Background and context (I): Transumo programme 1 Why the Transumo programme was interested in ‘transitioning’

The Transumo programme (2004-2009) was one of several Dutch programmes that was explicitly aimed at infl uencing a sustainability transition in a specifi c sector, including: the Energy Transition, PSIB (focused on a transition in the construction sector), the Inno- vation Network and Transforum (both focused on the transition to sustainable agricul- ture). Transumo had received a Bsik6 _{grant on the condition that this programme would} stimulate sustainable system innovation and specifi cally a transition towards a more sustainable Dutch transport sector. But, though the title of Transumo explicitly referred to a Transition to Sustainable Mobility, the programme was not set up with a Transition

6. Bsik programmes were initiated by the Dutch government to improve the Dutch knowledge infrastruc- ture. This included 37 research consortia that were granted with in total 802 million euro subsidies, derived from the Dutch natural gas revenues. Most of the consortia have set up extensive and multi-disciplinair programmes that take up 4 to 6 years (www.senternovem.nl/bsik).

Management (TM) approach.7 _{Hence, the programme did not start with setting up a} transition arena, developing a long-term sustainability vision, transition agenda and transition pathways. Transumo did select and support 45 innovation projects, which were clustered in 7 themes.8 _{These Transumo projects had to contribute to a transition to} sustainable mobility and the project leaders were requested to indicate how they would approach this. However, the project leaders were not familiar with the TM approach and the Transumo programme management did not have enough expertise to support them with translating TM theory into practice.

An analysis9 _{of the Bsik-programmes Transumo, Transforum and PSIB showed that} their projects did not have an explicit societal challenge as a starting point for learning, did not have a long-term perspective (partly because the Bsik grant asks for short-term results) and had a limited focus on sustainability (Krom, 2006). The TM theory would therefore suggest that these projects would have a limited potential to contribute to a sustainability transition and therefore could not be characterised as transition experi- ments.

In several dialogues10 _{between transition researchers and practitioners, the practi-} tioners brought forward that TM theory lacked concrete guidelines for stimulating the contribution of their ongoing projects to transitions. Furthermore, they asked for an active participation of transition researchers to support their ongoing programmes and projects. Hence, Transumo was one of several Dutch programmes with an interest in receiving scientifi c and practical support to ‘apply the TM approach in their ongoing programme and projects’ and specifi cally ‘transforming ongoing projects into transition experiments’. In the remainder of this chapter this will be referred to as ‘transitioning’.

7. This can be explained by the fact that when Transumo was developed (in 2002-2003, during the call for Bsik proposals), the Transition Management approach had just been developed and had not been fully translated to practice.

8. The 7 Transumo themes include: self regulation, traffi c management, spatial developments, governance processes, chain integration, network integration and public transport.

9. This analysis was based on a database study of 81 potential transition experiments, which were sup- ported by several programmes (including: the Energy Transition, Transumo, PSIB, the Innovation Network and Transforum). The database was developed at the end of 2006, as part of the research of the Knowledge Centre for system innovations and Transitions (KCT).

10. These dialogues between transition researchers and practitioners were facilitated by the Competence

Centre for Transitions. This chapter specifi cally refers to the various group discussions between transition researchers and practitioners at the “Grensverleggend Vernieuwen” meeting in April 2006, and the “7de verdieping” meeting (in which Rob Raven and Suzanne van den Bosch presented theory about transition experiments and debated with various practitioners) and the various meetings to discuss the “Competence Kit for Transition Experiments” (Raven et al., 2008), which was developed by transition researchers (Ruth Mourik, Rob Raven and Suzanne van den Bosch), the Competence Centre for Transitions (Rob Weterings and Jose Andringa) and practitioners (mainly Gert-Jan Fonk from the Innovation Network)

118 Chapter 5

5.2.2 How Transumo initiated a transitioning process

Starting from early 2006, Transumo obtained fi rst experiences with transforming an ongoing Transumo project, the People Mover11 _{project, into a transition experiment.} In this fi rst transitioning process at the project level, TM researchers and consultants supported the People Mover consortium with broadening the scope of their ongoing project in terms of process and substance, by applying TM theory (this is described in detail in section 5.4).

The People Mover project was not the only Transumo project that was interested in a transition perspective (other projects included Logistic Networks, PROTECT and Tradu- vem). At the end of 2006, when all Transumo projects had been started, the Transumo programme management concluded that there was a mismatch between requesting projects to contribute to a sustainability transition on the one hand and the lack of practical knowledge (at both the project and programme level) on how projects could do this on the other hand. During a “project day” organised by Transumo in December 2006, an idea emerged to organise “transition accelerator” sessions that would address: – Relevant aspects of TM theory

– Setting up transition experiments – Changing an ongoing project

In February and March 2007 Transumo, together with the Competence Centre for Transitions (CCT), organised three “transition accelerator” sessions that were aimed at: “Strengthening the working on Transumo projects from a transition perspective. (…) Eventually it is intended that the project leaders of Transumo will take up the challenge to set up their projects according to the principles of transition management”12_{. The} sessions were attended by all project leaders (for whom the sessions were compulsory) and several project participants of the 45 Transumo projects. For each session diff er- ent KSI/DRIFT researchers13 _{were invited to increase the knowledge about transition} management, to inspire a group discussion and address specifi c problems put forward by project leaders. These sessions increased the knowledge of project leaders about transition management and provided them with a conceptual framework to refl ect on their projects, which brought out several dilemmas (Box 5.1).

