Reorganization: A Case Study of a Danish Smart Grid Demonstration, Energy Res. Social Sci. 41 (2018) 80–88.

[185] M. Aune, Å.L. Godbolt, K.H. Sørensen, Mismatch or Misunderstanding? Calculation and Qualification among Economists and Consumers in their Framings of the Electricity Market, Acta Sociologica 59 (4) (2016) 347-361.

[186] S.J. Darby, Metering: EU Policy and Implications for Fuel Poor Households, Energy Policy 49 (2012) 98–106.

[187] E. Noboa, P. Upham, Energy Policy and Transdisciplinary Transition Management Arenas in Illiberal Democracies: A Conceptual Framework, Energy Res. Social Sci. 46 (2018) 114–124.

[188] J.K. Kirkegaard, K. Kaliskan, When Socialists Marketize: The Case of China's Wind Power Market Sector, Journal of Cultural Economy 12 (2) (2019) 154–168.

[189] M. Korsnes, Wind and Solar Energy Transition in China, Routledge, London, 2020.

[190] J. Schot, W.E. Steinmueller, Three frames for innovation policy: R&D, systems of innovation and transformative change, Res. Policy. 47 (2018) 1554–1567, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2018.08.011.

[191] F.W. Geels, B. Turnheim, M. Asquith, F. Kern, P. Kivimaa, Sustainability transitions: policy and practice, Copenhagen (2019), https://doi.org/10.2800/641030.

[192] A. Rip, T.J. Misa, J. Schot, U. Weisenfeld-Sheuk, Managing technology in society: The approach of constructive technology assessment, R Manag. 28 (1998) 56–56.

[193] B. Wynne, The rhetoric of consensus politics: a critical review of technology assessment, Research Policy, 4(2), 108-158.

[194] J. Schot, A. Rip, The past and future of constructive technology assessment, Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change. 54 (1997) 251–268.

[195] R.P.J.M. Raven, E. Jolivet, R.M. Mourik, Y.C.F.J. Feenstra, ESTEEM: Managing societal acceptance in new energy projects: A toolbox method for project managers, Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change. 76 (2009) 963–977, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2009.02.005.

[196] H. Rohracher, M. Ornetzeder, Green Buildings in Context: Improving Social Learning Processes between Users and Producers, Built Environ. 1978. 28 (2002) 73–84. www.jstor.org/stable/23288552.

[197] S. de Saille, Innovating innovation policy: the emergence of 'Responsible Research and Innovation', J. Responsible Innov. 2 (2015) 152–168, https://doi.org/10.1080/23299460.2015.1045280.

[198] C. Egeland, E.-M. Forsberg, T. Maximova-Mentzoni, RRI: implementation as learning, J. Responsible Innov. 6 (2019) 375–380, https://doi.org/10.1080/23299460.2019.1603570.

[199] A. Rip, The Past and Future of RRI, in: A. Rip (Ed.), Futur. Sci. Technol. Soc., Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden, Wiesbaden, 2018: pp. 115–133. Doi: 10.1007/978-3-658-21754-9-7.

[200] J. Stilgoe, R. Owen, P. Macnaghten, Developing a framework for responsible innovation, Res. Policy. 42 (2013) 1568–1580, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2013.05.008.

[201] R. Von Schomberg, A vision of responsible research and innovation, Responsible Innov. Manag. Responsible Emergence Sci. Innov. 2013 (2014) 51–74.

[202] M. Dignum, A. Correlié, J. Cuppen, U. Pesch, B. Taebi, Contested Technologies and Design for Values: The Case of Shale Gas, Sci. Eng. Ethics. 22 (2016) 1171–1191, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-015-9685-6.

[203] A. Pellizzone, A. Allansdottir, R. De Franco, G. Muttoni, A. Manzella, Exploring public engagement with geothermal energy in southern Italy: A case study, Energy Policy. 85 (2015) 1–11, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2015.05.002.

[204] J. Schot, W.E. Steinmueller, Three frames for innovation policy: R&D, systems of innovation and transformative change, Res. Policy. (2018).

[205] R. Kemp, J. Schot, R. Hoogma, Regime shifts to sustainability through processes of niche formation: the approach of strategic niche management, Technol. Anal. Strateg. Manag. 10 (1998) 175–198.

[206] J. Schot, P. Kivimaa, J. Torrens, Transforming Experimentation: Experimental policy engagements and their transformative Outcomes, (2019). http://www tipconsortium.net/wp-content/uploads/2019/07/Transforming-Experimentation.pdf.

[207] A. Stirling, Direction, Distribution, Diversity! Pluralising Progress in Innovation, Sustainability and Development (STEPS Working Paper 32), STEPS Centre, University of Sussex, Brighton, 2010.

[208] S. Jasanoff, The idiom of co-production in Jasanoff S ed States of knowledge: the co-production of science and social order Routledge, New York and London, pp. 1–12, 2004.

[209] J. Schot, C. Daniels, J. Torrens, G. Bloomfield, Developing a Shared Understanding of Transformative Innovation Policy, (2017). http://www tipconsortium.net/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/TIPC-Research-Brief-Developing-a-Shared-Understanding-of-Transformative-Innovation-Policy-FINAL.pdf.

[210] S. Kuhlmann, A. Rip, Next-Generation Innovation Policy and Grand Challenges, Public Policy, Sci, 2017.

[211] G. Kavlak, J. McNerney, J.E. Trancik, Evaluating the causes of photovoltaics cost reduction, SSRN. (2017). Doi: 10.2139/ssrn.2891516.

[212] TIPC, Transformative Innovation Policy Consortium, (n.d.). http://www tipconsortium.net/.

[213] Turnheim, B., Kivimaa, P., Berkhout, F., 2018c. Experiments and Beyond: An Emerging Agenda for Climate Governance Innovation, in: Turnheim, B., Kivimaa, P., Berkhout, F. (Eds.), Innovating Climate Governance: Moving Beyond Experiments. Cambridge University Press, pp. 216–241. Doi: 10.1017/9781108277679_12.

