Multi-level

Mapping
 Overview
Systems change is about transitioning a system from where we are today to somewhere we would prefer
to be in the future. To do this we need some overall vision of how the system is changing on its different
levels. To get a comprehensive understanding of how a system is changing we have to look at the processes
of change taking place on those different levels and how the different patterns, structures and processes of
change interrelate across and between different scales.
One model for helping us to think about how change happens on these different levels is the multi-level
perspective(MLP) a prominent framework for describing transition processes in complex socio-technical
systems. This model has been designed to help us analyze and better understand the "long-term, multi-
dimensional and fundamental transformation processes through which established socio-technical systems
shift to more sustainable modes of production and consumption.”
 Transitions
The Multilevel model is designed to describe complex transition
processes involving paradigm-shifting innovations. Examples of this
might include the advent of modern computing, or the
industrialization of agriculture. Such transitions are multi-
dimensional, long-term, and fundamental change processes through
which established sociotechnical systems shift to new patterns of
organization; new modalities of production and consumption.

MLP is an analytical tool for generating an overall understanding of

societal levels and the opportunities for, restrictions on, and
possibilities of sustainable transitions. It is one model that attempts
to deal with the complexities and resistance to change inherent in
these major transitions; as such it also incorporates a theory of
change.
 Wholistic Approach
The MLP is decisively holistic in nature for it does not search for any single
solution as to how and why transitions may occur but instead takes a broad
overview of different scales, dimensions, and time frames. This model takes
a systems approach by starting with the perspective that, at any level,
economies are organized into systems. In a system, every element is
interrelated to everything else and in diagnosing problem situations as
systems there can be many sides and multiple levels to consider; thus taking
different points of view from different levels of perspective is beneficial.

The MLP model tries to capture the many interrelated factors to large scale
system innovation. These kinds of changes involve the co-evolution of
several related elements. They involve a wide range of actors. They are
constituted of a multi-scalar, multi-modal hierarchy of activities at different
nested scales. They are long-term processes taking place over decades or
even centuries. They involve changes in the supply side - e.g. knowledge,
technology, industry structures, and demand side - such as infrastructure,
user preferences, cultural meaning.
 Aspects of large scale sociotechnical systems change

Multidimensional Multi-Scale Co-evolution History

Involves a wide variety of Change takes place on many Co-development of different Prolonged processes that
actors, institutions and different levels across systems, processes and develop over the course of
technologies. different scales. elements multiple decades
 Multidimensional
Traditionally we tend to think of innovation as happening through
scientific and technological change; from scientific research centers and
academia to R&D centers to tech startups and new companies. However,
for a technology to have use it must be linked to social structures, human
agency and organizations to fulfill a specific need. To get a comprehensive
view we need to take a holistic approach that deals with the ‘seamless
web’ where physical artifacts, scientific communities, social practices, and
organizations are combined.

A transition is a structural change of an economy's systems and

subsystems that is the result of a complex set of interactions between the
technological, economic, cultural, political, ecological and social domains
and takes place across different scale-levels. The systems that comprise
the socio-technical paradigm include technology, supply networks,
infrastructure, maintenance networks, regulation, cultural narratives,
user practices, markets, etc.
 Multi-Scale
As the name implies the multilevel perspective focuses our
attention on how complex socio-technical systems exist on
different levels; with those different levels having their own
internal dynamics and rules. The focus is on how transitions occur
through the interplay between processes that take place on
qualitatively different levels.

Multi-level engineered systems are technologies that involve

many different emergent levels to their overall structure. Urban
infrastructure systems are such an example requiring many
different levels to their design in order for them to function
effectively. For example, office development requires
telecommunications infrastructure, which rests upon an electrical
power grid, which is dependent upon a national energy
architecture, which in turn depends upon a transport
infrastructure for the supply of fuels, etc. While all of this requires
regulation, financial markets, national security, etc.
 Varying Time Horizons
Transitions are long-term processes of change. Complete
system-change can take many decades; case studies reveal
them to often be between 40 and 90 years in duration. Thus
we need to be looking across multiple time horizons and
looking at how different - fast and slow - processes interact.

