Transcript PowerPoint-presentatie

Ervaring rond transitie in Nederland in
landbouw en voeding
5 november 2012,
Krijn J. Poppe
Aalst (B)
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
2
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
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
4
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
5
The opportunity for green growth
Degree
ofverspreiding
diffusion of the
Mate van
technological revoluton
van technologische revolutie
Installationperiode
period
Installatie
Turning
Draaipoint
punt
Crash
Institutional
Institutionele
2008
innovation
innovatie
Deployment
Uitrol periode
period
RIJPHEID
MATURITY
1929
Financiele
Financialbubble
bubble
Decoupling in the system
Onevenwichtigheden
Polarisation poor and rich
Polarisatie arm en rijk
1771 water , textile
1893
SYNERGIE
SYNERGY
1847
1797
Last products & industries
Techniek
bereikt
grenzen
Market
saturation
Disappointment vs
Marktverzadiging
complacency
Teleurstelling en gemakzucht
1829 steam, railways
1875DoorsteelBang
Big
1908 car, oil,
braak
massproduction
1971 ICT chip
INDRINGER
IRRUPTION
EXTASE
FRENZY
Goldeneeuw
age
Gouden
Coherent growth
Coherente groei
Increasing externalities
Toenemende externalities
Unemployment
Werkeloosheid
Decline of old industries
Stilstand oude bedrijfstakken
Capital searches new techniques
Kapitaal zoekt nieuwe techniek
Based
on Perez,
Naar Perez,
20022002
Volgende
Next golf
wave
time
tijd
Four scenarios on Scarcity and Transition
National States
Multipolair
Non
cooperative
• Power blocks
• Economic and politcal
competition
• Protectionism
Multilateral
• Strong west and upcoming BRICs
• Global governance reformed
• Globalisation continues
Fragmentation
Network
•Stagnating globalisation
•Insecure society
•Identity first
• Non-polair world order
• Global market economy and civil
society
• Unpredictable
Cooperative
Many actors
© De Ruijter Strategie
7
The Shell 2025 Scenario study
– a geopolitics view
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
9
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
Economics: thinking on equilibrium and dis-eq.
Adam Smith
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
11
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.
Ministry of Economic Affairs, Agriculture
Two views on innovation policy (Smits et al,
2010)
Mainstream macro-economics
Main assumptions
Equilibrium
Institutional and evolutionary
economics: Systems of Innovation
Dis-equilibrium
Focus
Perfect information
Allocation of resources for invention
Asymetric information
Interaction in innovation processes
Main policy
Individuals
Science / research policy
Networks and frame conditions
Innovation policy
Market failure
provide public goods
Systemic problems
solve problems in the system
mitigate externalities
facilitate creation new systems
reduce barriers to entry
facilitate transition and avoid lock-in
eliminate inefficient market structures
induce changes in the supporting structure
for innovation: create institutions and
support networking
context specific
Main rationale
Government intervenes
to
main strengths of
clarity and simplicity
policies designed under
analysis based on long term trends of
this paradigm
science-based indicators
involvement of all policies related to
innovation
holistic approach to innovation
difficult to implement
main weaknesses of
linear model of innovation
policies designed under
(institutional) framework conditions are not lack of indicators for analysis and evaluation
this paradigm
explicitly considered
of policy
12
DIFFERENT MOTIVES NEED TO BE ADDRESSED
Table S.1 Two types of motivation for research
Aspect
Incentive to program a
topic
Science driven research
Emerging science that can
contribute to solving a societal
issue (or a scientific question)
Innovation driven research
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
Quality criteria
Focus
Scientific quality
Research organisations
In agenda setting, defining the
problem and during the research
process
Relevance (for the sector or a region)
Networks of producers and users of
knowledge
Diffusion model
Type of government policy
Economic line of thinking
(see table 2.1)
Linear model
Science / Research Policy
Macro-economics
System (network) approach
Innovation Policy
Systems of innovation
Finance
To a large extent public money:
more speculative and large spill
over effects
Efficiency of scale (member states
often too small), smart
specialisation between member
states, create European research
market with harmonisation of hardand soft infrastructures
Public-private partnerships very
possible / advantageous
Typical EU examples
Horizon 2020, FP7, ERC, some
ERAnets, Joint Programming
Initiatives
Type of research
CAP: European Innovation
Partnership, LEADER, European
Technology Platforms, EIPs, some
ERAnets
Transdisciplinary and translational
with close interactions.
Interdisciplinary with absorption
capacity in AKIS (to work with
material science, ICT, chemistry
SCAR Collaborative
etc.).
The role of the EU
13
Stimulate interaction and learning in
Europe between national/regional
AKIS.
Enable in CAP innovation by networks
with farmers
Working Group AKIS
Research & Innovation
Framework:
Steering Board
European Innovation Partnership
‚Agricultural Productivity and Sustainability ‘
Rural
Development
Network
Steering Group
EIP
Network
•
•
•
•
•
Standing
Committee
on Agricultural
Research
(SCAR)
Rural
Development
Committee
ETPs, ERANets, JPIs,
etc.
Rural Development
Policy:
•
•
•
•
•
•
Knowledge transfer
Cooperation
Pilot projects
Demonstration
Advisory services
Investment
Research projects
Multi-actor projects
Pilot project clusters
Innovation brokers
On-farm
experiments
Operational
Groups
Member
States
Programmes
Operational
Groups
Operational
Groups
Horizon 2020
Programme
Committee
Operational
Groups
Operational
Groups
Farmers . Advisers . Enterprises . Scientists. NGOs
Scenario’s
Sterke overheid
Conserveren
Ontwikkelen
Veel ruimte voor markten en burgers
Dank voor uw
aandacht
[email protected]
www.lei.wur.nl