[214] Turnheim, B., Kivimaa, P., Berkhout, F. (Eds.), 2018. Innovating Climate Governance: Moving Beyond Experiments. Cambridge University Press.

[215] B. Latour, Which Protocol for the New Collective Experiments? in: H. Schmindgen, P. Geimerand, S. Dierig (Eds.), Kultur Im Experiment, Kadmos Verlag, Berlin, 2004, pp. 17–36.

[216] F. Sengers, A.J. Wieczorek, R. Raven, Experimenting for sustainability transitions: A systematic literature review, Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 145 (2019) 153–164, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2016.08.031.

[217] J. Brown, C. Hendry, Public demonstration projects and field trials: Accelerating commercialisation of sustainable technology in solar photovoltaics, Energy Policy 37 (2009) 2560–2573, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2009.01.040.

[218] H. Hellsmark, P. Söderholm, J. Frishammar, H. Ylinenpää, The Role of Pilot and Demonstration Plants in Technology Development and Innovation Policy: An Analytical Framework based on Lessons from Swedish Biorefinery Development, Res. Policy 45 (2016) 1743–1761.

[219] Y. Voytenko, K. McCormick, J. Evans, G. Schliwa, Urban living labs for sustainability and low carbon cities in Europe: Towards a research agenda, J. Cleaner Prod. 123 (2016) 45–54, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.08.053.

[220] H. Bulkeley, L. Coenen, N. Frantzeskaki, C. Hartmann, A. Kronsell, L. Mai, S. Marvin, K. McCormick, F. van Steenbergen, Y. Voytenko Palgan, Urban living labs: governing urban sustainability transitions, Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability 22 (2016) 13–17, https://doi.org/10.1016/j cosust.2017.02.003.

[221] A. Smith, T. Hargreaves, S. Hielscher, M. Martiskainen, G. Seyfang, Making the most of community energies: Three perspectives on grassroots innovation, Environ. Plan. A 48 (2016) 407–432, https://doi.org/10.1177/030851815597908.

[222] B. McFadgen, D. Huitema, Are all experiments created equal? A framework for analysis of the learning potential of policy experiments in environmental governance, J. Environ. Plann. Manage. (2016) 1–20.

[223] H. Bulkeley, V. Castán Broto, Government by experiment ? Global cities and the governing of climate change, Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers 361–375 (2013), https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-5661.2012.00535.x.

[224] S. Laakso, A. Berg, M. Annala, Dynamics of experimental governance: A meta-study of functions and uses of climate governance experiments, J. Cleaner Prod. 1–9 (2017), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.04.140.

[225] Turnheim, B., Kivimaa, P., Berkhout, F., 2018b. Beyond experiments: innovation in climate governance, in: Turnheim, B., Kivimaa, P., Berkhout, F. (Eds.), Innovating Climate Governance: Moving Beyond Experiments. Cambridge University Press, pp. 1–26. Doi: 10.1017/9781108277679_1.

[226] M. Hildén, A. Jordan, D. Huitema, Special issue on experimentation for climate change solutions editorial: The search for climate change and sustainability solutions - The promise and the pitfalls of experimentation, J. Cleaner Prod. 169 (2017) 1–7, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.09.019.

[227] F. Steward, Transformative innovation policy to meet the challenge of climate change: sociotechnical networks aligned with consumption and end-use as new transition arenas for a low-carbon society or green economy, Technology Analysis & Strategic Management 24 (2012) 331–343, https://doi.org/10.1080/09537325.2012.663959.

[228] L. Coenen, R. Raven, G. Verbong, Local niche experimentation in energy transitions: A theoretical and empirical exploration of proximity advantages and disadvantages, Technol. Soc. 32 (2010) 295–302, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techsoc.2010.10.006.

[229] J. Schot, F.W. Geels, Strategic niche management and sustainable innovation journeys: theory, findings, research agenda, and policy, Technology Analysis & Strategic Management 20 (2008) 537–554, https://doi.org/10.1080/09537320802292651.

[230] S. Thomke, E. von Hippel, R. Franke, Modes of experimentation: an innovation process—and competitive—variable, Res. Policy 27 (1998) 315–332, https://doi.org/10.1016/S0048-7333(98)00041-9.

[231] M. Elmquist, P. Le Masson, The value of a “failed” R&D project: an emerging evaluation framework for building innovative, R&D Management 39 (2009) 136–152.

[232] B. Turnheim, P. Kivimaa, F. Berkhout, Beyond experiments: innovation in climate governance, in: B. Turnheim, P. Kivimaa, F. Berkhout (Eds.), Innovating Climate Governance: Moving Beyond Experiments, Cambridge University Press, 2018, pp. 1–26.

[233] A. Smith, R. Raven, What is protective space? Reconsidering niches in transitions to sustainability, Res. Policy 41 (2012) 1025–1036, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2011.12.012.

[234] International Energy Agency. 2019. World Energy Outlook. Paris, France.

[235] The social construction of technological systems: New directions in the sociology and history of technology, MIT press, 1989.

[236] Clark A. Miller, Alastair Iles, Christopher Jones, The Social Dimensions of Energy Transitions, Science as Culture 22 (2) (2013) 135–148.

[237] Kolya Abramsky, Sparking a worldwide energy revolution: Social struggles in the transition to a post-petrol world, AK Press (2010).

[238] Andy Stirling, Transforming power: Social science and the politics of energy choices, Energy Res. Social Sci. 1 (2014) 83–95.

[239] Noel Healy, John Barry, Politicizing energy justice and energy system transitions: Fossil fuel divestment and a "just transition", Energy Policy 108 (2017) 451–459.

[240] Smith, Jessica M., and Abraham SD Tidwell. "The everyday lives of energy transitions: Contested sociotechnical imaginaries in the American West." Social Studies of Science 46.3 (2016): 327-350.

