challenges by fostering transitions toward sustainable consumption practices.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":54294,"journal":{"name":"Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions","volume":"57 ","pages":"Article 101026"},"PeriodicalIF":5.7,"publicationDate":"2025-07-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144604870","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2025-07-01DOI: 10.1016/j.eist.2025.101025
Daniel Fernández Galeote, Linas Gabrielaitis, Georgina Guillén, Juho Hamari
Transitioning towards more sustainable systems is crucial in an era where carbon emissions continue to rise and planetary boundaries have been exceeded. However, traditional methods for public engagement with institutionally, technically, and ecologically complex issues have shown limited results in motivating change. In response, play, games, and gamification promise to support sustainability transitions by engaging diverse stakeholders and promoting psychological and behavioral changes. Despite these promises, we lack systematic knowledge of whether such techniques, which typically leverage individual motivation and agency, can bring together stakeholders in diverse areas. Thus, we conducted a scoping review of 86 empirical outputs, which revealed untapped potential to transform practices and support large-scale transitions. Based on our findings, we propose three future agendas. First, our contextual agenda encourages clearly anchored and critical sustainability conceptualizations, engaging practitioners for resilient transitions, considering emotions, supporting technical and ecological transitions, and expanding beyond the West and the local scale. Second, for design, we suggest user-centered approaches, customizable interventions, a broader conceptualization of play, combining game and goal types, including more immersive game elements and technologies, and leveraging tools and methods beyond gamification. Third, our empirical agenda calls for larger sample sizes and longer studies, contrasting conditions, employing mixed methods, exploring double and triple loop learning, displaying critical reflexivity, and reporting clearer causal links and experiences. Future research may utilize these points to explore and leverage the potential of playful and gameful interventions in changing transition dynamics, environments, and actors for practice and regime-level system transformations.
{"title":"Play, games, and gamification to support sustainability transitions: a scoping review and research agenda","authors":"Daniel Fernández Galeote, Linas Gabrielaitis, Georgina Guillén, Juho Hamari","doi":"10.1016/j.eist.2025.101025","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.eist.2025.101025","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Transitioning towards more sustainable systems is crucial in an era where carbon emissions continue to rise and planetary boundaries have been exceeded. However, traditional methods for public engagement with institutionally, technically, and ecologically complex issues have shown limited results in motivating change. In response, play, games, and gamification promise to support sustainability transitions by engaging diverse stakeholders and promoting psychological and behavioral changes. Despite these promises, we lack systematic knowledge of whether such techniques, which typically leverage individual motivation and agency, can bring together stakeholders in diverse areas. Thus, we conducted a scoping review of 86 empirical outputs, which revealed untapped potential to transform practices and support large-scale transitions. Based on our findings, we propose three future agendas. First, our contextual agenda encourages clearly anchored and critical sustainability conceptualizations, engaging practitioners for resilient transitions, considering emotions, supporting technical and ecological transitions, and expanding beyond the West and the local scale. Second, for design, we suggest user-centered approaches, customizable interventions, a broader conceptualization of play, combining game and goal types, including more immersive game elements and technologies, and leveraging tools and methods beyond gamification. Third, our empirical agenda calls for larger sample sizes and longer studies, contrasting conditions, employing mixed methods, exploring double and triple loop learning, displaying critical reflexivity, and reporting clearer causal links and experiences. Future research may utilize these points to explore and leverage the potential of playful and gameful interventions in changing transition dynamics, environments, and actors for practice and regime-level system transformations.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":54294,"journal":{"name":"Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions","volume":"57 ","pages":"Article 101025"},"PeriodicalIF":5.7,"publicationDate":"2025-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144522687","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2025-06-25DOI: 10.1016/j.eist.2025.101024
Nadine Bruehwiler , Jens Koehrsen , Julius Malin , Rebeca Roysen , Lasse Kos
Religion is seen as potential leverage for sustainability transitions by scholars and other actors. However, so far, little is known about how religion influences the diffusion of sustainable practices. Drawing from a global survey of 130 ecovillages, this mixed-methods study investigates the role of religious difference in the diffusion activities of ecovillages. We integrate survey results with findings from 24 semi-structured interviews. The results show that ecovillages employ self-secularization strategies. Self-secularization strategies enable ecovillages to collaborate with other actors for local sustainability transitions despite differences in religious beliefs and practices. This study is the first to examine the role of religion in the diffusion activities of grassroots groups engaged in sustainability. The results illustrate the potential of religious beliefs and practices to act as barriers and/or catalysts to sustainability transitions.
