Advertisement

Organisations in the Context of Socio-technical Transitions

  • Sarah Debor
Chapter
Part of the Contributions to Economics book series (CE)

Abstract

The central aim of this section is to develop a theoretical framework for analysing the impact of organisations within a far reaching system change. The work shall be embedded in the context of sustainability transitions research and will contribute to actor research in general and enterprise research in special in this emerging research field.

References

  1. Arapostathis, S., Pearson, P. J., & Foxon, T. J. (2014). UK natural gas system integration in the making, 1960–2010: Complexity, transitional uncertainties and uncertain transitions. Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions, 11, 87–102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Audretsch, D. B., Bönte, W., & Keilbach, M. (2008). Entrepreneurship capital and its impact on knowledge diffusion and economic performance. Journal of Business Venturing, 23(6), 687–698.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Audretsch, D. B., Bönte, W., & Keilbach, M. (2011). Determinants and impact of entrepreneurship capital: The spatial dimension and a comparison of different econometric approaches. In S. Desai, P. Nijkamp, & R. R. Stough (Eds.), New directions in regional economic development. The role of entrepreneurship theory and methods, practice and policy (pp. 41–59). Cheltenham, Glos: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
  4. Augenstein, K. (2014). e-Mobility as a sustainable system innovation. Insights from a captured niche. PhD thesis, Bergische Universität Wuppertal, Wuppertal.Google Scholar
  5. Bakker, S., van Lente, H., & Meeus, M. T. H. (2012). Credible expectations – The US Department of Energy’s Hydrogen Program as enactor and selector of hydrogen technologies. Contains Special Section: Actors, Strategies and Resources in Sustainability Transitions, 79(6), 1059–1071.Google Scholar
  6. Barney, J. (1991). Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. Journal of Management, 17(1), 99–120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Barney, J. B. (2001). Is the resource-based “view” a useful perspective for strategic management research? Yes. The Academy of Management Review, 26(1), 41–56.Google Scholar
  8. Battilana, J., Leca, B., & Boxenbaum, E. (2009). How actors change institutions: Towards a theory of institutional entrepreneurship. The Academy of Management Annals, 3(1), 65–107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bauman, Z. (1989). Hermeneutics and modern social theory. In D. Held & J. B. Thompson (Eds.), Social theory of modern societies. Anthony Giddens and his critics (pp. 34–55). Cambridge [England], New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Becker, A. (1996). Rationalität strategischer Entscheidungsprozesse: Ein strukturationstheoretisches Konzept. DUV: Wirtschaftswissenschaft. Wiesbaden: DUV, Dt. Univ.-Verl.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Bergek, A. (2002). Shaping and exploiting technological opportunities: The case of renewable energy technology in Sweden. PhD thesis, Chalmers University of Technology, Goeteburg.Google Scholar
  12. Bergek, A., Jacobsson, S., Carlsson, B., Lindmark, S., & Rickne, A. (2008). Analyzing the functional dynamics of technological innovation systems: A scheme of analysis. Research Policy, 37, 407–429.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Best, B., Prantner, M., & Augenstein, K. (2012). The concept of regime and ‘flat ontologies’: Empirical potential and methodological implications. Proceedings of the 3rd international conference on sustainability transitions. August 29th–31st 2012, Lyngby, Denmark; Track E. – Lyngby: Dänemarks Technical University.Google Scholar
  14. Bijker, W. E., & Law, J. (Eds.). (1992). Inside technology. Shaping technology/building society: Studies in sociotechnical change. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  15. Bijker, W. E., Hughes, T. P., & Pinch, T. J. (Eds.). (1987). The Social construction of technological systems: New directions in the sociology and history of technology. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  16. Binz, C., & Truffer, B. (2011). Technological innovation systems in multiscalar space. Analyzing an emerging water recycling technology with social network analysis. Geographica Helvetica, 66(4), 254–260.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Binz, C., Truffer, B., & Coenen, L. (2014). Why space matters in technological innovation systems – Mapping global knowledge dynamics of membrane bioreactor technology. Research Policy, 43(1), 138–155.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Bolton, R., & Foxon, T. J. (2015). A socio-technical perspective on low carbon investment challenges – Insights for UK energy policy. Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions, 14, 165–181.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Bönte, W., Procher, V. D., & Urbig, D. (2016). Biology and selection into entrepreneurship – The relevance of prenatal testosterone exposure. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 40(5), 1121–1148.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Borup, M., Brown, N., Konrad, K., & van Lente, H. (2006). The sociology of expectations in science and technology. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 18(3/4), 285–298.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Braukmann, U. (2012). Zur “Didaktik der Entwicklung unternehmerischer Persönlichkeit” – Genese, kursorischer Überblick und referenztheoretische Bezüge zur problemorientierten Didaktik. In S. Seufert & C. Metzger (Eds.), Kompetenzentwicklung in unterschiedlichen Lernkulturen. Festschrift für Dieter Euler zum 60. Geburtstag (pp. 465–486). Paderborn: Eusl.Google Scholar
  22. Braukmann, U., & Bartsch, D. (2014). Entrepreneurship Education im Spannungsfeld interessenspolitischer Instrumentalisierung und bildungstheoretischer Legitimität. In U. Braukmann, B. Dilger, & H.-H. Kremer (Eds.), Wirtschaftspädagogische Handlungsfelder. Festschrift für Peter F. E. Sloane zum 60. Geburtstag (pp. 41–72). Detmold: Eusl.Google Scholar
  23. Braukmann, U., & Schneider, D. (2010). Zum Bild des mittelständischen Unternehmens – Analyse des Status quo anhand einer empirischen Vollerhebung von Schulbüchern des Landes Nordrhein-Westfalen und Plädoyer für ein “aufgeklärtes” Unternehmensbild. In W. Baumann, U. Braukmann, & W. Matthes (Eds.), Innovation und Internationalisierung (pp. 201–230). Wiesbaden: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Braukmann, U., Bijedic, T., & Schneider, D. (2008). “Unternehmerische Persönlichkeit” – eine theoretische Rekonstruktion und nominaldefinitorische Konturierung. Wuppertal: Schumpeter School of Business and Economics.Google Scholar
  25. Braukmann, U., Fischedick, M., & Lindfeld, C. (2012). Zur programmatischen Neuausrichtung der Gründungs- und Innovationsförderung aus Universitäten und Forschungseinrichtungen mittels CEODD und SCTGIZ. In S. Armutat & A. Seisreiner (Eds.), Differentielles management (pp. 254–284). Wiesbaden: Springer.Google Scholar
