International Journal of Systems Engineering

Archive

Submit a Manuscript

Publishing with us to make your research visible to the widest possible audience.

Propose a Special Issue

Building a community of authors and readers to discuss the latest research and develop new ideas.

A Compatibility Framework for System Transition Literature

A complex (adaptive) system consists of heterogeneous, autonomous agents that interact with one another. Conceptual theories in the literature of complex systems transition are vast and seem to be discrete. This paper attempts to collect together all concepts of (socio-technical) system transitions to design an all-inclusive compatibility framework for the complex literature in socio-technical transitions. The framework takes the form of a universal system transition model that integrates and harmonises theories and practices on socio-technical transitions to simplify understanding of the complexity and diversity of complex systems transition literature. The framework was designed by appropriately superimposing, streamlining and condensing the existing transition models to produce a single universal model. With the multi-level perspective (MLP) framework as the reference centre, all other concepts could be suitably identified and described without much ambiguity. The other components of the framework include the analytical concepts of the multi-phase perspective (MPP) of transition phases, the stocks-flows concept of transition, and the management concepts of transition design and management process. The various system elements are represented by the three dimensions of actors, rules/institutions, and technical components. The universal transition framework accurately demonstrates and represents the core ideas of system transitions by accurately identifying and matching all the elements in a monolithic typology for instant conceptualisation.

Socio-technical System, Conceptual Model, Transition Framework

APA Style

Mohammed Hussaini, Miklas Scholz. (2021). A Compatibility Framework for System Transition Literature. International Journal of Systems Engineering, 5(2), 69-78. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijse.20210502.13

ACS Style

Mohammed Hussaini; Miklas Scholz. A Compatibility Framework for System Transition Literature. Int. J. Syst. Eng. 2021, 5(2), 69-78. doi: 10.11648/j.ijse.20210502.13

AMA Style

Mohammed Hussaini, Miklas Scholz. A Compatibility Framework for System Transition Literature. Int J Syst Eng. 2021;5(2):69-78. doi: 10.11648/j.ijse.20210502.13

Copyright © 2021 Authors retain the copyright of this article.
This article is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