[241] Gwen Ottinger, Refining expertise: How responsible engineers subvert environmental justice challenges, NYU Press, 2013.

[242] Kirsten Jenkins, et al., Energy justice: a conceptual review, Energy Res. Social Sci. 11 (2016) 174–182.

[243] Clark A. Miller, Jason O'Leary, Elisabeth Graffy, Ellen Stechel, Gary Dirks, Narrative Futures and the Governance of Energy Transitions, Futures 70 (2015) 65–74.

[244] Joey Eschrich and Clark A. Miller, eds. Ruth Wylie and Ed Finn, project directors.
The Weight of Light: A Collection of Solar Futures. Tempe: Center for Science and
Imagination. 2019. https://csi.asu.edu/books/weight/, downloaded Dec. 2, 2019.

[245] Langdon Winner, Upon opening the black box and finding it empty: Social con-
structivism and the philosophy of technology, Sci. Technol. Human Values 18 (3)
(1993) 362-378.

[246] Trevor J. Pinch, Wiebe E. Bijker, The social construction of facts and artefacts: Or how the sociology of science and the sociology of technology might benefit each other, Soc. Stud. Sci. 14 (3) (1984) 399-441.

[247] Clark A. Miller, Carina Wyborn, Co-production in global sustainability: histories and theories, Environ. Sci. Policy (2018).

[248] Carina Wyborn, et al., Co-producing sustainability: Reordering the governance of science, policy, and practice, Annu. Rev. Environ. Resour. 44 (2019).

[249] L. Winner, Do artifacts have politics? Daedalus (1980) 121-136.

[250] F. Fischer, Citizens, experts, and the environment: The politics of local knowledge,
Duke University Press, 2000.

[251] Frickel, S. and Moore, K. eds., 2006. The new political sociology of science: Institutions, networks, and power. Univ of Wisconsin Press.

[252] Jasanoff, S. ed., 2004. States of knowledge: the co-production of science and the social order. Routledge.

[253] B.K. Sovacool, Contesting the future of nuclear power: a critical global assessment of atomic energy, World Scientific, 2011.

[254] S. Amir, Challenging nuclear: antinuclear movements in postauthoritarian Indonesia, East Asian Science, Technology and Society: An International Journal 3 (2-3) (2009) 343-366.

[255] S. Jasanoff, S.H. Kim, Containing the atom: Sociotechnical imaginaries and nuclear power in the United States and South Korea, Minerva 47 (2) (2009) 119.

[256] M.B. Haines, Contested credibility economies of nuclear power in India, Soc. Stud. Sci. 49 (1) (2019) 29-51.

[257] S. Amir, K. Juraku, Undermining disaster: engineering and epistemological bias in the Fukushima nuclear crisis, Eng. Stud. 6 (3) (2014) 210-226.

[258] J. Ahn, C. Carson, M. Jensen, K. Juraku, S. Nagasaki, S. Tanaka, Reflections on the Fukushima Daichi nuclear accident, Springer-Verlag GmbH, 2015.

[259] S.L. Loh, S. Amir, Healing Fukushima: Radiation hazards and disaster medicine in post-3.11 Japan, Soc. Stud. Sci. 49 (3) (2019) 333-354.

[260] D. Kelly, Ideology, society, and the origins of nuclear power in Japan, East Asian Science, Technology and Society: an International Journal 9 (1) (2014) 47-64.

[261] Jasper, J.M., 1990. Nuclear politics: Energy and the state in the United States, Sweden, and France (Vol. 1126). Princeton University Press.

[262] S.D. Schmid, Producing power: The pre-Chernobyl history of the Soviet nuclear industry, MIT Press, 2015.

[263] S. Amir, The state and the reactor: Nuclear politics in post-Suharto Indonesia, Indonesia 89 (2010) 101-147.

[264] A. King, M.V. Ramana, The China syndrome? Nuclear power growth and safety after Fukushima, Asian Perspective 39 (4) (2015) 607-636.

[265] M.V. Ramana, The power of promise: Examining nuclear energy in India, Penguin UK. 2012.

[266] Amir, S. ed., 2018. The Sociotechnical Constitution of Resilience: A New Perspective on Governing Risk and Disaster. Springer.

[267] J. Hodbod, W.N. Adger, Integrating social-ecological dynamics and resilience into energy systems research, Energy Res. Sci. 1 (2014) 226-231.

[268] A. Zolli, A.M. Healy, Resilience: Why things bounce back, Simon and Schuster, 2013.

[269] K. Tierney, Resilience and the neoliberal project: Discourses, critiques, practices—and Katrina, American Behavioral Scientist 59 (10) (2015) 1327-1342.

[270] S. Amir, V. Kant, Sociotechnical resilience: a preliminary concept, Risk Anal. 38 (1) (2018) 8-16.

[271] S. Amir, The technological state in Indonesia: The co-constitution of high technology and authoritarian politics, Routledge, 2012.

[272] A. Mohsin, Lighting “Paradise”: A Sociopolitical History of Electrification in Bali, East Asian Science, Technology and Society: An International Journal 11 (1) (2017) 9-34.

[273] Leonardi, P.M., Nardi, B.A. and Kallinikos, J. eds., 2012. Materiality and organizing: Social interaction in a technological world. Oxford university press on demand.

[274] M. Margarita, Balmaceda, Differentiation, materiality, and power: Towards a political economy of fossil fuels, Energy Res. Soc. Sci. 39 (2018) 130-140.

[275] Tasic, J., Tantri, F. and Amir, S., 2019. Modelling Multilevel Interdependencies for Resilience in Complex Organisation. Complexity, 2019.

[276] G. Frigo, Energy ethics, homogenization, and hegemony: A reflection on the traditional energy paradigm, Energy Research and Social Sciences 30 (2017) 7-17.

[277] A. Mol, The Body Multiple. Ontology in Medical Practice, Duke University Press, Durham, 2003.

