Normative contestation in transitions 'in the making': Animal welfare concerns and system innovation in pig husbandry

被引:154
作者
Elzen, Boelie [1 ,2 ]
Geels, Frank W. [3 ]
Leeuwis, Cees [2 ]
van Mierlo, Barbara [2 ]
机构
[1] Univ Wageningen & Res Ctr, Wageningen UR Livestock Res, NL-8200 AB Lelystad, Netherlands
[2] Wageningen Univ, NL-6700 EW Wageningen, Netherlands
[3] Univ Sussex, Freeman Ctr, SPRU Sci & Technol Policy Res, Brighton BN1 9QE, E Sussex, England
基金
欧洲研究理事会;
关键词
System innovation; Sustainability; Animal welfare; Agriculture; Normative directionality; Multiple stream approach; SOCIOTECHNICAL TRANSITION; DYNAMICS; EVOLUTIONARY; PERFORMANCE; MOVEMENTS;
D O I
10.1016/j.respol.2010.09.018
中图分类号
C93 [管理学];
学科分类号
12 ; 1201 ; 1202 ; 120202 ;
摘要
Previous studies of system innovations mainly focused on historical cases that were driven by commercial motivations of pioneers and entrepreneurs. This article investigates a system innovation in the making that is driven by normative concerns, such as sustainability or animal welfare, initially formulated by outsiders like special-interest groups. Our central research question is: How, when and why is normative contestation of existing regimes effective in influencing the orientation of transitions in the making? The conceptual framework enriches innovation studies and the multi-level perspective with insights from social movement theory (SMT) and political science. SMT is used to analyze the build up of normative pressure (through framing, resource mobilization, and political opportunity structures). From political science we use the notion of multiple streams, in our analysis a problem, regulatory, market and technology stream. The research design consists of a comparative case study of pig husbandry systems. One case analyses the sub-sector of pregnant sows where normative pressures, after several decades, led to the changes advocated by the contestants. The second case concerns the sub-sector of pig fattening where normative pressure was less successful. The difference is partly explained by the normative pressure for pregnant sows being larger than for fattening pigs. The other part of the explanation is that in the first case normative pressure aligned better with the three other streams (regulatory, market and technology) to lead to the changes desired by the contestants. (C) 2010 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:263 / 275
页数:13
相关论文
共 58 条
[1]  
[Anonymous], 2005, SOCIAL MOVEMENTS ORG
[2]  
Backus G.B.C., 1997, VERGELIJKING VIER BE, P1171
[3]   Framing processes and social movements: An overview and assessment [J].
Benford, RD ;
Snow, DA .
ANNUAL REVIEW OF SOCIOLOGY, 2000, 26 :611-639
[4]  
Bokma Sj., 1990, PRAKTIJKONDERZOEK NA, P154
[5]  
Bolhuis J., 2008, EERSTE KWARTAAL ZEUG
[6]   Doing reflexive modernization in pig husbandry - The hard work of changing the course of a river [J].
Bos, Bram ;
Grin, John .
SCIENCE TECHNOLOGY & HUMAN VALUES, 2008, 33 (04) :480-507
[7]  
Brossard D., 2004, MASS COMMUNICATION S, V7, P259
[8]  
Commissie Welzijn Varkens (Committee Pig Welfare), 1984, WELZ VARK PRAKT
[9]  
Crijns A.H., 1998, Van overgang naar omwenteling in de Brabantse land- en tuinbouw 1950-1985
[10]   The embeddedness of organizations: Dialogue & directions [J].
Dacin, MT ;
Ventresca, MJ ;
Beal, BD .
JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT, 1999, 25 (03) :317-356