How to cite this WIREs title:
WIREs Clim Change

Impact Factor: 6.099

Deliberate decline: An emerging frontier for the study and practice of decarbonization

Advanced Review

Daniel Rosenbloom, Adrian Rinscheid

Published Online: Jul 26 2020

DOI: 10.1002/wcc.669

Full article on Wiley Online Library: HTML PDF

Can't access this content? Tell your librarian.

Abstract Promoting low‐carbon innovation has long been a central preoccupation within both the practice and theory of climate change mitigation. However, deep lock‐ins indicate that existing carbon‐intensive systems will not be displaced or reconfigured by innovation alone. A growing number of studies and practical initiatives suggest that mitigation efforts will need to engage with the deliberate decline of carbon‐intensive systems and their components (e.g., technologies and practices). Yet, despite this realisation, the role of intentional decline in decarbonization remains poorly understood and the literature in this area continues to be dispersed among different bodies of research and disciplines. In response, this article structures the fragmented strands of research engaging with purposive decline, interrogating the role it may play in decarbonization. It does so by systematically surveying concepts with particular relevance for intentional decline, focusing on phase‐out, divestment, and destabilization. This article is categorized under: Decarbonizing Energy and/or Reducing Demand > Decarbonizing Energy and/or Reducing Demand

Relative prominence of concepts engaging with deliberate decline. This figure is based on the search strings used to query the SCOPUS database (see Appendix A) and the approach described in Section 2

[ Normal View | Magnified View ]

Citation network of scholarly work on phase‐out. This figure maps the 37 texts captured by the survey and their referencing patterns. Nodes symbolize individual texts. Arrows depict referencing patterns (e.g., Normann, 2019 cites Rogge & Johnstone, 2017). Node size is proportional to the number of incoming citations within the sample. Node color is explained in the figure legend. Sixteen papers were not cited by other contributions on phase‐out

[ Normal View | Magnified View ]

Citation network of scholarly work on divestment. This figure maps the 32 texts captured by the survey and their referencing patterns. Nodes symbolize individual texts. Arrows depict referencing patterns (e.g., Hestres & Hopke, 2019 cite Mangat, Dalby, & Paterson, 2018). Node size is proportional to the number of incoming citations within the sample. Node color is explained in the figure legend. Three papers were not cited by other contributions on divestment

[ Normal View | Magnified View ]

Citation network of scholarly work on destabilization. This figure maps the 30 texts captured by the survey and their referencing patterns. Nodes symbolize individual texts. Arrows depict referencing patterns (e.g., Kainiemi, Eloneva, & Levänen, 2019 cite Kivimaa & Kern, 2016). Node size is proportional to the number of incoming citations within the sample. Arrow color is explained in the figure legend. Four papers were not cited by other contributions on destabilization

[ Normal View | Magnified View ]

Citation network of studies on phase‐out, divestment, and destabilization in the context of decarbonization. This image depicts the aggregated citation network based on Figures 2–4. Arrows indicate referencing patterns (e.g., Richardson, 2017 cites Franta, 2017). Node size is proportional to the number of incoming citations within the network. Node color is explained in the figure legend. Isolates and isolated dyads are omitted from the graph. The table in the top right indicates citation counts within and across the literatures contributing to the development of each concept. For the table in the top right, the three texts included in both reviews of phase‐out and destabilization were assigned to destabilization

[ Normal View | Magnified View ]

Data collection and sampling strategy

[ Normal View | Magnified View ]

