4.6 Review

Moving beyond disruptive innovation: A review of disruption in sustainability transitions

Journal

ENVIRONMENTAL INNOVATION AND SOCIETAL TRANSITIONS
Volume 38, Issue -, Pages 110-126

Publisher

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.eist.2020.12.001

Keywords

Sustainability transitions; Disruption; Disruptive innovation; Destabilisation

Funding

  1. Academy of Finland [315,897, 322667]
  2. Academy of Finland (AKA) [322667, 322667] Funding Source: Academy of Finland (AKA)

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study critically evaluates the concept of disruption in the context of sustainability transition studies, identifying technological and non-technological dimensions of disruption. A new definition focusing on speed and magnitude of change is provided, with an emphasis on the importance of disruptive practices and low-tech solutions alongside disruptive technologies and policies.
Because of the urgency of accelerating transitions, we examine the emerging understanding of the concept of 'disruption' in the context of sustainability transition studies to critically assess its value, pitfalls and potentials. By conducting a qualitative systematic review of 47 articles, we analyse how disruption is seen in this literature and what is being disrupted. We identify four nontechnical dimensions of disruption, adding 'behaviour, practices and cultural models' to previously suggested dimensions, i.e., markets and business models, regulations and policy, and actors and networks. We summarise what the literature identifies as disruption in transitions and draw on other literatures (e.g. social practice theory and institutional theory) to elaborate the dimensions of disruption. We provide a new definition of disruption in sociotechnical transitions, with focus on both speed and magnitude of change. We end by highlighting the importance of disruptive practices and low-tech solutions alongside disruptive technologies and policies.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available