Transition Governance and Networks: Enabling Systemic Change

1. Core Concept: Governance ≠ Control

• Transitions are emergent and contested, not centrally manageable.
• Governance in transitions is about coordination, facilitation, and enabling—not command and control.
• Involves multiple actors with different values, capacities, and interests.

2. Key Actors in Transition Governance

• Government agencies (central and local)
• Private companies and investors
• Civil society groups, NGOs, activists
• Researchers and academics
• Citizens and communities
• International networks

3. Principles of Transition Governance

• Creating shared visions
• Enabling spaces for experimentation
• Building trust
• Facilitating knowledge sharing
• Supporting scaling through networks

4. Case Study: System of Rice Intensification (SRI) in India

How SRI Spread Through Network Governance

Phase	Timeline	Key Actors & Actions
Spark	1999–2003	Civil society, researchers in South India; drought as trigger; knowledge sharing via platforms like Leisa Magazine
Sense-Making	Mid-2000s	WWF convened dialogues; PRADAN, state universities joined; distributed innovation platforms (e.g., Learning Alliance in Odisha)
Momentum	2006–2009	National/state symposia; Sir Dorabji Tata Trust supported adaptive adoption by farmers
Policy Engagement	2010–2014	National Consortium on SRI; rural development departments; multi-actor policy learning
Reflection	2015+	Mature network; no single agency; open system with interactions across scales

Key Success Factors:

• No central authority: Distributed, trust-based learning
• Farmer-to-farmer exchanges
• Shared narrative: Soil health and farmer dignity
• Open knowledge infrastructure: Cornell University’s online repository
• Adaptive, context-specific implementation

5. Why Networks Matter More Than Central Authority

• Transitions are non-linear and multi-actor
• Networks enable:
  • Distributed learning
  • Knowledge sharing
  • Policy engagement
  • Adaptive scaling
• Governance = enabling conditions, not control

6. Challenges and Tensions in Transition Governance

Tension	Description
Speed vs. Inclusion	Acting quickly vs. ensuring all voices are heard
Top-down vs. Bottom-up	Scaling from grassroots vs. pushing reforms from top
Innovation vs. Equity	Supporting innovators vs. protecting vulnerable communities
Power dynamics	Who decides what gets funded? Whose knowledge counts?

7. Toward Reflexive and Inclusive Governance

• Must ask:
  • Who is at the table?
  • Whose knowledge counts?
  • How can processes be more just and participatory?
• Avoid technocratic approaches that exclude lived experience.
• Ensure investment in research and extension (e.g., SRI struggled due to lack of support).

8. Key Takeaways

• Transitions are co-created through networks.
• Governance is about enabling, not directing.
• Inclusion and equity are central to just transitions.
• Power and participation must be consciously addressed.

---

📘 Exam Tip:

Focus on understanding that transition governance is about network-based coordination, not top-down control. Use the SRI case study to illustrate how multi-actor networks enable change through trust, shared learning, and adaptive scaling. Be prepared to discuss tensions like speed vs. inclusion or innovation vs. equity, and emphasize the role of inclusive, reflexive governance in just transitions.