  26. Breschi, S., & Malerba, F. (1997). Sectoral innovation systems: Technological regimes, schumpeterian dynamics, and spatial boundaries. In B. Carlsson (Ed.), Technological systems and industrial dynamics (pp. 130–152). Boston [u.a.]: Kluwer Academic.Google Scholar
  27. Bridge, G., Bouzarovski, S., Bradshaw, M., & Eyre, N. (2013). Geographies of energy transition: Space, place and the low-carbon economy. Energy Policy, 53, 331–340.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Brinckerhoff, P. C. (2000). Social entrepreneurship: The art of mission-based venture development. Wiley nonprofit law, finance, and management series. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  29. Brown, H. S., & Vergragt, P. J. (2008). Bounded socio-technical experiments as agents of systemic change: The case of a zero-energy residential building. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 75(1), 107–130.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Brundtland, G. H., & Khalid, M. (Eds.). (1987). Report of the world commission on environment and development: Our common future. Retrieved 01.10.2016, from http://www.un-documents.net/wced-ocf.htm
  31. Bryant, C. G. A., & Jary, D. (1991). Coming to terms with Anthony Giddens. In C. G. A. Bryant & D. Jary (Eds.), International library of sociology. Giddens’ theory of structuration. A critical appreciation (pp. 1–31). London, New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  32. Budde, B., Alkemade, F., & Weber, K. M. (2012). Expectations as a key to understanding actor strategies in the field of fuel cell and hydrogen vehicles. Contains Special Section: Actors, Strategies and Resources in Sustainability Transitions, 79(6), 1072–1083.Google Scholar
  33. Busco, C. (2009). Giddens’ structuration theory and its implications for management accounting research. Journal of Management & Governance, 13(3), 249–260.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Byrne, R. P. (2009). Learning drivers. Rural electrification regime building in Kenya and Tanzania. PhD, University of Sussex, East Sussex.Google Scholar
  35. Callinicos, A. (1985). Anthony Giddens: A contemporary critique. Theory and Society, 14(2), 133–166.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Caniëls, M. C. J., & Romijn, H. A. (2008). Actor networks in strategic niche management: Insights from social network theory. Futures, 40(7), 613–629.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Capallo, S. (2008). Die Strukturationstheorie der Strategischen Managementforschung. In T. Wrona (Ed.), Gabler-Edition Wissenschaft. Strategische Managementforschung. Aktuelle Entwicklungen und internationale Perspektiven (1st ed., pp. 105–126). Wiesbaden: Gabler.Google Scholar
  38. Carlsson, B., & Jacobsson, S. (1997). Diversity creation and technological system: A technology policy perspective. In C. Edquist (Ed.), Systems of innovation. Technologies, institutions, and organizations (pp. 266–290). London, Washington: Pinter.Google Scholar
  39. Coenen, L., Benneworth, P., & Truffer, B. (2012). Toward a spatial perspective on sustainability transitions. Special Section on Sustainability Transitions, 41(6), 968–979.Google Scholar
  40. Collins, R. (1981). Mirco-translation as a theory-building strategy. In K. Knorr-Cetina & A. V. Cicourel (Eds.), Advances in social theory and methodology. Toward an integration of micro- and macro-sociologies (pp. 81–108). Boston: Routledge & Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
  41. Das, T. K., & Teng, B.-S. (1998). Resource and risk management in the strategic alliance making process. Journal of Management, 24(1), 21–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. de Carolis, D. M., & Saparito, P. (2006). Social capital, cognition, and entrepreneurial opportunities: A theoretical framework. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 30(1), 41–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Dean, T. J., & McMullen, J. S. (2007). Toward a theory of sustainable entrepreneurship: Reducing environmental degradation through entrepreneurial action. Journal of Business Venturing, 22(1), 50–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Deuten, J. J. (2003). Cosmopolitanising technology: A study of four emerging technological regimes. PhD, Twente University, Enschede.Google Scholar
  45. Dewald, U., & Truffer, B. (2012). The local sources of market formation: Explaining regional growth differentials in German photovoltaic markets. European Planning Studies, 20(3), 397–420.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. DiMaggio, P. J., & Powell, W. W. (1983). The Iron cage revisited: Institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields. American Sociology Review, 48(2), 147–160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Docherty, I., & Shaw, J. (2012). The governance of transition policy. In F. W. Geels, R. Kemp, G. Dudley, & G. Lyons (Eds.), Automobility in transition? A socio-technical analysis of sustainable transport (pp. 104–122). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  48. Dolata, U. (2009). Technological innovations and sectoral change. Research Policy, 38(6), 1066–1076.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Dosi, G. (1982). Technological paradigms and technological trajectories: A suggested interpretation of the determinants and directions of technical change. Research Policy, 6(3), 147–162.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Dosi, G., Freemann, C., Nelson, R., & Soete, L. (Eds.). (1988). Technical change and economic theory. London, New York: Pinter.Google Scholar
  51. Duschek, S. (1996). Miszelle zur Dualität von Struktur. Wuppertal: unveröff. Man.Google Scholar
  52. Edquist, C. (2004). Reflections on the systems of innovation approach. Science and Public Policy, 31(6), 485–489.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Ehrnberg, E., & Jacobsson, S. (1997). Technological discontinuities and incumbents’ performance: An analytical framework. In C. Edquist (Ed.), Systems of innovation. Technologies, institutions, and organizations (pp. 318–341). London, Washington: Pinter.Google Scholar
  54. Englund, H., & Gerdin, J. (2014). Structuration theory in accounting research: Applications and applicability. Critical Perspectives on Accounting, 25(2), 162–180.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Essletzbichler, J. (2012). Renewable energy technology and path creation: A multi-scalar approach to energy transition in the UK. European Planning Studies, 20(5), 791–816.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Faller, F. (2016). A practice approach to study the spatial dimensions of the energy transition. Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions, 16, 85–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Farla, J., Markard, J., Raven, R. P. J. M., & Coenen, L. (2012). Sustainability transitions in the making: A closer look at actors, strategies and resources: Contains special section: Actors, strategies and resources in sustainability transitions. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 79(6), 991–998.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Foester, H. v. (1992). Entdecken und Erfinden – Wie läßt sich Verstehen verstehen? In H. Gumin & H. Meier (Eds.), Einführung in den Konstruktivismus (pp. 41–88). München, Zürich: Pieper.Google Scholar