Change in complex systems is non-linear; the rate of change

will vary over time. For example, the pace of change may be
slow at the gestation period but much more rapid when a
breakthrough is occurring. Due to the rigidity of technology
infrastructure, economic and social institutions, cultural
norms and regulation, change typically happens incrementally
building upon past changes until a paradigm shift occurs
rapidly.
 Co-Evolving
Socio-technical transitions are co-evolutionary as different levels and
different dimensions to the system have to adapt to each other's changes.
The success of many innovations is predicated upon them “fitting” in with
the changes in other parts and the overall paradigm. Technological
developments occur intertwined with societal needs, wants and uses;
diffusion happens not in a deterministic fashion but based on the
interplay between the innovation, other changes in the system, and
societal requirements.

Co-evolution also implies emergence over time; the idea that as time
moves forward and different systems interact with feedback, new
contexts will emerge that could not have been predicted. The Internet of
Things would be one such emerging socio-technical paradigm that will
involve parallel developments in many different areas as it spans across
cities, transport, supply chains, production, accommodation, etc. As these
different systems co-evolve becoming connected and interconnected new
service systems will become possible and new contexts will emerge.
Multi-Levels
 SocioTechnical Systems
The MLP is based on the idea of sociotechnical systems; that change
within complex systems is multidimensional and we need to
consider both the technical and social aspects in relation to each
other. The ultimate functioning of almost all technologies will
involve the interaction between people and technology. Whether
we are talking about a mobile phone, a house or a subway station,
the end throughput to the whole process requires these two
dimensions to function together.

Sociotechnical systems is an approach to the study and design of

complex organizations and technologies that recognizes the
interaction between people and technology as a defining factor in
the overall system’s makeup and functioning. This is both on the
micro-level of how an individual interacts with a particular
technology, but also on the macro-level, referring to the complex
nonlinear interactions between society’s infrastructure and its
socio-cultural domains.
 Producers Politics End-users

Demographics Finance
Environment

Resources

Regulation

Incentives
Technology

Media Science
 Paradigms
Because socio-technical systems are interlinked and
interdependent they form an overall pattern or paradigm,
within which technologies, economics, business models,
social and cultural institutions fit and interoperate.

If we take the example of the automobile, the car is in fact

dependent upon a whole transport paradigm. To get
modern personal transportation required a significant
number of interlinked changes to road infrastructure and
traffic systems, traffic rules and regulations, symbolic
meanings, marketing, cultural changes, fuels, the
development of new infrastructure, changes in user
behavior and mass production capabilities, and distribution
networks, etc.
 Regime
We can see how this whole system came to form and a certain paradigm or pattern emerged over time that
we live with today as the dominant transport regime. A key idea of MLP is that a technology like a car,
comes to prominence through its interdependencies and co-evolution with social-technical and institutional
factors, creating a system called a socio-technological regime that supports and sustains that particular
innovation.
Over time these interdependencies in this pattern lock society into a particular regime. As a technology like
a car matures people working in the industry - the car designers, researcher, managers, engineers and so
forth - tend to develop common assumptions knowledge beliefs and habits about what is possible and
legitimate as a transport solution.
 Multi-Scale
The focus of the MLP is on how transitions occur at multiple-
levels through the interplay of processes at different levels.
As illustrated below the model posits three heuristic levels
on which change takes place. The macro-level (called the
landscape), the meso-level (the regime) and micro-level
(home to the niches).

Firstly, the landscape level is the broader overall social,

economic and technological environment within which the
system exists. Secondly, the regime level represents the
current structures and practices characterized by dominant
rules, institutions, and technologies that are self-reinforcing.
Finally, the niche is defined as the place for new innovations
where dedicated actors nurture the development of
technological novelties.
 Landscape
Represents the overall
environment within which
the system exists.

