Roely Rijpkema,
Marti Valero Gispert
Hybrid pathways to sustainability
Within the process of developing a mobility sub-system for 2065, the preparation of several transition stages is of a great importance. The aim is to achieve the 2065 vision for a sustainable mobility in the island via the optimal pathway, by means of social, technological and ecological development.
The protagonists acting in our scenarios are, basically, the users of the mobility network (locals and tourists), Texel municipality, government, the local market and the private sector (especially the companies involved in the production of vehicles and all the technologies-products in relation to mobility).
The general idea is to start by setting a local Agenda, with actions for the next five years, in order to set the bases for stable and efficient development and to create the best conditions for the commitment of the different stakeholders for the actions that have to be undertaken in the future. This means, to inform, on a first level, the stakeholders, about the intentions of the mobility sub-system plan, the initiatives of it and the benefits for them. The flow of information is very important on this stage, as it creates dialogue that can ultimately be very fruitful. The main goal of this is to motivate everyone and make them active in relation with the Agenda created.
In the long term future of mobility, innovative technologies are expected to be applied, such as the automated vehicles. The Netherlands, and especially Texel island (which does not belong in the main land) will not be the first place to try these innovative technologies. Unsurprisingly, the United states and Australia appear to be the first places on earth where these innovative technologies will be integrated. This means that the rest of the world will have the chance to observe the changes and gradually decide to accept them. The willingness of the people, but also the power relations of market values, the business interest (automated car companies, public transport, start-up companies) and government support will all together define the time and speed of development. Therefore, we need to introduce a diversity of pathways that can potentially lead to the 2065 vision.
The main pathways to work through in the mobility sub-system are three: The first one is the gradual replacement of polluting private cars with non-polluting ones, while at the same time integrating a car-sharing system that will make transport comfortable, cheap and sustainable. The second pathway has to do with the development of public transport and reduction in use of the private car and the third one with the development of the existing cycle paths to intelligent paths that will make transport by bicycle more attractive. Moreover, new types of bicycles can be designed, with the main focus on the comfort of the user.
The integration of one or more of the aforementioned pathways can potentially lead to a sustainable mobility sub-system in Texel. As it all depends on the stakeholders, the strategy followed from 2015 until 2065 includes small steps -actions, laws, technologies- towards all the different parts that take place in the mobility sub-system. The innovation system is quite complex and therefore a 3D Agenda, with all the different costs, risks and benefits created by the different pathways is necessary.
Exploring sustainability transitions in the electricity sector with socio-technical pathways
Transitions do not come about easily, because existing systems are characterised by stability and lock-in. However, a major transition has occurred in the electricity sector in the EU during the last two decades: changes in the institutional framework have resulted in a shift from a system dominated by engineers to a market-based system, ruled by managers.
The Global Energy Network Institute tries to combine the vision of the supergrid in Europe and an energy internet: “Research shows that the premier global strategy is the interconnection of electric power networks between regions and continents into a global energy grid, with an emphasis on tapping abundant renewable energy resources—a world wide web of electricity”.
Transitions are about changes at the meso-level of socio-technical regime. Niches form the micro-level, the locus where novelties emerge. The macro-level is the socio-technical landscape, which forms an exogenous environment that usually changes slowly and influences niches and regime dynamics. The relationship between the three levels is a nested hierarchy.
To analyze electricity systems, we therefore use a more refined typology of transition pathways, which distinguishes four ideal-typical paths, based on different kinds and timing of multi-level interactions. The kinds of multi-level interactions refer to the nature of the relation between niche-innovations and landscape pressure with the regime (reinforcing or disruptive). Timing is in particular relevant in the case of landscape pressure on regimes. If this pressure occurs at a time when niche-innovations are not yet fully developed, the transition path will be different than when they are fully developed.
The paper explains about three possible socio-technical pathways, which the electricity sector can take in order to change the present electricity system (developed by Geels and Schot).
● The first one is the transformation pathway. This is a hybrid path and it is focusing on the market-regime.
Both regime actors and policy makers believe that the introduction of so-called smart grids will solve most of the networks problems, but as the few examples in the introduction demonstrated, opinions on the direction of change differ greatly. Using the pathway typology we will briefly explore three different pathways for the electricity system. Landscape pressures have resulted in several policy efforts to increase the share of renewables.
● The second path is the reconfiguration pathway. This path is focusing on internationalization, the scale increases, namely on European scale. This pathway can also be called the ‘Supergrid’.
The main dynamism is an economic one: the market mechanism, introduced in the 1990s, remains the dominant organising principle. National and European policies focus on market-based instruments, e.g. the expansion of the carbon emission trading system in Europe.