{"title":"Does religious difference have an impact on the diffusion of sustainable innovations? A mixed-methods analysis of ecovillages worldwide","authors":"Nadine Bruehwiler , Jens Koehrsen , Julius Malin , Rebeca Roysen , Lasse Kos","doi":"10.1016/j.eist.2025.101024","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.eist.2025.101024","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Religion is seen as potential leverage for sustainability transitions by scholars and other actors. However, so far, little is known about how religion influences the diffusion of sustainable practices. Drawing from a global survey of 130 ecovillages, this mixed-methods study investigates the role of religious difference in the diffusion activities of ecovillages. We integrate survey results with findings from 24 semi-structured interviews. The results show that ecovillages employ self-secularization strategies. Self-secularization strategies enable ecovillages to collaborate with other actors for local sustainability transitions despite differences in religious beliefs and practices. This study is the first to examine the role of religion in the diffusion activities of grassroots groups engaged in sustainability. The results illustrate the potential of religious beliefs and practices to act as barriers and/or catalysts to sustainability transitions.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":54294,"journal":{"name":"Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions","volume":"57 ","pages":"Article 101024"},"PeriodicalIF":5.7,"publicationDate":"2025-06-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144471134","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2025-06-19DOI: 10.1016/j.eist.2025.101023
Henk-Jan Kooij , Martijn Gerritsen , Kristof Van Assche
Despite The Netherlands' advanced spatial planning system and robust energy infrastructure, attempts to integrate energy policy and spatial planning for energy transition faced significant challenges. This paper examines these efforts and their impact on both systems within nation-wide discussions, using social systems theory to explore why a cohesive strategy failed to emerge. It draws on Luhmann’s theory of social systems and his concept of irritations, combined with a theory-informed thematic analysis, to understand the communications and perturbations between energy planning and spatial planning. The paper argues that the planning and energy systems were unable to adequately understand and coordinate with each other, partly due to the lack of a unifying perspective and the inherent tensions within each system. These challenges hindered the formulation of effective energy transition strategies on a policy level. To distinguish between the degree to which communications of energy planning organizations successfully initiated internal reflections on and revisions of spatial planning organizations’ interests, operations, and priorities, we introduced three types of perturbations, so-called ‘irritations’: incomprehensible, inapt and interpretive irritations. The Dutch experience offers broader insights into the complexities of aligning spatial planning with energy policy in the pursuit of energy transition.
{"title":"Integrating spatial planning and energy policy in The Netherlands: challenges and lessons for societal energy transitions","authors":"Henk-Jan Kooij , Martijn Gerritsen , Kristof Van Assche","doi":"10.1016/j.eist.2025.101023","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.eist.2025.101023","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Despite The Netherlands' advanced spatial planning system and robust energy infrastructure, attempts to integrate energy policy and spatial planning for energy transition faced significant challenges. This paper examines these efforts and their impact on both systems within nation-wide discussions, using social systems theory to explore why a cohesive strategy failed to emerge. It draws on Luhmann’s theory of social systems and his concept of irritations, combined with a theory-informed thematic analysis, to understand the communications and perturbations between energy planning and spatial planning. The paper argues that the planning and energy systems were unable to adequately understand and coordinate with each other, partly due to the lack of a unifying perspective and the inherent tensions within each system. These challenges hindered the formulation of effective energy transition strategies on a policy level. To distinguish between the degree to which communications of energy planning organizations successfully initiated internal reflections on and revisions of spatial planning organizations’ interests, operations, and priorities, we introduced three types of perturbations, so-called ‘irritations’: <strong><em>incomprehensible, inapt</em></strong> and <strong><em>interpretive</em></strong> irritations. The Dutch experience offers broader insights into the complexities of aligning spatial planning with energy policy in the pursuit of energy transition.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":54294,"journal":{"name":"Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions","volume":"57 ","pages":"Article 101023"},"PeriodicalIF":5.7,"publicationDate":"2025-06-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144313468","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2025-06-16DOI: 10.1016/j.eist.2025.101008
Matthew Tyce
This paper aligns with, and seeks to build on, literature which has called for more sophisticated, dynamic conceptions of ‘the state’ in sustainability transitions research. Specifically, the paper echoes scholars who have argued that relational state theory can offer a useful approach for understanding the complex, often contradictory roles that states play in shaping sustainability transitions. The paper demonstrates its utility through the case of Kenya’s geothermal energy transition. Since the early-2000s, geothermal has displaced hydro and thermal power as Kenya’s biggest source of electricity and, today, Kenya ranks seventh amongst geothermal power producers worldwide. Mainstream accounts often appear to locate Kenya’s geothermal ‘success’ in the adoption of institutional arrangements that have promoted private investment and restricted the state’s presence. Where the state is recognised, it is often seemingly for dutifully performing the functions of a ‘de-risking state’. Critical academic literature identifies a more expansive role for the state. However, it, too, underplays various ways in which the Kenyan state – and balance of social forces underpinning it – has shaped geothermal developments. A relational approach, by contrast, uncovers a fuller, more extensive role for state actors in Kenya’s geothermal transition. It also yields a more complicated, nuanced account in which state actors have not always supported geothermal expansion and, in some respects, have actively forestalled it, through combinations of intra-state turf wars, flawed planning processes and personalistic rent-seeking.