References

Aldy,, J. E. (2017). Policy surveillance in the G‐20 fossil fuel subsidies agreement: Lessons for climate policy. Climatic Change, 144(1), 97–110. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-015-1505-0
Arthur,, W. B. (1989). Competing technologies, increasing returns, and lock‐in by historical events. The Economic Journal, 99, 116–131.
Asquith,, M., Backhaus,, J., Geels,, F. W., Golland,, A., Kemp,, R., Lung,, T., … Strasser,, T. (2017). Perspectives on transitions to sustainability. Luxembourg: European Environment Agency.
Ayling,, J. (2017). A contest for legitimacy: The divestment movement and the fossil fuel industry. Law %26 Policy, 39(4), 349–371. https://doi.org/10.1111/lapo.12087
Ayling,, J., & Gunningham,, N. (2017). Non‐state governance and climate policy: The fossil fuel divestment movement. Climate Policy, 17(2), 131–149. https://doi.org/10.1080/14693062.2015.1094729
Bergman,, N. (2018). Impacts of the fossil fuel divestment movement: Effects on finance, policy and public discourse. Sustainability, 10(7), 2529. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10072529
Berkhout,, F. (2002). Technological regimes, path dependency and the environment. Global Environmental Change, 12(1), 1–4.
Bernstein,, S., & Hoffmann,, M. (2018). The politics of decarbonization and the catalytic impact of subnational climate experiments. Policy Sciences, 51, 1–23. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11077-018-9314-8
Blondeel,, M., Van de Graaf,, T., & Haesebrouck,, T. (2020). Moving beyond coal: Exploring and explaining the powering past coal Alliance. Energy Research %26 Social Science, 59, 101304. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2019.101304
Bosman,, R., Loorbach,, D., Frantzeskaki,, N., & Pistorius,, T. (2014). Discursive regime dynamics in the Dutch energy transition. Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions, 13, 45–59. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eist.2014.07.003
Bratman,, E., Brunette,, K., Shelly,, D. C., & Nicholson,, S. (2016). Justice is the goal: Divestment as climate change resistance. Journal of Environmental Studies and Sciences, 6(4), 677–690. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13412-016-0377-6
Braungardt,, S., van den Bergh,, J., & Dunlop,, T. (2019). Fossil fuel divestment and climate change: Reviewing contested arguments. Energy Research %26 Social Science, 50, 191–200. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2018.12.004
Brown,, H. S., Vergragt,, P., Green,, K., & Berchicci,, L. (2003). Learning for sustainability transition through bounded socio‐technical experiments in personal mobility. Technology Analysis %26 Strategic Management, 15(3), 291–315. https://doi.org/10.1080/09537320310001601496
Burke,, M. J., & Stephens,, J. C. (2017). Energy democracy: Goals and policy instruments for sociotechnical transitions. Energy Research %26 Social Science, 33, 35–48. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2017.09.024
Burniaux,, J.‐M., & Chateau,, J. (2014). Greenhouse gases mitigation potential and economic efficiency of phasing‐out fossil fuel subsidies. International Economics, 140, 71–88. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.inteco.2014.05.002
Buschmann,, P., & Oels,, A. (2019). The overlooked role of discourse in breaking carbon lock‐in: The case of the German energy transition. WIREs Climate Change, 10(3), e574. https://doi.org/10.1002/wcc.574
Ćetković,, S., & Hagemann,, C. (2020). Changing climate for populists? Examining the influence of radical‐right political parties on low‐carbon energy transitions in Western Europe. Energy Research %26 Social Science, 66, 101571. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2020.101571
Chappin,, E. J. L., & Afman,, M. R. (2013). An agent‐based model of transitions in consumer lighting: Policy impacts from the E.U. phase‐out of incandescents. Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions, 7, 16–36. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eist.2012.11.005
Christensen,, C. M. (1997). The innovator`s dilemma: When new technologies cause great firms to fail. Cambridge: Harvard Business School Press.
David,, M. (2017). Moving beyond the heuristic of creative destruction: Targeting exnovation with policy mixes for energy transitions. Energy Research %26 Social Science, 33, 138–146. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2017.09.023
David,, M., & Gross,, M. (2019). Futurizing politics and the sustainability of real‐world experiments: What role for innovation and exnovation in the German energy transition? Sustainability Science, 14(4), 991–1000. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11625-019-00681-0
