Ervaring rond transitie in Nederland in landbouw en voeding

5 november 2012,

Krijn J. Poppe Aalst (B)

2

Inhoud

Een korte historie en stand van het transitie onderzoek in Nederland

Enkele onderschatte aspecten in transities

De rol van transitie en – innovatiebeleid

●Topsectorenbeleid

●EU: Horizon2020, GLB-post 2013 en EIP

Een korte historie en stand van het transitie onderzoek in Nederland

Prof. Jan Rotmans (Rivm, Maastricht, Rotterdam – EUR/DRIFT)

Maatschappelijk-technologisch onderzoek aan de TU’s (o.a. F. Geels, Multi-level perspective)

KSI project Rotmans, Grin, Schot et al.

NWO project rond Energie

Wageningen UR: Kennisbasis-programma – naast systeem-innovatieprogramma’s, Vakgroepen

LNV’s Innovatienet.

Transforum

Veel is inmiddels beeindigd en gepubliceerd

4

Wat heeft het opgeleverd ?

●Wetenschappelijke output, die internationaal gebruikt wordt

●Aandacht voor transities en structurele verandering

●Discussies over transitie-management en beleid

●Resultaten van actie-onderzoek: nieuwe concepten (bv. Ronddeel als kippenstal) en (lokale) initiatieven (bv. Stadslandbouw Rotterdam)

●Als er al Rijksbeleid in transitiemanagement is geweest, dan weinig effectief want huidige structuren en business models werken nog volop

●Vgl. Energie, Mobiliteit, Voedsel

5

Enkele onderschatte aspecten in transities

●Rol van de consument (en technologie-adoptie)

●Zie Spaargaren et al. 2012

●Roeselare, 1960s: van vlas naar vries

●De business cycle

●Political economy en machtsvraagstukken

●Energie ?

●Geo-politiek

tijd

Mate van verspreiding

van technologische revolutie

Installatie periode

Volgende

golf

Uitrol periode

Draai-punt

INDRINGER

EXTASE

SYNERGIE

RIJPHEID

Door-

braak

Werkeloosheid

Stilstand oude bedrijfstakken

Kapitaal zoekt nieuwe techniek

Financiele bubble

Onevenwichtigheden

Polarisatie arm en rijk

Gouden eeuw

Coherente groei

Toenemende externalities

Techniek bereikt grenzen

Marktverzadiging

Teleurstelling en gemakzucht

Institutionele

innovatie

Naar Perez, 2002

Crash

2008

1929

1893

1847

1797

time

Degree of diffusion of thetechnological revoluton

Installation period

Nextwave

Deploymentperiod

Turningpoint

IRRUPTION

FRENZY

SYNERGY

MATURITY

Big Bang

UnemploymentDecline of old industries

Capital searches new techniques

Financial bubbleDecoupling in the systemPolarisation poor and rich

Golden ageCoherent growth

Increasing externalities

Last products & industriesMarket saturation

Disappointment vscomplacency

Crash

2008

1929

1893

1847

1797

Institutional

innovation

Based on Perez, 2002

The opportunity for green growth

1771 water , textile

1829 steam, railways

1875 steel

1908 car, oil, massproduction

1971 ICT chip

National States

Many actors

Coope-rative

Non coope-rative

Multipolair• Power blocks• Economic and

politcal competition• Protectionism

Fragmentation• Stagnating globalisation• Insecure society• Identity first

Multilateral• Strong west and upcoming

BRICs• Global governance reformed• Globalisation continues

Network• Non-polair world order• Global market economy and

civil society• Unpredictable

Four scenarios on Scarcity and Transition

7© De Ruijter Strategie

The Shell 2025 Scenario study

– a geopolitics view

9

De rol van transitie- en innovatiebeleid

●Transitie-management

●Rijksoverheidsbeleid maar tijdelijk van aard

●Landbouw: ● “de overheid houdt geen kippen”● Consumentenbeleid achter de

voordeur niet aantrekkelijk● Liever de Productivity dan de

Sufficiency narrative

●Topsectorenbeleid (na fusie LNV en EZ): bedrijfsleven veel meer aan het stuur

●EU: Horizon2020, GLB-post 2013 en EIP

EU’s SCAR Foresight: two narratives

Productivity:

Science has the potential to develop technologies that can boost productivity whilst addressing resource scarcities and environmental problems

Massive investments needed in R&D, technology adoption, rural infrastructure, access to markets

GRIN technologies (Genetics, Robotics, Informatics, Nano)

Sufficiency:

Science has the potential to develop technological solutions that are productive, reduce resource use, preserve biodiversity

However, demand increases need to be mitigated, through behavorial change, structural changes food systems

Appropriate governance structures to internalise externalities

11 Ministry of Economic Affairs, Agriculture and Innovation

Economics: thinking on equilibrium and dis-eq.