{"title":"Steaming ahead while also losing pressure? Examining the roles of the state in Kenya’s geothermal energy transition","authors":"Matthew Tyce","doi":"10.1016/j.eist.2025.101008","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.eist.2025.101008","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>This paper aligns with, and seeks to build on, literature which has called for more sophisticated, dynamic conceptions of ‘the state’ in sustainability transitions research. Specifically, the paper echoes scholars who have argued that relational state theory can offer a useful approach for understanding the complex, often contradictory roles that states play in shaping sustainability transitions. The paper demonstrates its utility through the case of Kenya’s geothermal energy transition. Since the early-2000s, geothermal has displaced hydro and thermal power as Kenya’s biggest source of electricity and, today, Kenya ranks seventh amongst geothermal power producers worldwide. Mainstream accounts often appear to locate Kenya’s geothermal ‘success’ in the adoption of institutional arrangements that have promoted private investment and restricted the state’s presence. Where the state is recognised, it is often seemingly for dutifully performing the functions of a ‘de-risking state’. Critical academic literature identifies a more expansive role for the state. However, it, too, underplays various ways in which the Kenyan state – and balance of social forces underpinning it – has shaped geothermal developments. A relational approach, by contrast, uncovers a fuller, more extensive role for state actors in Kenya’s geothermal transition. It also yields a more complicated, nuanced account in which state actors have not always supported geothermal expansion and, in some respects, have actively forestalled it, through combinations of intra-state turf wars, flawed planning processes and personalistic rent-seeking.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":54294,"journal":{"name":"Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions","volume":"57 ","pages":"Article 101008"},"PeriodicalIF":5.7,"publicationDate":"2025-06-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144291354","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2025-06-12DOI: 10.1016/j.eist.2025.101022
David M. Evans, Jonathan D. Beacham
This paper considers the phenomenon of responsible consumption, which we approach as an organisational field. In doing so, we contribute analytic guidance for the study of both consumption and responsibility in sustainability transitions. Our analysis draws on three qualitative longitudinal case studies of ostensibly ‘consumer-facing’ policies and initiatives for healthy and sustainable food: carbon labelling, food waste campaigning, and sugar taxation. In each case we explore the mechanisms by which ‘consumers' are responsibilised and trace the effects of these over time. We demonstrate that responsibilisation is a dynamic and ongoing process that cannot be reduced to the unidirectional transfer of responsibilities from organisations to individuals. We also link shifts in the relationships between, and responsibilities of, different actor groups to tangible changes in the configuration of food consumption practices. Taken together, we argue that the enactment of responsible consumption is not contingent on the success of efforts to responsibilise individual consumers. To conclude, we consider the implications of our analysis for theoretical and practical understandings of sustainability transitions.