  59. Fontes, M., Sousa, C., & Ferreira, J. (2016). The spatial dynamics of niche trajectory: The case of wave energy. Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions, 19, 66–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Forrest, N., & Wiek, A. (2015). Success factors and strategies for sustainability transitions of small-scale communities – Evidence from a cross-case analysis. Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions, 17, 22–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Foxon, T. J. (2013). Transition pathways for a UK low carbon electricity future. Special Section: Transition Pathways to a Low Carbon Economy, 52, 10–24.Google Scholar
  62. Freemann, C., & Perez, C. (1988). Structural crises of adjustment, business cycles and investment behaviour. In G. Dosi, C. Freemann, R. Nelson, & L. Soete (Eds.), Technical change and economic theory (pp. 38–66). London, New York: Pinter.Google Scholar
  63. Fudge, S., Peters, M., & Woodman, B. (2016). Local authorities as niche actors: The case of energy governance in the UK. Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions, 18, 1–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Fuenfschilling, L., & Truffer, B. (2014). The structuration of socio-technical regimes – Conceptual foundations from institutional theory. Research Policy, 43(4), 772–791.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Geels, F. W. (2002). Technological transitions as evolutionary reconfiguration processes: A multi-level perspective and a case-study, Nr. 8/9. Research Policy, pp. 1257–1274.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Geels, F. W. (2004). From sectoral systems of innovation to socio-technical systems: Insights about dynamics and change from sociology and institutional theory. Research Policy, 33(6–7), 897–920.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Geels, F. W. (2005). Technological transitions and system innovations. Cheltenham, Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Geels, F. W. (2006). The hygienic transition from cesspools to sewer systems (1840–1930): The dynamics of regime transformation. Research Policy, 35(7), 1069–1082.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Geels, F. W. (2011). The multi-level perspective on sustainability transitions: Responses to seven criticisms. Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions, 1, 24–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Geels, F. W. (2014). Reconceptualising the co-evolution of firms-in-industries and their environments: Developing an inter-disciplinary Triple Embeddedness Framework. Research Policy, 43(2), 261–277.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Geels, F., & Deuten, J. J. (2006). Local and global dynamics in technological development: A socio-cognitive perspective on knowledge flows and lessons from reinforced concrete. Science and Public Policy, 33(4), 265–275.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Geels, F. W., & Kemp, R. (2012). The multi-level perspective as a new perspective for studying socio-technological transitions. In F. W. Geels, R. Kemp, G. Dudley, & G. Lyons (Eds.), Automobility in transition? A socio-technical analysis of sustainable transport (pp. 49–82). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  73. Geels, F., & Raven, R. P. J. M. (2006). Non-linearity and expectations in niche-development trajectories: Ups and downs in Dutch biogas development (1973–2003). Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 18(3–4), 375–392.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Geels, F. W., & Schot, J. (2007). Typology of sociotechnical transition pathways. Research Policy, 36(3), 399–417.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Geels, F. W., & Schot, J. (2010). The dynamics of transitions: A socio-technical perspective. In J. Grin, J. Rotmans, & J. Schot (Eds.), Transitions to sustainable development. New directions in the study of long term transformative change (pp. 11–93). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  76. Geels, F. W., Kemp, R., Dudley, G., & Lyons, G. (Eds.). (2012). Automobility in transition?: A socio-technical analysis of sustainable transport. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  77. German Advisory Council on Global Change. (2011). World in transition – A social contract for sustainability (Flagship report). Berlin: German Advisory Council on Global Change.Google Scholar
  78. Giddens, A. (1976). New rules of social method. A positive critique of interpretative sociologies. New York: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  79. Giddens, A. (1979). Central problems in social theory: Action, structure and contradiction in social analysis. Berkeley: University of California Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. Giddens, A. (1981). A contemporary critique of historical materialism. Volume 1: Power, property and the state. London: Macmillan, Polity Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. Giddens, A. (1982). Power, the dialectic of control and class structuration. In A. Giddens & G. MacKenzie (Eds.), Social class and the division of labour: Essays in honour of Ilya Neustadt (pp. 29–45). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  82. Giddens, A. (1984). The constitution of society: Outline of the theory of structuration. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  83. Giddens, A. (1989). A reply to my critics. In D. Held & J. B. Thompson (Eds.), Social theory of modern societies. Anthony Giddens and his critics (pp. 249–301). Cambridge [England], New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. Giddens, A. (1995). Konsequenzen der Moderne. Suhrkamp-Taschenbuch Wissenschaft (Vol. 1295). Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp.Google Scholar
  85. Gottschick, M. (2015). Reflexive capacity in local networks for sustainable development: Integrating conflict and understanding into a multi-level perspective transition framework. Journal of Environmental Policy & Planning, 1–22.Google Scholar
  86. Gray, B., & Wood, D. J. (1991). Collaborative alliances: Moving from practice to theory. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 27(1), 3–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  87. Gregory, D. (1989). Presences and absences: Time-space relations and structuration theory. In D. Held & J. B. Thompson (Eds.), Social theory of modern societies. Anthony Giddens and his critics (pp. 185–214). Cambridge [England], New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  88. Gregson, N. (1989). On the (ir)relevance of structuration theory to empirical research. In D. Held & J. B. Thompson (Eds.), Social theory of modern societies. Anthony Giddens and his critics (pp. 235–248). Cambridge [England], New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  89. Grin, J. (2008). The multi-level perspective and design of system innovations. In J. C. van den Bergh & F. R. Bruinsma (Eds.), Managing the transition to renewable energy. Theory and practice from local, regional and macro perspective (pp. 47–80). Cheltenham, Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