However, three sessions were not suffi cient to meet the needs of project leaders for more support with implementing a transition perspective in their ongoing projects. The most important dilemma was that while Transumo required projects to contribute to the

11. Unfortunately the People Mover project was stopped because of bankruptcy of the company that produced the People Movers.

12. Source: “Aankondiging leertraject Transumo”. De Transitieversneller. Transumo, January, 2007.

13. These KSI/DRIFT researchers included: Jan Rotmans (fi rst session), Rene Kemp and Suzanne van den Bosch (second session) and Derk Loorbach, Harry te Riele, Henk Diepenmaat and Pepik Henneman (third session).

transition to sustainable mobility, at the same time projects had to realise short-term re- sults and apply traditional project management. This was related to the fact that within the organisation of Transumo “the supervisory board (traditionally oriented) was not convinced about the added value of TM” (Gorris and Pommer, 2008:5). However, within the diff erent layers of the Transumo organisation the interest in TM increased, which was caused by “the growing insight into the defi ciencies of the traditional means (of project management) and their impossibility to solve the problems of today, let alone those of tomorrow” (Gorris and Pommer, 2008:5). Transumo also learned that “more and more project managers were facing certain issues they could not solve themselves by means of traditional project management; issues raised by the regime (a Ministry which stands in the way of an innovation) or issues regarding cooperation within the private sector - in fact those issues that are the cause of the present lock-in situation in the transport sector. Knowledge of the TM basics was not suffi cient. Project managers were not able to make it applicable to their situation and urged for more tailor-made support” (Gorris and Pommer, 2008:5-6). To address these issues, it was acknowledged that Transumo projects should receive “tailor-made” support to translate TM to their own project context and gain practical experience with the TM approach.

During the Transumo “transition accelerator” sessions, project leaders expressed the following dilemmas:

– Transition vs. optimisation: Some Transumo projects were perceived by the project leaders as ‘optimisa-

tion’ projects instead of projects that are really aimed at fundamental changes. Transumo should be clear about the distinction between optimisation and transition, though both types of projects could also complement each other.

– Learning vs. short-term results: TM theory states that some projects that fail (in terms of short-term

results) can contribute to a transition process because of valuable learning experiences. But many actors are more interested in concrete short-term results than innovation in the long-term. A project leader should always fi nd a balance between concrete realisation (which is also necessary in transitions) and learning about all aspects of a problem.

– Including vs. excluding regime players: TM theory states that (change-inclined) regime players should be

involved early to anticipate resistance. But a general fear was that regime players would immediately start to steer the project and if they are involved early they might stop the project based on negative impressions. It is diffi cult to determine the adequate moment to involve regime players.

– Protection vs. transparency: The dilemma: informing regime players about project results (transparency)

versus keeping project results quiet (protecting from regime pressure).

– Deepening vs. broadening: In practice deepening is quickly transformed into broadening, but when

promising projects (with a high learning potential) are implemented in a broader context too soon, this might lead to project failure (for example because of diff erences between the pilot location and follow-up locations).

120 Chapter 5

5.2.3 Setting up the Transumo Transition Programme

Following up the Transumo “transition accelerator” sessions and various ad hoc TM ac- tivities within Transumo, the Transumo board decided in April 2007 that the TM activities within Phase II of Transumo would be intensifi ed. This space for increasing the focus on TM theory and practice was a result of learning experiences at both the programme and project level (Gorris and van den Bosch, 2008). Furthermore, this decision was infl uenced by KSI-research and advice.14 _{Transumo requested KSI/DRIFT and other TM and sustain-} ability experts to participate in the Transumo Transition Programme (TTP).15 _{The TTP was} organised as a separate project within the Transumo programme to accommodate all transition-aimed activities of Transumo. The TTP project plan (July 2007) stated:

“The objective of the Transition Programme is setting up, enabling, encouraging and coordinating all transition-aimed activities within Transumo. With this Tran- sumo wants to realise a concrete translation of the concept transition management, within the Transumo Programme as a whole and within all projects separately. This originates from the ambition to make the Transumo programme a recognisable step in the transition to sustainable mobility.

The ‘leitmotiv’ for all actions within this programme is: it must be of practical use to project leaders and management, the Transition Programme must ‘off er’ them something. Hence, the accent in the Transition Programme is on making applicable and applying the knowledge on transition management, although the develop- ment of knowledge on this area is also part of the programme.”

Source: Project plan Transumo Transition Programme, July 2007

The TTP involved diff erent ‘transition activities’ at three diff erent levels (project-, pro- gramme- and societal level). These activities included the development of a sustain- ability vision, transition monitoring, setting up transition arenas and developing a transitioning method (described in following section).

14. The KSI research network is also supported with a Bsik grant. At the start of Bsik it was agreed that KSI research on transitions would provide input to the more practical Transumo programme. One infl uential KSI research project about Transumo was a transition analysis on two logistic projects (Avelino and Rot- mans, 2007). As a result of this KSI-analysis the Transumo board decided to stop these two projects abruptly. They also requested for similar analyses of all Transumo projects, but this was not possible because of lim- ited time of DRIFT. Transumo then requested DRIFT to participate in the Transumo Transition Programme.

15. Participants in the Transumo Transition Programme included: DRIFT (Dutch Research Institute For Transitions), CCT (Competence Centre Transitions), TNO (Netherlands Organisation for Applied Scientifi c Research), AT Osborne (a management consultancy) and CE (a sustainability consultancy).