IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/envira/v47y2015i2p320-337.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Grassroots Innovation for Urban Sustainability: Comparing the Diffusion Pathways of Three Ecovillage Projects

Author

Listed:
  • Robert H W Boyer

    (Department of Geography and Earth Sciences, University of North Carolina at Charlotte, NC 28223, USA)

Abstract

Grassroots innovation literature proposes that ‘intermediately’ situated community-based projects—those which are neither too radical, nor too embedded in the mainstream—play an important cross-contextual bridging role in processes of innovation for sustainable development. This paper explores this intermediacy claim by comparing how three established ecovillage projects engage outsiders and diffuse their lessons learned. Employing comparative case-study methodology, I find that while all three projects successfully replicate alternative practices outside their boundaries—for example through education, outreach, and on-site activities—one project has partnered with municipal planners to translate ‘ecovillage concepts’ into a new zoning category that will facilitate similar development by mainstream actors. The argument is made that the landscape for grassroots innovation is uneven, and that niche-to-regime translation occurs through projects that position themselves as part of two action domains at once.

Suggested Citation

  • Robert H W Boyer, 2015. "Grassroots Innovation for Urban Sustainability: Comparing the Diffusion Pathways of Three Ecovillage Projects," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 47(2), pages 320-337, February.
  • Handle: RePEc:sae:envira:v:47:y:2015:i:2:p:320-337
    DOI: 10.1068/a140250p
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1068/a140250p
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1068/a140250p?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Seyfang, Gill, 2010. "Community action for sustainable housing: Building a low-carbon future," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(12), pages 7624-7633, December.
    2. Smith, Adrian & Raven, Rob, 2012. "What is protective space? Reconsidering niches in transitions to sustainability," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(6), pages 1025-1036.
    3. Bernhard Truffer & Lars Coenen, 2012. "Environmental Innovation and Sustainability Transitions in Regional Studies," Regional Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 46(1), pages 1-21, November.
    4. Geels, Frank W. & Schot, Johan, 2007. "Typology of sociotechnical transition pathways," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(3), pages 399-417, April.
    5. Shoup, Donald C., 2001. "The trouble with minimum parking requirements," University of California Transportation Center, Working Papers qt0cz3g7wt, University of California Transportation Center.
    6. Geels, Frank W., 2002. "Technological transitions as evolutionary reconfiguration processes: a multi-level perspective and a case-study," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 31(8-9), pages 1257-1274, December.
    7. Robinson, John, 2004. "Squaring the circle? Some thoughts on the idea of sustainable development," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 48(4), pages 369-384, April.
    8. Bev Wilson & Arnab Chakraborty, 2013. "The Environmental Impacts of Sprawl: Emergent Themes from the Past Decade of Planning Research," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 5(8), pages 1-26, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. 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.
    2. Pant, Laxmi Prasad, 2016. "Paradox of mainstreaming agroecology for regional and rural food security in developing countries," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 111(C), pages 305-316.
    3. Berkeley, Nigel & Bailey, David & Jones, Andrew & Jarvis, David, 2017. "Assessing the transition towards Battery Electric Vehicles: A Multi-Level Perspective on drivers of, and barriers to, take up," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 106(C), pages 320-332.
    4. Strambach, Simone & Pflitsch, Gesa, 2020. "Transition topology: Capturing institutional dynamics in regional development paths to sustainability," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(7).
    5. 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.
    6. Ben Zhang & Lei Ma & Zheng Liu, 2020. "Literature Trend Identification of Sustainable Technology Innovation: A Bibliometric Study Based on Co-Citation and Main Path Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(20), pages 1-20, October.
    7. Harald Rohracher & Philipp Späth, 2014. "The Interplay of Urban Energy Policy and Socio-technical Transitions: The Eco-cities of Graz and Freiburg in Retrospect," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 51(7), pages 1415-1431, May.
    8. 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.
    9. Filippo Celata & Venere Stefania sanna, "undated". "Community activism and sustainability: a multi-dimensional assessment," Working Papers 137/14, Sapienza University of Rome, Metodi e Modelli per l'Economia, il Territorio e la Finanza MEMOTEF.
    10. Mike Hodson & Frank W. Geels & Andy McMeekin, 2017. "Reconfiguring Urban Sustainability Transitions, Analysing Multiplicity," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(2), pages 1-20, February.
    11. 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.
    12. Beers, Pieter J. & Turner, James A. & Rijswijk, Kelly & Williams, Tracy & Barnard, Tim & Beechener, Sam, 2019. "Learning or evaluating? Towards a negotiation-of-meaning approach to learning in transition governance," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 145(C), pages 229-239.
    13. Wiegand, Julia, 2017. "Dezentrale Stromerzeugung als Chance zur Stärkung der Energie-Resilienz: Eine qualitative Analyse kommunaler Strategien im Raum Unna," Wuppertaler Studienarbeiten zur nachhaltigen Entwicklung, Wuppertal Institute for Climate, Environment and Energy, volume 11, number 11.
    14. David Gibbs & Kirstie O'Neill, 2014. "Rethinking Sociotechnical Transitions and Green Entrepreneurship: The Potential for Transformative Change in the Green Building Sector," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 46(5), pages 1088-1107, May.
    15. Tiia-Lotta Pekkanen, 2021. "Institutions and Agency in the Sustainability of Day-to-Day Consumption Practices: An Institutional Ethnographic Study," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 168(2), pages 241-260, January.
    16. Kriechbaum, Michael & Posch, Alfred & Hauswiesner, Angelika, 2021. "Hype cycles during socio-technical transitions: The dynamics of collective expectations about renewable energy in Germany," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(9).
    17. Andersen, Allan Dahl & Markard, Jochen, 2020. "Multi-technology interaction in socio-technical transitions: How recent dynamics in HVDC technology can inform transition theories," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 151(C).
    18. Kamp, Linda Manon & Bermúdez Forn, Esteban, 2016. "Ethiopia׳s emerging domestic biogas sector: Current status, bottlenecks and drivers," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 475-488.
    19. 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.
    20. van Geenhuizen, Marina & Ye, Qing, 2014. "Responsible innovators: open networks on the way to sustainability transitions," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 87(C), pages 28-40.

    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:sae:envira:v:47:y:2015:i:2:p:320-337. 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: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    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.