Does transition management travel? Two case studies from Finland

1. Does transition management travel? Two case studies from Finland Raimo Lovio, Helsinki School of Economics Sirkku Kivisaari, VTT Technical Research Centre Per Mickwitz, Finnish Environment Institute Eva Heiskanen, National Consumer Research Centre

2. Aim of the paper • Examine the uptake of Transition Management (TM) policy model in Finland • find particular drivers & obstacles for the Finnish context • make some more general observations on the conditions for its uptake internationally • requirements for goverance capacity? • future needs to specify the TM model?

3. Data and theoretical perspective Data = two case studies: • Environmental policy: TM in the work of the Comittee for Sustainable Consumption & Production • Healthcare technology: TM as an extension of the societal embedding of innovations • cases based on documents, interviews, participant observation Theoretical perspectives: • Policy transfer • diffusion vs. learning, role of socio-historical institutions & domestic political interests, soft transfer & non-state actors • Neoinstitutional research on transfer as ’translation’: • carriers, relations to dominant institutional logics & frames, hybridization

4. Case 1: Environmental policy (2003-2007) • Background & carriers: • environmental policy facing new challenges over which MoE lacks direct power: eco-efficiency & climate change > TM as a tool for dealing with these challenges • Enthusiastic civil servants imported TM ideas • Committee for Sustainable Consumption and Production (KULTU Committee) main forum for learning • Dutch researchers, policy makers and businesses invited to present model & transition projects • Initial response (industry & MTI): ”not invented here”

5. Conflicting/supporting institutional logics • critics equated TM with ’planned economy’ • unsuccessful historical experiences of state involvement in tech & biz development (e.g. ’Finnish TV industry’) • innovation policy focused on securing microeconomic conditions for competitiveness • weak role of the MoE in domestic policies • tradition of voluntary agreements? • less in environmental policy • long tradition in general income settlements (employers, employees, state)

6. Local translation Measure 5 in the KULTU Committee Report (2005): • “Constructive dialogues should be initiated between companies, business sector organizations, researchers and administrators to set comprehensive targets for material- and energy-efficiency throughout the life cycle of products, and to prevent waste in different sectors: these dialogues can also lead to commitments and the signing of voluntary agreements. Trials and pilot projects should be launched in various sectors to assess the potential for such improvements and to help set related targets. The applicability of goals defined in international discussions should also be considered during the setting of such targets.([To be implemented by] MTI & MoE, industrial and trade organisations, companies, SITRA, TEKES& research institutes.) • Included in gvmt programme, but no dialogues started yet

7. Case 2: Healthcare technology (1997-2007) Background and carriers: • VTT co-operation with healthcare tech industry 1970s- > lack of business growth & efficiency gains for users > need to create understanding of industry dynamics • Main forum for TM learning: VTT-industry (&user) collaboration and the Societal Embedding of Innovations (SEI) • SEI drew on Strategic Niche Management (SNM), but introduced 3 major local modifications: • producers, users & societal actors model • learning path, spiral • multivocal dialogues for different level of innovations

8. Supporting institutional logics • Existing community of policy makers, companies and user organisations with perceived urgent need and means to solve the healthcare crisis • Bottom-up process of mutual learning facilitated by the SEI processes • TM linked the local niche development activities in a more articulated way to larger societal change processes • Enabled policy makers to understand the role of various technology & actor configurations in transforming the healthcare regime > targeted programmes to promote uptake of systemic innovations

9. Local translation

10. Future for TM in Finland? • local interpretations & translations: some generative, others problematic • top policy level & local elites not reached • bottom-up process needed • role of intermediaries & long-term learning processes • understanding of the underlying logic of the TM model • practical examples • links to innovation & technology policies needed for breakthrough in environmental policy

11. More generalizable conclusions: nature & priming of ’receiving’ contexts • Gap between necessary & existing capacities! • knowledge of tech dynamics needed to understand targeted experimentation & learning • coalitions of state & non-state actors • policy integration • Some transitions are likely to be easier than others • perceived urgency & power of domestic actors • existing networks & advocacy coalitions • historical legacy of institutional logics in different sectors

12. More generalizable conclusions: needs to enhance the TM model • Translations and hybridizations inevitable • worth following because they reveal users’ needs & contexts • Need to open up the ’black box’ of power & the policy process • what works in multilevel, multiactor governance processes (and what does not)? • Current attempts to transfer more ’emulation’ than learning • dire need for evidence of outcomes > lessons-drawing