Abstract
To date, a major portion of sustainability transition research has relied on retrospective methods to generate encompassing macro-level views of transitions. However, such methods may have considerable impacts on the insights generated in the study of intermediation, action and agency by actors on the micro-level of transitions. In this article, we compare retrospective interviews and real-time ethnography to understand how they portray micro-level transition processes and intermediation. The empirical context of our study is energy retrofitting, which we use to illustrate three structural and three process aspects that distinguish the findings from retrospective interviewing and real-time ethnography. Ethnographic methods can provide significant new detail on the uncertainty and complexity of micro-level transition processes while interviews facilitate cross-case comparison and understanding of commonalities in micro-level transition intermediation processes better.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 406-417 |
| Number of pages | 12 |
| Journal | Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions |
| Volume | 36 |
| Early online date | 31 Jan 2020 |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | Published - Sept 2020 |
| MoE publication type | A1 Journal article-refereed |
Funding
The research was conducted with financial support from the Academy of Finland grant number 288402 : ‘Intermediaries in the energy transition: The invisible work of creating markets for sustainable energy solutions (TRIPOD)’ and the Academy of Finland strategic research council consortium 293405 'Smart Energy Transition: Realizing its potential for sustainable growth for Finland's second century'. We would also like to thank the participants of the ‘Dynamics of change: Novel approaches to energy consumption’ workshop for their remarks on a presentation about the study.
Keywords
- Intermediaries
- Intermediation
- Qualitative research
- Research methods
- Sustainability transition