  90. Grin, J. (2010). Understanding transitions from a governance perspective. In J. Grin, J. Rotmans, & J. Schot (Eds.), Transitions to sustainable development. new directions in the study of long term transformative change (pp. 223–338). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  91. Grin, J., Rotmans, J., & Schot, J. (2010a). From persistent problems to system innovations and transitions. In J. Grin, J. Rotmans, & J. Schot (Eds.), Transitions to sustainable development. new directions in the study of long term transformative change (pp. 1–4). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  92. Grin, J., Rotmans, J., & Schot, J. (2010b). Preface. In J. Grin, J. Rotmans, & J. Schot (Eds.), Transitions to sustainable development. new directions in the study of long term transformative change (pp. xvii–xxix). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  93. Hall, R. (1992). The strategic analysis of intangible resources. Strategic Management Journal, 13(2), 135–144.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  94. Hansen, T., & Coenen, L. (2015). The geography of sustainability transitions: Review, synthesis and reflections on an emergent research field. Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions, 17, 92–109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  95. Hansen, G. H., & Steen, M. (2015). Offshore oil and gas firms’ involvement in offshore wind: Technological frames and undercurrents. Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions, 17, 1–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  96. Hauptmann, S. (2015). Structure and action in organisational social media settings: Genre and speech act analysis combined – Exemplified on a case of strategic action. Die Betriebswirtschaft: DBW = Business Administration Review, 75(6), 431–444.MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  97. Hauschildt, J., & Salomo, S. (2011). Innovationsmanagement. München: Vahlen.Google Scholar
  98. Hegger, D. L., van Vliet, J., & van Vliet, B. J. (2007). Niche management and its contribution to regime change: The case of innovation in sanitation. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 19(6), 729–746.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  99. Hekkert, M. P., Suurs, R. A., Negro, S. O., Kuhmann, S., & Smits, R. E. (2007). Functions of innovation systems: A new approach for analysing technological change. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 74, 413–432.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  100. Hendriks, C. (2008). On inclusion and network governance: The democratic disconnect of Dutch energy transitions. Public Administration, 86(4), 1009–1031.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  101. Hermans, F., van Apeldoorn, D., Stuiver, M., & Kok, K. (2013). Niches and networks: Explaining network evolution through niche formation processes. Research Policy, 42(3), 613–623.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  102. Hofman, P. S., & Elzen, B. (2010). Exploring system innovation in the electricity system through sociotechnical scenarios. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 22(6), 653–670.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  103. Holtz, G., Brugnach, M., & Pahl-Wostl, C. (2008). Specifying “regime” – A framework for defining and describing regimes in transition research. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 75(5), 623–643.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  104. Hoogma, R., Kemp, R., Schot, J., Truffer, B., Hoogma, R., & Schot, J. (2002). Experimenting for sustainable transport. The approach of strategic niche management. London: Spon.Google Scholar
  105. Hughes, T. P. (1983). Networks of power: Electrification in Western society, 1800–1930. Baltimore, MD, London: Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
  106. Hughes, T. P. (1986). The seamless web: Technology, science, etcetera, etcetera. Social Studies of Science, 16(2), 281–292.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  107. Hughes, T. P. (1987). The evolution of large technology systems. In W. E. Bijker, T. P. Hughes, & T. J. Pinch (Eds.), The Social construction of technological systems. New directions in the sociology and history of technology (pp. 51–82). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  108. Jacobsson, S., & Bergek, A. (2004). Transforming the energy sector: The evolution of technological systems in renewable energy technology. Industrial and Corporate Change, 13(5), 815–849.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  109. Jacobsson, S., & Bergek, A. (2011). Innovation system analyses and sustainability transitions: Contributions and suggestions for research. Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions, 1, 41–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  110. Jepperson, R. L. (1991). Institutions, institutional effects and institutionalism. In W. W. Powell & P. J. DiMaggio (Eds.), The new institutionalism in organizational analysis (pp. 143–163). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  111. Jones, M. (2011). Structuration theory. In R. Galliers & W. L. Currie (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of management information systems (pp. 113–137). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  112. Kemp, R. (1994). Technology and the transition to environmental sustainability. The problem of technological regime shifts. Futures, 26(10), 1023–1046.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  113. Kemp, R., Schot, J., & Hoogma, R. (1998). Regime shifts to sustainability through processes of niche formation: The approach of strategic niche management. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 10(2), 175–198.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  114. Kemp, R., Geels, F. W., & Dudley, G. (2012). Sustainability transitions in the automobility regime and the need for a new perspective. In F. W. Geels, R. Kemp, G. Dudley, & G. Lyons (Eds.), Automobility in transition? A socio-technical analysis of sustainable transport (pp. 3–28). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  115. Kern, F., & Smith, A. (2008). Restructuring energy systems for sustainability? Energy transition policy in the Netherlands. Transition Towards Sustainable Energy Systems, 36(11), 4093–4103.Google Scholar
  116. Khan, J. (2013). What role for network governance in urban low carbon transitions? Special Issue: Advancing Sustainable Urban Transformation, 50, 133–139.Google Scholar
  117. Kieser, A., & Ebers, M. (Eds.). (2006). Organisationstheorien. Stuttgart: Kohlhammer.Google Scholar
  118. Kießling, B. (1988). Die “Theorie der Strukturierung” interview mit Anthony Giddens. Zeitschfrift für Soziologie, 17(4), 286–295.Google Scholar