Regime
The persistent configurations
that form the dominant
pattern of organization

Niche
The margins that are home
to new innovations, new
models, communities.
 Landscape
The landscape-level represents the overall environment within which the system exists. The Landscape
forms the ‘external structure or context for interactions of actors.’ The landscape level is defined as the
exogenous, broader contextual developments in underlying cultural patterns, geopolitical arrangements,
macro-economics, macro-politics, etc. For example, the Industrial Age forms an overall technological
context, likewise, the Anthropocene forms an overall socio-ecological context.

Here shocks to the system can occur through wars, economic crises, natural disasters, and political
upheaval. Current major changes on this level may include; globalization, the environmental crises or the
information revolution, all of which will persist over many decades and form the context to which our
sociotechnical systems must adapt.
 Landscape Examples
The Industrial Revolution (1770-1830)

The Green Revolution (1960-1980)

Globalization (1980-?)

Mass Production & Consumer Society (1930-1980)

The Information Age (1980-?)

Sustainability Crisis (2000-?)

 Meso-Level
The meso-level is the locus of the “regimes" which are persistent
configurations of markets, infrastructures, technology, policy and so
on that have settled into stable configurations. From a systems
theory perspective, the regime would represent the overall structure
of the system within which elements find themselves, the way they
are interrelated, the existing pattern to the flow of resources, the
rules, policies, and protocols that structure this. The socio-technical
regime is dynamically stable, i.e. innovation still happens, though
along a predictable trajectory and incrementally.

The incumbent systems at the mesa-level involve dominant

configurations for relating and logic. For example, scientific
paradigms, infrastructure, markets, and technology; all of which have
established institutional logic. The "logic" of these groups can be
defined as the socially created, historical patterns of values,
assumptions, beliefs, rules and material practices by which
individuals create meaning and organize their material living.
 Meso-Level example
One example of a mesa-level regime may be seen in the complex web
of our current industrial food systems connecting many multiple sub-
regimes within processes of production, distribution, and
consumption. Beyond this, the existing food system regime is also
related to other regimes such as water, transport or energy, and is
thus linked to the stability and norms of these regimes as well.

At present, there are many rules and regulations that foster or inhibit
alternative methods to be used in food production. Many social
norms that keep conventional food systems in place, such as the
existing infrastructure of global food production and distribution
networks, as well as social values and economic incentives that are
influencing many people to buy the cheapest products. The result is
the perpetuation of a logic of commodified mass production and an
agro-industry food system that encourages the standardization of
farming practices and production qualities.
 Micro-Level
The micro-level is the home of the "niche" innovations, new
models, communities, or local networks on the micro-level.
The niche is defined as the “locus for radical innovations”
where dedicated actors nurture the development of
technological novelties.

The niche fosters and incubates innovations that differ

fundamentally from the prevailing regime and usually require
landscape developments that open windows of opportunity
at the regime level. From a systems theory perspective these
may be seen as the emerging new elements. Niches are
locations where it is possible to deviate from the rules in the
existing regime to create new paths.
 Micro-Level
Because the performance of radical novelties is initially low, they
emerge in ‘protected spaces’ to shield them from mainstream
market selection. This protection may take different forms. For
example, it may take the form of an R&D lab funded by a company
or it may be a new innovation that is supported by government
subsidies.

The niche hope that their novelties will eventually be used in the
regime or even replace it. This is not easy, because the existing
regime is entrenched in many ways. Radical novelties do not easily
breakthrough as often they do not fit with the context.
Nevertheless, niches are crucial for system innovations, because
they provide the seeds for change. Niches provide space to build
social networks that support innovations. Those operating on this
level try to expand the network of linkages in which these
innovations can function and take hold.
 Hierarchy Landscape
The relationship among the three
concepts can be understood as a
nested hierarchy, meaning that
regimes are embedded in
landscapes and niches within
regimes.
Regime

Niche
 Path
Dependence
 Path Dependence
The concept of Path Dependence is used to capture the way in which small, historical contingent events can
set off self-reinforcing mechanisms and processes that “lock-in” particular pathways of development. The
result is that the current set of decisions faced for any given circumstance is limited by decisions made in
the past that may have locked us into a given paradigm that is now expensive for us to get out of - even
though the past circumstances may no longer exist or be relevant.