In this scenario, the generation capacity in 2050 consists of a few large-scale generation units as well as a large number of small units nearby consumers, producing a hybrid system.
In this pathway the system in 2050 is characterised by very large-scale generation units, which are in general located far from consumption centres. Despite the fluctuating nature of some of resources (in particular wind) the overall power production is well predictable and controllable. Balancing via generation and some demand management will suffice for stable alignment of demand and supply in the system. The main infrastructural issue is to create sufficient network capacity.
● The de-alignment and re-alignment pathway is the last one. This is focussing on more local infrastuctures. This pathway is taking when there is no other choice, when there is no faith in ‘normal’ solutions. (I think this last pathway is happening on Samso. The Island had to change because of an economical crisis and no-one had a job)
This pathway leads to a major restructuring of the electricity system. The system in 2050 could be dominated by a set of loosely coupled regional and local grids (micro grids).
All the three pathways needs require major investments in infrastructure and innovative technologies. Making the grid 'smarter' is important in all pathways, but especially so in a shift towards distributed generation.
All the scenarios assume that electricity networks remain necessary in the future. Completely different configurations are feasible, e.g. it is possible to construct a hydrogen economy with local electricity generation, but this does not seem very likely because electricity networks provide a high degree of reliability and reduce the need for spare generation capacity.
Islands at the periphery: Integrating the challenges of island sustainability into European policy
Several policies of Sustainable Development are being implemented in the EU (EU sustainable development strategy). However, the islands lands are not totally included in these policies as they are considered to have each specific challenges due to their isolation and relatively small size, which demand special attention. The conducted study analyses common social, geographical and economic characteristics that EU islands have in order to determine a list of aspects that could be develop in order to make such islands more sustainable.
In the EU, a distinction between three types of islands is made:
- Islands that are whole or part of ‘overseas countries and territories’ (such as Greenland, French Polynesia and Bermuda)
- Most remote region islands (the Azores, Madeira and the Canary Islands). They have special treatment in various sectors such as transport and cohesion policy under the Treaty of Amsterdam (1997)
- Continental EU islands, which are recognised under various sectoral polices such as agriculture and fisheries to be in need of special consideration
The study is focused on the last two categories of islands. Texel would fit in the third category, and with regard to this group, relevant EU island policy is fragmented, and relates primarily to its cohesion, and agriculture and fisheries policies.
It has been studied that these two groups of islands tend to have the following “backwardness” characteristics:
- Below average Gross Domestic Product (GDP) per capita
- Higher cost of living due to its insularity
- Lower wages due to smaller sized markets
- Vulnerability to climate change
Factors that contribute to this “backwardness” include: isolation from the mainland, higher costs of sea and air transport, restricted usable land area, limited fisheries resource, restricted water supplies, restricted sources of energy, marine and coastal pollution, difficulties in waste management, decreasing population, coastal erosion, the shortage of a qualified workforce, absence of a favourable climate for business, difficulties to access health and education, small size of the local market and poor economic diversification.
It is proposed five ways in which policies can contribute to the SD of the islands. These are: 1) by directly aiming at alleviating the problems of islands (cohesion and transport policies); 2) by applying across the whole EU with some limited territorial element (agriculture and fisheries, environment and cohesion fund); 3) by applying across the whole EU with little territorial element (competition and state aid); 4) by applying across the EU with no island priority but benefiting the islands (energy, research, information society and public health); 5) within emerging areas that may potentially assist the islands (employment - growing local dimension).
Together with that, a list of different points where action could be taken is presented. It can be seen that most of the presented points represent to some degree the situation in Texel. Two remarkable aspects that relate to our sub-topic, the mobility in the island are:
- Extreme Population Dynamics
The population in the islands tends to have fast changes. It is very common a process of aging especially in the population of small islands, having an effect on the services provided within the territory.
This factor must be taken into account when presenting a transport solution for Texel; different aged people have different physical capacities and, therefore, different needs in regard to their way of being transported.
- Waste Management Challenges Due to Small Size and Remoteness
A big material consumption by the people of an island (including the tourists) brings the problem of treating the waste in such small area of isolated land. In this point, we should look at the situation in the group that is focused on developing a sustainable waste treatment for the island. Depending on their plans and prediction, our transport system might need to adjust a bit to fit this sub-topic.
These two points should be taken into account and added to the objectives of our project. As it was presented in the previous chapters, it is wanted to reduce the negative impact that transport has in the island and this is directed mainly on changing how tourists are transported.