This page has only limited features, please log in for full access.
As SDG7-related interventions seek to transform access to clean energy, this paper presents an analysis of both a previous transformative intervention (Lighting Africa) and a theoretical approach to understanding how such transformations can be achieved in the Global South (socio-technical innovation system, STIS, building). The paper makes four contributions. First, it tests the extent to which the STIS-building concept is useful in understanding and conceptualising how Lighting Africa transformed the market for solar lanterns in Kenya from an estimated market size of 29,000 lamps in 2009 to one where 680,000 Lighting Africa certified lamps were sold in Kenya by the end of the Programme in 2013. Second, it presents the most in-depth analysis of Lighting Africa that we are aware of to date. Third, it presents a conceptual framework that illustrates the Lighting Africa approach, providing a framework for future policy interventions aiming to transform access to clean energy technologies in the Global South. Fourth, it reflects on weaknesses in the STIS approach. In particular, these include a need to better attend to: the gendered implications of interventions (and social justice more broadly); implications of different scales of technologies; value accumulation and the extent to which interventions benefit indigenous actors and local economies; and the political and economic implications of any intervention and its distribution of benefits.
David Ockwell; Robert Byrne; Joanes Atela; Victoria Chengo; Elsie Onsongo; Jacob Fodio Todd; Victoria Kasprowicz; Adrian Ely. Transforming Access to Clean Energy Technologies in the Global South: Learning from Lighting Africa in Kenya. Energies 2021, 14, 4362 .
AMA StyleDavid Ockwell, Robert Byrne, Joanes Atela, Victoria Chengo, Elsie Onsongo, Jacob Fodio Todd, Victoria Kasprowicz, Adrian Ely. Transforming Access to Clean Energy Technologies in the Global South: Learning from Lighting Africa in Kenya. Energies. 2021; 14 (14):4362.
Chicago/Turabian StyleDavid Ockwell; Robert Byrne; Joanes Atela; Victoria Chengo; Elsie Onsongo; Jacob Fodio Todd; Victoria Kasprowicz; Adrian Ely. 2021. "Transforming Access to Clean Energy Technologies in the Global South: Learning from Lighting Africa in Kenya." Energies 14, no. 14: 4362.
In this exploratory study, we employ an interdisciplinary approach to explore potential synergies and trade‐offs between the needs of people and nature in the context of agroecological farming and nature conservation. Ecological field studies and management surveys from six sites were combined with a participatory‐deliberative appraisal exercise using the Multi‐Criteria Mapping (MCM) method. All six study sites and all four land use options in the appraisal were characterised by the use of large herbivores for agricultural and/or conservation purposes, to varying degrees, and were located in South‐East England. MCM participants identified habitat and species diversity, soil health, food production, provision of education and recreational access, as the principal benefits associated with successful management of such sites. Taken overall, their appraisals indicated that a combination of land uses may be best suited to delivering these diverse benefits, but with agroecological (While organic and biodynamic agriculture are subject to legal definition, agroecology offers a more flexible approach and can be viewed as ‘a development pathway from input‐intensive industrial systems through to highly sustainable, ecological systems’—see Laughton, R. (2017) ‘A Matter of Scale’, Land Workers Alliance and Centre for Agroecology, Coventry University) farming being perceived as a particularly effective multi‐purpose option. Five of the six sites were used for recreational purposes, and in total we recorded five times more humans than wild mammals. Ecological data from the sites indicated that the most conservation‐oriented sites performed best in terms of species richness and activity (birds, mammals, bats and invertebrates) and number of species of conservation concern. However, beta diversity metrics indicated important variation in the species assemblages recorded within and between sites. Whereas both agroecological farms in our study produced the greatest weight of saleable meat per unit area, the site that produced the most meat also demonstrated consistently strong performance across many biodiversity metrics. Overall, expert perspectives and the performance of our study sites suggests that combinations of diverse approaches to the management of large herbivores, within a ‘wildlife‐friendly’ envelope, are consistent with providing for the diverse needs of people and nature within shared landscapes. A free Plain Language Summary can be found within the Supporting Information of this article.
Nicholas J. Balfour; Rachael Durrant; Adrian Ely; Christopher J. Sandom. People, nature and large herbivores in a shared landscape: A mixed‐method study of the ecological and social outcomes from agriculture and conservation. People and Nature 2021, 1 .