Path dependence means that even though previous choices were made on chance or limited information
with better options now being available, it is often still easier to simply continue upon a pre-existing sub-
optimal path than to create an entirely new one. In other words, the present is rarely a clean slate, instead,
there is typically some socio-technical regime that we are locked into - in some respects - and getting out of
it will be more costly than staying in it, thus creating inertia. Path dependence has huge implications for
transitions as it creates inertia to change.
 Example
When we look around us we can see that many of our
systems of organization are a product of a path dependent
process. For example, we can ask, why do we still have the
QWERTY keyboard that was designed for typewriters when it
is not the most efficient for today’s keyboards? Why do we
still use the standard gauge train track designed two
centuries ago for horse-drawn coal carts to run today’s
powerful trains when it is far from optimal? Why is it so
difficult for us to switch to renewable energy sources? Why
do businesses all cluster in a particular area like Silicon
Valley when there is nothing special about that particular
location? All of these examples are because the choices we
made in the past as to what technology or system we
adopted influence the choices we make today.

This icon will take you

to the explainer video
 Phase | Phase || Phase |||

Chosen Path
Available Possibilities
Convergence Lock-in
View Original Source
 Network Effects
The basic theory to path dependency is that it is a product of a self-
organizing process where some small initial event - maybe arbitrary

+ in nature - comes through positive feedback to create a lock-in

effect. This lock-in effect leads to negative externalities and inertia
the result is a particular course of events that are difficult to change
in the future.

+ Network effects are central to lock-in. Network effects result when

there is a dynamic where the more people that adopt a certain
technology the more valuable it becomes. The value of the system is
primarily in the fact that everyone has decided to adopt that system
+ so it is highly interoperable, giving it extra value due to this
interoperability. For example, social media platforms have huge
network effects making it difficult for us to simply create a new
social network and for everyone to go and adopt that because it is
better.
 Protectionism
Once a pattern has become dominant and part of the meso-level the
regime will then work to resist change and throw up barriers to
innovations that challenge it. Economies of scale initially protect the
incumbents and a network of third parties that have formed around it
will reinforce its workings; with little incentive to support new
alternatives.

In the case of the car, lifestyles and attitudes co-evolved with the
evolution of the car as the dominant means of transport. This was
reinforced by media and popular culture as signs of individual freedom
and success, as well as public policies such as taxation and regulation
which the car evolved with; the result is an uneven playing field for
other potential solutions. Now innovations have to compete not just
with the car, but with this whole system of social, physical and
institutional factors that have co-evolved with the car and this tends to
lock society into a particular trajectory even when it has become
suboptimal.
 Lock-in Effects
Network effects create technological ‘lock-ins’ which prevent innovation
that disrupts the status quo. Once an industry has grown to maturity
there are a lot of sunk costs; this is not just in terms of the fixed assets
of a company but also in terms of the education and training of
personnel, of mindsets, of organizational hierarchies, etc.

There is also a "rich get richer" effect - the systems archetype of success
to the successful. This means once you have become a large player
within an industry you will gain certain advantages just by the fact that
you have been successful and are now large. For example,
pharmaceutical companies may get to sit at the table when regulators
are formulating a new drug policy or tax regime, however, the founders
of the yet unknown startups in the industry will not. In the evolution of
sociotechnical systems, there is no level playing field, the breakthrough
and dissemination of technological innovations is dependent on more
than their respective benefits.
 Carbon Lock-in
An example of this might be what is called Carbon Lock-In. This
refers to the self-perpetuating inertia created by large fossil fuel-
based energy systems that inhibit the adoption of alternative
energy technologies.

Now that we have built up sophisticated machinery for extracting

and processing petroleum and the combustion engine has
become a default technology, the industry is being subsidized by
economies of scale and the network effect; meaning because of
historical events we can produce a barrel of oil very cheaply.

