{"title":"Decolonising innovation in sustainability transitions for pluriversal justice and wellbeing","authors":"Saurabh Arora , Bipashyee Ghosh , Andy Stirling","doi":"10.1016/j.eist.2025.101064","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Sustainability scholars address social-ecological injustices associated with innovation processes, through concepts such as ‘just transitions’ and ‘energy justice’. However, the making of today’s innovations by <em>deep and pervasive formations of power and privilege – colonial modernities</em> – is currently neglected in sustainability transition studies. We conceptualise nine epistemological and ontological foundations of distinctively colonial-modern innovation processes. These foundations include: fixing categorical divides on flowing relations; stratifying rigidly separated orders; promoting appropriation of privileges; objectifying and reifying realities; monopolising quantifications; standardising practices; singularising ontology, by approaching the pluriverse (of many different and connected ways of knowing, being and doing in disparate worlds) as just one world; and dominating other worlds by colonial-modern worldmaking.</div><div>Taken together, these interwoven foundations point to the following actions to help decolonise modern innovation processes: recognising and <em>challenging colonial formations</em> of concentrated power and privilege as they are built into modern knowing; <em>extending egalitarian relations</em> towards intersectionally marginalised contributors in knowledge production; <em>grasping multifarious encompassment</em> by wider material and living ecologies of beings notionally separated as ‘human’ or ‘nonhuman’; <em>embracing inherent uncertainties</em> in all that can be known or made, to imbue knowing and making with humility and care; <em>admitting open pluralities</em> of qualities, which include approaching dimensions of categories as fluid; and <em>supporting pluriversal reparations</em> spanning many ways of knowing, in struggles to dismantle coloniality everywhere. Decolonising innovation processes in these ways, we propose, can contribute to deeper decolonial transformations of modernities in solidarity with colonially subordinated peoples’ <em>struggles for pluriversal wellbeing and justice</em>. Without realising such justice for the flourishing of many worlds, sustainability may remain little more than a modern illusion.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":54294,"journal":{"name":"Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions","volume":"58 ","pages":"Article 101064"},"PeriodicalIF":6.1000,"publicationDate":"2026-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2210422425001030","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/11/22 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Sustainability scholars address social-ecological injustices associated with innovation processes, through concepts such as ‘just transitions’ and ‘energy justice’. However, the making of today’s innovations by deep and pervasive formations of power and privilege – colonial modernities – is currently neglected in sustainability transition studies. We conceptualise nine epistemological and ontological foundations of distinctively colonial-modern innovation processes. These foundations include: fixing categorical divides on flowing relations; stratifying rigidly separated orders; promoting appropriation of privileges; objectifying and reifying realities; monopolising quantifications; standardising practices; singularising ontology, by approaching the pluriverse (of many different and connected ways of knowing, being and doing in disparate worlds) as just one world; and dominating other worlds by colonial-modern worldmaking.
Taken together, these interwoven foundations point to the following actions to help decolonise modern innovation processes: recognising and challenging colonial formations of concentrated power and privilege as they are built into modern knowing; extending egalitarian relations towards intersectionally marginalised contributors in knowledge production; grasping multifarious encompassment by wider material and living ecologies of beings notionally separated as ‘human’ or ‘nonhuman’; embracing inherent uncertainties in all that can be known or made, to imbue knowing and making with humility and care; admitting open pluralities of qualities, which include approaching dimensions of categories as fluid; and supporting pluriversal reparations spanning many ways of knowing, in struggles to dismantle coloniality everywhere. Decolonising innovation processes in these ways, we propose, can contribute to deeper decolonial transformations of modernities in solidarity with colonially subordinated peoples’ struggles for pluriversal wellbeing and justice. Without realising such justice for the flourishing of many worlds, sustainability may remain little more than a modern illusion.
期刊介绍:
Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions serves as a platform for reporting studies on innovations and socio-economic transitions aimed at fostering an environmentally sustainable economy, thereby addressing structural resource scarcity and environmental challenges, particularly those associated with fossil energy use and climate change. The journal focuses on various forms of innovation, including technological, organizational, economic, institutional, and political, as well as economy-wide and sectoral changes in areas such as energy, transport, agriculture, and water management. It endeavors to tackle complex questions concerning social, economic, behavioral-psychological, and political barriers and opportunities, along with their intricate interactions. With a multidisciplinary approach and methodological openness, the journal welcomes contributions from a wide array of disciplines within the social, environmental, and innovation sciences.