Demaria,, F., Schneider,, F., Sekulova,, F., & Martinez‐Alier,, J. (2013). What is degrowth? From an activist slogan to a social movement. Environmental Values, 22(2), 191–215. https://doi.org/10.3197/096327113X13581561725194
Ditz,, D. W. (1989). The phase out of North Sea incineration. International Environmental Affairs, 1(3), 175–202.
Dixon‐Woods,, M., Bonas,, S., Booth,, A., Jones,, D. R., Miller,, T., Sutton,, A. J., … Young,, B. (2006). How can systematic reviews incorporate qualitative research? A critical perspective. Qualitative Research, 6(1), 27–44. https://doi.org/10.1177/1468794106058867
Dordi,, T., & Weber,, O. (2019). The impact of divestment announcements on the share price of fossil fuel stocks. Sustainability, 11(11), 3122. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11113122
Edenhofer,, O., Steckel,, J. C., Jakob,, M., & Bertram,, C. (2018). Reports of coal`s terminal decline may be exaggerated. Environmental Research Letters, 13(2), 024019. https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/aaa3a2
Edler,, J., & Boon,, W. P. (2018). ‘The next generation of innovation policy: Directionality and the role of demand‐oriented instruments’—Introduction to the special section. Science and Public Policy, 45(4), 433–434. https://doi.org/10.1093/scipol/scy026
Edwards,, G. A. S. (2019). Coal and climate change. WIREs Climate Change, 10(5), e607. https://doi.org/10.1002/wcc.607
Elzen,, B., Geels,, F. W., & Green,, K. (2004). System innovation and the transition to sustainability. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing. https://doi.org/10.4337/9781845423421
Erickson,, P., Kartha,, S., Lazarus,, M., & Tempest,, K. (2015). Assessing carbon lock‐in. Environmental Research Letters, 10(8), 084023. https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/10/8/084023
Erickson,, P., van Asselt,, H., Koplow,, D., Lazarus,, M., Newell,, P., Oreskes,, N., & Supran,, G. (2020). Why fossil fuel producer subsidies matter. Nature, 578(7793), E1–E4. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-019-1920-x
Falk,, H. L. (1977). Conclusions of the committee on human health consequences of lead exposure from automobile emissions. Environmental Health Perspectives, 19, 243–246.
Friedlander,, G. D. (1970). Power, pollution, and the imperiled environment. II. East, Midwest, and West Coast: Pollution‐control plans of some major utilities; role of government in environmental matters; other proposed systems for reducing stack emissions. IEEE Spectrum, 7(12), 65–75. https://doi.org/10.1109/MSPEC.1970.5213087
Gaulin,, N., & Le Billon,, P. (2020). Climate change and fossil fuel production cuts: Assessing global supply‐side constraints and policy implications. Climate Policy, 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1080/14693062.2020.1725409
Geels,, F. W. (2014). Regime resistance against low‐carbon transitions: Introducing politics and power into the multi‐level perspective. Theory, Culture %26 Society, 31(5), 21–40. https://doi.org/10.1177/0263276414531627
Geels,, F. W. (2019). Socio‐technical transitions to sustainability: A review of criticisms and elaborations of the multi‐level perspective. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, 39, 187–201. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cosust.2019.06.009
Geels,, F. W., & Schot,, J. (2007). Typology of sociotechnical transition pathways. Research Policy, 36(3), 399–417. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2007.01.003
Geels,, F. W., Sovacool,, B. K., Schwanen,, T., & Sorrell,, S. (2017). The socio‐technical dynamics of low‐carbon transitions. Joule, 1(3), 463–479. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joule.2017.09.018
Grady‐Benson,, J., & Sarathy,, B. (2016). Fossil fuel divestment in US higher education: Student‐led organising for climate justice. Local Environment, 21(6), 661–681. https://doi.org/10.1080/13549839.2015.1009825
Green,, F. (2018). Anti‐fossil fuel norms. Climatic Change, 150(1), 103–116. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-017-2134-6
Hamilton,, W., & Till,, I. (1940). Antitrust—The reach after new weapons. Washington University Law Quarterly, 26(1), 1–26.
Hare,, B. (1997). Fossil fuels and climate protection: The carbon logic. Amsterdam: Greenpeace International.
Healy,, N., & Barry,, J. (2017). Politicizing energy justice and energy system transitions: Fossil fuel divestment and a “just transition”. Energy Policy, 108, 451–459. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2017.06.014