  119. Kondratieff, N. D., & Stolper, W. F. (1935). The long waves in economic life. The Review of Economics and Statistics, 17(6), 105–115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  120. Konrad, K., Truffer, B., & Voß, J.-P. (2008). Multi-regime dynamics in the analysis of sectoral transformation potentials: Evidence from German utility sectors. Journal of Cleaner Production, 16, 1190–1202.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  121. Kristof, K. (2010). Models of change: Einführung und Verbreitung sozialer Innovationen und gesellschaftlicher Veränderungen in transdisziplinärer Perspektive. Zürich: vdf Hochschulverlag.Google Scholar
  122. Law, J. (1987). Technology and heterogeneous engineering: The case of Portuguese expansion. In W. E. Bijker, T. P. Hughes, & T. J. Pinch (Eds.), The Social construction of technological systems. New directions in the sociology and history of technology (pp. 111–134). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  123. Law, J., & Callon, M. (1992). The life and death of an aircraft: A network analysis of technical change. In W. E. Bijker & J. Law (Eds.), Inside technology. Shaping technology/Building society. Studies in sociotechnical change (pp. 21–52). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  124. Loorbach, D. (2007). Transition management: New mode of governance for sustainable development. Utrecht: International Books.Google Scholar
  125. Loorbach, D., & Rotmans, J. (2010). The practice of transition management: Examples and lessons from four distinct cases. Futures, 42(3), 237–246.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  126. Loorbach, D., & Verbong, G. (2012). Conclusion. In G. Verbong & D. Loorbach (Eds.), Governing the energy transition. Reality, illusion or necessity? (pp. 317–335). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  127. Lopolito, A., Morone, P., & Sisto, R. (2011). Innovation niches and socio-technical transition: A case study of bio-refinery production. Futures, 43(1), 27–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  128. Lovell, H., Bulkeley, H., & Owens, S. (2009). Converging agendas? Energy and climate change policies in the UK. Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy, 27(1), 90–109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  129. Malerba, F. (2002). Sectoral systems of innovation and production. Research Policy, 31(2), 247–264.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  130. Markard, J., & Truffer, B. (2008). Technological innovation systems and the multi-level perspective: Towards an integrated framework. Research Policy, 37(4), 596–615.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  131. Markard, J., Raven, R., & Truffer, B. (2012). Sustainability transitions: An emerging field of research and its prospects. Research Policy, 41(6), 955–967.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  132. Monstadt, J., & Wolff, A. (2015). Energy transition or incremental change? Green policy agendas and the adaptability of the urban energy regime in Los Angeles. Energy Policy, 78, 213–224.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  133. Moss, T. (2009). Intermediaries and the governance of sociotechnical networks in transition. Environment and Planning A, 41(6), 1480–1495.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  134. Musiolik, J., Markard, J., & Hekkert, M. (2012). Networks and network resources in technological innovation systems: Towards a conceptual framework for system building. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 79(6), 1032–1048.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  135. Nelson, R. R., & Winter, S. G. (1982). An evolutionary theory of economic change. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  136. Nilsson, M. (2012). Energy governance in the European Union: Enabling conditions for a low carbon transition? In G. Verbong & D. Loorbach (Eds.), Governing the energy transition. Reality, illusion or necessity? (pp. 296–316). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  137. Ortmann, G. (1995). Formen der Produktion: Organisation und Rekursivität. Opladen: Westdt. Verl.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  138. Ortmann, G., & Sydow, J. (Eds.). (2001). Strategie und Strukturation: Strategisches Management von Unternehmen, Netzwerken und Konzernen (1st ed.). Wiesbaden: Gabler.Google Scholar
  139. Ortmann, G., Sydow, J., & Windeler, A. (2000). Die Organisation als reflexive Strukturation. In G. Ortmann, J. Sydow, & K. Türk (Eds.), Organisation und Gesellschaft. Theorien der Organisation. Die Rückkehr der Gesellschaft (pp. 315–354). Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften.Google Scholar
  140. Parker, J. (2000). Structuration. Buckingham: Open University Press.Google Scholar
  141. Parson, T. (1951). The social system. Glencoe, IL: Free Press.Google Scholar
  142. Penna, C. C. R., & Geels, F. W. (2012). Multi-dimensional struggles in the greening of industry: A dialectic issue lifecycle model and case study. Contains Special Section: Actors, Strategies and Resources in Sustainability Transitions, 79(6), 999–1020.Google Scholar
  143. Perez, C. (1983). Structural change and assimilation of new technologies in the economic and social systems. Futures, 15(5), 357–375.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  144. Peteraf, M. A. (1993). The cornerstones of competitive advantage: A resource-based view. Strategic Management Journal, 14(3), 179–191.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  145. Porter, M. E. (1990). Competitive strategy: Techniques for analyzing industries and competitors. New York: The Free Press.Google Scholar
  146. Porter, M. E. (1991). Towards a dynamic theory of strategy. Strategic Management Journal, 12, 95–117.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  147. Powell, W. W. (1991). Expanding the scope of institutional analysis. In W. W. Powell & P. J. DiMaggio (Eds.), The new institutionalism in organizational analysis (pp. 183–203). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  148. Powell, W. W., & DiMaggio, P. J. (Eds.). (1991). The new institutionalism in organizational analysis. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  149. Pozzebon, M. (2004). The influence of a structurationist view on strategic management research. Journal of Management Studies, 41(2), 247–272.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  150. Rammert, W. (1997). New rules of sociological method: Rethinking technology studies. British Journal of Sociology, 48(2), 171–191.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  151. Ranson, S., Hinings, B., & Greenwood, R. (1980). The structuring of organizational structures. Administrative Science Quarterly, 25(1), 1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  152. Raven, R. (2004). Implementation of manure digestion and co-combustion in the Dutch electricity regime: A multi-level analysis of market implementation in the Netherlands. Energy Policy, 32(1), 29–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  153. Raven, R. P. J. M. (2005). Strategic Niche Management for Biomass. A comparative study on the experimental introduction of bioenergy technologies in the Netherlands and Denmark. PhD thesis, Eindhoven University, Eindhoven.Google Scholar