AMA StyleNicholas J. Balfour, Rachael Durrant, Adrian Ely, Christopher J. Sandom. People, nature and large herbivores in a shared landscape: A mixed‐method study of the ecological and social outcomes from agriculture and conservation. People and Nature. 2021; ():1.
Chicago/Turabian StyleNicholas J. Balfour; Rachael Durrant; Adrian Ely; Christopher J. Sandom. 2021. "People, nature and large herbivores in a shared landscape: A mixed‐method study of the ecological and social outcomes from agriculture and conservation." People and Nature , no. : 1.
Realising the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) will require transformative changes at micro, meso and macro levels and across diverse geographies. Collaborative, transdisciplinary research has a role to play in documenting, understanding and contributing to such transformations. Previous work has investigated the role of this research in Europe and North America, however the dynamics of transdisciplinary research on ‘transformations to sustainability’ in other parts of the world are less well-understood. This paper reports on an international project that involved transdisciplinary research in six different hubs across the globe and was strategically designed to enable mutual learning and exchange. It draws on surveys, reports and research outputs to analyse the processes of transdisciplinary collaboration for sustainability that took place between 2015–2019. The paper illustrates how the project was structured in order to enable learning across disciplines, cultures and contexts and describes how it also provided for the negotiation of epistemological frameworks and different normative commitments between members across the network. To this end, it discusses lessons regarding the use of theoretical and methodological anchors, multi-loop learning and evaluating emergent change (including the difficulties encountered). It offers insights for the design and implementation of future international transdisciplinary collaborations that address locally-specific sustainability challenges within the universal framework of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development.
Adrian Ely; Anabel Marin; Lakshmi Charli-Joseph; Dinesh Abrol; Marina Apgar; Joanes Atela; Becky Ayre; Robert Byrne; Bikramaditya K. Choudhary; Victoria Chengo; Almendra Cremaschi; Rowan Davis; Pranav Desai; Hallie Eakin; Pravin Kushwaha; Fiona Marshall; Kennedy Mbeva; Nora Ndege; Cosmas Ochieng; David Ockwell; Per Olsson; Nathan Oxley; Laura Pereira; Ritu Priya; Aschalew Tigabu; Patrick Van Zwanenberg; Lichao Yang. Structured Collaboration Across a Transformative Knowledge Network—Learning Across Disciplines, Cultures and Contexts? Sustainability 2020, 12, 2499 .
AMA StyleAdrian Ely, Anabel Marin, Lakshmi Charli-Joseph, Dinesh Abrol, Marina Apgar, Joanes Atela, Becky Ayre, Robert Byrne, Bikramaditya K. Choudhary, Victoria Chengo, Almendra Cremaschi, Rowan Davis, Pranav Desai, Hallie Eakin, Pravin Kushwaha, Fiona Marshall, Kennedy Mbeva, Nora Ndege, Cosmas Ochieng, David Ockwell, Per Olsson, Nathan Oxley, Laura Pereira, Ritu Priya, Aschalew Tigabu, Patrick Van Zwanenberg, Lichao Yang. Structured Collaboration Across a Transformative Knowledge Network—Learning Across Disciplines, Cultures and Contexts? Sustainability. 2020; 12 (6):2499.
Chicago/Turabian StyleAdrian Ely; Anabel Marin; Lakshmi Charli-Joseph; Dinesh Abrol; Marina Apgar; Joanes Atela; Becky Ayre; Robert Byrne; Bikramaditya K. Choudhary; Victoria Chengo; Almendra Cremaschi; Rowan Davis; Pranav Desai; Hallie Eakin; Pravin Kushwaha; Fiona Marshall; Kennedy Mbeva; Nora Ndege; Cosmas Ochieng; David Ockwell; Per Olsson; Nathan Oxley; Laura Pereira; Ritu Priya; Aschalew Tigabu; Patrick Van Zwanenberg; Lichao Yang. 2020. "Structured Collaboration Across a Transformative Knowledge Network—Learning Across Disciplines, Cultures and Contexts?" Sustainability 12, no. 6: 2499.
