The final section of literature on the role of niches presented in this chapter focuses on the properties of niches. Smith and Raven (2012) argue that previous literatures on niches have failed to systematically interrogate niches as a concept, and they distinguish between three distinct functions that they can perform: ‘shielding’, ‘nurturing’ and ‘empowering’:
Shielding processes act as a form of protection for an innovation so that learning and development can take place away from the full pressures of the regime. This may take the form of ‘passive’ shielding, where a niche is naturally created thanks to contextual circumstances such as an off-grid area of the energy system. ‘Active’ shielding uses active measures to shield the niche, for example tax incentives or subsidy, which shield the technology from the market environment. Multiple forms of protection will often be required to offer an effective shield from the resistant dimensions of the incumbent regime (Smith and Raven, 2012).
Nurturing processes support actors to learn and develop the skills, networks and capacities required to be able to apply an innovation (Smith and Raven, 2012). The
functions of strategic niche management (discussed in section 3.2.2) are examples of how such processes might be supported.
Empowering processes act to translate practices from the niche into the wider regime, to enable an innovation to be applied outside of niche spaces. The
processes are iterative and can involve multiple actors (Smith and Raven, 2012). Smith (2007) describes the activities that enable empowering processes to take place as ‘translations’ of niche rules and practices to enable some form of
incorporation into the socio-technical regime. Similar to the typology of socio- technical transitions pathways developed by Geels (2007), the presence of tensions within the incumbent regime are important enablers of successful translation processes, where actors can exploit tensions in the incumbent regime to argue for change or present a solution in the form of their innovation. Smith & Raven (2012) highlight two distinct types of empowering processes:
‘Fit and conform’ processes seek to enable an innovation to compete within the selection environment of the incumbent regime. This requires learning processes within the niche to enable innovations to develop to an extent where they can function within the incumbent regime, through both first order and second order learning4.
‘Stretch and transform’ processes seek to alter the practices and norms of the incumbent regime sufficiently to enable the innovation to be applied without the need for protection or adaptation.
Context, power and agency are important determinants of the influence or success of empowering processes (Smith, 2007; Smith and Raven, 2012). Activities to support niche empowering processes are shaped and determined by actors’ access and commandment of “material and non-material resources, and collective action” (p.1031, Smith and Raven, 2012). They identify the importance of discursive strategies and narratives as a mechanism for actors to mobilise these resources,
4Smith (2007) refers to first order and second order learning processes within niches. First order
learning is described as learning about the “immediate, surface features” of a socio-technical innovation, whereas second order learning “questions the values and assumptions that frame the socio-technical configuration” of an innovation.
actor networks, and to influence the regime context. Global niche actors (see section 3.2.2, Geels and Deuten, 2006) play an important role because of their ability to draw on experiences and evidence from local niches and adapt their messages for key actors. For ‘fit and conform’ empowering processes, embedded regime actors are a key audience, whereas for ‘stretch and transform’ empowering processes, a key audience are actors who are lobbying for institutional reform already. Smith and Raven (2012) highlight three types of characteristics they expect to see in narratives aiming to empower innovations:
1. Positive expectations about a future with widespread uptake of the innovation and niche practices
2. Arguments for specific institutional reforms that would favour the niche innovation
3. Criticisms of the incumbent regime, to highlight tensions where the innovation can provide a solution.
Smith and Raven (2012) emphasise how empowering processes are likely to be messy, and full of competing narratives from different niche and regime actors. Translation processes are two-way and iterative, not just translating practices from the niche into the regime, but also resulting in adapting the practices of the niche according to translations from the regime (Smith, 2007). Translations of niche practices do not necessarily take all aspects of the original innovation. For example, Smith (2007) illustrates how the process of empowering organic food supply resulted in only certain aspects of the original sustainable organic food niche being translated and adopted by the regime (i.e. large-scale organic
production for distribution and supply by multi-national supermarkets rather than small-scale, local organic farming distributed by local shops). This left the niche actors within the study unsatisfied with the loss of many of their original
sustainability objectives and led to the adoption of alternative translation activities focusing on local and seasonal food (Smith, 2007). Further empirical studies of niche processes have explored various issues such as niche creation for transport innovations, energy innovations and agriculture innovations (e.g. Truffer et al., 2002; Raven, 2005).
Smith and Raven (2012) note that the socio-technical transitions literature is least developed on the subject of niche empowering processes, despite researchers’ interest in niches being driven by their potential for catalysing transitions in the long term. Empowering processes and the concepts of translation narratives and agency are explored in more detail in particular in Chapters 8 and 9. A theoretical contribution of this thesis is therefore to add to understanding of how empowering processes take place and might be governed.
Criticisms and further developments of theories on niche processes in transitions
There have been various criticisms and calls for theoretical and empirically-based development of the literature on niches, particularly regarding empowering innovations and stimulating reconfiguration of the socio-technical regime. For example, in a review of empirical studies applying strategic niche management theory, Schot and Geels (2008) argue that many cited case studies were not successful at stimulating deep socio-technical change. The presence of niches enabled first order learning such as technical adjustments or development of delivery processes, but rarely enabled second order learning such as re-framing of a problem or shifting understanding of how an innovation should be valued (Schot and Geels, 2008). They recognise that the process of niche creation and innovation development is not sufficient to stimulate a regime transformation on its own. Broader forces and pressures across the socio-technical system are needed. Hargreaves et al. (2013) cautions that diffusion or scaling up of an innovation is not always desired by actors in a niche. They highlight the diversity of visions and contexts in community energy examples, and argue that for some local, grassroots innovations it is more appropriate for intermediaries to focus on innovating within a local space, rather than aiming to scale up and alter the socio-technical regime. Work by Seyfang and Smith (2007), also focusing on community energy groups, distinguishes between ‘strategic’ niches which seek to scale up innovations to become part of the regime and ‘simple’ niches which instead seek to enable or protect space for grassroots innovations. Studies of sustainable transitions need to consider whether strategically managing niche spaces is appropriate.