Innovation and institutional change: the transition to a sustainable ...

Analytical framework 63
alternative practices, and profit from linkages to other networks, but will be
more difficult to organise and maintain its momentum.
Technologies and their artefacts form the material part of a system, with a
variety of technologies and technological components making up a
technological system. The way technologies and their components are linked
in a technological system is a focal point of attention as for example the
specific architecture or a dominant design guides and constrains the
evolution and uptake of technologies within a system. The technologies,
components and their underlying principles, problems are also part of
knowledge fields that play a role in guiding further search processes,
problem definitions (reverse salients) and solution paths. With regard to
systems change, the focus is on alternative technologies that have the
potential to change the system, and potential paths that may lead to
transformation or renewal of systems. Key notions are the flexibility,
versatility and linking potential of technologies. As a technology is more
flexible and versatile it has a larger chance to connect to the dynamics in
systems and society at large (e.g. it can be used because it can connect to the
development of the new economy plus the demands for more sustainable
behaviour).
Practices refer to the way things are done through involvement of a variety
of actors, technologies and networks. It can range from standard practices
done by actors within the system, alternative practices by actors not
‘captured’ by or breaking out of the system, and the introduction of novel
practices. The focus is here on the nature of the practices (standard,
alternative, new) and on the actors (routines, competencies, motivation,
power), networks, technologies, and linkages playing a role in making the
practice work. With regard to the existing pool of practices we analyse how
these are supported by institutions, powerful actors, linkages between
different components and technologies, and relationships between different
actors. Systems change can be seen as a sequence of alternative and new
practices that are set in motion. Understanding why certain practices may
move on towards further diffusion and others not is key to this. The diffusion
literature may give some clues, but the main limit of the work of Rogers
(1995) is that it does not take into account the way these practices co-evolve
with markets, users, and institutions. Rogers conceptualizes diffusion as the
introduction of a finished innovation into markets, whereas our focus on
practices takes into account that the nature of the practice is constantly
shaped by actors, in processes of imitation, adaptation, and reconfiguration.
While these elements form the building blocks of any system of production
and consumption, the way they are configured and fine-tuned in their
development is explained by the following components of systems: