Regions reliant on declining fossil fuel production often grapple with upcoming deindustrialisation, economic decline, and deterioration of liveability. In attempts to address these issues proactively, local change agents, including sub-national government authorities, increasingly collaborate to develop new, more sustainable and just regional pathways. A potential yet not uncontested stepping stone towards such pathways is co-creative asset redevelopment. In this paper, we focus on the role of sub-national government authorities in co-creative redevelopment. Particularly, we zoom in on the legitimacy challenges that these authorities face and must address for co-creative redevelopment to have transformative capacity. We draw on insights from the case of GZI Next in Emmen, the Netherlands, and identify six challenges, amongst others intra-organisational conflicts of interests, accountability issues, and competing claims to the right to a just transition. We reflect on these challenges and how to overcome them and propose avenues for future research.

The agency of incumbents has gained increasing attention in the study of transitions. Recent studies show that besides being inert and resistant to change, incumbents can also support transitions. We focus on the agency of a particular type of incumbent, grid operators. In several countries, these actors play an active role in institutional change in the energy domain. At the same time, they are engaging in activities to maintain the regime. This paper examines the actions of grid operators when performing institutional work, i.e. when creating, maintaining and disrupting institutions. We conducted a qualitative content analysis of Dutch media to analyze the actions of grid operators while engaging with decentralized energy innovations. We conclude that grid operators are both subject and object of institutional work as part of a distributed, collective process of institutional change. Furthermore, our analysis reflects on their paradoxical position as embedded actors engaging in institutional change.

Finding leverage points for sustainability transformation of industrial and infrastructure systems is challenging, given that transformation is emergent from the complex interactions among socio-technical system elements over time within a specific social, technical and geographical context. Participatory multi-modelling, in which modellers and stakeholders collaborate to develop multiple interacting models to support a shared understanding of systems, is a promising approach to support sustainability transformations. The participatory process of modeling can serve as a leverage point by facilitating social learning amongst stakeholders, in which models can function as boundary objects that facilitate dialogue between stakeholders from different social worlds. We propose that participatory multi-modeling allows for the creation of a boundary object ecology, which involves a set of interacting and co-evolving boundary objects emerging throughout the modeling process. To explore this, we analyse the participatory multi-modelling process in the Windmaster project in the Rotterdam Port industrial cluster to understand which design choices were key to the creation of boundary objects. Our analysis shows that two types of design choices were key: design choices that enabled translations between participants, and those between participants and their organisation. We conclude that conceptualising participatory multi-modelling as a process of an evolving boundary object ecology, creating and adapting multiple interacting boundary objects provides a novel perspective that is useful for analysis and design of future participatory multi-modeling processes.

The crowd increasingly plays a key role in facilitating innovations in a variety of sectors, spurred on by IT-developments and the concomitant increase in connectivity. Initiatives in this direction, captured under the umbrella-term ‘crowd-based innovations’ (CBI), offer novel opportunities in all domains of society by increasing the access, reach and speed of services and goods. At the same time, they signify important challenges because these innovations occur in a context of traditional, well-established institutional arrangements. CBI create an ‘institutional void’: existing rules, standards and practices are challenged and renegotiated. This raises questions about the safeguarding of public values such as quality, legitimacy, efficiency and governance of crowd-based innovations. The objective of this perspective piece is to present an interdisciplinary research agenda to address normative challenges for governing CBI. We will argue that such an agenda needs an integrated empirical-normative approach. We will detail three lines of empirical-normative research that together build up towards an interdisciplinary agenda.

Industrial Symbiosis (IS) is a collective approach to competitive advantage in which separate industries create a cooperative network to exchange materials, energy, water and/or by-products. By addressing issues related to resource depletion, waste management and pollution, IS plays an important role in the transition towards sustainable development. In the literature, two conceptual perspectives on IS can be identified: the Industrial Ecology (IE) and the Circular Economy (CE) perspective. Despite the recognition of these two perspectives, their relationship remains unclear and explicit attempts to develop an integrated perspective have not been made yet. Consequently, the goal of this research is to highlight and start addressing this critical gap of knowledge in order to support future research and practice geared towards the design of new IS clusters. We pose the following research question: How can the IE and CE perspectives on IS be combined in order to support the design of IS clusters? To this end, we first investigate the two perspectives more in depth and compare them in terms of nature, features and relevance for the study of IS. This is done by applying them as conceptual lenses for the analysis of the same case study, an existing IS cluster. The comparative analysis provides insights into how the two perspectives differ, ultimately demonstrating that they are complimentary and both necessary to fully describe an IS cluster. While the CE perspective is more suitable to explain how a cluster functions from a business standpoint in the operating phase, the IE perspective is more suitable to explain its development over time and its impacts on the environment, the economy and society. Building upon the outcomes of the comparative analysis, we leverage on the discipline of Strategic Design and integrate the two perspectives into a process for designing new IS clusters. We suggest two directions for future research. First, improving our comparative analysis of the two perspectives by looking at a wider sample of IS clusters of different sizes and in different contexts. Second, focusing with more specificity on the issue of how IS clusters can be designed, potentially by trying to apply the process we propose on a real case aimed at designing a new IS cluster.

