IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v14y2022i5p2976-d763581.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Importance of a Natural Social Contract and Co-Evolutionary Governance for Sustainability Transitions

Author

Listed:
  • Patrick Huntjens

    (Governance of Sustainability Transitions, Maastricht Sustainability Institute (MSI), Maastricht University, 6200 MD Maastricht, The Netherlands
    Social Innovation and Governance for Sustainability at the Research and Innovation Centre Agri, Food and Life Sciences (RIC-AFL), Inholland University of Applied Sciences, 2628 AL Delft, The Netherlands)

  • René Kemp

    (Innovation and Sustainable Development, Maastricht Sustainability Institute (MSI), Maastricht University, 6200 MD Maastricht, The Netherlands
    Maastricht Economic and Social Research Institute on Innovation and Technology (UNU-MERIT), United Nations University, 6200 MD Maastricht, The Netherlands)

Abstract

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic offers an opportunity for dealing with persistent problems, through a transformative recovery process. It is a crisis that offers opportunities for dealing with three interrelated crises: the ecological crisis (climate change, loss of biodiversity, resource depletion, pollution and ecosystem destruction), the confidence crisis (people losing trust in government, politics, companies, regular news channels, science, each other and the future), and the inequality crisis (the widening of the gap between rich and poor). Our argument is that sustainability transitions will not succeed without a different economy and another social contract with rights and duties of care for the environment and the well-being of others, including future generations. A different social contract is not only desirable from the point of view of sustainability and fairness, and justice and equality, but it is also necessary to restore citizens’ trust in politics, government, companies and each other. In the paper we discuss mechanisms towards a Natural Social Contract: systemic leverage points for system transformations and possibilities for co-evolutionary governance by actor coalitions interested in transformative change. The combination of those three elements helps to synchronize different agendas and reduce the chance that they will work against each other.