{"title":"Organising the subjects of responsible consumption: Analysing the locus of responsibility for transitions in the UK food sector (2007-2021)","authors":"David M. Evans, Jonathan D. Beacham","doi":"10.1016/j.eist.2025.101022","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.eist.2025.101022","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>This paper considers the phenomenon of responsible consumption, which we approach as an organisational field. In doing so, we contribute analytic guidance for the study of both consumption and responsibility in sustainability transitions. Our analysis draws on three qualitative longitudinal case studies of ostensibly ‘consumer-facing’ policies and initiatives for healthy and sustainable food: carbon labelling, food waste campaigning, and sugar taxation. In each case we explore the mechanisms by which ‘consumers' are responsibilised and trace the effects of these over time. We demonstrate that responsibilisation is a dynamic and ongoing process that cannot be reduced to the unidirectional transfer of responsibilities from organisations to individuals. We also link shifts in the relationships between, and responsibilities of, different actor groups to tangible changes in the configuration of food consumption practices. Taken together, we argue that the enactment of responsible consumption is not contingent on the success of efforts to responsibilise individual consumers. To conclude, we consider the implications of our analysis for theoretical and practical understandings of sustainability transitions.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":54294,"journal":{"name":"Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions","volume":"57 ","pages":"Article 101022"},"PeriodicalIF":5.7,"publicationDate":"2025-06-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144263653","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2025-06-11DOI: 10.1016/j.eist.2025.101020
Niko Soininen , J.B. Ruhl , Barbara Cosens , Lance Gunderson
Responses to ongoing global climate change include economy-wide mitigation efforts and large-scale societal adaptation that demand novel approaches to governance. An array of innovative governance models has been proposed since the late 1900s and early 2000s as scholars observed inadequacies of government-centric and formal legal approaches to natural resource management, complexity and uncertainty, failures of neoliberal economic reforms, and cross-scale institutional arrangements. Four such models have come to dominate the solution-oriented discourse on climate change governance: adaptive governance, transition governance, transformation governance, and anticipatory governance. We compare these models in terms of their origin and applicability to deal with the complexities of climate change. Our particular interest lies in how the four governance models propose to manage complexity and how they envision the role of governments as actors and law as an instrument in steering societal responses to climate change. Our analysis shows that while transition and transformation governance are often portrayed as more readily applicable to climate change mitigation, and adaptive and anticipatory governance to climate change adaptation, this sharp dichotomy does not hold water on closer scrutiny. Rather, all four governance models are applicable to different aspects of climate change mitigation and adaptation. Concerning complexity, all four governance models take some variation of social-ecological-technological complexity as their starting point. Finally on the role of government and law, adaptive governance, transition governance and one branch of transformation governance favour a facilitative role of governments, while another branch of transformation governance calls for a more involved and directive role for governments with heavy legal instrumentation and legal systemic change to match. Anticipatory governance plays more of a supporting role for implementing the other models and can range from facilitative to directive in that respect. With these observations, we hope to clarify the current global discussion over the perspectives offered by the four governance models in governing complexity in the context of climate change and beyond.
{"title":"Governing complexity: A comparative assessment of four governance models with applications to climate change mitigation and adaptation","authors":"Niko Soininen , J.B. Ruhl , Barbara Cosens , Lance Gunderson","doi":"10.1016/j.eist.2025.101020","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.eist.2025.101020","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Responses to ongoing global climate change include economy-wide mitigation efforts and large-scale societal adaptation that demand novel approaches to governance. An array of innovative governance models has been proposed since the late 1900s and early 2000s as scholars observed inadequacies of government-centric and formal legal approaches to natural resource management, complexity and uncertainty, failures of neoliberal economic reforms, and cross-scale institutional arrangements. Four such models have come to dominate the solution-oriented discourse on climate change governance: adaptive governance, transition governance, transformation governance, and anticipatory governance. We compare these models in terms of their origin and applicability to deal with the complexities of climate change. Our particular interest lies in how the four governance models propose to manage complexity and how they envision the role of governments as actors and law as an instrument in steering societal responses to climate change. Our analysis shows that while transition and transformation governance are often portrayed as more readily applicable to climate change mitigation, and adaptive and anticipatory governance to climate change adaptation, this sharp dichotomy does not hold water on closer scrutiny. Rather, all four governance models are applicable to different aspects of climate change mitigation and adaptation. Concerning complexity, all four governance models take some variation of social-ecological-technological complexity as their starting point. Finally on the role of government and law, adaptive governance, transition governance and one branch of transformation governance favour a facilitative role of governments, while another branch of transformation governance calls for a more involved and directive role for governments with heavy legal instrumentation and legal systemic change to match. Anticipatory governance plays more of a supporting role for implementing the other models and can range from facilitative to directive in that respect. With these observations, we hope to clarify the current global discussion over the perspectives offered by the four governance models in governing complexity in the context of climate change and beyond.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":54294,"journal":{"name":"Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions","volume":"57 ","pages":"Article 101020"},"PeriodicalIF":5.7,"publicationDate":"2025-06-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144263654","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2025-06-11DOI: 10.1016/j.eist.2025.101021
Amelie Bennich
With the growing interest in so-called ‘twin transitions’, i.e. the intersection of the sustainable and digital development, digitalisation has emerged as a topic of interest within the transition field. However, despite recent advancements, research on digitalisation in this field remains conceptually and empirically narrow. This perspective builds on previous calls for transition scholars to pay closer attention to digitalisation but advocates for greater diversity, creativity, and clarity in how it is studied. In particular, it highlights three main suggestions for advancement. First, transition scholars should engage more critically with the digitalisation literature to better untangle the nature of digital phenomena. Second, they should take a leading role in developing a systemic understanding of digitalisation, addressing gaps in the broader digitalisation literature. Finally, they should leverage the conceptual flexibility of digital phenomena to generate novel insights that enrich transition studies. The relationship between digitalisation and sustainability is complex and ambiguous, requiring a broad array of empirical and theoretical approaches to fully grasp their interconnections.