If you now have a barrel of oil, you can use it to do almost

anything, from making raincoats, to greasing your car’s wheels, to
trading it on a futures market. It is interoperable across a wide set
of technologies giving it the network effect, an attractor and
creating inertia.
 Stakeholders
The MLP has also been found to be a valuable tool for stakeholder
analysis. This is because it can differentiate regime and niche actors,
who may be seen to behave in different ways and offer different
perspectives on the sustainability transition.

In the example of the energy and transport sustainability transition,

it has been found that niche groups - citizens concerned about
environmental issues - were more open to talking about demand
management policies and modal shift, while regime groups -
automotive and energy companies - preferred technological
innovation.

Thus those at the niche level avoided only considering a ‘techno-fix’

transition in which there was a simple reproduction of current power
structures and the continued dominance of personal motorized
transport, and instead also considered radical technological,
institutional or behavioral reconfigurations of this sociotechnical
system.
Transitions
 Overview
The multi-level perspective not only provides us with a way of mapping out a system on its different levels
but also provides us with an account of change; how transitions may occur within socio-technical systems.
In general, the MLP model attributes socio-technical transitions to the interaction of stabilizing forces at the
regime level with destabilizing forces from both the landscape and niche levels. Transitions are seen to
appear when a prevailing socio-technical regime starts to display stress from multiple dimensions. More
specifically this is seen to proceed given pressures from both above, as the landscape changes in some way,
and from the niche, where a key innovation occurs that could become a dominant design.
 Landscape
Changes at the landscape
level put pressure on the
existing regime

Regime
Destabilization of regime
creates a "window of
opportunity” for niche
innovations to break through

Niche
Niche innovations build up
momentum through support,
learning and improved
efficiencies over time
 Disruption
First, the current system has to be disrupted in some way from
the landscape level, i.e. a change in the environment. This may
include change in society's dominant values and beliefs, a new
technology paradigm such as the internet, or concerns over
climate change in the example of the car. These disruptions
coming from the landscape level create windows of opportunity
for new and alternative solutions to gain market share, for
example, the electric car.

However, success is certainly not guaranteed, the elements of

the niche level need to be mature enough, become aligned and
stabilize into a coherent pattern. Even if there is pressure on the
regime to change coming from the landscape, if niche-
innovations are not mature and structured adequately, the
incumbents may well respond by altering the course of
development paths and their innovation to simply absorb them
within the current regime.
 Window of Opportunity
As long as the regime level is aligned and stable, alternative novelties
will have few opportunities and remain grounded in particular niches.
However, when stresses, mismatches, and contradictions start to show
in the regime, this creates ‘windows of opportunity’ for the break-
through of radical novelties into the prevailing regime. This is seen to
require landscape developments that open windows of opportunity at
the regime level. Frank Geels proposed a four-phase approach. The first
phase sees the emergence of an innovation, created out of the existing
regime. At phase two development then occurs at the niche level.
Breakthroughs into the meso-level then occur at phase three.

A number of possible circumstances can act as windows of opportunity

for the diffusion of new technologies, such as; internal technical
problems in the existing regime that cannot be solved by refinement of
existing technologies; problems external to the system, such as pressure
groups like environmentalists; changing user preferences, when existing
technologies cannot meet user needs, etc.
 Stages of Transformation
From many case studies of industry reorientation by Frank
Geels, he identifies several stages to the change process.
As he notes it seems to always start with resistance - in the
beginning, the incumbents say something along the lines
of, "it can't be done," "it's too expensive," "the problem is
not caused by us it can't be addressed by us."

Then gradually in the second phase, if the pressures begin

to build, they start hedging as they still do the mainstream
strategy but to protect some investments they will start
investing a little bit in alternatives. The third phase would
be diversification when they start to see opportunities and
start to seriously go for markets with innovation races
occurring. Then in the fourth phase only do you get a full
reorientation when the new logic is embedded in the
economic strategy.
 Example
In a study entitled The transition in water supply and personal hygiene in
the Netherlands (1850–1930) Frank Geels uses the MLP to interpret the
transition from surface water to piped water in the Netherlands. This
transition is a good illustration of the co-evolution of technology and
society, involving technological innovations, such as piped water
infrastructure, soap, toilets, baths, as well as cultural, political, economic
and behavioral changes.

