IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/lauspo/v116y2022ics0264837722000941.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Perceived legitimacy of agricultural transitions and implications for governance. Lessons learned from England’s post-Brexit agricultural transition

Author

Listed:
  • de Boon, Auvikki
  • Sandström, Camilla
  • Rose, David Christian

Abstract

It is widely recognized that there is a global need for a transition towards more sustainable forms of agriculture. In order for such a transition to be socially sustainable, its input (problem and goal formulation), output (policy instruments), and throughput (processes) need to be perceived as legitimate. However, we currently know relatively little on how to legitimize normatively shaped transition processes and their outcomes. We aim to address this knowledge gap by examining how the governance of agricultural transitions can be shaped to improve the perceived legitimacy of the transition. Through a combined lens of normative and sociological approaches to legitimacy we investigate the English post-Brexit agricultural transition as a crucial case-study. Building on a policy analysis and semi-structured interviews we find that in order to create perceived legitimacy of agricultural transitions, both in the English case and for agricultural transitions generally, clarity and diversity in design is essential. In addition, in order to take account of the normative and political nature of agricultural transitions, our study highlights the importance of a broad problem formulation, a diverse mix of instruments, and a process that is transparent and includes stakeholders in a meaningful and equal way. We conclude that a combined lens of normative and sociological legitimacy forms a useful framework for future research to critically evaluate the normative and power dimensions of transition processes. In addition, it can support governments in their efforts to develop policies for agricultural sustainability transitions that will be accepted by society.

Suggested Citation

  • de Boon, Auvikki & Sandström, Camilla & Rose, David Christian, 2022. "Perceived legitimacy of agricultural transitions and implications for governance. Lessons learned from England’s post-Brexit agricultural transition," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 116(C).
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:lauspo:v:116:y:2022:i:c:s0264837722000941
    DOI: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2022.106067
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0264837722000941
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.landusepol.2022.106067?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. Tahrir Jaber & Elin M. Oftedal, 2020. "Legitimacy for Sustainability: A Case of A Strategy Change for An Oil and Gas Company," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(2), pages 1-19, January.
    2. Biermann, Frank & Gupta, Aarti, 2011. "Accountability and legitimacy in earth system governance: A research framework," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(11), pages 1856-1864, September.
    3. Chika Aoki‐Suzuki & Sébastien M. R. Dente & Daisuke Tanaka & Chihiro Kayo & Shinsuke Murakami & Chiharu Fujii & Kiyotaka Tahara & Seiji Hashimoto, 2021. "Total environmental impacts of Japanese material production," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 25(6), pages 1474-1485, December.
    4. Valkeapää, Annukka & Karppinen, Heimo, 2013. "Citizens' view of legitimacy in the context of Finnish forest policy," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 28(C), pages 52-59.
    5. Reynaert, Mathias & Ale-Chilet, Jorge & Chen, Cuicui & Li, Jing, 2021. "Colluding Against Environmental Regulation," CEPR Discussion Papers 16038, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    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. Katie Jo Black & Andrew J. Boslett & Elaine L. Hill & Lala Ma & Shawn J. McCoy, 2021. "Economic, Environmental, and Health Impacts of the Fracking Boom," Annual Review of Resource Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 13(1), pages 311-334, October.
    8. Inga C. Melchior & Jens Newig, 2021. "Governing Transitions towards Sustainable Agriculture—Taking Stock of an Emerging Field of Research," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(2), pages 1-27, January.
    9. 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.
    10. Hamid El Bilali, 2020. "Transition heuristic frameworks in research on agro-food sustainability transitions," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 22(3), pages 1693-1728, March.
    11. Florian Kern & Michael Howlett, 2009. "Implementing transition management as policy reforms: a case study of the Dutch energy sector," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 42(4), pages 391-408, November.
    12. Michael B. Wironen & Robert V. Bartlett & Jon D. Erickson, 2019. "Deliberation and the Promise of a Deeply Democratic Sustainability Transition," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(4), pages 1-18, February.
    13. Li, Huan & Zhang, Ruohao & Khanna, Neha, 2021. "Environmental Justice: A Multigenerational Perspective," 2021 Annual Meeting, August 1-3, Austin, Texas 313873, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    14. Guillaume Martin & Sandrine Allain & Jacques-Eric Bergez & Delphine Burger-Leenhardt & Julie Constantin & Michel Duru & Laurent Hazard & Camille Lacombe & Danièle Magda & Marie-Angélina Magne & Julie , 2018. "How to Address the Sustainability Transition of Farming Systems? A Conceptual Framework to Organize Research," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(6), pages 1-20, June.
    15. Li, Minghao & Zhang, Wendong, 2021. "Trade policies have environmental implications," ISU General Staff Papers 202108120700001837, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    16. Ana C. Rorato & Michelle C. A. Picoli & Judith A. Verstegen & Gilberto Camara & Francisco Gilney Silva Bezerra & Maria Isabel S. Escada, 2021. "Environmental Threats over Amazonian Indigenous Lands," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(3), pages 1-28, March.
    17. Vringer, Kees & Carabain, Christine L., 2020. "Measuring the legitimacy of energy transition policy in the Netherlands," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 138(C).
    18. Klerkx, Laurens & Begemann, Stephanie, 2020. "Supporting food systems transformation: The what, why, who, where and how of mission-oriented agricultural innovation systems," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 184(C).
    19. Vivien A. Schmidt, 2013. "Democracy and Legitimacy in the European Union Revisited: Input, Output and ‘Throughput’," Political Studies, Political Studies Association, vol. 61(1), pages 2-22, March.
    20. Ossenbrink, Jan & Finnsson, Sveinbjoern & Bening, Catharina R. & Hoffmann, Volker H., 2019. "Delineating policy mixes: Contrasting top-down and bottom-up approaches to the case of energy-storage policy in California," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(10).
    21. Carolyn Hendriks, 2009. "Policy design without democracy? Making democratic sense of transition management," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 42(4), pages 341-368, November.
    22. Biermann, Frank & Gupta, Aarti, 2011. "Accountability and legitimacy: An analytical challenge for earth system governance," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(11), pages 1854-1855, September.
    23. Upham, Paul & Virkamäki, Venla & Kivimaa, Paula & Hildén, Mikael & Wadud, Zia, 2015. "Socio-technical transition governance and public opinion: The case of passenger transport in Finland," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 46(C), pages 210-219.
    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. Akimowicz, Mikaël & Del Corso, Jean-Pierre & Gallai, Nicola & Képhaliacos, Charilaos, 2022. "The leader, the keeper, and the follower? A legitimacy perspective on the governance of varietal innovation systems for climate changes adaptation. The case of sunflower hybrids in France," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 203(C).
    2. Daniel Velden & Joost Dessein & Laurens Klerkx & Lies Debruyne, 2023. "Constructing legitimacy for technologies developed in response to environmental regulation: the case of ammonia emission-reducing technology for the Flemish intensive livestock industry," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 40(2), pages 649-665, June.
    3. Urquhart, Julie & Ambrose-Oji, Bianca & Chiswell, Hannah & Courtney, Paul & Lewis, Nick & Powell, John & Reed, Matt & Williams, Chris, 2023. "A co-design framework for natural resource policy making: Insights from tree health and fisheries in the United Kingdom," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 134(C).
    4. Matthijs J Janssen & Joeri Wesseling & Jonas Torrens & K Matthias & Caetano Penna & Laurens Klerkx, 2023. "Missions as boundary objects for transformative change: understanding coordination across policy, research, and stakeholder communities," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 50(3), pages 398-415.
    5. David Christian Rose & Anna Barkemeyer & Auvikki Boon & Catherine Price & Dannielle Roche, 2023. "The old, the new, or the old made new? Everyday counter-narratives of the so-called fourth agricultural revolution," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 40(2), pages 423-439, June.

