IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/tefoso/v118y2017icp195-204.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Replacing centralised waste and sanitation infrastructure with local treatment and nutrient recycling: Expert opinions in the context of urban planning

Author

Listed:
  • Särkilahti, Maarit
  • Kinnunen, Viljami
  • Kettunen, Riitta
  • Jokinen, Ari
  • Rintala, Jukka

Abstract

Solutions for resource scarcity should be sought from urban waste management and sanitation, which are characterised by central plants and long networks. The socio-technical transition to more sustainable infrastructure is expected to include partial decentralisation based on local conditions. This paper focuses on drivers, barriers and enablers in implementing a decentralised circular system in a new residential area (Tampere, Finland). In the alternative system, biowaste and feces are treated in a local biogas plant, and nutrient and energy output are utilised within the area. This research aims to understand what kind of urban planning enables alternative infrastructure, as well as the characteristics of an innovation capable of making a breakthrough. Seventeen infrastructure planning experts were interviewed, then assembled to re-develop ideas arising from the interviews. Based on these qualitatively analysed data, 11 factors which help the adoption of the alternative system were formulated. The results indicate that sustainability transition can be facilitated through impartial urban planning that allows the early participation of actors and improved communications. Additionally, studying the impact of alternative solutions and city guidance according to environmental policy aims may enhance transition. Innovation success factors include suitable locations, competent partners, mature technology and visible local benefits.

Suggested Citation

  • Särkilahti, Maarit & Kinnunen, Viljami & Kettunen, Riitta & Jokinen, Ari & Rintala, Jukka, 2017. "Replacing centralised waste and sanitation infrastructure with local treatment and nutrient recycling: Expert opinions in the context of urban planning," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 195-204.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:tefoso:v:118:y:2017:i:c:p:195-204
    DOI: 10.1016/j.techfore.2017.02.020
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0040162517302007
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.techfore.2017.02.020?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. Edwards, Joel & Othman, Maazuza & Burn, Stewart, 2015. "A review of policy drivers and barriers for the use of anaerobic digestion in Europe, the United States and Australia," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 815-828.
    2. Ruggiero, Salvatore & Varho, Vilja & Rikkonen, Pasi, 2015. "Transition to distributed energy generation in Finland: Prospects and barriers," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 433-443.
    3. Geels, Frank W., 2012. "A socio-technical analysis of low-carbon transitions: introducing the multi-level perspective into transport studies," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 24(C), pages 471-482.
    4. Smith, Adrian & Raven, Rob, 2012. "What is protective space? Reconsidering niches in transitions to sustainability," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(6), pages 1025-1036.
    5. Zhao, Zhen-Yu & Chang, Rui-Dong & Chen, Yu-Long, 2016. "What hinder the further development of wind power in China?—A socio-technical barrier study," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 88(C), pages 465-476.
    6. Alanne, Kari & Saari, Arto, 2006. "Distributed energy generation and sustainable development," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 10(6), pages 539-558, December.
    7. Smith, Adrian & Voß, Jan-Peter & Grin, John, 2010. "Innovation studies and sustainability transitions: The allure of the multi-level perspective and its challenges," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(4), pages 435-448, May.
    8. de Haan, Fjalar J. & Ferguson, Briony C. & Adamowicz, Rachelle C. & Johnstone, Phillip & Brown, Rebekah R. & Wong, Tony H.F., 2014. "The needs of society: A new understanding of transitions, sustainability and liveability," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 85(C), pages 121-132.
    9. Geels, Frank W., 2010. "Ontologies, socio-technical transitions (to sustainability), and the multi-level perspective," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(4), pages 495-510, May.
    10. Fuenfschilling, Lea & Truffer, Bernhard, 2014. "The structuration of socio-technical regimes—Conceptual foundations from institutional theory," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(4), pages 772-791.
    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. Eftychia Ntostoglou & Dilip Khatiwada & Viktoria Martin, 2021. "The Potential Contribution of Decentralized Anaerobic Digestion towards Urban Biowaste Recovery Systems: A Scoping Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(23), pages 1-21, December.
    2. Nabil Touili, 2021. "Hazards, Infrastructure Networks and Unspecific Resilience," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(9), pages 1-16, April.

