The DOI matches its Crossref record; 93 of the 93 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Six policy intervention points for sustainability transitions: A conceptual framework and a systematic literature review
Open accessAbstract
Recent literature has turned considerable attention to the role of policy mixes in shaping socio-technical systems towards sustainability. However, the identification of relevant policy intervention points has remained a relatively neglected topic. This is a potentially significant oversight given that such intervention points constitute a mid-step between means (particular policy instruments) and overall goals (change in the directionality of socio-technical systems). By complementing existing work on policy mixes with additional insights from transitions literature, this paper formulates a conceptual framework of six policy intervention points for transformative systems change. The coding scheme developed on the basis of this framework is used to review current literature on policy mixes in sustainability transitions. It is shown that the latter has so far primarily focused on niche-regime dynamics while largely neglecting the broader context of these interactions. We argue that adopting a wider perspective on intervention points can aid future work on policy mixes by enabling the identification of root causes and critical problems of ongoing transitions, and to spot gaps in existing policy activities. The case of the Estonian energy system is used to briefly illustrate these possibilities. Methodologically, we demonstrate the value of combining theory-based concept-formation with a systematic literature review, enabling not only a provision of a summary of existing literature but also highlighting systematic gaps in that literature.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Geels, F. W. (2002) · Research Policy · doi:10.1016/s0048-7333(02)00062-8 · Cited by 7,275
Typology of sociotechnical transition pathways
Geels, F. W., & Schot, J. (2007) · Research Policy · doi:10.1016/j.respol.2007.01.003 · Cited by 5,245
Sustainability transitions: An emerging field of research and its prospects
Markard, J., Raven, R., & Truffer, B. (2012) · Research Policy · doi:10.1016/j.respol.2012.02.013 · Cited by 3,763
An agenda for sustainability transitions research: State of the art and future directions
Köhler, J., Geels, F. W., Kern, F., Markard, J., Onsongo, E., Wieczorek, A., Alkemade, F., Avelino, F., Bergek, A., Boons, F., et al. (2019) · Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions · doi:10.1016/j.eist.2019.01.004 · Cited by 2,800
Self-citationSchot, J., & Geels, F. W. (2008) · Technology Analysis & Strategic Management · doi:10.1080/09537320802292651 · Cited by 2,025
Three frames for innovation policy: R&D, systems of innovation and transformative change
Schot, J., & Steinmueller, W. E. (2018) · Research Policy · doi:10.1016/j.respol.2018.08.011 · Cited by 1,801
Ontologies, socio-technical transitions (to sustainability), and the multi-level perspective
Geels, F. W. (2010) · Research Policy · doi:10.1016/j.respol.2010.01.022 · Cited by 1,718 · cited 2×
“1 Stimulate different niches The MLP identifies itself as a cross-over between sociological approaches and evolutionary economics (Geels and Schot, 2007; Geels, 2010), encompassing not only social learning, collective interpretation and power struggles, but also the processes of variation, selection and retention.”
BackgroundStirling, A. (2008) · Science, Technology, & Human Values · doi:10.1177/0162243907311265 · Cited by 1,567
Policy mixes for sustainability transitions: an extended concept and framework for analysis
Rogge, K. S., & Reichardt, K. (2016) · Research Policy · doi:10.1016/j.respol.2016.04.004 · Cited by 1,524
Geographies of energy transition: Space, place and the low-carbon economy
Bridge, G., Bouzarovski, S., Bradshaw, M., & Eyre, N. (2013) · Energy Policy · doi:10.1016/j.enpol.2012.10.066 · Cited by 1,500
Metadata
- Authors
- Kanger, L., Sovacool, B. K., & Noorkõiv, M.
- Venue
- Research Policy
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2020-09
- Volume
- 49
- Issue
- 7
- Pages
- 104072
- ISSN
- 0048-7333 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W3040746956
- Cited by
- 266
- References
- 93
- FWCI
- 2.06
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Six policy intervention points for sustainability transitions: A conceptual framework and a systematic literature review. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.respol.2020.104072
- The paper
- Kanger, L., Sovacool, B. K., & Noorkõiv, M. (2020). Six policy intervention points for sustainability transitions: A conceptual framework and a systematic literature review. Research Policy. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2020.104072
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.