Stakeholder analysis

Actors in transition studies

There are different ways to classify actors in transition studies. However, the transition literature often refers to incumbents, niche players, frontrunners, change agents and intermediaries. Although reality is generally far more complex and does not completely allow for such a straightforward classification, there are some general characteristics of these different groups that can be good to keep in mind.

Incumbents are organisations that are a part of the existing sociotechnical regime. They have established dynamics, perhaps work together and are (generally speaking) satisfied with how things are currently done. Thus, incumbents might not want things to change and could therefore constitute or bring about barriers. Since they are a part of the existing regime, they often have access to resources and power. Moreover, as they have an interest in the system as it is now, they could constitute very important stakeholders to take into consideration. Of course, this is not always the case. For instance, some companies invest a lot in innovation and may then be both incumbents and innovators. Similarly, although incumbents might be against some changes, they could be in favour of other types of changes.

Niche players, frontrunners and change agents all refer to organisations and individuals who want change. Such players can also be found within the structure of larger companies. Intermediaries in turn refer to actors that might not be producing or using things themselves, but they create networks and links between different actors. Intermediaries are therefore important supporters, especially in the early stage of niche development.

Agency

System-level changes are, by definition, enacted through the coordination and steering of many actors and resources, regardless of whether these are intended or emergent features of the transformation processes. Political, economic and institutional power need to be exercised for there to be a change (Smith et al., 2005). Agency is the ability to take action and make a difference over a course of events (Giddens, 1984). The concept of distributed agency is highly relevant in transition studies, referring to the common situation when there is no single actor that has enough power to enable change but the ability of different actors are combined.

Power

Power facilitates and circumscribes agency. There is also a resource interdependence in the sense that one is reliant upon other actors for resources (e.g. finance, legitimate authority and knowledge) in order to meet one’s goals and exercise agency. Depending on the scientific discipline, the concept of power is described in different ways. In the PB context, one important aspect is to identify formal versus informal power (/hard vs. soft power).

Oftentimes, it is relevant to compare the power of a stakeholder with the stakeholder’s interest in the matter in question. This can be done using a so called power-interest grid (P/I-grid), charting the power of the same stakeholder (x-axis) against the overall interest of the stakeholder (y-axis). More on such P/I-grids can be found in module 4. Stakeholder analysis.

Role

A role can be conceptualised as set of recognizable activities and attitudes used by an actor to address recurring situations. The same actor can have different roles in different situations and things can change over time. In transitions, actors can for instance change from being consumers to being “prosumers” (producers and consumers). Moreover, changing responsibilities between citizens and government can lead to a transition from a “participation society” to more “active citizenship”. Another example is how researchers, in addition to conducting research, increasingly often becoming facilitators and mediators of different societal processes etc. (Wittmayer et al., 2017).

Roles exists on the individual level as well as on the collective levels (e.g. municipality, district municipality, welfare organisations). It is possible to use roles to to construct the self and as a resource for gaining access to cultural, social and material resources (Wittmayer et al., 2017). A role does not stand on its own, but ”always bears a […] relationship to one or more other roles, change in one role always means change in a system of roles” (Turner, 1990). Role constellations can be considered a web of roles, which interact, interrelate and co-evolve with one another with regard to a specific issue. Roles can be supporting, observing, opposing, challenging or competing (Wittmayer et al., 2017).

Often, actions tend to build on ”old” role understanding, rather than explicitly questioning current roles. Role constellations can be changed by actors playing a role, making a role, creating a new role, destroying or altering existing roles, explicitly negotiating and purposefully assigning roles (Wittmayer et al., 2017).

References and further readings