By the mid-19th century, problems in the water supply regime were

getting bad, as expanding urban populations discharged their waste in
canals and surface waters. Local conditions in some specific cities
provided space for the first piped water systems in the 1850s. Problems
in the water supply regime grew more serious in the 1860-70s, but
public officials in other cities did not adopt the new niche. Instead, they
sought solutions within the existing regime. Only after wider economic,
cultural and political landscape developments in the 1880-90s could the
niche breakthrough and realize larger transformations.
Evolution
 Overview
Transitions are co-evolutionary and multi-dimensional technological developments that occur intertwined
with societal needs, wants and uses. The transition process within the MLP model is an evolutionary one as
it draws upon evolutionary economics.

Transitions in the MLP model can be understood in evolutionary terms. Here the landscape is the
environment, the regime the current set of solutions and the niche the new variants. When the
environment changes the system requires new solutions that are better suited to the environment and it
selects those from the niche level.

Within this paradigm, evolution is seen as ultimately a search mechanism; the means through which a
complex adaptive system searches for the appropriate solutions to the challenges of operating within a
given environment.
 Selection Process
The process of economic evolution is performed similarly to that taking place within natural ecosystems.
This process involves a number of key stages; firstly, the generation of variety through cross mixing and
invention; secondly, adaptation, whereby products and services are exposed to their operating environment
in order to reveal their functionality; finally, selection whereby functional variants are selected to become
more prevalent within the economy’s future life cycle.

1. Variety 2. Selection 3. Replication

 Variety
Enabling this process means developing open platforms that
enable diverse variants to interact and cross mix. For example,
the rise of the Internet and YouTube have put all our music on
the same platform right next to each other. The result of this has
been a great acceleration in the production of mash-up mixes
between all types of very disparate music; many of which do not
work but some do. Co-working and business incubators are
based on the same idea of having an open space for the
interaction between disparate activities, ideas, and expertise, to
enable cross-pollination.

For this reason, it is important to maintain a stock of diversity

within the system for the sake of innovation, but this is not the
only factor. We also need to create and foster weak links
between disparate domains so that we can get a greater diversity
of cross-mixed variants, and the diversity between these variants
will be less superficial.
 Adaptation
Next, these variants need to be put into their operating
environment. To adapt, they need to be fully exposed to that
environment but given sufficient time and space to develop and
exhibit all of their capabilities – this may take time. It takes time to
develop a new product in a market or a new industry within an
economy. If we think about evolution within ecosystems, new
creatures are typically fostered for a prolonged period before being
exposed to the full requirements of survival.

A new agile approach to product development called MVP, standing

for minimum viable product, is one approach to this process
whereby new very basic solutions are rapidly developed and are
deployed as soon as they have the minimum requirements to
function within their operating environment. In this way, we can
start to receive immediate feedback as to the system’s viability and
possible future trajectory without the need for significant
investment or foresight.
 Operations
All variants ultimately must be exposed to the same
environment in order to see how well they perform,
although the traditional narrative surrounding evolution
is one of competition, a vision of every one against
everyone else, however this is only really true in very
simple relatively isolated environments.

Most products, services, business or individuals within

advanced economies fail or succeed within that
environment, based not only on their own capabilities
but also on their capacity to interoperate and coordinate
with other systems. Within environments of heightened
interconnectivity, this capacity for interoperability is very
important.
 Selection
Lastly, selection has to be performed on the set of elements
based on their functionality. Ultimately, all products, services,
and economic institutions have to serve some function for
someone who is prepared to pay for it. Every time we purchase
an item and cast our vote for that product or service, we are
tipping the balance in favor of its continuing to exist, while the
balance of all the other products on the shelf that we did not
select is very gradually tipping in the other direction.