This paper examines the rapidly emerging and rapidly changing phenomenon of pay-as-you-go (PAYG), digitally enabled business models, which have had significant early success in providing poor people with access to technologies relevant to the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) (e.g., for electricity access, water and sanitation, and agricultural irrigation). Data are analysed based on literature review, two stakeholder workshops (or “transformation labs”), and stakeholder interviews (engaging 41 stakeholders in total). This demonstrates the existing literature on PAYG is patchy at best, with no comprehensive or longitudinal, and very little theoretically grounded, research to date. The paper contributes to existing research on PAYG, and sustainability transformations more broadly, in two key ways. Firstly, it articulates a range of questions that remain to be answered in order to understand and deliver against the current and potential contribution of PAYG in affecting sustainability transformations (the latter we define as achieving environmental sustainability and social justice). These questions focus at three levels: national contexts for fostering innovation and technology uptake, the daily lives of poor and marginalised women and men, and global political economies and value accumulation. Secondly, the paper articulates three areas of theory (based on emerging critical social science research on sustainable energy access) that have potential to support future research that might answer these questions, namely: socio-technical innovation system-building, social practice, and global political economy and value chain analysis. Whilst recognising existing tensions between these three areas of theory, we argue that rapid sustainability transformations demand a level of epistemic pragmatism. Such pragmatism, we argue, can be achieved by situating research using any of the above areas of theory within the broader context of Leach et al.’s (2010) Pathways Approach. This allows for exactly the kind of interdisciplinary approach, based on a commitment to pluralism and the co-production of knowledge, and firmly rooted commitment to environmental sustainability and social justice that the SDGs demand.
David Ockwell; Joanes Atela; Kennedy Mbeva; Victoria Chengo; Rob Byrne; Rachael Durrant; Victoria Kasprowicz; Adrian Ely. Can Pay-As-You-Go, Digitally Enabled Business Models Support Sustainability Transformations in Developing Countries? Outstanding Questions and a Theoretical Basis for Future Research. Sustainability 2019, 11, 2105 .
AMA StyleDavid Ockwell, Joanes Atela, Kennedy Mbeva, Victoria Chengo, Rob Byrne, Rachael Durrant, Victoria Kasprowicz, Adrian Ely. Can Pay-As-You-Go, Digitally Enabled Business Models Support Sustainability Transformations in Developing Countries? Outstanding Questions and a Theoretical Basis for Future Research. Sustainability. 2019; 11 (7):2105.
Chicago/Turabian StyleDavid Ockwell; Joanes Atela; Kennedy Mbeva; Victoria Chengo; Rob Byrne; Rachael Durrant; Victoria Kasprowicz; Adrian Ely. 2019. "Can Pay-As-You-Go, Digitally Enabled Business Models Support Sustainability Transformations in Developing Countries? Outstanding Questions and a Theoretical Basis for Future Research." Sustainability 11, no. 7: 2105.
Adrian Ely; Sam Geall; Yixin Dai. Low-carbon China: Emerging phenomena and implications for innovation governance. Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions 2019, 30, 1 -5.
AMA StyleAdrian Ely, Sam Geall, Yixin Dai. Low-carbon China: Emerging phenomena and implications for innovation governance. Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions. 2019; 30 ():1-5.
Chicago/Turabian StyleAdrian Ely; Sam Geall; Yixin Dai. 2019. "Low-carbon China: Emerging phenomena and implications for innovation governance." Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions 30, no. : 1-5.
Purpose The urgent challenges of sustainability require novel teaching methods facilitating different types of learning. The purpose of this paper is to examine the important role of experiential learning in higher education programmes relating to sustainability and to evaluate a number of teaching and learning activities (TLAs) that can be used to leverage this approach. Design/methodology/approach Based on questionnaire surveys carried out for over seven years with students from a highly international master’s-level course, this paper describes the utility of experiential learning theory in teaching around “innovation for sustainability”. Drawing on Kolb’s theories and subsequent modifications, the paper reviews and evaluates the TLAs used in the course that have fostered experiential learning in the classroom, including role-play seminars, case study-based seminars and sessions centred around sharing and reflecting on personal professional histories. Findings The qualitative data and discussion illustrate the utility of experiential learning approaches in post-graduate education for sustainable development, especially in generating empathy and understanding for different sustainability perspectives and priorities from around the world. In particular, the paper offers novel insights into the strengths and limitations of the TLAs. Originality/value These insights are valuable to education for sustainable development practitioners dealing with international student intakes displaying variable levels of professional experience who are looking to foster experiential learning, reflection and inter-cultural empathy. They can inform the design of classroom-based TLAs that are capable of equipping students with not only the analytical skills for career success but also the inter-cultural sensibility required for international leadership in the sustainable development domain.