Healy,, N., & Debski,, J. (2017). Fossil fuel divestment: Implications for the future of sustainability discourse and action within higher education. Local Environment, 22(6), 699–724. https://doi.org/10.1080/13549839.2016.1256382
Hekkert,, M. P., Suurs,, R. A. A., Negro,, S. O., Kuhlmann,, S., & Smits,, R. E. H. M. (2007). Functions of innovation systems: A new approach for analysing technological change. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 74(4), 413–432. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2006.03.002
Henderson,, G. (1973). Korea: The preposterous division. Journal of International Affairs, 27(2), 204–212.
Hess,, D. J. (2014). Sustainability transitions: A political coalition perspective. Research Policy, 43(2), 278–283. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2013.10.008
Hestres,, L. E., & Hopke,, J. E. (2019). Fossil fuel divestment: Theories of change, goals, and strategies of a growing climate movement. Environmental Politics, 29(3), 371–389. https://doi.org/10.1080/09644016.2019.1632672
Hoffmann,, S., Weyer,, J., & Longen,, J. (2017). Discontinuation of the automobility regime? An integrated approach to multi‐level governance. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 103, 391–408. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tra.2017.06.016
Howarth,, N. A. A., & Rosenow,, J. (2014). Banning the bulb: Institutional evolution and the phased ban of incandescent lighting in Germany. Energy Policy, 67, 737–746. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2013.11.060
Hunt,, C., & Weber,, O. (2019). Fossil fuel divestment strategies: Financial and carbon‐related consequences. Organization %26 Environment, 32(1), 41–61. https://doi.org/10.1177/1086026618773985
Hunt,, C., Weber,, O., & Dordi,, T. (2017). A comparative analysis of the anti‐Apartheid and fossil fuel divestment campaigns. Journal of Sustainable Finance %26 Investment, 7(1), 64–81. https://doi.org/10.1080/20430795.2016.1202641
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. (2018). Global warming of 1.5°C. An IPCC special report on the impacts of global warming of 1.5°C above pre‐industrial levels and related global greenhouse gas emission pathways, in the context of strengthening the global response to the threat of climate change, sustainable development, and efforts to eradicate poverty. Geneva: IPCC.
Jewell,, J., McCollum,, D., Emmerling,, J., Bertram,, C., Gernaat,, D. E. H. J., Krey,, V., … Riahi,, K. (2018). Limited emission reductions from fuel subsidy removal except in energy‐exporting regions. Nature, 554(7691), 229–233. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature25467
Jewell,, J., Vinichenko,, V., Nacke,, L., & Cherp,, A. (2019). Prospects for powering past coal. Nature Climate Change, 9(8), 592–597. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41558-019-0509-6
Johnson,, N., Krey,, V., McCollum,, D. L., Rao,, S., Riahi,, K., & Rogelj,, J. (2015). Stranded on a low‐carbon planet: Implications of climate policy for the phase‐out of coal‐based power plants. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 90, 89–102. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2014.02.028
Johnstone,, P., & Hielscher,, S. (2017). Phasing out coal, sustaining coal communities? Living with technological decline in sustainability pathways. The Extractive Industries and Society, 4(3), 457–461. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.exis.2017.06.002
Johnstone,, P., Rogge,, K. S., Kivimaa,, P., Fratini,, C. F., Primmer,, E., & Stirling,, A. (2020). Waves of disruption in clean energy transitions: Sociotechnical dimensions of system disruption in Germany and the United Kingdom. Energy Research %26 Social Science, 59, 101287. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2019.101287
Jordan,, A., & Matt,, E. (2014). Designing policies that intentionally stick: Policy feedback in a changing climate. Policy Sciences, 47(3), 227–247. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11077-014-9201-x
Kaijser,, A. (1992). Redirecting power: Swedish nuclear power policies in historical perspective. Annual Review of Energy and the Environment, 17, 437–462.
Kainiemi,, L., Eloneva,, S., & Levänen,, J. (2019). Transition towards a decentralised energy system: Analysing prospects for innovation facilitation and regime destabilisation in Finland. Technology Analysis %26 Strategic Management, 31(9), 1003–1015. https://doi.org/10.1080/09537325.2019.1582765