  154. Raven, R. P. (2006). Towards alternative trajectories? Reconfigurations in the Dutch electricity regime. Research Policy, 35(4), 581–595.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  155. Raven, R. (2007). Niche accumulation and hybridisation strategies in transition processes towards a sustainable energy system: An assessment of differences and pitfalls. Energy Policy, 35(4), 2390–2400.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  156. Raven, R. P. J. M. (2012). Analyzing emerging sustainable energy niches in Europe. In G. Verbong & D. Loorbach (Eds.), Governing the energy transition. Reality, illusion or necessity? (pp. 123–152). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  157. Raven, R. P. J. M., & Geels, F. W. (2010). Socio-cognitive evolution in niche development: Comparative analysis of biogas development in Denmark and the Netherlands (1973–2004). Technovation, 30(2), 87–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  158. Raven, R., & Verbong, G. (2007). Multi-regime interactions in the Dutch energy sector: The case of combined heat and power technologies in the Netherlands 1970–2000. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 19(4), 491–507.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  159. Raven, R., & Verbong, G. (2009). Boundary crossing innovations: Case studies from the energy domain. Technology in Society, 31(1), 85–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  160. Raven, R. P. J. M., Heiskanen, E., Lovio, R., Hodson, M., & Brohmann, B. (2008). The contribution of local experiments and negotiation processes to field-level learning in emerging (niche) technologies: Meta-analysis of 27 new energy projects in Europe. Bulletin of Science, Technology & Society, 28(6), 464–477.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  161. Raven, R., Schot, J., & Berkhout, F. (2012). Space and scale in socio-technical transitions. Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions, 4, 63–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  162. Reckwitz, A. (2007). Anthony Giddens. In D. Kaesler (Ed.), Klassiker der Soziologie. Von Talcott Parsons bis Anthony Giddens (5th ed., pp. 311–337). München: Verlag C.H. Beck.Google Scholar
  163. Rip, A. (1992). A quasi-evolutionary model of technological development and a cognitive approach to technology policy. RISESST. Rivista di studi epistemologici e sociale sulla scienza e la technologia (2), 69–102.Google Scholar
  164. Rip, A., & Kemp, R. (1998). Technological change. In S. Rayner & E. L. Malone (Eds.), Human choice & climate change. Resources and technology (Vol. 2, 1st ed., pp. 327–392). Ohio: Batelle Press.Google Scholar
  165. Rogers, E. M. (1962). Diffusion of innovation. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
  166. Rosenberg, N., & Frischtalk, C. R. (1984). Technological innovation and long waves. Cambridge Journal of Economics, 8(1), 7–27.Google Scholar
  167. Rosenfeld, S. A. (1996). Does cooperation enhance competitiveness? Assessing the impacts of inter-firm collaboration. Evaluation of Industrial Modernization, 25(2), 247–263.Google Scholar
  168. Rothaermel, F. T., & Boeker, W. (2008). Old technology meets new technology: Complementarities, similarities, and alliance formation. Strategic Management Journal, 29(1), 47–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  169. Rothaermel, F. T., & Hill, C. W. L. (2005). Technological discontinuities and complementary assets: A longitudinal study of industry and firm performance. Organization Science, 16(1), 52–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  170. Rotmans, J., & Loorbach, D. (2010). Towards a better understanding of transitions and their governance. A systemic and reflexive approach. In J. Grin, J. Rotmans, & J. Schot (Eds.), Transitions to sustainable development. New directions in the study of long term transformative change (pp. 105–222). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  171. Rotmans, J., Kemp, R., & van Asselt, M. (2001). More evolution than revolution: Transition management in public policy. Foresight, 3(1), 15–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  172. Saunders, P. (1989). Space, urbanism and the created environment. In D. Held & J. B. Thompson (Eds.), Social theory of modern societies. Anthony Giddens and his critics (pp. 215–234). Cambridge [England], New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  173. Schaltegger, S. (2002). A framework for ecopreneurship. Leading bioneers and environmental managers to ecopreneurship. Greener Management International, 38, 45–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  174. Schaltegger, S., & Wagner, M. (2011). Sustainable entrepreneurship and sustainability innovation: Categories and interactions. Business Strategy and the Environment, 20(4), 222–237.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  175. Schaper, M. (2002). The essence of ecopreneurship. Greener Management International, 38, 26–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  176. Schneidewind, U. (1998). Die Unternehmung als strukturpolitischer Akteur. Marburg: Metropolis-Verlag.Google Scholar
  177. Schneidewind, U. (2011). “Embedded technologies”: The case for a deeper understanding of innovation. Exzellenz – The Cluster Magazine for North Rhine-Westphalia, (4), 14–15.Google Scholar
  178. Schneidewind, U., & Petersen, H. (1998). Changing the rules: Business-NGO partnerships and structuration theory. Greener Management International, 24, 105–115.Google Scholar
  179. Schneidewind, U., & Scheck, H. (2012). Zur Transformation des Energiesektors – ein Blick aus der Perspektive der Transition-Forschung. In H.-G. Servatius, U. Schneidewind, & D. Rohlfing (Eds.), Smart Energy. Wandel zu einem nachhaltigen Energiesystem (pp. 45–61). Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer.Google Scholar
  180. Schneidewind, U., Augenstein, K., & Scheck, H. (2013). The transition to renewable energy systems: On the way to a comprehensive transition concept. In D. Stolten & V. Scherer (Eds.), Transition to renewable energy systems (pp. 119–136). Weinheim: Wiley-VCH.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  181. Schot, J. (1998). The usefulness of evolutionary models for explaining innovation. The case of the Netherlands in the nineteenth century. History and Technology, 14(3), 173–200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  182. Schot, J., & Geels, F. W. (2008). Strategic niche management and sustainable innovation journeys: Theory, findings, research agenda, and policy. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 20(5), 537–554.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  183. Schot, J., Hoogma, R., & Elzen, B. (1994). Strategies for shifting technological systems. The case of the automobile system. Futures, 26(10), 1060–1076.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  184. Schumpeter, J. A. (1934). The theory of economic development. Harvard economic studies. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  185. Schumpeter, J. A. (1942). Capitalism, socialism and democracy (1st ed.). New York: Harper & Brothers.Google Scholar
  186. Schumpeter, J. A. (1954). History of economic analysis. London: Allen & Unwin.Google Scholar
  187. Schütz, A. (1974). Der sinnhafte Aufbau der sozialen Welt. Eine Einleitung in die verstehende Soziologie. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp.Google Scholar