Adrian Ely. Experiential learning in “innovation for sustainability”. International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education 2018, 19, 1204 -1219.
AMA StyleAdrian Ely. Experiential learning in “innovation for sustainability”. International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education. 2018; 19 (7):1204-1219.
Chicago/Turabian StyleAdrian Ely. 2018. "Experiential learning in “innovation for sustainability”." International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education 19, no. 7: 1204-1219.
Since the United States committed to withdraw from the UN Paris Agreement on climate change, international observers have increasingly asked if China can take the lead instead to raise global ambition in the context of a world leadership vacuum. Given the country's increasing economic and strategic focus on sustainable and low-carbon innovation, China might seem well placed to do so. However, much depends on the direction of governance and reform within China regarding the environment. To better understand how the government is seeking to make progress in these areas, this article explores key political narratives that have underpinned China's policies around sustainable development (kechixu fazhan) and innovation (chuangxin) within the context of broader narratives of reform. Drawing on theoretical insights from work that investigates the role of power in shaping narratives, knowledge and action around specific pathways to sustainability, this article explores the ways in which dominant policy narratives in China might drive particular forms of innovation for sustainability and potentially occlude or constrain others. In particular, we look at ecological civilization (shengtai wenming) as a slogan that has gradually evolved to become an official narrative and is likely to influence pathways to sustainability over the coming years.
Sam Geall; Adrian Ely. Narratives and Pathways towards an Ecological Civilization in Contemporary China. The China Quarterly 2018, 236, 1175 -1196.
AMA StyleSam Geall, Adrian Ely. Narratives and Pathways towards an Ecological Civilization in Contemporary China. The China Quarterly. 2018; 236 ():1175-1196.
Chicago/Turabian StyleSam Geall; Adrian Ely. 2018. "Narratives and Pathways towards an Ecological Civilization in Contemporary China." The China Quarterly 236, no. : 1175-1196.
Christopher J. Sandom; Benedict Dempsey; David Bullock; Adrian Ely; Paul Jepson; Stefan Jimenez-Wisler; Adrian Newton; Nathalie Pettorelli; Rebecca A. Senior. Rewilding in the English uplands: Policy and practice. Journal of Applied Ecology 2018, 56, 266 -273.
AMA StyleChristopher J. Sandom, Benedict Dempsey, David Bullock, Adrian Ely, Paul Jepson, Stefan Jimenez-Wisler, Adrian Newton, Nathalie Pettorelli, Rebecca A. Senior. Rewilding in the English uplands: Policy and practice. Journal of Applied Ecology. 2018; 56 (2):266-273.
Chicago/Turabian StyleChristopher J. Sandom; Benedict Dempsey; David Bullock; Adrian Ely; Paul Jepson; Stefan Jimenez-Wisler; Adrian Newton; Nathalie Pettorelli; Rebecca A. Senior. 2018. "Rewilding in the English uplands: Policy and practice." Journal of Applied Ecology 56, no. 2: 266-273.
Studies of China’s agri-food transitions have so far largely overlooked the role of the public in policymaking and practice. We argue that a deeper understanding of public perceptions of – and engagement with – agricultural innovation, is required to better understanding the dynamic responses that exist to the multiple complex and intersecting challenges facing China’s food and agriculture system. In order to demonstrate the kinds of additional evidence that might contribute to an enhanced understanding of the role of the public sphere in China’s agri-food transitions, we present findings from an exploratory project drawing on qualitative field research. Focussing in particular on public perceptions of genetically-modified crops, we suggest a number of preliminary insights that confirm, challenge or supplement earlier findings. We use this study, in the particular socio-political context of China, to shed light on the complex role of public perceptions (elsewhere in the transitions literature referred to as ‘market/ user preferences’ or ‘culture’) in agri-food transitions. This raises important questions for the governance of Chinese agri-food transitions and how future research might better inform its response to a changing public sphere.
Sam Geall; Adrian Ely. Agri-food transitions and the “green public sphere” in China. Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions 2018, 30, 33 -42.