{"title":"Untangling digitalisation: a topic of growing relevance for transition scholars","authors":"Amelie Bennich","doi":"10.1016/j.eist.2025.101021","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.eist.2025.101021","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>With the growing interest in so-called ‘twin transitions’, i.e. the intersection of the sustainable and digital development, digitalisation has emerged as a topic of interest within the transition field. However, despite recent advancements, research on digitalisation in this field remains conceptually and empirically narrow. This perspective builds on previous calls for transition scholars to pay closer attention to digitalisation but advocates for greater diversity, creativity, and clarity in how it is studied. In particular, it highlights three main suggestions for advancement. First, transition scholars should engage more critically with the digitalisation literature to better untangle the nature of digital phenomena. Second, they should take a leading role in developing a systemic understanding of digitalisation, addressing gaps in the broader digitalisation literature. Finally, they should leverage the conceptual flexibility of digital phenomena to generate novel insights that enrich transition studies. The relationship between digitalisation and sustainability is complex and ambiguous, requiring a broad array of empirical and theoretical approaches to fully grasp their interconnections.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":54294,"journal":{"name":"Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions","volume":"57 ","pages":"Article 101021"},"PeriodicalIF":5.7,"publicationDate":"2025-06-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144255030","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2025-06-03DOI: 10.1016/j.eist.2025.101019
Axel Lindfors, Wisdom Kanda, Marcus Gustafsson, Stefan Anderberg
This article explored opportunities and benefits of combining insights from sustainability assessment and sustainability transitions research. First, an overview of both research areas regarding their key ontological, epistemological, and methodological assumptions is presented. Second, an analysis of what benefits both areas may bring to the another was conducted. Finally, a synthesis was done based on recent literature in the cross-section between the two areas of research. The overview showed that there are fundamental differences between the two research areas, such as in how sustainability is conceptualized, regarding what knowledge is needed to achieve sustainability, and in the units and levels of analysis applied. Despite this, several ways in which interaction between the two areas and cross-pollination of results could be beneficial was shown. Finally, it is argued that a multi-disciplinary approach—where theories and methods are combined sequentially or in parallel—is preferred from a practical perspective.
{"title":"Interactions between Sustainability assessment and Sustainability transitions research: The benefits of combining approaches","authors":"Axel Lindfors, Wisdom Kanda, Marcus Gustafsson, Stefan Anderberg","doi":"10.1016/j.eist.2025.101019","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.eist.2025.101019","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>This article explored opportunities and benefits of combining insights from sustainability assessment and sustainability transitions research. First, an overview of both research areas regarding their key ontological, epistemological, and methodological assumptions is presented. Second, an analysis of what benefits both areas may bring to the another was conducted. Finally, a synthesis was done based on recent literature in the cross-section between the two areas of research. The overview showed that there are fundamental differences between the two research areas, such as in how sustainability is conceptualized, regarding what knowledge is needed to achieve sustainability, and in the units and levels of analysis applied. Despite this, several ways in which interaction between the two areas and cross-pollination of results could be beneficial was shown. Finally, it is argued that a multi-disciplinary approach—where theories and methods are combined sequentially or in parallel—is preferred from a practical perspective.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":54294,"journal":{"name":"Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions","volume":"57 ","pages":"Article 101019"},"PeriodicalIF":5.7,"publicationDate":"2025-06-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144205117","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2025-05-30DOI: 10.1016/j.eist.2025.101009
Jair K.E.K. Campfens , Mert Duygan , Claudia R. Binder
{"title":"Corrigendum to “Initiating social tipping dynamics in energy transitions: A novel analytical approach for exploring feedback loops and intervention points” [Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions, 56, 2025, 1-21]","authors":"Jair K.E.K. Campfens , Mert Duygan , Claudia R. Binder","doi":"10.1016/j.eist.2025.101009","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.eist.2025.101009","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":54294,"journal":{"name":"Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions","volume":"57 ","pages":"Article 101009"},"PeriodicalIF":6.1,"publicationDate":"2025-05-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145026744","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号