In that simple act of choosing, some product or business has

lived on to become more prevalent within the next life cycle to
the system while others have come closer to being discontinued
and thus becoming less prevalent in the future. In evolutionary
terms, socio-technical regimes function as a selection and
retention mechanism. Each of these social groups has its own
distinctive features and its own ‘selection’ environment.
Conclusion
 Version 1.1
A Systems Innovation Publication
[Link]
info@[Link]
Reference and Resources
Geels, F.W. (2006). Mul$-Level Perspec$ve on System Innova$on: Relevance for Industrial Transforma$on. [online] ResearchGate. Available at: hops://[Link]/publicaqon/226512683_Mulq-
Level_Perspecqve_on_System_Innovaqon_Relevance_for_Industrial_Transformaqon [Accessed 5 Oct. 2020].

[Link]. (2013). Mul$level System Analysis - An Introduc$on to Systems Thinking. [online] Available at: hops://[Link]/davidalman/mulqlevel-system-analysis [Accessed 5 Oct. 2020].

Wikiwand. (2020). Technological transi$ons | Wikiwand. [online] Available at: hops://[Link]/en/Technological_transiqons [Accessed 5 Oct. 2020].

Twomey, P. and İdil Gaziulusoy (2014). Review of System Innova$on and Transi$ons Theories Concepts and frameworks for understanding and... [online] ResearchGate. Available at: hops://[Link]/
publicaqon/306119135_Review_of_System_Innovaqon_and_Transiqons_Theories_Concepts_and_frameworks_for_understanding_and_enabling_transiqons_to_a_low_carbon_built_environment [Accessed 5 Oct.
2020].

Steward, T. (2012). A Brief Introduc$on to the Mul$-Level Perspec$ve (MLP). [online] Available at: hop://[Link]/igov/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/[Link].

Wikiwand. (2020). Technological transi$ons | Wikiwand. [online] Available at: hops://[Link]/en/Technological_transiqons [Accessed 5 Oct. 2020].

amelia (2015). Sustainable Transi$on: Using Mul$level Perspec$ve and Strategic Niche Management to Understand Food System Tranisi$ons - Ameliara$on. [online] Ameliaraqon. Available at: hop://
[Link]/2015/03/sustainable-transiqon-mulqlevel-perspecqve-and-strategic-niche-management/ [Accessed 5 Oct. 2020].

Seerp Wigboldus, Laurens Klerkx, C. Leeuwis and H. Jochemsen (2016). Systemic perspec$ves on scaling agricultural innova$ons. A review. [online] ResearchGate. Available at: hops://[Link]/
publicaqon/306028698_Systemic_perspecqves_on_scaling_agricultural_innovaqons_A_review [Accessed 5 Oct. 2020].

Devika Singh (2019). Assignment 2: Mul$-Level Perspec$ve Mapping - Lack of Access to Healthy Food - Medium. [online] Medium. Available at: hops://[Link]/lack-of-access-to-healthy-food/mulq-level-
perspecqve-mapping-c6155cda3372 [Accessed 5 Oct. 2020].

Geels, F.W., Kern, F., Fuchs, G., Hinderer, N., Kungl, G., Mylan, J., Neukirch, M. and Wassermann, S. (2016). The enactment of socio-technical transiqon pathways: A reformulated typology and a comparaqve mulq-
level analysis of the German and UK low-carbon electricity transiqons (1990–2014). Research Policy, [online] 45(4), pp.896–913. Available at: hops://[Link]/science/arqcle/pii/S0048733316300087
[Accessed 5 Oct. 2020].

Manaaki Whenua - Landcare Research (2012). MLP: Insights into social and technological change. YouTube. Available at: hops://[Link]/watch?v=1VtokMi8JrU&ab_channel=ManaakiWhenua-
LandcareResearch [Accessed 5 Oct. 2020].

ORGANIZATIONAL PATH DEPENDENCE: OPENING THE BLACK BOX. (n.d.). [online] Available at: hops://[Link]/forschung/pfadkolleg/_NEU_Downloads/AMR_09.pdf [Accessed 5 Oct. 2020].