AMA StyleSam Geall, Adrian Ely. Agri-food transitions and the “green public sphere” in China. Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions. 2018; 30 ():33-42.
Chicago/Turabian StyleSam Geall; Adrian Ely. 2018. "Agri-food transitions and the “green public sphere” in China." Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions 30, no. : 33-42.
Lorenz Gollwitzer; David Ockwell; Ben Muok; Adrian Ely; Helene Ahlborg. Rethinking the sustainability and institutional governance of electricity access and mini-grids: Electricity as a common pool resource. Energy Research & Social Science 2018, 39, 152 -161.
AMA StyleLorenz Gollwitzer, David Ockwell, Ben Muok, Adrian Ely, Helene Ahlborg. Rethinking the sustainability and institutional governance of electricity access and mini-grids: Electricity as a common pool resource. Energy Research & Social Science. 2018; 39 ():152-161.
Chicago/Turabian StyleLorenz Gollwitzer; David Ockwell; Ben Muok; Adrian Ely; Helene Ahlborg. 2018. "Rethinking the sustainability and institutional governance of electricity access and mini-grids: Electricity as a common pool resource." Energy Research & Social Science 39, no. : 152-161.
Long Zhang; Benjamin K. Sovacool; Jingzheng Ren; Adrian Ely. The Dragon awakens: Innovation, competition, and transition in the energy strategy of the People’s Republic of China, 1949–2017. Energy Policy 2017, 108, 634 -644.
AMA StyleLong Zhang, Benjamin K. Sovacool, Jingzheng Ren, Adrian Ely. The Dragon awakens: Innovation, competition, and transition in the energy strategy of the People’s Republic of China, 1949–2017. Energy Policy. 2017; 108 ():634-644.
Chicago/Turabian StyleLong Zhang; Benjamin K. Sovacool; Jingzheng Ren; Adrian Ely. 2017. "The Dragon awakens: Innovation, competition, and transition in the energy strategy of the People’s Republic of China, 1949–2017." Energy Policy 108, no. : 634-644.
Adrian Ely; Anabel Marin. Learning about ‘Engaged Excellence’ across a Transformative Knowledge Network. IDS Bulletin 2016, 47, 1 .
AMA StyleAdrian Ely, Anabel Marin. Learning about ‘Engaged Excellence’ across a Transformative Knowledge Network. IDS Bulletin. 2016; 47 (6):1.
Chicago/Turabian StyleAdrian Ely; Anabel Marin. 2016. "Learning about ‘Engaged Excellence’ across a Transformative Knowledge Network." IDS Bulletin 47, no. 6: 1.
China provides a stark and globally significant illustration of how changing patterns of food production and consumption (especially related to increased intake of animal protein) are creating negative impacts on biodiversity, climate, nitrogen and phosphorous cycles and the use of freshwater. However, China's rapidly growing innovation capabilities and dynamic pattern of development also offer a unique opportunity for transitions towards more sustainable and resilient agri-food systems. Applying a ‘food practices in transition’ framework (Spaargaren et al 2012), this paper discusses the technological, political and socio-cultural factors central to such systemic changes, with a focus on maize as a core case study. In particular it presents and discusses two contending (but not mutually-exclusive) pathways towards more sustainable maize production and consumption. One, which we call the ‘indigenous innovation’ pathway is framed by ‘systemic rationalities’ and characterised by a focus on R&D-intensive technologies for agricultural intensification, including the controversial use of transgenic phytase maize. The second, which we term the ‘alternative’ pathway, is framed by ‘lifeworld rationalities’ and focusses on improved management practices, shorter supply chains, agro-ecological and participatory research. The two pathways claim different environmental benefits and present different risks and political implications. This paper analyses the food practices in transition in each pathway, identifying links with shifting political conditions and pointing to the increasingly significant role of consumer agency in steering patterns of maize production and consumption in China.
Adrian Ely; Sam Geall; Yiching Song. Sustainable maize production and consumption in China: practices and politics in transition. Journal of Cleaner Production 2016, 134, 259 -268.
AMA StyleAdrian Ely, Sam Geall, Yiching Song. Sustainable maize production and consumption in China: practices and politics in transition. Journal of Cleaner Production. 2016; 134 ():259-268.