[278] Llosa, C. (2019): Socio-environmental conflicts as social cohesion thermometers: a case study, Tapuya: Latin American Science, Technology and Society, DOI:10.1080/25729861.2018.1554344.

[279] Bow, B. and Anderson, G (eds) (2016) Regional Governance in Post-NAFTA North America: Building without Architecture. New York: Routledge.

[280] J.A. Le Clercq Ortega, Instituciones para el Antropoceno. ¿Son efectivos el Acuerdo de París y los Objetivos global, crisis ambiental, y sistemas socio-ecológicos. Mexico City: UNAM, pp. 174-205, 2019.

[281] Studer, I. and Wise, C. (eds) (2007) Quaproin or Revival?: The Promise of North American Integration. Washington DC: Brookings Institution Press.

[282] Azamar-Alonso, A. and Azamar-Alonso, A. (2016) Las promesas del extractivismo en América Latina: Luces y sombras. In Carrillo-Nieto, J.J., Escárzaga, F. and Günther, M.G. (coordinates) Los gobiernos progresistas latinoamericanos.

Contradicciones, avances y retrocesos. Mexico City: Universidad Autónoma Metropolitana-Xochimilco.

[283] M. Lahsen, Transnational locals: Brazilian experiences of the climate regime, in: S. Jasanoff, M. Martello (Eds.), Earthly Politics: Local and global in Environmental Governance, MIT Press, Cambridge MA, 2004, pp. 151-172.

[284] Hurtado de Mendoza, D. (2009) Periferia y fronteras tecnológicas. Energía nuclear y dictadura militar en la Argentina (1976-1983), Revista CTS, 13(5): 27-64.

[285] E. Viola, M. Franchini, Brasil na governança global do clima, 2005-2012: a luta entre conservadores e reformistas, Contexto Internacional 35 (1) (2013) 43-76.

[286] J.C. Hochsprung-Miguel, M. Mahony, M.S. Alves Monteiro, 'Infrastructural geopolitical' of climate knowledge: the Brazilian Earth System Model and the North-South knowledge divide, Sociologias 21 (51) (2019) 44-75.

[287] Tollefsen, Jeff. 2010. Brazil's climate modellers are set to go global. Nature, 468:20, 04 November, Doi:10.1038/468020.

[288] Tironi, M. y Sannazzaro, J (2017) Energía huilliche. Experimentos en integración y disensos ontológicos en un parque eólico. Revista Internacional de Sociología 75(4): e080. Doi: 10.3989/ris.2017.75.4.17.06.

[289] C.B. Jensen, Wound-up worlds and The Wind-up Girl: on the anthropology of climate change and climate fiction, Tapuya: Latin American Science, Technology, and Society 1 (2018) 186-200.

[290] A. Arellano-Hernández, Tláloc. Teogonía, cosmogonía y epistemología atmosféricas precortesianas, Universidad Autónoma del Estado de México and Colófón, Mexico City, 2017.

[291] A. Arellano-Hernández, Cambio climático y sociedad, Universidad Autónoma del Estado de México and Porrúa Editores, Mexico City, 2014.

[292] D.H. Guston, Evaluating the First U.S. Consensus Conference, Sci. Technol. Human Values 24 (4) (1999) 451-482.

[293] J. Wilsson, R. Willis, See-through Science: Why Public Engagement Needs to Move Upstream, Demos, London, 2004.

[294] D. Hess, Alternative Pathways in Science and Industry: Activism, Innovation, and the Environment in an Era of Globalization, MIT Press, Cambridge, 2007.

[295] A. Irwin, Citizen Science, Routledge Press, London, 1995.

[296] R. Sclove, Democracy and Technology, Guilford Press, New York, 1995.

[297] R. Phadke, Public deliberation and the Geographies of Wind Justice, Science as Culture 22 (2) (2013) 247-255.

[298] D. Mulvaney, Opening the Black Box of Solar Energy Technologies: Exploring Tensions Between Innovation and Environmental Justice, Science as Culture 22 (2) (2013) 230-237.

[299] A. Kinchy, Citizen Science and Democracy: Participatory Water Monitoring in the Marcellus Shale Fracking Boom, Science as Culture 26 (1) (2016) 88-110.

[300] L. Williams, P. Macnaghten, R. Davies, S. Curtis, Framing 'fracking': Exploring public perceptions of hydraulic fracturing in the United Kingdom, Public Understanding of Science 26 (1) (2015) 89-104.

[301] M. Goulden, B. Bedwell, S. Rennick-Egglestone, T. Rodden, A. Spence, Smart grids, smart users? The role of the user in demand side management, Energy Res. Social Sci. 2 (2014) 21-29.

[302] S.T. Depoe, J.W. Delicath, M.A. Elsenbeer (Eds.), Communication and Public Participation in Environmental Decision-making, SUNY Press, Albany, 2004.

[303] D.S. Carr, K.E. Halvorsen, An evaluation of three democratic, community-based approaches to citizen participation: Surveys, conversations with community groups, and community dinners, Society and Natural Resources 14 (2001) 107-126.

[304] D. Day, Citizen participation in the planning process: An essentially contested concept? Journal of Planning Literature 11 (3) (1997) 421-434.

[305] J. Poisner, A civic republican perspective on the National Environmental Policy Act's process of citizen participation, Environmental Law 26 (1996) 53-94.

[306] S. Jasanoff, Science and citizenship: a new synergy, Science and Public Policy 31 (2) (2004) 90-94.

[307] S. Jasanoff, Designs on nature: Science and democracy in Europe and the United States, Princeton University Press, Princeton, 2005.

[308] J. Chilvers, H. Pallett, Energy Democracies and Publics in the Making: A Relational Agenda for Research and Practice, Frontiers in Communication (2018), https://doi.org/10.3389/fcomm.2018.00014.

[309] A. Stirling, Opening up" and "closing down": power, participation, and pluralism in the social appraisal of technology, Sci. Technol. Human Values 33 (2008) 262-294.

