3.1 Literature on transitions

Walker et al. (2011) found that previous literature and frameworks on social response to renewable energy projects did not present a satisfactory representation of the processes, dynamics and interactions involved. Figure 3.1 shows the framework that they devised as a result, giving a conceptual overview of the elements and processes involved in shaping the interactions that take place between technology promoters and local publics in relations to proposed RET developments.

In short, both RET promoters as well as public actors start with certain expectations about each other, which in turn shapes the way in which they engage each other and become involved in the interactions space. This is a continuous feedback loop, as new interactions lead to new insights, following new expectations, following new engagements, etc. However, a bigger long-term feedback loop is also present, representing new technology designs (mostly with the goal of making RE technology physically less intrusive for public actors) and shifting in development locations, both of which are again based on new expectations that are derived from interaction with the public actors. Last but not least, contextual factors also play a role in the whole decision making process. This highlights all forms of policy and cultural and economical contexts.

It is clear that support from public actors is key to success for any new technology or sustainable project or initiative. However, this is not an easy job. Many small-scale, local community project still fail to succeed. Scholars mention that an important role is laid out for so-called “intermediary actors”. Geels and Deuten (2006) state that these intermediary actors are important for the survival of grassroot initiatives because they have three distinct roles. Firstly, they aggregate lessons from across multiple local projects. Secondly, they establish an institutional infrastructure for the innovation niche as a whole and lastly, they utilize framing and coordinating action on the ground in local projects. Hargreaves et al. (2013) add a fourth role, namely that of brokering and managing partnerships with actors from ‘outside’ the community energy sector. It is important to note that this paper is based on research focussing on the energy sector alone. However, the following conclusions can be of importance on a more broad sense:

Hargreaves et al. (2013) conclude that learning must be seen as a constant and ongoing process both for local community energy projects and for intermediaries themselves. Furthermore, building institutional infrastructures is extremely difficult when diverse interests are in play. Third, framing and coordinating local projects involves lots of resource intensive work to build confidence and capabilities and to respond to and attempt to shape local and policy contexts. Fourth, community (energy) intermediaries are increasingly engaging in a process of forging partnerships and lobbying with the wider social world.

group interpretation on literature

Group member	Literature interpretation	Application to texel / general comments
Jeffrey	Walker et al. (2011): It is not just important to look at technologies themselves, but also on people’s reactions to them. People don’t just accept change, but they have expectations and engage in various ways with technology (and their corresponding actors). Hargreaves et al. (2013): In order to attempt to successfully implement (grassroot) technology and innovation, the role of intermediaries is important. Because they will have to deal with the network-like complexity of today’s society and find their way through this maze to connect all parties that are involved in transitioning towards sustainability.	If Texel is going to become self-sufficient in 2065, not only lifestyles need to gradually change. It is important to create a positive support structure for (grassroot) innovations and to be aware of- and act on the expectations and reactions by Texelers about such innovations. Entrepreneurs can play intermediary roles as described in the literature. However, this cannot be done without a good entrepreneurial support structure (Support & Finance domain). I also think that community-based initiatives will be the key to success on this small island. (Good example: www.zelfpluktuin.nl)
Karolina	Walker et al. (2011):  The developed and presented framework addresses the dynamics, processes and interactions between actors in energy projects, which so far was lacking in the previous models. Importance of expectations, feedback and engagement are stressed from both RET and public actors. Hargreaves et al. (2013): Grassroot innovations, going beyond mainstream market-based changes, try to replace the current system. It focuses on the system as whole rather than on its elements. Intermediaries are the actors facilitating such innovations, bringing together the actors with their goals and visions.	Although Texel already has some sort of intermediaries (for example initiatives as Stichting Duurzaam Texel or JONT could be seen as such), these focus more on the elements in the system, not at the system as a whole. Moreover, they work individualistically. A proper intermediate bridge in between different actors is lacking and could be established to achieve big (grassroots) innovations, which self-sufficiency for sure requires.
Robert	Walker et al. (2011): In this paper, it is stated that there is a very important literature part giving a unsatisfactory answer to the developed framework between actors in energy projects. Therefore, a new framework is given by this paper which addresses understanding public responses to large-scale, developer-led RET developments Hargreaves et al. (2013): I believe that the grassroot innovations are usually really context related and not directly applicable in the bigger system. The help of intermediaries is needed to bridge this gap. Since grassroot innovations are so context dependent and therefore beyond mainstream, there is a need for a mediator.	I believe that for Texel, small scale grassroot innovations can work very well for thriving sustainable transitions. When these ideas are to be projected on the mainland and beyond however, it is essential that intermediaries are involved to bridge the gap between specific Texel and mainstream elsewhere. Using Texel as a try-out location seems very promising though.

 

reflection on the literature

Presence is an important concept especially for entrepreneurs. Through presence they gather knowledge about the market and competitors. The continuous development of online presence and its integration with “real” physical presence will in our opinion play a huge role in the years to come. Even though Texel is a small island, online applications (i.e. apps or in the future, perhaps augmented reality applications) can play a role in visualizing goals for sustainability, making them more graspable for everyone. Also, even though we strive for self-sufficiency of Texel in 2065 this does not mean that Texel will be completely disconnected from the mainland. Online presence will increasingly ease the way that actors interact with each other.

Pro-environmental behavior is strongly desired if it is to reach self-sufficiency in 2065. Entrepreneurs will play a key role and we feel that they can take the role of intermediaries due to specific traits that they generally own. They will be able to come up with smart ways to engage people to act more pro-environmental, by playing into their wish for well-being, which is a state of existence where people feel happy, either because of feeling pleasure (hedonic well-being) or by striving for the ‘right’ values and goals (eudaimonic well-being).