• Ricardo• Marshall• Walras• Coase• Hayek• Friedman• Ostrom

• F. List: infant industry

• K. Marx: role of capitalist

• J. Schumpeter: entrepreneur / business cycle

• K. Arrow: market failure

• O. Williamson: Inst. Econ.

Adam Smith

12

Two views on innovation policy (Smits et al, 2010)  Mainstream macro-economics Institutional and evolutionary

economics: Systems of InnovationMain assumptions Equilibrium

Perfect information

Dis-equilibrium

Asymetric information

Focus Allocation of resources for invention

Individuals

Interaction in innovation processes

Networks and frame conditions

Main policy Science / research policy Innovation policy

Main rationale Market failure Systemic problemsGovernment intervenes to

provide public goods

mitigate externalities

reduce barriers to entry

eliminate inefficient market structures

solve problems in the system

facilitate creation new systems

facilitate transition and avoid lock-in

induce changes in the supporting structure for innovation: create institutions and support networking

main strengths of policies designed under this paradigm

clarity and simplicity

analysis based on long term trends of science-based indicators

context specific

involvement of all policies related to innovation

holistic approach to innovation

main weaknesses of policies designed under this paradigm

linear model of innovation

(institutional) framework conditions are not explicitly considered

difficult to implement 

lack of indicators for analysis and evaluation of policy

13 SCAR Collaborative Working Group AKIS

Table S.1 Two types of motivation for research

Aspect Science driven research Innovation driven researchIncentive to program a topic

Emerging science that can contribute to solving a societal issue (or a scientific question)

An issue / problem in society that can be solved by new research, or a new idea to solve an existing issue

Participation of users In demonstration phase / via research dissemination

In agenda setting, defining the problem and during the research process

Quality criteria Scientific quality Relevance (for the sector or a region)Focus Research organisations Networks of producers and users of

knowledge

Diffusion model Linear model System (network) approachType of government policy Science / Research Policy Innovation PolicyEconomic line of thinking (see table 2.1)

Macro-economics Systems of innovation

Finance To a large extent public money: more speculative and large spill over effects

Public-private partnerships very possible / advantageous

The role of the EU Efficiency of scale (member states often too small), smart specialisation between member states, create European research market with harmonisation of hard- and soft infrastructures

Stimulate interaction and learning in Europe between national/regional AKIS.Enable in CAP innovation by networks with farmers

Typical EU examples Horizon 2020, FP7, ERC, some ERAnets, Joint Programming Initiatives

CAP: European Innovation Partnership, LEADER, European Technology Platforms, EIPs, some ERAnets

Type of research Interdisciplinary with absorption capacity in AKIS (to work with material science, ICT, chemistry etc.).

Transdisciplinary and translational with close interactions.

DIFFERENT MOTIVES NEED TO BE ADDRESSED

Rural Development Policy:

• Knowledge transfer• Cooperation• Pilot projects • Demonstration• Advisory services• Investment

Research & Innovation Framework:

• Research projects• Multi-actor projects• Pilot project clusters• Innovation brokers• On-farm

experiments

Operational Groups Operational

Groups

Operational Groups

Operational Groups

Operational Groups

MemberStates

Programmes

ETPs, ERA-Nets, JPIs,

etc.

EIP Network

Rural Development

Committee

Rural Development

NetworkSteering Group

Steering BoardEuropean Innovation Partnership

‚Agricultural Productivity and Sustainability ‘

Standing Committee

on Agricultural Research (SCAR)

Farmers . Advisers . Enterprises . Scientists. NGOs

Horizon 2020ProgrammeCommittee

Scenario’sSterke overheid

Veel ruimte voor markten en burgers

Con-serveren Ontwikkelen

Dank voor uw aandacht

krijn.poppe@wur.nl

www.lei.wur.nl