    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. Sebastian Fastenrath & Boris Braun, 2018. "Lost in Transition? Directions for an Economic Geography of Urban Sustainability Transitions," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(7), pages 1-17, July.
    2. Attila Havas & Doris Schartinger & K. Matthias Weber, 2022. "Innovation Studies, Social Innovation, and Sustainability Transitions Research: From mutual ignorance towards an integrative perspective?," CERS-IE WORKING PAPERS 2227, Institute of Economics, Centre for Economic and Regional Studies.
    3. 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).
    4. Razieh Nejabat & Marina Van Geenhuizen, 2019. "Entrepreneurial Risk-Taking in Sustainable Energy: University Spin-Off Firms and Market Introduction in Northwest Europe," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(24), pages 1-23, December.
    5. Geels, Frank W., 2020. "Micro-foundations of the multi-level perspective on socio-technical transitions: Developing a multi-dimensional model of agency through crossovers between social constructivism, evolutionary economics," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 152(C).
    6. Svensson, Oscar & Nikoleris, Alexandra, 2018. "Structure reconsidered: Towards new foundations of explanatory transitions theory," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(2), pages 462-473.
    7. Nilsson, Måns & Nykvist, Björn, 2016. "Governing the electric vehicle transition – Near term interventions to support a green energy economy," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 179(C), pages 1360-1371.
    8. G. Marletto, 2013. "Car and the city: Socio-technical pathways to 2030," Working Paper CRENoS 201306, Centre for North South Economic Research, University of Cagliari and Sassari, Sardinia.
    9. Hamid El Bilali, 2019. "The Multi-Level Perspective in Research on Sustainability Transitions in Agriculture and Food Systems: A Systematic Review," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 9(4), pages 1-24, April.
    10. Rosenbloom, Daniel & Berton, Harris & Meadowcroft, James, 2016. "Framing the sun: A discursive approach to understanding multi-dimensional interactions within socio-technical transitions through the case of solar electricity in Ontario, Canada," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(6), pages 1275-1290.
    11. Manning, Stephan & Reinecke, Juliane, 2016. "A modular governance architecture in-the-making: How transnational standard-setters govern sustainability transitions," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(3), pages 618-633.
    12. Sorrell, Steve, 2018. "Explaining sociotechnical transitions: A critical realist perspective," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(7), pages 1267-1282.
    13. Kvellheim, Ann Kristin, 2017. "The power of buildings in climate change mitigation: The case of Norway," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 110(C), pages 653-661.
    14. Ignė Stalmokaitė & Johanna Yliskylä-Peuralahti, 2019. "Sustainability Transitions in Baltic Sea Shipping: Exploring the Responses of Firms to Regulatory Changes," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(7), pages 1-23, March.
    15. Zolfagharian, Mohammadreza & Walrave, Bob & Raven, Rob & Romme, A. Georges L., 2019. "Studying transitions: Past, present, and future," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(9), pages 1-1.
    16. Fuenfschilling, Lea & Truffer, Bernhard, 2014. "The structuration of socio-technical regimes—Conceptual foundations from institutional theory," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(4), pages 772-791.
    17. Marletto, Gerardo, 2014. "Car and the city: Socio-technical transition pathways to 2030," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 87(C), pages 164-178.
    18. Cheng Wang & Tao Lv & Rongjiang Cai & Jianfeng Xu & Liya Wang, 2022. "Bibliometric Analysis of Multi-Level Perspective on Sustainability Transition Research," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(7), pages 1-31, March.
    19. Jain, Sanjay & Islam, Habib A. & Goossen, Martin C. & Nair, Anil, 2023. "Social movements and institutional entrepreneurship as facilitators of technology transition: The case of free/open-source software," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(2).
    20. Rachel Greer & Timo Wirth & Derk Loorbach, 2023. "The Circular Decision-Making Tree: an Operational Framework," Circular Economy and Sustainability, Springer, vol. 3(2), pages 693-718, June.

    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:tefoso:v:118:y:2017:i:c:p:195-204. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/00401625 .

    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.