Karltorp,, K., & Sandén,, B. A. (2012). Explaining regime destabilisation in the pulp and paper industry. Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions, 2, 66–81. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eist.2011.12.001
Kern,, F., Rogge,, K. S., & Howlett,, M. (2019). Policy mixes for sustainability transitions: New approaches and insights through bridging innovation and policy studies. Research Policy, 48, 103832. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2019.103832
Kivimaa,, P., Kangas,, H.‐L., & Lazarevic,, D. (2017). Client‐oriented evaluation of ‘creative destruction’ in policy mixes: Finnish policies on building energy efficiency transition. Energy Research %26 Social Science, 33, 115–127. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2017.09.002
Kivimaa,, P., & Kern,, F. (2016). Creative destruction or mere niche support? Innovation policy mixes for sustainability transitions. Research Policy, 45(1), 205–217. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2015.09.008
Krause,, F., Bach,, W., & Koomey,, J. (1990). Energy policy in the greenhouse. London: Earthscan.
Kulp,, C. A. (1932). Unemployment compensation in the United States. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 161(1), 118–127. https://doi.org/10.1177/000271623216100120
Kungl,, G., & Geels,, F. W. (2018). Sequence and alignment of external pressures in industry destabilisation: Understanding the downfall of incumbent utilities in the German energy transition (1998–2015). Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions, 26, 78–100. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eist.2017.05.003
Lazarevic,, D., Kautto,, P., & Antikainen,, R. (2019). Finland`s wood‐frame multi‐storey construction innovation system: Analysing motors of creative destruction. Forest Policy and Economics, 110, 101861. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forpol.2019.01.006
Lazarus,, M., Greber,, L., Hall,, J., Bartels,, C., Bernow,, S., Hansen,, E., … Hippel,, D. (1993). Towards a fossil free energy future—A technical analysis for Greenpeace international. Boston: Stockholm Environment Institute—Boston Center.
Lazarus,, M., & van Asselt,, H. (2018). Fossil fuel supply and climate policy: Exploring the road less taken. Climatic Change, 150(1), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-018-2266-3
Le Billon,, P., & Kristoffersen,, B. (2019). Just cuts for fossil fuels? Supply‐side carbon constraints and energy transition. Environment and Planning A: Economy and Space. https://doi.org/10.1177/0308518X18816702
Lehotský,, L., Černoch,, F., Osička,, J., & Ocelík,, P. (2019). When climate change is missing: Media discourse on coal mining in The Czech Republic. Energy Policy, 129, 774–786. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2019.02.065
Leipprand,, A., & Flachsland,, C. (2018). Regime destabilization in energy transitions: The German debate on the future of coal. Energy Research %26 Social Science, 40, 190–204. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2018.02.004
Lelieveld,, J., Klingmüller,, K., Pozzer,, A., Burnett,, R. T., Haines,, A., & Ramanathan,, V. (2019). Effects of fossil fuel and total anthropogenic emission removal on public health and climate. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of Amercia, 116(15), 7192–7197. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1819989116
Levin,, K., Cashore,, B., Bernstein,, S., & Auld,, G. (2012). Overcoming the tragedy of super wicked problems: Constraining our future selves to ameliorate global climate change. Policy Sciences, 45(2), 123–152. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11077-012-9151-0
Linnenluecke,, M. K., Meath,, C., Rekker,, S., Sidhu,, B. K., & Smith,, T. (2015). Divestment from fossil fuel companies: Confluence between policy and strategic viewpoints. Australian Journal of Management, 40(3), 478–487. https://doi.org/10.1177/0312896215569794
Lockwood,, M. (2018). Right‐wing populism and the climate change agenda: Exploring the linkages. Environmental Politics, 27(4), 712–732. https://doi.org/10.1080/09644016.2018.1458411
Löschel,, A. (2002). Technological change in economic models of environmental policy: A survey. Ecological Economics, 43(2), 105–126. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0921-8009(02)00209-4
Lovei,, M. (1998). Phasing out lead from gasoline: Worldwide experiences and policy implications. World Bank Technical Paper, 397. Retrieved from https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-0031837322%26partnerID=40%26md5=2da32a4cdfb2cdfca03022ccc978a3cd