Chicago/Turabian StyleAdrian Ely; Sam Geall; Yiching Song. 2016. "Sustainable maize production and consumption in China: practices and politics in transition." Journal of Cleaner Production 134, no. : 259-268.
Innovation is increasingly invoked by policy elites and business leaders as vital for tackling global challenges like sustainable development. Often overlooked, however, is the fact that networks of community groups, activists, and researchers have been innovating grassroots solutions for social justice and environmental sustainability for decades. Unencumbered by disciplinary boundaries, policy silos, or institutional logics, these ‘grassroots innovation movements’ identify issues and questions neglected by formal science, technology and innovation organizations. Grassroots solutions arise in unconventional settings through unusual combinations of people, ideas and tools. This book examines six diverse grassroots innovation movements in India, South America and Europe, situating them in their particular dynamic historical contexts. Analysis explains why each movement frames innovation and development differently, resulting in a variety of strategies. The book explores the spaces where each of these movements have grown, or attempted to do so. It critically examines the pathways they have developed for grassroots innovation and the challenges and limitations confronting their approaches. With mounting pressure for social justice in an increasingly unequal world, policy makers are exploring how to foster more inclusive innovation. In this context grassroots experiences take on added significance. This book provides timely and relevant ideas, analysis and recommendations for activists, policy-makers, students and scholars interested in encounters between innovation, development and social movements. Innovation is increasingly invoked by policy elites and business leaders as vital for tackling global challenges like sustainable development. Often overlooked, however, is the fact that networks of community groups, activists, and researchers have been innovating grassroots solutions for social justice and environmental sustainability for decades. Unencumbered by disciplinary boundaries, policy silos, or institutional logics, these ‘grassroots innovation movements’ identify issues and questions neglected by formal science, technology and innovation organizations. Grassroots solutions arise in unconventional settings through unusual combinations of people, ideas and tools. This book examines six diverse grassroots innovation movements in India, South America and Europe, situating them in their particular dynamic historical contexts. Analysis explains why each movement frames innovation and development differently, resulting in a variety of strategies. The book explores the spaces where each of these movements have grown, or attempted to do so. It critically examines the pathways they have developed for grassroots innovation and the challenges and limitations confronting their approaches. With mounting pressure for social justice in an increasingly unequal world, policy makers are exploring how to foster more inclusive innovation. In this context grassroots experiences take on added significance. This book provides timely and relevant ideas, analysis and recommendations for activists, policy-makers, students and scholars interested in encounters between innovation, development and social movements. Innovation is increasingly invoked by policy elites and business leaders as vital for tackling global challenges like sustainable development. Often overlooked, however, is the fact that networks of community groups, activists, and researchers have been innovating grassroots solutions for social justice and environmental sustainability for decades. Unencumbered by disciplinary boundaries, policy silos, or institutional logics, these ‘grassroots innovation movements’ identify issues and questions neglected by formal science, technology and innovation organizations. Grassroots solutions arise in unconventional settings through unusual combinations of people, ideas and tools. This book examines six diverse grassroots innovation movements in India, South America and Europe, situating them in their particular dynamic historical contexts. Analysis explains why each movement frames innovation and development differently, resulting in a variety of strategies. The book explores the spaces where each of these movements have grown, or attempted to do so. It critically examines the pathways they have developed for grassroots innovation and the challenges and limitations confronting their approaches. With mounting pressure for social justice in an increasingly unequal world, policy makers are exploring how to foster more inclusive innovation. In this context grassroots experiences take on added significance. This book provides timely and relevant ideas, analysis and recommendations for activists, policy-makers, students and scholars interested in encounters between innovation, development and social movements. Innovation is increasingly invoked by policy elites and business leaders as vital for tackling global challenges like sustainable development. Often overlooked, however, is the fact that networks of community groups, activists, and researchers have been innovating grassroots solutions for social justice and environmental sustainability for decades. Unencumbered by disciplinary boundaries, policy silos, or institutional logics, these ‘grassroots innovation movements’ identify issues and questions neglected by formal science, technology and innovation organizations. Grassroots solutions arise in unconventional settings through unusual combinations of people, ideas and tools. This book examines six diverse grassroots innovation movements in India, South America and Europe, situating them in their particular dynamic historical contexts. Analysis explains why each movement frames innovation and development differently, resulting in a variety of strategies. The book explores the spaces where each of these movements have grown, or attempted to do so. It...