With this paper, I want to raise attention to the value of social conflict in energy policy and planning, and the limitations of participatory processes for including different normative appraisals in energy policy and planning. I first discuss three perspectives on the value of social conflict. Although invited participation is generally considered as a way to ameliorate, or anticipate social conflict on energy projects, this ‘participatory reflex’ goes past the fact that social conflict can itself be considered a form of participation, i.e. self-organized participation. Second, I discuss two basic characteristics of social conflict that show the limitations of invited participation in identifying and including divergent normative appraisals: 1) social conflict challenges institutions, and 2) social conflict involves emergent positions and groups. I propose to see social conflict as self-organized participation that serves as an source for identification and inclusion of normative appraisals in energy policy and planning. This not only necessitates the study of these phenomena as such, but also suggests a different approach to deal with such phenomena in research and practice. I will lay out three directions for further research.

This paper aims to contribute to understanding the dynamics of industrial symbiosis. More specifically, we focus on the dynamics of anchoring as they can be observed in the Chinese context of eco-industrial development. We define anchoring as those activities that (typically local) actors perform to create local physical and institutional conditions conducive to the emergence and further development of industrial symbiosis in a specific regional industrial system. We argue that, in the study of industrial symbiosis dynamics, it is conceptually more useful to focus on anchoring as an activity, rather than anchor tenants as actors. Based on a systematic literature review, we distinguish two types of anchoring activities: institutional and physical. We analyze anchoring dynamics in the case of Qijiang Industrial Symbiosis (Chongqing Municipality) in China. We have identified the physical and institutional anchoring activities, the actors responsible for these activities, and how different anchoring activities build on each other over time. Our case study shows that the attempt to bring about industrial symbiosis in the Qijiang industrial park can be described in a richer way than just 'governmental planning'.

In this paper we develop a framework for understanding how justice-related claims play a role in the dynamics of controversy in energy projects. We do so by distinguishing two interacting trajectories of assessment: a formal trajectory that is embedded in the legal system and an informal trajectory that is mainly embedded in public discourse. The emergence of an informal assessment trajectory can be seen as a response to a (perceived) lack of attention to particular concerns or values in the formal trajectory, i.e. '. overflowing'. The emerging informal assessment may subsequently lead to adaptations in the formal trajectory, which we refer to as '. backflowing'. Based on insights from case studies on Dutch energy projects and literature on energy justice we identify three justice-related attributes that facilitate understanding of the emergence of controversies. These attributes are based on differences between the two trajectories in terms of 1) the way in which values are expressed, 2) the dimension of energy justice that is taken as a starting point, and 3) the democratic legitimization of assessment trajectories. In order to allow for legitimate and effective energy policy, overflowing and backflowing need to be addressed as interrelated rather than as separate processes.

While societal controversy is often seen as a barrier for technological development, we take the position that controversies can be useful for guiding and steering these developments. Controversies articulate the conflicting values at stake and reveal unanticipated societal and ethical risks. A common reaction to public controversies is to counter public responses to technology with facts and experts' conclusions. Formal assessment methods such as Environmental Impact Assessment, (social) Cost Benefit Analysis and Risk Assessment are often used as an expert-based approach to inform decisionmaking on large energy projects. These methods are, however, predominantly (and sometimes solely) warranting one single value, being sustainability, utility or safety. Due to their inability to address the wide and variable range of values, formal assessment methods often become debated, for instance because their scope and process is not considered appropriate for the project at hand. As such they can be seen as imperfect (and sometimes even counterproductive) in supporting socially responsible public-private decision-making for energy projects. We argue that project developers and policy makers need to enrich the assessment of energy projects by acknowledging the broad range of values that emerge from such controversies.