Mangat,, R., Dalby,, S., & Paterson,, M. (2018). Divestment discourse: War, justice, morality and money. Environmental Politics, 27(2), 187–208. https://doi.org/10.1080/09644016.2017.1413725
Manne,, A., & Richels,, R. (2004). The impact of learning‐by‐doing on the timing and costs of CO₂ abatement. Energy Economics, 26(4), 603–619. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eneco.2004.04.033
Markard,, J., Raven,, R., & Truffer,, B. (2012). Sustainability transitions: An emerging field of research and its prospects. Research Policy, 41(6), 955–967. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2012.02.013
Martínez Arranz,, A. (2017). Lessons from the past for sustainability transitions? A meta‐analysis of socio‐technical studies. Global Environmental Change, 44, 125–143. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2017.03.007
Mazzucato,, M. (2013). The entrepreneurial state: Debunking public vs. private sector myths. London: Anthem Press.
McAteer,, E., & Pulver,, S. (2009). The corporate boomerang: Shareholder transnational advocacy networks targeting oil companies in the Ecuadorian Amazon. Global Environmental Politics, 9(1), 1–30.
McKibben,, B. (2012). Global warming`s terrifying new math. Rolling Stone. Retrieved from https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-news/global-warmings-terrifying-new-math-188550/
Meadowcroft,, J., & Fiorino,, D. (2017). Conceptual innovation in environmental policy. Cambridge: The MIT Press.
Meckling,, J. (2015). Oppose, support, or hedge? Distributional effects, regulatory pressure, and business strategy in environmental politics. Global Environmental Politics, 15(2), 19–37. https://doi.org/10.1162/GLEP_a_00296
Meckling,, J., & Nahm,, J. (2019). The politics of technology bans: Industrial policy competition and green goals for the auto industry. Energy Policy, 126, 470–479. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2018.11.031
Melosi,, M. V. (1981). Waste management: The cleaning of America. Environment: Science and Policy for Sustainable Development, 23(8), 6–44. https://doi.org/10.1080/00139157.1981.9928747
Mez,, L., & Piening,, A. (2002). Phasing‐out nuclear power generation in Germany: Policies, actors, issues and non‐issues. Energy and Environment, 13(2), 161–181. https://doi.org/10.1260/0958305021501155
Morrisette,, P. M. (1989). The evolution of policy responses to stratospheric ozone depletion. Natural Resources Journal, 3, 793–820.
Normann,, H. E. (2019). Conditions for the deliberate destabilisation of established industries: Lessons from U.S. tobacco control policy and the closure of Dutch coal mines. Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions, 33, 102–114. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eist.2019.03.007
Nyborg,, K., Anderies,, J. M., Dannenberg,, A., Lindahl,, T., Schill,, C., Schluter,, M., … de Zeeuw,, A. (2016). Social norms as solutions. Science, 354(6308), 42–43. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aaf8317
Peters,, M., Schneider,, M., Griesshaber,, T., & Hoffmann,, V. H. (2012). The impact of technology‐push and demand‐pull policies on technical change—Does the locus of policies matter? Research Policy, 41(8), 1296–1308. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2012.02.004
Rentier,, G., Lelieveldt,, H., & Kramer,, G. J. (2019). Varieties of coal‐fired power phase‐out across Europe. Energy Policy, 132, 620–632. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2019.05.042
Rinscheid,, A., Pianta,, S., & Weber,, E. U. (2020). Fast track or Slo‐Mo? Public support and temporal preferences for phasing out fossil fuel cars in the United States. Climate Policy, 20(1), 30–45. https://doi.org/10.1080/14693062.2019.1677550
Rinscheid,, A., & Wüstenhagen,, R. (2019). Germany`s decision to phase out coal by 2038 lags behind citizens` timing preferences. Nature Energy, 4(10), 856–863. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41560-019-0460-9
Ritchie,, J., & Dowlatabadi,, H. (2014). Understanding the shadow impacts of investment and divestment decisions: Adapting economic input–output models to calculate biophysical factors of financial returns. Ecological Economics, 106, 132–140. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2014.07.005
Roberts,, C. (2017). Discursive destabilisation of socio‐technical regimes: Negative storylines and the discursive vulnerability of historical American railroads. Energy Research %26 Social Science, 31, 86–99. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2017.05.031
Robinson,, J., & Cole,, R. J. (2015). Theoretical underpinnings of regenerative sustainability. Building Research %26 Information, 43(2), 133–143. https://doi.org/10.1080/09613218.2014.979082