[310] Chilvers, J., and M. Kearnes. 2019. "Remaking Participation in Science and Democracy," Science, Technology, & Human Values. Accessed at doi: 10.1177/01622439198508855.

[311] Leach, M., I. Scoones and B. Wynne (eds). 2005. Science and Citizens. London: Zed Books. P. 12.

[312] M. Moezzi, K. Janda, S. Rotmann, Using stories, narratives, and storytelling in energy and climate change research, Energy Res. Social Sci. 31 (2017) 1-10.

[313] Lezaun, J., N. Marres, and M. Tironi. 2017. "Experiments in Participation," in The Handbook of Science and Technology Studies. Fourth Edition, eds U. Felt, R. Fouché, C. Miller, and L. Smith-Doerr, 195-221. Cambridge: MIT Press.

[314] S. Shackley, B. Wynne, Global climate change: The mutual construction of an emergent science-policy domain, Science and Public Policy 22 (4) (1995) 218-230.

[315] S. Shackley, P. Young, S. Parkinson, B. Wynne, Uncertainty, complexity and concepts of good science in climate change modelling: Are GCMs the best tools? Clim. Change 38 (2) (1998) 159-205.

[316] C. Gough, S. Shackley, The respectable politics of climate change: the epistemic communities and NGOs, International Affairs 77 (2) (2001) 329-346.

[317] S. Yearley, Sociology and climate change after Kyoto: What roles for social science in understanding climate change? Current Sociology 57 (3) (2009) 389-405.
[318] Marianne Ryghaug, Tomas Moe Skjolsvold, The global warming of climate science: Climategate and the construction of scientific facts, Int. Stud. Philos. Sci. 24 (3) (2010) 287-307.

[319] Mitchell, R.B., Clark, W.C., Cash, D.W. and Dickson, N.M. eds., 2006. Global environmental assessments: information and influence. MIT Press.

[320] S. Jasanoff, A world of experts: science and global environmental constitutionalism, BC Envtl. Aff. L. Rev. 40 (2) (2013) 439-452.

[321] Jessica O'Reilly, Naomi Oreskes, Michael Oppenheimer, The rapid disintegration of projections: the west Antarctic ice sheet and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Soc. Stud. Sci. 42 (5) (2012) 709-731.

[322] Hulme, M., 2009. Why we disagree about climate change: understanding controversy, inaction and opportunity. CUP pages 87-92.

[323] K. Anderson, G. Peters, The trouble with negative emissions, Science 354 (6309) (2016) 182-183.

[324] Göran Sundqvist, Ingemar Bohlin, Erlend A.T. Hermansen, Steven Yearley, Formalization and separation: A systematic basis for interpreting approaches to summarizing science for climate policy, Soc. Stud. Sci. 45 (3) (2015) 416-440.

[325] Yearley, S., 2017. 'Communication strategies of environmental NGOs and advocacy groups', in The Oxford Encyclopedia of Climate Change Communication Vol 1, ed M C Nisbet et al (New York: Oxford University Press 2017) 311-326.

[326] K. Bäckstrand, Civic science for sustainability: Reframing the role of experts, policymakers and citizens in environmental governance, Global Environmental Politics 3 (4) (2003) 24-40.

[327] Sheila Jasanoff 2011 "Cosmopolitan Knowledge: Climate Science and Global Civic Epistemology," in J. S. Dryzek, R. B. Norgaard, and D. Schlosberg, eds., The Oxford Handbook of Climate Change and Society (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2011), pp. 129-143.

[328] Steven Yearley 2014 'Environmentalists as communicators of science', in New Handbook of Public Communication of Science and Technology, ed M Bucchi and B Trench (London: Routledge 2014) 113-24.

[329] Trump, D. 2017. Statement by President Trump on the Paris Accord. White House, June 1. https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefings-statements/statement-president-trump-paris-climate-accord/.

[330] D. Helm, 2012. The carbon crunch: how we're getting climate change wrong – and how to fix it. Yale UP, pp. 67-71.

[331] Winskel, M., Kattirtzi, M., 2019 "Disruption and Continuity in the UK Energy Transition: What do the experts think? Results of the UKERC and CXC survey of UK energy experts and stakeholders" https://www.climatexchange.org.uk/media/3599/ukerc_cxc_disruption_and continuity_briefing note-web.pdf.

[332] Richard Herrington, 2019, Leading scientists set out resource challenge of meeting net zero emissions in the UK by 2050. Natural History Museum, June 5. https://www.nhm.ac.uk/press-office/press-releases/leading-scientists-set-out-resource-challenge-of-meeting-net-zer.html.

[333] Helm, D., 2017. Burn out: the endgame for fossil fuels. Yale UP.

[334] A. Stirling, How deep is incumbency? A 'configuring fields' approach to redistributing and reorienting power in socio-material change, Energy Res. Soc. Sci. 58 (2019).

[335] N. Marres, M. Guggenheim, A. Wilkie (Eds.), Inventing the social, Mattering Press, Manchester, 2018.

[336] A. Boucher, B. Gaver, T. Kerridge, et al., Energy Babble, Mattering Press, Manchester, 2018.

[337] M. Michael, Actor-network theory: trials, trails and translations, Sage, London, 2017.

[338] C.M. Hendriks, Policy design without democracy: Making democratic sense of transition management, Policy Science 42 (2009) 341-368.

[339] S. Jhagroe, D. Loorbach, See no evil, hear no evil: The democratic potential of transition management, Environ. Innov. Soc. Transitions 1-19 (2014), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eist.2014.07.001.

[340] A. Stirling, Transforming power: Social science and the politics of energy choices, Energy Res. Soc. Sci. 1 (2014).

[341] Ghosh, B. & Arora, S. Smart as Democratically Transformative? An Analysis of 'Smart City' Sociotechnical Imaginary in India.

[342] A. Ely, P Van Zwanenberg, A. Stirling, Broadening out and opening up technology assessment: Approaches to enhance international development, co-ordination and democratisation, Res. Policy 43 (2014) 505-518.

