We will ask how policymakers can instigate a particular direction of change across multiple sectors amidst political contestation, including facilitating phase-out of environmentally unsustainable activities. Is the formulation of innovation missions and public innovation procurement a sufficient way of reducing uncertainty and setting direction? How can selective interventions be balanced with maintaining variety and experimentation (e.g. how to avoid premature lock-in of key technologies amidst urgency)?
A key issue is how to deal with social backlashes against transition policies as evident in recent examples such as the yellow vests in France, the road pay toll rebellion in Norway, or resistance against coal phase out in Germany and Poland. Considering how a transition can not only ensure decarbonization to avoid breaching planetary boundaries but also compensate those who stand to ‘loose’ from energy transition will be crucial for identifying politically feasible transition pathways (Turnheim & Nykvist, 2019).
This also involves aspects of how to ensure agreement on what constitute acceptable environmental characteristics. It includes how broadly we understand energy transition. Is it merely decarbonization of power production or does it entail a broader notion of sustainability transition that integrates thinking on social, environmental and economic issues.
WP3 furthermore looks at who the main actors in policy change are. There are indications that national policymakers will not lead sustainability initiatives before a critical mass of important business actors, NGOs or municipalities support it. This opens up questions about which conditions that can enable significant policy change and what role there is for policy feedbacks among technological change, actor preferences, and policy changes.
We also ask how to cope with coordination challenges for policy instruments across different policy domains (e.g. research, energy, transport, and environment), geographical scales, public–private civic spheres, and key sectors such as energy, transport, and industry. Are new, more socially inclusive and diverse models for policymaking the answer?
Past and ongoing attempts at overcoming such challenges will be subject to policy analysis with particular attention to mission-oriented policies for grand challenges as well as assessments of public sector capacity for managing such demanding processes. Relevant examples include NRC’s Pilot-E initiative, “Mission Innovation”, public innovation procurement (cf. UC3), and exceptional international experiences in this domain.