    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. 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).
    2. Kanger, Laur & Sovacool, Benjamin K. & Noorkõiv, Martin, 2020. "Six policy intervention points for sustainability transitions: A conceptual framework and a systematic literature review," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(7).
    3. Nuñez-Jimenez, Alejandro & Knoeri, Christof & Hoppmann, Joern & Hoffmann, Volker H., 2022. "Beyond innovation and deployment: Modeling the impact of technology-push and demand-pull policies in Germany's solar policy mix," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(10).
    4. 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).
    5. Sampsa Hyysalo & Jani Lukkarinen & Paula Kivimaa & Raimo Lovio & Armi Temmes & Mikael Hildén & Tatu Marttila & Karoliina Auvinen & Sofi Perikangas & Allu Pyhälammi & Janne Peljo & Kaisa Savolainen & L, 2019. "Developing Policy Pathways: Redesigning Transition Arenas for Mid-range Planning," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(3), pages 1-22, January.
    6. Inga C. Melchior & Jens Newig, 2021. "Governing Transitions towards Sustainable Agriculture—Taking Stock of an Emerging Field of Research," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(2), pages 1-27, January.
    7. Xieao Chen & Ping Huang & Zhenhong Xiao, 2022. "Uncovering the verticality and temporality of environmental policy mixes: The case of agricultural residue recycling in China," Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 39(5), pages 632-653, September.
    8. 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).
    9. Ossenbrink, Jan & Finnsson, Sveinbjoern & Bening, Catharina R. & Hoffmann, Volker H., 2019. "Delineating policy mixes: Contrasting top-down and bottom-up approaches to the case of energy-storage policy in California," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(10).
    10. Naimeh Mohammadi & Hamid Mostofi & Hans-Liudger Dienel, 2023. "Policy Chain of Energy Transition from Economic and Innovative Perspectives: Conceptual Framework and Consistency Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(17), pages 1-27, August.
    11. Schmidt, Tobias S. & Sewerin, Sebastian, 2019. "Measuring the temporal dynamics of policy mixes – An empirical analysis of renewable energy policy mixes’ balance and design features in nine countries," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(10).
    12. 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.
    13. Annemarie Groot-Kormelinck & Jos Bijman & Jacques Trienekens & Laurens Klerkx, 2022. "Producer organizations as transition intermediaries? Insights from organic and conventional vegetable systems in Uruguay," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 39(4), pages 1277-1300, December.
    14. Hilde Nykamp, 2020. "Policy Mix for a Transition to Sustainability: Green Buildings in Norway," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(2), pages 1-17, January.
    15. 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).
    16. Huang, Ping, 2019. "The verticality of policy mixes for sustainability transitions: A case study of solar water heating in China," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(10).
    17. Bernini, Cristina & Cerqua, Augusto, 2019. "Do sustainability policies finance local economies?," MPRA Paper 91882, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    18. 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.
    19. Sareen, Siddharth & Wolf, Steven A., 2021. "Accountability and sustainability transitions," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 185(C).
    20. Söderholm, Patrik & Hellsmark, Hans & Frishammar, Johan & Hansson, Julia & Mossberg, Johanna & Sandström, Annica, 2019. "Technological development for sustainability: The role of network management in the innovation policy mix," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 138(C), pages 309-323.

    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:lauspo:v:116:y:2022:i:c:s0264837722000941. 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: Joice Jiang (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/land-use-policy .

    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.