Adrian Smith; Mariano Fressoli; Dinesh Abrol; Elisa Arond; Adrian Ely. Grassroots Innovation Movements. Grassroots Innovation Movements 2016, 1 .
AMA StyleAdrian Smith, Mariano Fressoli, Dinesh Abrol, Elisa Arond, Adrian Ely. Grassroots Innovation Movements. Grassroots Innovation Movements. 2016; ():1.
Chicago/Turabian StyleAdrian Smith; Mariano Fressoli; Dinesh Abrol; Elisa Arond; Adrian Ely. 2016. "Grassroots Innovation Movements." Grassroots Innovation Movements , no. : 1.
Anabel Marin; Adrian Ely; Patrick van Zwanenberg. Co-design with aligned and non-aligned knowledge partners: implications for research and coproduction of sustainable food systems. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability 2016, 20, 93 -98.
AMA StyleAnabel Marin, Adrian Ely, Patrick van Zwanenberg. Co-design with aligned and non-aligned knowledge partners: implications for research and coproduction of sustainable food systems. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability. 2016; 20 ():93-98.
Chicago/Turabian StyleAnabel Marin; Adrian Ely; Patrick van Zwanenberg. 2016. "Co-design with aligned and non-aligned knowledge partners: implications for research and coproduction of sustainable food systems." Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability 20, no. : 93-98.
A very large grey area exists between translational stem cell research and applications that comply with the ideals of randomised control trials and good laboratory and clinical practice and what is often referred to as snake-oil trade. We identify a discrepancy between international research and ethics regulation and the ways in which regulatory instruments in the stem cell field are developed in practice. We examine this discrepancy using the notion of ‘national home-keeping’, referring to the way governments articulate international standards and regulation with conflicting demands on local players at home. Identifying particular dimensions of regulatory tools - authority, permissions, space and acceleration – as crucial to national home-keeping in Asia, Europe and the USA, we show how local regulation works to enable development of the field, notwithstanding international (i.e. principally ‘western’) regulation. Triangulating regulation with empirical data and archival research between 2012 and 2015 has helped us to shed light on how countries and organisations adapt and resist internationally dominant regulation through the manipulation of regulatory tools (contingent upon country size, the state’s ability to accumulate resources, healthcare demands, established traditions of scientific governance, and economic and scientific ambitions).
Margaret Sleeboom-Faulkner; Choon Key Chekar; Alex Faulkner; Carolyn Heitmeyer; Marina Marouda; Achim Rosemann; Nattaka Chaisinthop; Hung-Chieh (Jessica) Chang; Adrian Ely; Masae Kato; Prasanna K. Patra; Yeyang Su; Suli Sui; Wakana Suzuki; Xinqing Zhang. Comparing national home-keeping and the regulation of translational stem cell applications: An international perspective. Social Science & Medicine 2016, 153, 240 -249.
AMA StyleMargaret Sleeboom-Faulkner, Choon Key Chekar, Alex Faulkner, Carolyn Heitmeyer, Marina Marouda, Achim Rosemann, Nattaka Chaisinthop, Hung-Chieh (Jessica) Chang, Adrian Ely, Masae Kato, Prasanna K. Patra, Yeyang Su, Suli Sui, Wakana Suzuki, Xinqing Zhang. Comparing national home-keeping and the regulation of translational stem cell applications: An international perspective. Social Science & Medicine. 2016; 153 ():240-249.
Chicago/Turabian StyleMargaret Sleeboom-Faulkner; Choon Key Chekar; Alex Faulkner; Carolyn Heitmeyer; Marina Marouda; Achim Rosemann; Nattaka Chaisinthop; Hung-Chieh (Jessica) Chang; Adrian Ely; Masae Kato; Prasanna K. Patra; Yeyang Su; Suli Sui; Wakana Suzuki; Xinqing Zhang. 2016. "Comparing national home-keeping and the regulation of translational stem cell applications: An international perspective." Social Science & Medicine 153, no. : 240-249.