[343] F. Marshall, J. Dolley, R. Priya, Transdisciplinary research as transformative space making for sustainability: enhancing propoor transformative agency in periurban contexts, Ecol. Soc. 23 (2018).

[344] J. Chilvers, H. Pallett, T. Hargreaves, Ecologies of participation in socio-technical change : The case of energy system transitions, Energy Res. Soc. Sci. 42 (2018) 199-210.

[345] Stirling, A. Engineering and Sustainability: Control and Care in Unfoldings of Modernity, in Routledge Companion to the Philosophy of Engineering (eds. Michelfelder, D. P. & Doorn, N.) 06, (Routledge, 2019).

[346] M. Hajer, et al., Beyond Cockpit-ism: Four Insights to Enhance the Transformative Potential of the Sustainable Development Goals, Sustainability 7 (2015) 1651-1660.

[347] Henfrey, T., Kenrick, J. & TNI. Climate, Commons and Hope: the transition movement in global perspective. (2015).

[348] PCS, Baugh, C., Mason, S. & Watts, K. Just transition and democracy: a civil service union perspective. (2017).

[349] Larry Lohmann & Hildyard, N. Energy, Work and Finance. (2014).

[350] Sparking a WorldWide energy revolution: social struggles in the transition to a post-petrol world. (AK Press, 2010).

[351] Sweeney, S. Resist, Reclaim, Restructure: unions and the struggle for energy democracy. (2012).

[352] N. Healy, J. Barry, Politicizing energy justice and energy system transitions: Fossil fuel divestment and a 'just transition', Energy Policy 108 (2017) 451-459.

[353] J. Chilvers, Energy Democracies and Publics in the Making: A Relational Agenda for Research and Practice. 3 (2018) 1-16.

[354] Veelen, B. Van & Horst, D. Van Der. What is energy democracy? Connecting social science energy research and political theory. Energy Res. Soc. Sci. 46, 19-28 (2018).

[355] D.J. Hess, Energy democracy and social movements: A multi-coalition perspective on the politics of sustainability transitions, Energy Res. Soc. Sci. 40 (2018) 177-189.

[356] B.K. Sovacool, P.L. Blyth, Energy and environmental attitudes in the green state of Denmark: Implications for energy democracy, low carbon transitions, and, Environ. Sci. Policy 54 (2015) 304-315.

[357] J. Voß, Performative policy studies: realizing "transition management", Innov. Eur. J. Soc. Sci. Res. 27 (2014) 317-343.

[358] F. Steward, Breaking the boundaries: transformative innovation for the global good, National Endowment for Science, Technology and the Arts, 2008.

[359] A. Genus, A. Stirling, Collingridge and the dilemma of control: Towards responsible and accountable innovation, Res. Policy 47 (2017) 61-69.

[360] L. Charli-joseph, J.M. Siqueiros-garcia, H. Eakin, D. Manuel-navarrete, R. Shelton, Promoting agency for social-ecological transformation: a transformation-lab in the Xochimilco social-ecological system. 23 (2018).

[361] P Van Zwanenberg, A. Cremaschi, M. Obaya, A. Marin, V. Lowenstein, Seeking unconventional alliances and bridging innovations in spaces for transformative change: the seed sector and agricultural sustainability in, Ecol. Soc. 23 (2018).

[362] J.M. Wittmayer, N. Scha, Action, research and participation: roles of researchers in sustainability transitions, Sustain. Sci. 9 (2014) 483-496.

[363] L.M. Pereira, T. Hichert, M. Hamann, R. Preiser, R. Biggs, Using futures methods to create transformative spaces: visions of a good Anthropocene in southern Africa, Ecol. Soc. 23 (2018).

[364] N. Frantzeskaki, A. Rok, Co-producing urban sustainability transitions knowledge with community, policy and science, Environ. Innov. Soc. Transitions 0-1 (2018), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eist.2018.08.001.

[365] L. Levidow, Democratizing technology - or technologizing democracy? Regulating agricultural biotechnology in Europe, Technol. Soc. 20 (1998) 211-226.

[366] A. Stirling, "Opening Up" and "Closing Down": Power, Participation, and Pluralism in the Social Appraisal of Technology, Sci. Technol. Hum. Values 23 (2008) 262-294.

[367] S. Burall, The Homeopathic Theory of Public Engagement, Involve (2010).

[368] J. Stilgoe, The Road Ahead, Public Dialogue on Science and Technology. 10 (2009) (H.M.S.O.).

[369] Braun, K. & Schultz, S. "... a certain amount of engineering involved ": Constructing the public in participatory governance arrangements. 1-17 (2016). doi:10.1177/0963662509347814.

[370] F. Goedkoop, P. Devine-wright, Partnership or placation: The role of trust and justice in the shared ownership of renewable energy projects, Energy Res. Soc. Sci. 17 (2016) 135-146.

[371] A. Attar, A. Genus, Framing public engagement : A critical discourse analysis of GM Nation ? Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 88 (2014) 241-250.

[372] W. Safire, Skin in the Game. 9-10 (2016).

[373] A. Ely, A. Marin, Learning about 'Engaged Excellence' across a Transformative Knowledge Network, IDS Bull. 47 (2016).

[374] B. Wynne, Public Participation in Science and Technology: Performing and Obscuring a Political-Conceptual Category Mistake. East Asian Sci. Technol. Soc. an, Int. J. 1 (2007) 99-110.

[375] On Science and Precaution in the Management of Technological Risk - Volume II: Case studies. II, (Institute for Prospective Technological Studies, 2001).

[376] SAPEA et al. Making sense of science for policy under conditions of complexity and uncertainty. doi:10.26356/MASOS.

[377] E. Turnhout, M. Stuiver, J. Klostermann, B. Harms, C. Leeuwis, New roles of science in society: Different repertoires of knowledge brokering, Sci. Public Policy 40 (2013) 354-365.