  188. Scott, J. (1994). Conceptualizing organizational fields: Linking organizations and societal systems. In H.-U. Derlien, U. Gerhardt, & F. W. Scharpf (Eds.), Systemrationalität und Partialinteresse. Festschrift für Renate Mayntz (pp. 203–211). Baden-Baden: Nomos.Google Scholar
  189. Scott, W. R. (1995). Institutions and organizations (1st ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  190. Sewell, W. H. (1992). A theory of structure: Duality, agency, and transformation. American Journal of Sociology, 89(1), 1–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  191. Seyfang, G., & Haxeltine, A. (2012). Growing grassroots innovations: Exploring the role of community-based initiatives in governing sustainable energy transitions. Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy, 30(3), 381–400.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  192. Seyfang, G., Hielscher, S., Hargreaves, T., Martiskainen, M., & Smith, A. (2014). A grassroots sustainable energy niche? Reflections on community in the UK. Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions, 13, 21–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  193. Shackley, S., & Green, K. (2007). A conceptual framework for exploring transitions to decarbonised energy systems in the United Kingdom. Energy, 32(3), 221–236.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  194. Shove, E. (2012). Energy transition in practice. The case of global indoor climate change. In G. Verbong & D. Loorbach (Eds.), Governing the energy transition. Reality, illusion or necessity? (pp. 51–75). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  195. Smith, A. (2012). Civil society in sustainable energy transition. In G. Verbong & D. Loorbach (Eds.), Governing the energy transition. Reality, illusion or necessity? (pp. 180–203). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  196. Smith, A., & Raven, R. P. J. M. (2012). What is protective space? Reconsidering niches in transitions to sustainability. Research Policy, 41(6), 1025–1036.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  197. Smith, A., Stirling, A., & Berkhout, F. (2005). The governance of sustainable socio-technical transitions. Research Policy, 34(10), 1491–1510.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  198. Smith, A., Voß, J.-P., & Grin, J. (2010). Innovation studies and sustainability transitions: The allure of the multi-level perspective and its challenges. Special Section on Innovation and Sustainability Transitions, 39(4), 435–448.Google Scholar
  199. Späth, P., & Rohracher, H. (2010). ‘Energy regions’: The transformative power of regional discourses on socio-technical futures. Research Policy, 39(4), 449–458.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  200. Späth, P., & Rohracher, H. (2012). Local demonstrations for global transitions—Dynamics across governance levels fostering socio-technical regime change towards sustainability. European Planning Studies, 20(3), 461–479.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  201. Steven, N., Beckmann, M., Gräbnitz, D., & Mirkovic, R. (2014). Social entrepreneurs and social change. Tracing impacts of social entrepreneurship through ideas, structures, and practices. International Journal of Entrepreneurial Venturing, 6(1), 51–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  202. Sustainability Transitions Research Network (Ed.). (2015). 17th newsletter. Retrieved 01.10.2016, from http://www.transitionsnetwork.org
  203. Suurs, R. A., & Hekkert, M. P. (2012). Motors of sustainable innovation. understanding transtions from a technological innovation system’s perspective. In G. Verbong & D. Loorbach (Eds.), Governing the energy transition. Reality, illusion or necessity? (pp. 153–179). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  204. Swedberg, R. (2007). Rebuilding Schumpeter’s theory of entrepreneurship. Conference on Marshall, Schumpeter and Social Science, Hitotsubashi University, 17–18th March 2007Google Scholar
  205. Sydow, J. (2005). Strategische Netzwerke. Evolution und Organisation, Neue Betriebswirtschaftliche Forschung (Vol. 100, 6th ed.). Wiesbaden: Gabler.Google Scholar
  206. Sydow, J. (Ed.). (2010a). Management von Netzwerkorganisationen: Beiträge aus der “Managementforschung” (5th ed.). Wiesbaden: Gabler.Google Scholar
  207. Sydow, J. (2010b). Management von Netzwerkorganisationen – zum Stand der Forschung. In J. Sydow (Ed.), Management von Netzwerkorganisationen. Beiträge aus der “Managementforschung” (5th ed., pp. 373–470). Wiesbaden: Gabler.Google Scholar
  208. Sydow, J., & Duschek, S. (2010). Management interorganisationaler Beziehungen. Netzwerke – Cluster – Allianzen. Stuttgart: Kohlhammer.Google Scholar
  209. Sydow, J., & Windeler, A. (1998). Organizing and evaluating interfirm networks: A structurationist perspective on network processes and effectiveness. Organization Science, 9(3), 265–284.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  210. Thrift, N. (1983). On the determination of social action in space and time. Environment and Planning D: Society and Space, (1), 23–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  211. Thue, L. (1995). Electricity rules. The formation and development of the Nordic electricity regime. In A. Kaijser & M. Hedin (Eds.), Nordic energy systems. Historical perspectives and current issues (pp. 11–30). Canton, MA: Science History Publications.Google Scholar
  212. Tigabu, A. D., Berkhout, F., & van Beukering, P. (2015). The diffusion of a renewable energy technology and innovation system functioning: Comparing bio-digestion in Kenya and Rwanda. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 90, 331–345.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  213. Toften, K., & Hammervoll, T. (2010). Strategic orientation of niche firms. Journal of Research in Marketing and Entrepreneurship, 12(2), 108–121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  214. Toften, K., & Hammervoll, T. (2013). Niche marketing research: Status and challenges. Marketing Intelligence & Planning, 31(3), 272–285.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  215. Truffer, B., & Coenen, L. (2012). Environmental innovation and sustainability transitions in regional studies. Regional Studies, 46(1), 1–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  216. Trutnevyte, E., Stauffacher, M., Schlegel, M., & Scholz, R. W. (2012). Context-specific energy strategies: Coupling energy system visions with feasible implementation scenarios. Environmental Science & Technology, 46(17), 9240–9248.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  217. Turnheim, B., & Geels, F. W. (2012). Regime destabilisation as the flipside of energy transitions: Lessons from the history of the British coal industry (1913–1997). Energy Policy, 50, 35–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  218. Urry, J. (1981). Localities, regions and social class. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 5(4), 455–473.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  219. Urry, J. (1991). Time and space in Gidden’s social theory. In C. G. A. Bryant & D. Jary (Eds.), International library of sociology. Giddens’ theory of structuration. A critical appreciation (pp. 160–175). London, New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  220. van Bree, B., Verbong, G., & Kramer, G. (2010). A multi-level perspective on the introduction of hydrogen and battery-electric vehicles. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 77, 529–540.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  221. van de Poel, I. (2003). The transformation of technological regimes. Research Policy, 32(1), 49–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  222. van den Bergh, J. C., & Bruinsma, F. R. (Eds.). (2008). Managing the transition to renewable energy. Theory and practice from local, regional and macro perspective. Cheltenham; Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