Rogge,, K. S., & Johnstone,, P. (2017). Exploring the role of phase‐out policies for low‐carbon energy transitions: The case of the German Energiewende. Energy Research %26 Social Science, 33, 128–137. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2017.10.004
Rosenbloom,, D. (2017). Pathways: An emerging concept for the theory and governance of low‐carbon transitions. Global Environmental Change, 43, 37–50. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2016.12.011
Rosenbloom,, D. (2018). Framing low‐carbon pathways: A discursive analysis of contending storylines surrounding the phase‐out of coal‐fired power in Ontario. Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions, 27, 129–145. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eist.2017.11.003
Rosenbloom,, D., & Markard,, J. (2020). A COVID‐19 recovery for climate. Science, 368(6490), 447. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.abc4887
Rosenbloom,, D., Markard,, J., Geels,, F. W., & Fuenfschilling,, L. (2020). Why carbon pricing is not sufficient to mitigate climate change—And how “sustainability transition policy” can help. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 5, 8664–8668. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2004093117
Rosenbloom,, D., Meadowcroft,, J., & Cashore,, B. (2019). Stability and climate policy? Harnessing insights on path dependence, policy feedback, and transition pathways. Energy Research %26 Social Science, 50, 168–178. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2018.12.009
Rosenzweig,, M. L. (1971). Paradox of enrichment: Destabilization of exploitation ecosystems in ecological time. Science, 171(3969), 385–387.
Rotmans,, J., & Swart,, R. (1990). The gloomy greenhouse: Should the world phase out fossil fuels? Environmental Management, 14(3), 291–296. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02394196
Salop,, F. I. (1989). Public protest and public policy: The anti‐apartheid movement and political innovation. Review of Policy Research, 9(2), 307–326. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1541-1338.1989.tb01127.x
Sarang,, S. (2015). Combating climate change through a duty to divest. Columbia Journal of Law and Social Problems, 49(2), 295–342.
Schifeling,, T., & Hoffman,, A. J. (2019). Bill McKibben`s influence on U.S. climate change discourse: Shifting field‐level debates through radical flank effects. Organization %26 Environment, 32(3), 213–233. https://doi.org/10.1177/1086026617744278
Schmidt,, T. S., & Sewerin,, S. (2017). Technology as a driver of climate and energy politics. Nature Energy, 2, 1–3. https://doi.org/10.1038/nenergy.2017.84
Schwanitz,, V. J., Piontek,, F., Bertram,, C., & Luderer,, G. (2014). Long‐term climate policy implications of phasing out fossil fuel subsidies. Energy Policy, 67, 882–894. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2013.12.015
Scordato,, L., Klitkou,, A., Tartiu,, V. E., & Coenen,, L. (2018). Policy mixes for the sustainability transition of the pulp and paper industry in Sweden. Journal of Cleaner Production, 183, 1216–1227. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.02.212
Seto,, K. C., Davis,, S. J., Mitchell,, R. B., Stokes,, E. C., Unruh,, G., & Ürge‐Vorsatz,, D. (2016). Carbon lock‐in: Types, causes, and policy implications. Annual Review of Environment and Resources, 41(1), 425–452. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-environ-110615-085934
Setzer,, J., & Vanhala,, L. C. (2019). Climate change litigation: A review of research on courts and litigants in climate governance. WIREs Climate Change, 10(3), e580. https://doi.org/10.1002/wcc.580
Sheller,, M., & Urry,, J. (2002). The city and the car. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 24(4), 737–757. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-2427.00276
Shove,, E., & Walker,, G. (2007). CAUTION! Transitions ahead: Politics, practice, and sustainable transition management. Environment and Planning A, 39(4), 763–770. https://doi.org/10.1068/a39310
Sovacool,, B. K. (2010). Building umbrellas or arks? Three alternatives to carbon credits and offsets. The Electricity Journal, 23(2), 29–40. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tej.2010.02.002
Sovacool,, B. K. (2011). The policy challenges of tradable credits: A critical review of eight markets. Energy Policy, 39(2), 575–585. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2010.10.029
Steffen,, B., Egli,, F., Pahle,, M., & Schmidt,, T. S. (2020). Navigating the clean energy transition in the COVID‐19 crisis. Joule, 4(6), 1137–1141. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joule.2020.04.011