[378] F.W. Geels, The multi-level perspective on sustainability transitions: Responses to seven criticisms, Environ. Innov. Soc. Transitions 1 (2011) 24-40.

[379] C. Folke, T. Hahn, P. Olsson, J. Norberg, Adaptive Governance of Social-Ecological Systems, Annu. Rev. Environ. Resour. 30 (2005) 441-473.

[380] P. Olsson, et al., Shooting the Rapids: Navigating Transitions to Adaptive Governance of Social-Ecological Systems. 11 (2006) 24.

[381] A. Smith, A. Stirling, Innovation, sustainability and democracy: an analysis of grassroots contributions, J. Self-Governance Manag. Econ. 6 (2018) 64-97.

[382] G. Seyfang, A. Smith, Constructing grassroots innovations for sustainability, Glob. Environ. Chang. 23 (2013) 827-829.

[383] A. Smith, M. Fressoli, D. Abrol, E. Around, A. Ely, Grassroots Innovation Movements. (Routledge Earthscan (2016).

[384] Konrad, K. H. van Lente, C. Groves, C. Selin (2017), Performing and governing the future in science and technology, U. Felt, R. Fouche, C.A. Miller, L. Smith-Doerr (Eds.), The handbook of science and technology studies (4th edition), MIT Press, Cambridge, pp. 465-493.

[385] H. Van Lente, Navigating foresight in a sea of expectations: lessons from the sociology of expectations, Technology Analysis & Strategic Management 24 (8) (2012) 769-782.

[386] O. Kuusi, M. Meyer, Technological generalizations and leitbilders—the anticipation of technological opportunities, Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 69 (6) (2002) 625-639.

[387] Van Lente 2012.

[388] Van Lente, H. and A. Rip (1998), Expectations in Technological Developments: an
Example of Prospective Structures to be Filled in by Agency, C. Disco B.J.R. van der Meulen (Eds), Getting New Technologies Together. Studies in Making Sociotechnical Order, Berlin: Walter De Gruyter, 203-231.

[389] S. Bakker, H. van Lente, M. Meeus, Arenas of expectations for hydrogen technologies, Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 78 (1) (2011) 152-162.

[390] A. Lösch, C. Schneider, Transforming power/knowledge apparatuses: the smart grid in the German energy transition, Innovation: The European Journal of Social Science Research 29 (3) (2016) 262-284.

[391] F.W.T. Geels, S. Schwanen, K. Sorrell, B.K Sovacool Jenkins, Reducing energy demand through low carbon innovation: A sociotechnical transitions perspective and thirteen research debates, Energy Res. Social Sci. 40 (2018) 23-35.

[392] K. Hojčíková, B. Sandén, H. Ahlborg, Three electricity futures: Monitoring the emergence of alternative system architectures, Futures 98 (2018) 72-89.

[393] B.K. Sovacool, J. Kester, L. Noel, G. Zarazua de Rubens, Contested visions and sociotechnical expectations of electric mobility and vehicle-to-grid innovation in five Nordic countries, Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions 31 (2019) 170-183.

[394] M. Eames, W. Mcdowall, M. Hodson, S. Marvin, Negotiating contested visions and place-specific expectations of the hydrogen economy, Technology Analysis & Strategic Management 18 (3-4) (2006) 361-374.

[395] M.A. Hajer, P. Pelzer, 2050—An Energetic Odyssey: Understanding ‘Techniques of Futuring’ in the transition towards renewable energy, Energy Res. Social Sci. 44 (2018) 222-231.

[396] M. Bladh, Origin of car enthusiasm and alternative paths in history, Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions 32 (2019) 153-168.

[397] B.D. Leibowicz, Policy recommendations for a transition to sustainable mobility based on historical diffusion dynamics of transport systems, Energy Policy 119 (2019) 357-366.

[398] A.M. Levenda, J. Richter, T. Miller, E. Fisher, Regional sociotechnical imaginaries and the governance of energy innovations, Futures 109 (2019) 181-191.

[399] B. Latour, Down to Earth: Politics in the New Climatic Regime, Polity Press, Cambridge, 2018.

[400] T. Hughes, The evolution of large technological systems, in: W. Bijker, T. Hughes, T. Pinch (Eds.), The social construction of technological systems: New directions in the sociology and history of technology, MIT Press, Cambridge, USA, 1987, pp. 51-82.

[401] L. Levidow, T. Papaioannou, State imaginaries of the public good: Shaping UK innovation priorities for bioenergy, Environ. Policy 30 (2013) 36-49.

[402] B. Sovacool, M. Ramana, Back to the future: Small modular reactors, nuclear fantasies, and symbolic convergence, Sci. Technol. Human Values 40 (1) (2015) 96-125.

[403] J. Stephenson, et al., Energy cultures: A framework for understanding energy behaviours, Energy Policy 38 (2010) 6120-6129.

[404] S. Jasanoff, S.-H. Kim, Containing the atom: Sociotechnical imaginaries and nuclear power in the United States and South Korea, Minerva 47 (2) (2009) 119-146.

[405] S. Jasanoff, H. Kim (Eds.), Dreamscapes of Modernity. Sociotechnical Imaginaries and the Fabrication of Power, University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 2015.

[406] H. Simmet, Lighting a dark continent: Imaginaries of energy transition in Senegal, Energy Res. Social Sci. 40 (2018) 71-81.

[407] D. Hess, Publics as threats: Integrating science and technology studies and social movement studies, Science as Culture 24 (1) (2015) 69-82.

[408] S.-H. Kim, Social movements and contested imaginaries in South Korea, in: S. Jasanoff, S.-H. Kim (Eds.), Dreamscapes of Modernity, University of Chicago Press, Chicago, Sociotechnical Imaginaries and the Fabrication of Power, 2015, pp. 152-173.

[409] J. Marquardt, L. Delina, Reimagining energy futures: contributions from community sustainable energy transitions in Thailand and the Philippines, Energy Res. Social Sci. 49 (2019) 91-102.