  223. van den Bergh, J. C. J. M., Truffer, B., & Kallis, G. (2011). Environmental innovation and societal transitions: Introduction and overview. Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions, 1, 1–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  224. van der Brugge, R. (2009). Transition dynamics in social-ecological systems. The Case of Dutch Water Management. PhD thesis, Erasmus University Rotterdam, Rotterdam.Google Scholar
  225. van der Loo, F., & Loorbach, D. (2012). The Dutch Energy Transition Project (2000–2009). In G. Verbong & D. Loorbach (Eds.), Governing the energy transition. Reality, illusion or necessity? (pp. 220–250). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  226. van der Vleuten, E., & Högselius, P. (2012). Resisting change? The transnational dynamics of European energy regimes. In G. Verbong & D. Loorbach (Eds.), Governing the energy transition. Reality, illusion or necessity? (pp. 75–100). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  227. van Eijck, J., & Romijn, H. (2008). Prospects for Jatropha biofuels in Tanzania: An analysis with Strategic Niche Management. Energy Policy, 36(1), 311–325.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  228. Verbong, G., & Geels, F. (2007). The ongoing energy transition: Lessons from a socio-technical, multi-level analysis of the Dutch electricity system (1960–2004). Energy Policy, 35(2), 1025–1037.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  229. Verbong, G., & Geels, F. W. (2012). Future electricity systems. Visions, scenarios and transition pathways. In G. Verbong & D. Loorbach (Eds.), Governing the energy transition. Reality, illusion or necessity? (pp. 203–219). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  230. Verbong, G., & Loorbach, D. (Eds.). (2012a). Governing the energy transition: Reality, illusion or necessity? New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  231. Verbong, G., & Loorbach, D. (2012b). Introduction. In G. Verbong & D. Loorbach (Eds.), Governing the energy transition. Reality, illusion or necessity? (pp. 1–23). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  232. Verbong, G., Geels, F. W., & Raven, R. (2008). Multi-niche analysis of dynamics and policies in Dutch renewable energy innovation journeys (1970–2006): Hype-cycles, closed networks and technology-focused learning. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 20(5), 555–573.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  233. Vergragt, P. J. (2012). Carbon capture and storage. Sustainable solution or reinforced carbon lock-in? In G. Verbong & D. Loorbach (Eds.), Governing the energy transition. Reality, illusion or necessity? (pp. 101–124). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  234. Verheul, H., & Vergragt, P. J. (1995). Social experiments in the development of environmental technology: A bottom-up perspective. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 7(3), 315–326.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  235. Volkmann, C. K., & Tokarski, K. O. (2010). Soziale innovationen und social entrepreneurship. In W. Baumann, U. Braukmann, & W. Matthes (Eds.), Innovation und Internationalisierung (pp. 151–170). Wiesbaden: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  236. Walgenbach, P. (2006). Neo-institutionalistische Ansätze in der Organisationstheorie. In A. Kieser & M. Ebers (Eds.), Organisationstheorien (pp. 353–402). Stuttgart: Kohlhammer.Google Scholar
  237. Wernerfelt, B. (1984). A resource-based view of the firm. Strategic Management Journal, 5(2), 171–180.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  238. Whittington, R. (1992). Putting Giddens into action: Social systems and managerial agency. Journal of Management Studies, 29(6), 693–712.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  239. Whittington, R. (2010). Giddens, structuration theory and strategy as practice. In D. Golsorkhi, L. Rouleau, D. Seidl, & E. Vaara (Eds.), Cambridge handbook of strategy as practice (pp. 109–127). Cambridge, New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  240. Wieczorek, A. J., Hekkert, M. P., Coenen, L., & Harmsen, R. (2015a). Broadening the national focus in technological innovation system analysis: The case of offshore wind. Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions, 14, 128–148.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  241. Witkamp, M. J., Royakkers, L. M., & Raven, R. P. J. M. (2009). From Cowboys to Diplomats: Why the growth of social entrepreneurship requires a different attitude than its creation: 2nd EMES International Conference on Social Enterprise, 1–4 July 2009, Trento, Italy. Retrieved 01.10.2016, from http://www.euricse.eu/sites/default/files/db_uploads/documents/1254752389_n166.pdf
  242. Witkamp, M. J., Raven, R. P., & Royakkers, L. M. (2011). Strategic niche management of social innovations: The case of social entrepreneurship. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 23(6), 667–681.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  243. Witt, P. (2016). Gründerteams. In: Faltin, G. (Ed.), Handbuch entrepreneurship. Wiesbaden: Gabler.Google Scholar
  244. Wüstenhagen, R. (1998). Greening Goliaths versus Multiplying Davids: Pfade einer Coevolution ökologischer Massenmärkte und nachhaltiger Nischen: IWÖ-Diskussionsbeitrag Nr. 61. Google Scholar
  245. Zentes, J., Swoboda, B., & Morschett, D. (Eds.). (2005a). Kooperationen, Allianzen und Netzwerke: Grundlagen – Ansätze – Perspektiven (2nd ed.). Wiesbaden: Gabler.Google Scholar
  246. Zentes, J., Swoboda, B., & Morschett, D. (2005b). Kooperationen, Allianzen und Netzwerke – Grundlagen, “Metaanalyse” und Kurzabriss. In J. Zentes, B. Swoboda, & D. Morschett (Eds.), Kooperationen, Allianzen und Netzwerke. Grundlagen – Ansätze – Perspektiven (2nd ed., pp. 3–34). Wiesbaden: Gabler.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  247. Zimmer, M., & Ortmann, G. (1996). Strategisches management, strukturationstheoretisch betrachtet. In H. H. Hinterhuber, A.-A. Ayad, & G. Handlbauer (Eds.), Das neue strategische Management. Perspektiven und Elemente einer zeitgemässen Unternehmensführung (pp. 87–114). Gabler: Wiesbaden.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Sarah Debor
    • 1
  1. 1.Wuppertal Institute for Climate, Environment and EnergyWuppertalGermany

Personalised recommendations