1. Smith, A. (2010). Civil society in sustainable energy transitions’, in Verbong, G. and Loorbach, D. (eds), Governing the Energy Transition: reality, illusion, or necessity, New York: Routledge.
2. Kayranli, B., Scholz, M., Mustafa, A. & Hedmark, Å. (2010). Carbon storage and fluxes within freshwater wetlands: a critical review,’ Wetlands, 30 (1): 111–124.
3. Geels, F. W. (2005). Co-evolution of technology and society: The transition in water supply and personal hygiene in the Netherlands (1850–1930) – A case study in multi-level perspective. Technology in Society, 27: 363–397.
4. Rotmans, J., Kemp, R. & Van Asselt, M. (2001). More evolution than revolution: transition management in public policy. The journal of futures studies, strategic thinking and policy, 3 (1): 15–31.
5. Darnhofer, I. (2014). Farming transitions: Pathways towards regional sustainability of agriculture in Europe, FarmPath project.
6. Geels, F. W. (2012). A socio-technical analysis of low-carbon transitions: introducing the multi-level perspective into transport studies. Journal of Transport Geography, 24: 471–482.
7. Geels, F. W. (2002). Technological transitions as evolutionary reconfiguration processes: A multi-level perspective and a case-study. Research Policy, 31 (8–9): 1257–1274.
8. Geels, F. W., Kern, F., Fuchs, G., Hinderer, N., Kungl, G., Mylan, J., Neukirch, M., & Wassermann, S. (2016). The enactment of socio-technical transition pathways: A reformulated typology and a comparative multi-level analysis of the German and UK low-carbon electricity transitions (1990–2014). Research Policy, 45: 896–913.
9. Geels, F. W. (2011). The multi-level perspective on sustainability transitions: Responses to seven criticisms. Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions, 1: 24–40.
10. Geels, F. W., & Schot, J. W. (2010). The dynamics perspective of transitions: a socio-technical In: Grin, J., Rotmans, Transitions J., Schot, J., Geels, F. W., Loorbach, D. (Eds.), to Sustainable Development: Term New Directions in the Study of Long Transformative Change. Routledge, New York, pp. 9–87.
11. Geels, F. W. (2007). Feelings of Discontent and the Promise of Middle Range Theory for STS: Examples from Technology Dynamics. Science, Technology, and Human Values, 32 (6): 627–651.
12. Geels, F. W. (2005). Processes and patterns in transitions and system innovations: Refining the co-evolutionary multi-level perspective. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 72: 681–696.
13. Geels, FW. & Schot, J. (2007). Typology of sociotechnical transition pathways. Research Policy, 36 (3): 399–417.
14. Schot, J. and Geels, F. W. (2008). Strategic niche management and sustainable innovation journeys: theory, findings, research agenda, and policy. Technology Analysis and Strategic Management, 20 (5): 537–554.
15. Holling, C. S. (2001). Understanding the complexity of economic, ecological, and social systems. Ecosystems, 4: 390–405.
16. Chappin, E. J. L. & Dijkema, G. P. J. (2008). On the design of system transitions: Is transition management in the energy domain feasible? In: IEEE International Engineering Management Conference (IEMC Europe), 2008. Estoril, Portugal: IEEE.
17. Loorbach, D. & Rotmans, J. (2006). Managing transitions for sustainable development.’ In: Olsthoorn, X. and Wieczorek, A. J. (eds), Understanding Industrial Transformation: Views from Different Disciplines, pp. 187–206.
18. Rotmans, J. & Kemp, R. (2003). Managing societal transitions: Dilemmas and uncertainties: The Dutch energy case-study, OECD Workshop on the Benefits of Climate Policy: Improving Information for Policy Makers. ENV/EPOC/GSP(2003)15/FINAL.
19. Frost, R. (2005). Transition management: an interesting model for sustainable development, Maastricht: United Nations University.
20. Kemp, R., Loorbach, D. & Rotmans, J. (2009). Transition management as a model for managing processes of co-evolution towards sustainable development. International Journal Sustainable Development and World Ecology, 14 (1): 78–91.
21. Chappin, E. J. L. (2011). Simulating energy transitions. PhD thesis, Next Generation Infrastructures Foundation P. O. Box 5015, 2600 GA Delft, The Netherlands.
22. Loorbach, D. (2010). Transition Management for Sustainable Development: A prescriptive, complexity based governance framework. Governance: An International Journal of Policy, Administration, and Institutions, 23 (1): 161–183.
23. Loorbach, D. (2004). Governance and transitions: A multi-level policy-framework based on complex systems thinking.’ in Berlin Conference on Human Dimensions of Global Environmental Change. Berlin, Germany. http://userpage.fu-berlin.de (Accessed 12 Sep 2017).
24. Loorbach, D. & van Raak, R. (2006). Transition Management: toward a prescriptive model for multilevel governance systems. In: 2006 NIG work conference, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
25. Kemp, R. & Loorbach, D. (2003). Governance for sustainability through transition management. Paper for Open Meeting of the Human Dimensions of Global Environmental Change Research Community, Oct 16-19, 2003. Montreal, Canada. http://sedac.ciesin.columbia.edu (Accessed May 2017).
26. Bruijn, H. & Herder, P. M. (2009). System and actor perspectives on sociotechnical systems. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics - Part A: Systems and Humans, 39 (5): 981–992.
27. Bonen, Z. (1979). Evolutionary behaviour of complex sociotechnical systems. Working paper. Cambridge, Massachusetts: School of Management: Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
28. Van Geenhuizen, M., Nuttall, W. J., Gibson, D. V. and Oftedal, E. M. (2010). Energy and innovation: Structural Change and Policy Implications, International Series on Technology Policy and Innovation.’ Purdue, Indiana: Purdue University Press.
29. Hillman, K., Nilsson, M., Rickne, A. and Magnusson, T. (2009) ‘Fostering sustainable technologies – A framework for analysing the governance of innovation systems.’ Stockholm: Stockholm Environment Institute.
30. Fischer, G. and Herrmann, T. (2010). Socio-technical Systems: A meta-design perspective, Boulder, Colorado: Centre for Lifelong Learning and Design.
31. Herder, P. M. and Stikkelman, R. M. (2004). Methanol-based industrial cluster design: A study of design options and the design process. Industrial and Engineering Chemistry Research, 43 (14): 3879–3885.
32. 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: 897–920.
33. Berkhout, F., Wieczorek, A. J. & Raven, R. (2011). Avoiding environmental convergence: A possible role for sustainability experiments in latecomer countries? International Journal of Institutions and Economies, 3 (2): 367–385.
34. Unruh, G. C. (2000). Understanding Carbon Lock-in. Energy Policy, 28 (12): 817–830.