通过政策变化评估制度不稳定性:英国脱欧期间的农业政策分析

IF 5.7 2区 经济学 Q1 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES
Leonard Frank , Giuseppe Feola , Niko Schäpke
{"title":"通过政策变化评估制度不稳定性:英国脱欧期间的农业政策分析","authors":"Leonard Frank ,&nbsp;Giuseppe Feola ,&nbsp;Niko Schäpke","doi":"10.1016/j.eist.2024.100810","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>In sustainability transitions research, the deliberate destabilisation of socio-technical regimes is increasingly recognised as a central intervention point. Absent, however, are granular approaches for assessing whether regime destabilisation actually occurs in processes of systemic change. We propose to assess regime destabilisation through shifts in the institutionalisation of field logics. Methodologically, we employ Socio-Technical Configuration Analysis to map changes over time in the composition and alignment of institutional and technological concepts embedded in sectoral policy.</p><p>Empirically, we assess the extent to which post-Brexit agricultural policy reform in the United Kingdom marks the destabilisation of an unsustainable regime. Assessing legislative debate transcripts, we find that the previously dominant regime is only partly destabilised, as pre-existing development trajectories along established configurations of field logics, policy goals and instruments remain. These findings support the validity of our conceptual approach. Moreover, they nuance expectations about large-scale policy change as windows of opportunity for regime shifts.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":54294,"journal":{"name":"Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions","volume":"50 ","pages":"Article 100810"},"PeriodicalIF":5.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Assessing regime destabilisation through policy change: An analysis of agricultural policy in the United Kingdom during Brexit\",\"authors\":\"Leonard Frank ,&nbsp;Giuseppe Feola ,&nbsp;Niko Schäpke\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.eist.2024.100810\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>In sustainability transitions research, the deliberate destabilisation of socio-technical regimes is increasingly recognised as a central intervention point. Absent, however, are granular approaches for assessing whether regime destabilisation actually occurs in processes of systemic change. We propose to assess regime destabilisation through shifts in the institutionalisation of field logics. Methodologically, we employ Socio-Technical Configuration Analysis to map changes over time in the composition and alignment of institutional and technological concepts embedded in sectoral policy.</p><p>Empirically, we assess the extent to which post-Brexit agricultural policy reform in the United Kingdom marks the destabilisation of an unsustainable regime. Assessing legislative debate transcripts, we find that the previously dominant regime is only partly destabilised, as pre-existing development trajectories along established configurations of field logics, policy goals and instruments remain. These findings support the validity of our conceptual approach. Moreover, they nuance expectations about large-scale policy change as windows of opportunity for regime shifts.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":54294,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions\",\"volume\":\"50 \",\"pages\":\"Article 100810\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":5.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-01-20\",\"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/S2210422424000017\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"经济学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2210422424000017","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在可持续性转型研究中,蓄意破坏社会技术体制的稳定日益被视为一个核心干预点。然而,在评估制度动荡是否真正发生在系统变革过程中时,却缺乏精细的方法。我们建议通过实地逻辑的制度化转变来评估制度的不稳定性。在方法论上,我们采用社会-技术配置分析法(Socio-Technical Configuration Analysis)来描绘嵌入部门政策中的制度和技术概念的构成和调整随时间推移而发生的变化。在实证上,我们评估了英国脱欧后的农业政策改革在多大程度上标志着不可持续制度的不稳定。通过评估立法辩论记录,我们发现以前占主导地位的制度只在一定程度上被动摇了,因为沿着既定的领域逻辑、政策目标和工具配置的原有发展轨迹依然存在。这些发现支持了我们概念方法的有效性。此外,这些发现还使人们对大规模政策变革的预期变得微妙起来,认为这是制度转变的机会之窗。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Assessing regime destabilisation through policy change: An analysis of agricultural policy in the United Kingdom during Brexit

In sustainability transitions research, the deliberate destabilisation of socio-technical regimes is increasingly recognised as a central intervention point. Absent, however, are granular approaches for assessing whether regime destabilisation actually occurs in processes of systemic change. We propose to assess regime destabilisation through shifts in the institutionalisation of field logics. Methodologically, we employ Socio-Technical Configuration Analysis to map changes over time in the composition and alignment of institutional and technological concepts embedded in sectoral policy.

Empirically, we assess the extent to which post-Brexit agricultural policy reform in the United Kingdom marks the destabilisation of an unsustainable regime. Assessing legislative debate transcripts, we find that the previously dominant regime is only partly destabilised, as pre-existing development trajectories along established configurations of field logics, policy goals and instruments remain. These findings support the validity of our conceptual approach. Moreover, they nuance expectations about large-scale policy change as windows of opportunity for regime shifts.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions
Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions Energy-Renewable Energy, Sustainability and the Environment
CiteScore
13.60
自引率
19.40%
发文量
90
审稿时长
56 days
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.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信