Discursive regime dynamics in the Dutch energy transition
By Rick Bosman, Derk A. Loorbach, Niki Frantzeskaki, T. Pistorius. 2014
134 citations recorded by the source corpus.
Abstract Since its introduction in the National Environmental Policy Plan in 2001 the notion of ‘energy transition’ is firmly rooted in the Dutch energy debate. Despite political efforts to shift to a sustainable energy system, the Netherlands is lagging behind other European countries. Scholarly literature generally ascribes such slow developments to the dominant role of incumbents. In this paper we explore how prominent incumbents of the Dutch energy system discursively frame the energy transition by unravelling their existing and evolving storylines. Our results show that decarbonization in the context of a European energy market is currently seen as the dominant driver for the energy transition, linked to discursive elements on keeping the energy supply secure and affordable. We found tensions within this dominant storyline and emerging storylines with the potential to undermine the dominant one. In response, incumbents are discursively repositioning themselves, thereby restructuring coalitions – possibly indicating discursive regime destabilization.
Subfields: Electrical and Electronic Engineering, General Energy, Renewable Energy, Sustainability and the Environment
View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/319bf36d3079445cfed6e7a2cc38cbbe83156e6a
How researchers see this paper
The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.
In Electrical and Electronic Engineering
In General Energy
In Renewable Energy, Sustainability and the Environment
- Jan Rotmans
- M. Smink
- Rick Bosman
- Marko P. Hekkert
- Simona Negro
- Niki Frantzeskaki
- F. Avelino
- Derk A. Loorbach
Citations in the corpus
- Sustainability Transitions Research: Transforming Science and Practice for Societal Change (2017, background): “This points to current research directions for transition management, such as explorations of institutional change and formal policy (27, 52, 62, 63, 74), new forms of power (25, 75, 155, 156), and the role of researchers (157).”
- Transition Governance towards a Bioeconomy: A Comparison of Finland and The Netherlands (2016, background): “Transitions often involve challenging the status quo and thus face fierce resistance from vested interests in the energy, petro-chemical, agriculture and forestry sectors [17,18].”
- How mismatching institutional logics hinder niche–regime interaction and how boundary spanners intervene (2015, background): “Thus, institutional logics help to understand why actors behave in a certain way and how they perceive their interests (cf. Bosman et al., 2014).”
- Policy mixes for incumbency: Exploring the destructive recreation of renewable energy, shale gas ‘fracking,’ and nuclear power in the United Kingdom (2017, unknown): “…is itself to be countered by deliberate efforts at ‘regime destabilisation’ (Scrase & Smith 2009; Turnheim & Geels 2012; Turnheim & Geels 2013; Bosman et al. 2014; Karltorp & Sandén 2012) then the scope of what constitutes the politics of transitions becomes significantly wider and deeper…”