This paper explores environmental innovation in the largest emerging economy – China – and its potential for contributing to global transitions to low‐carbon, more sustainable patterns of development. It builds on earlier studies bringing alternative forms of low(er)‐technology, ‘below‐the‐radar', ‘disruptive' and/or social innovation into its analysis. In addition, however, the paper develops our understanding of low‐carbon innovation by paying particular attention to issues of changing power relations and social practices: theoretical issues that need attention in the literature generally but are notably absent when studying transitions in China. This shift in perspective allows four neglected questions to be introduced and, in each case, points to both opportunities and challenges to low‐carbon system transition that are overlooked by an orthodox focus on technological innovations alone. These are briefly illustrated by drawing on examples from three key domains of low‐carbon innovation: solar‐generated energy, electric urban mobility, and food and agriculture. Copyright © 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd and ERP Environment
David Tyfield; Adrian Ely; Sam Geall. Low Carbon Innovation in China: From Overlooked Opportunities and Challenges to Transitions in Power Relations and Practices. Sustainable Development 2015, 23, 206 -216.
AMA StyleDavid Tyfield, Adrian Ely, Sam Geall. Low Carbon Innovation in China: From Overlooked Opportunities and Challenges to Transitions in Power Relations and Practices. Sustainable Development. 2015; 23 (4):206-216.
Chicago/Turabian StyleDavid Tyfield; Adrian Ely; Sam Geall. 2015. "Low Carbon Innovation in China: From Overlooked Opportunities and Challenges to Transitions in Power Relations and Practices." Sustainable Development 23, no. 4: 206-216.
Adrian Ely. Lessons From China’S GM Controversy. Governing Agricultural Sustainability 2015, 161 -166.
AMA StyleAdrian Ely. Lessons From China’S GM Controversy. Governing Agricultural Sustainability. 2015; ():161-166.
Chicago/Turabian StyleAdrian Ely. 2015. "Lessons From China’S GM Controversy." Governing Agricultural Sustainability , no. : 161-166.
Technology assessment (TA) has a strong history of helping to identify priorities and improve environmental sustainability, cost-effectiveness and wider benefits in the technology policies and innovation strategies of nation-states. At international levels, TA has the potential to enhance the roles of science, technology and innovation towards achieving the Millennium Development Goals, effectively implementing the UN Framework on Climate Change and fostering general global transitions to ‘green economies’. However, when effectively recommending single ostensibly ‘best’ technologies or strategies, TA practices can serve unjustifiably to ‘close down’ debate, failing adequately to address technical uncertainties and social ambiguities, reducing scope for democratic accountability and co-ordination across scales and contexts. This paper investigates ways in which contrasting processes ‘broadening out’ and ‘opening up’ TA can enhance both rigour and democratic accountability in technology policy, as well as facilitating social relevance and international cooperation. These methods allow TA to illuminate options, uncertainties and ambiguities and so inform wider political debates about how the contending questions, values and knowledges of different social interests often favour contrasting innovation pathways. In this way TA can foster both technical robustness and social legitimacy in subsequent policy-making. Drawing on three empirical case studies (at local, national and international levels), the paper discusses detailed cases and methods, where recent TA exercises have contributed to this ‘broadening out’ and ‘opening up’. It ends by exploring wider implications and challenges for national and international technology assessment processes that focus on global sustainable development challenges.ESR
Adrian Ely; Patrick Van Zwanenberg; Andy Stirling. Broadening out and opening up technology assessment: Approaches to enhance international development, co-ordination and democratisation. Research Policy 2014, 43, 505 -518.
AMA StyleAdrian Ely, Patrick Van Zwanenberg, Andy Stirling. Broadening out and opening up technology assessment: Approaches to enhance international development, co-ordination and democratisation. Research Policy. 2014; 43 (3):505-518.
Chicago/Turabian StyleAdrian Ely; Patrick Van Zwanenberg; Andy Stirling. 2014. "Broadening out and opening up technology assessment: Approaches to enhance international development, co-ordination and democratisation." Research Policy 43, no. 3: 505-518.
Patrick Van Zwanenberg; Adrian Ely; Adrian Smith. Regulating Technology. Regulating Technology 2013, 1 .
AMA StylePatrick Van Zwanenberg, Adrian Ely, Adrian Smith. Regulating Technology. Regulating Technology. 2013; ():1.
Chicago/Turabian StylePatrick Van Zwanenberg; Adrian Ely; Adrian Smith. 2013. "Regulating Technology." Regulating Technology , no. : 1.