Suggested Citation

  • Patrick Huntjens & René Kemp, 2022. "The Importance of a Natural Social Contract and Co-Evolutionary Governance for Sustainability Transitions," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(5), pages 1-26, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:5:p:2976-:d:763581
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/5/2976/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/5/2976/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. René Kemp & Jan Rotmans, 2005. "The Management of the Co-Evolution of Technical, Environmental and Social Systems," Springer Books, in: Matthias Weber & Jens Hemmelskamp (ed.), Towards Environmental Innovation Systems, pages 33-55, Springer.
    2. Elinor Ostrom, 2010. "Beyond Markets and States: Polycentric Governance of Complex Economic Systems," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 100(3), pages 641-672, June.
    3. Henk Diepenmaat & René Kemp & Myrthe Velter, 2020. "Why Sustainable Development Requires Societal Innovation and Cannot Be Achieved without This," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(3), pages 1-26, February.
    4. Ison, Ray & Blackmore, Chris & Iaquinto, Benjamin L., 2013. "Towards systemic and adaptive governance: Exploring the revealing and concealing aspects of contemporary social-learning metaphors," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 87(C), pages 34-42.
    5. John S. Dryzek & Christian Hunold & David Schlosberg & David Downes & Hans‐Kristian Hernes, 2002. "Environmental Transformation of the State: the USA, Norway, Germany and the UK," Political Studies, Political Studies Association, vol. 50(4), pages 659-682, September.
    6. Nill, Jan & Kemp, Ren, 2009. "Evolutionary approaches for sustainable innovation policies: From niche to paradigm?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(4), pages 668-680, May.
    7. Nicholas A. Ashford & Ralph P. Hall & Johan Arango-Quiroga & Kyriakos A. Metaxas & Amy L. Showalter, 2020. "Addressing Inequality: The First Step Beyond COVID-19 and Towards Sustainability," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(13), pages 1-43, July.
    8. Leonard-Barton, Dorothy, 1988. "Implementation as mutual adaptation of technology and organization," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 17(5), pages 251-267, October.
    9. von Tunzelmann, Nick, 2003. "Historical coevolution of governance and technology in the industrial revolutions," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 14(4), pages 365-384, December.
    10. 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.
    11. Marc Dijk & Eric Iversen & Antje Klitkou & René Kemp & Simon Bolwig & Mads Borup & Peter Møllgaard, 2020. "Forks in the Road to E-Mobility: An Evaluation of Instrument Interaction in National Policy Mixes in Northwest Europe," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(2), pages 1-20, January.
    12. 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.
    13. Kivimaa, Paula & Kern, Florian, 2016. "Creative destruction or mere niche support? Innovation policy mixes for sustainability transitions," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(1), pages 205-217.
    14. Jan-Peter Voß & Adrian Smith & John Grin, 2009. "Designing long-term policy: rethinking transition management," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 42(4), pages 275-302, November.
    15. Atkinson, Anthony B., 2015. "Inequality: what can be done?," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 101810, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    16. Yumiko Yasuda & Douglas Hill & Dipankar Aich & Patrick Huntjens & Ashok Swain, 2018. "Multi-track water diplomacy: current and potential future cooperation over the Brahmaputra River Basin," Water International, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 43(5), pages 642-664, July.
    17. Kristof van Assche & Raoul Beunen & Martijn Duineveld, 2014. "Evolutionary Governance Theory," SpringerBriefs in Economics, Springer, edition 127, number 978-3-319-00984-1, June.
    18. Geels, Frank W. & Schot, Johan, 2007. "Typology of sociotechnical transition pathways," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(3), pages 399-417, April.
    19. Richard B. Norgaard, 1984. "Coevolutionary Development Potential," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 60(2), pages 160-173.
    20. René Kemp, 2010. "The Dutch energy transition approach," International Economics and Economic Policy, Springer, vol. 7(2), pages 291-316, August.
    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. Ledy Gómez-Bayona & Alejandro Valencia-Arias & Elizabeth Emperatriz García-Salirrosas & Cinthy Catheryne Espinoza-Requejo & Gustavo Moreno-López, 2023. "Perception of Green Product Consumption in the Context of the COVID-19 Pandemic in an Emerging Economy," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(11), pages 1-16, 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. 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.
    2. Bjerkan, Kristin Ystmark & Seter, Hanne, 2021. "Policy and politics in energy transitions. A case study on shore power in Oslo," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 153(C).
    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. 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).
    5. 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).
    6. Kivimaa, Paula & Rogge, Karoline S., 2022. "Interplay of policy experimentation and institutional change in sustainability transitions: The case of mobility as a service in Finland," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(1).
    7. 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).
    8. 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).
    9. Paula Kivimaa & Mikael Hildén & Dave Huitema & Andrew Jordan & Jens Newig, 2015. "Experiments in Climate Governance. Lessons from a Systematic Review of Case Studies in Transition Research," SPRU Working Paper Series 2015-36, SPRU - Science Policy Research Unit, University of Sussex Business School.
    10. 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.
    11. 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).
    12. Bhardwaj, Chandan & Axsen, Jonn & Kern, Florian & McCollum, David, 2020. "Why have multiple climate policies for light-duty vehicles? Policy mix rationales, interactions and research gaps," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 135(C), pages 309-326.
    13. Barbanente, Angela & Grassini, Laura, 2022. "Fostering transitions in landscape policies: A multi-level perspective," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 112(C).
    14. Iizuka, Michiko & Hane, Gerald, 2021. "Transformation towards sustainable development goals: Role of innovation ecosystems for inclusive, disruptive advances in five Asian case studies," MERIT Working Papers 2021-001, United Nations University - Maastricht Economic and Social Research Institute on Innovation and Technology (MERIT).
    15. Fagerberg, Jan, 2018. "Mobilizing innovation for sustainability transitions: A comment on transformative innovation policy," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(9), pages 1568-1576.
    16. Hilde Nykamp, 2020. "Policy Mix for a Transition to Sustainability: Green Buildings in Norway," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(2), pages 1-17, January.
    17. Imbert, Enrica & Ladu, Luana & Morone, Piergiuseppe & Quitzow, Rainer, 2017. "Policy strategies for a transition to a bioeconomy in Europe: the case of Italy and Germany," MPRA Paper 78143, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    18. Frans Sengers & Bruno Turnheim & Frans Berkhout, 2021. "Beyond experiments: Embedding outcomes in climate governance," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 39(6), pages 1148-1171, September.
    19. Paula Kivimaa & Karoline S. Rogge, 2020. "Interplay of Policy Experimentation and Institutional Change in Transformative Policy Mixes: The Case of Mobility as a Service in Finland," SPRU Working Paper Series 2020-17, SPRU - Science Policy Research Unit, University of Sussex Business School.
    20. Jan-Peter Voß & Adrian Smith & John Grin, 2009. "Designing long-term policy: rethinking transition management," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 42(4), pages 275-302, November.

    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:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:5:p:2976-:d:763581. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.