Stegmaier,, P., Kuhlmann,, S., & Visser,, V. R. (2014). The discontinuation of socio‐technical systems as a governance problem. In S. Borrás, & J. Edler, (Eds.), The governance of socio‐technical systems (pp. 111–131). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing. https://doi.org/10.4337/9781784710194.00015
Stephens,, J. C., Frumhoff,, P. C., & Yona,, L. (2018). The role of college and university faculty in the fossil fuel divestment movement. Elementa: Science of the Anthropocene, 6(1), 41. https://doi.org/10.1525/elementa.297
Stern,, P. C. (2020). A reexamination on how behavioral interventions can promote household action to limit climate change. Nature Communications, 11(1), 918. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-020-14653-x
Stognief,, N., Walk,, P., Schöttker,, O., & Oei,, P.‐Y. (2019). Economic resilience of German lignite regions in transition. Sustainability, 11(21), 5991. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11215991
Swanson,, A. D., & King,, R. A. (1992). The impact of school governance restructuring on public financial support systems. Journal of Education Policy, 7(2), 173–185. https://doi.org/10.1080/0268093920070204
Tilman,, R. (1974). Value theory, planning, and reform: Ayres as incrementalist and utopian. Journal of Economic Issues, 8(4), 689–706. https://doi.org/10.1080/00213624.1974.11503223
Trencher,, G., Healy,, N., Hasegawa,, K., & Asuka,, J. (2019). Discursive resistance to phasing out coal‐fired electricity: Narratives in Japan`s coal regime. Energy Policy, 132, 782–796. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2019.06.020
Tukker,, A. (2005). Leapfrogging into the future: Developing for sustainability. International Journal of Innovation and Sustainable Development, 1(1–2), 65–84. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJISD.2005.008087
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. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2012.04.060
Turnheim,, B., & Geels,, F. W. (2013). The destabilisation of existing regimes: Confronting a multi‐dimensional framework with a case study of the British coal industry (1913–1967). Research Policy, 42(10), 1749–1767. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2013.04.009
Turnheim,, B., & Sovacool,, B. K. (2020). Forever stuck in old ways? Pluralising incumbencies in sustainability transitions. Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions, 35, 180–184. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eist.2019.10.012
Unruh,, G. C. (2000). Understanding carbon lock‐in. Energy Policy, 28(12), 817–830. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0301-4215(00)00070-7
Victor,, D. G., Geels,, F. W., & Sharpe,, S. (2019). Accelerating the low carbon transition: The case for stronger, more targeted and coordinated international action. London: UK Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy.
Vögele,, S., Kunz,, P., Rübbelke,, D., & Stahlke,, T. (2018). Transformation pathways of phasing out coal‐fired power plants in Germany. Energy, Sustainability and Society, 8(1), 25. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13705-018-0166-z
Walker,, G., Shove,, E., & Brown,, S. (2014). How does air conditioning become ‘needed’? A case study of routes, rationales and dynamics. Energy Research %26 Social Science, 4, 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2014.08.002
Wander,, N., & Malone,, R. E. (2004). Selling off or selling out? Medical schools and ethical leadership in tobacco stock divestment. Academic Medicine, 79(11), 1017–1026. https://doi.org/10.1097/00001888-200411000-00002
Wettestad,, J. (2009). EU energy‐intensive industries and emission trading: Losers becoming winners? Environmental Policy and Governance, 19(5), 309–320. https://doi.org/10.1002/eet.516
Wilson,, C., & Tyfield,, D. (2018). Critical perspectives on disruptive innovation and energy transformation. Energy Research %26 Social Science, 37, 211–215. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2017.10.032
Wüstenhagen,, R., Wolsink,, M., & Bürer,, M. J. (2007). Social acceptance of renewable energy innovation: An introduction to the concept. Energy Policy, 35(5), 2683–2691. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2006.12.001

Society Partners

	Royal Geographical Society (with IBG)
	Royal Meteorological Society

Access to this WIREs title is by subscription only.

Recommend to Your
Librarian Now!

The latest WIREs articles in your inbox

Sign Up for Article Alerts