[410] L. Levidow, S. Raman. Sociotechnical imaginaries of low-carbon energy-waste futures: UK techno-market fixes displacing public accountability. Sci. as Culture doi.org/10.1177/0306312720905084.

[411] S. Zilliox, J. Smith, Colorado's fracking debates: citizen science, conflict and collaboration, Science as Culture 27 (2) (2018) 221-241.

[412] D. Rosenbloom, Framing low-carbon pathways: a discursive analysis of contending storylines surrounding the phase-out of coal-fired power in Ontario, Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions 27 (2018) 129-145.

[413] S. Fuller, D. McCauley, Framing energy justice: perspectives from activism and advocacy, Energy Res. Social Sci. 11 (2016) 1-8.

[414] D. Hess, Coalitions, framing, and the politics of energy transitions: Local democracy and community choice in California, Energy Res. Social Sci. 50 (2019) 38-50.

[415] M. Hajer, Doing discourse analysis: coalitions, practices, and meaning, in: M. van den Brink and T. Metze (Eds.), Words Matter in Policy and Planning, Netherlands Graduate School of Urban and Regional Research, Utrecht, The Netherlands, 2006, 65-74.

[416] R. Benford, D. Snow, Framing processes and social movements: An overview and assessment, Ann. Rev. Sociol. 26 (1) (2000) 611-639.

[417] D.J. Hess, Coalitions, framing, and the politics of energy transitions: Local democracy and community choice in California, Energy Res. Social Sci. 50 (2019) 38-50.

[418] D. Hess, Energy democracy and social movements: A multi-coalition perspective on the politics of sustainability transitions, Energy Res. Social Sci. 40 (2018) 177-189.

[419] M. Hajer, The Politics of Environmental Discourse, Oxford University Press, Oxford, U.K., 1995.

[420] F. Fischer, Reframing Public Policy: Discursive Politics and Deliberative Practices, Oxford University Press, Oxford, U.K., 2003.

[421] D.J. Hess, Q.D. Mai, K.P. Brown, Red states, green laws: ideology and renewable energy legislation in the United States, Energy Res. Social Sci. 11 (2016) 19-28.

[422] B.K. Sovacool, J. Axsen, S. Sorrell, "Promoting novelty, rigor, and style in energy social science: Towards codes of practice for appropriate methods and research design, Energy Res. Soc. Sci. 45 (2018) 12-42.

[423] B.K. Sovacool, What Are We Doing Here? Analyzing Fifteen Years of Energy Scholarship and Proposing a Social Science Research Agenda, Energy Res. Social Sci. 1 (2014) 1-29.

[424] J. Henrich, S.J. Heine, et al., Most people are not WEIRD, Nature 466 (2010) 29.

[425] Joseph Henrich, Steven J. Heine, Ara Norenzayan, The weirdest people in the world? Behavioural and Brain Sciences (2010) 1-75.

[426] Elise Boulding, Kenneth E. Boulding, The Future Images and Processes, Sage Publications, London, 1995.

[427] F.W. Geels, J.W. Schot, Typology of sociotechnical transition pathways, Res. Policy 36 (3) (2007) 399-417.

[428] A.H. Van de Ven, M.S. Poole, Explaining development and change in organizations, Acad. Manag. Rev. 20 (3) (1995) 510-540.

[429] Mari Ratinen, Social embeddedness of policy actors: The failure of consumer-owned wind energy in Finland, Energy Policy 128 (2019) 735-743.

[430] B. Jessop, Institutionalised re(turns) and the strategic-relational approach, Environ. Plan. A 33 (7) (2001) 1213-1235.

[431] Jeffrey Broadbent, Movement in Context: Thick Networks and Japanese Environmental Protest, in: Mario Diani, Doug McAdam (Eds.), Social Movements and Networks, Oxford University Press, Relational Approaches to Collective Action, Oxford/New York, 2003, pp. 204-229.

[432] J.B. Foster, B. Clark, R. York, The ecological rift: Capitalism's war on the earth, NYU Press, 2011.

[433] Bozeman, Barry. Epistemology and Future Studies: How Do We Know What We Can't Know? Public Administration Review, Vol. 37, No. 5. (Sep.-Oct., 1977), pp. 544-549.

[434] EH Noppers, K Keizer, JW Bolderdijk, L Steg, The adoption of sustainable innovations: driven by symbolic and environmental motives, Global Environmental Change 25, 52-62.

[435] Clark A. Miller, Jason O'Leary, Elisabeth Graffy, Ellen B. Stechel, Gary Dirks, Narrative futures and the governance of energy transitions, Futures 70 (2015) 65-74.

[436] Sjoerd Bakker, Harro Van Lente, Marius Meeus, Arenas of Expectations for Hydrogen Technologies, Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 78 (1) (2011) 152-162.

[437] Cynthia Selin, Expectations and the Emergence of Nanotechnology, Sci. Technol. Human Values 32 (2) (2007) 196-220.

[438] Brown, Nik, Brian Rappert and Andrew Webster. "Introducing Contested Futures: From Looking into the Future to Looking at the Future." In Brown, Nik, Brian Rappert, and Andrew Webster (Eds). 2000. Contested Futures: a Sociology of Prospective Techno-science. Aldershot; Burlington, VT: Ashgate, pp. 3-20.

[439] Andy Stirling, How deep is incumbency? A 'configuring fields' approach to re-distributing and reorienting power in socio-material change, Energy Res. Social Sci. 58 (2019).

[440] A. Stirling, Democratising science and technology, SPRU, University of Sussex, 2019.

[441] F.W. Geels, Foundational ontologies and multi-paradigm analysis, applied to the socio-technical transition from mixed farming to intensive pig husbandry (1930-1980), Technol. Anal. Strat. Manage. 21 (7) (2009) 805-832.

[442] S. Harding, Objectivity and diversity: Another logic of scientific research, University of Chicago Press, 2015.

[443] F.W. Geels, Ontologies, socio-technical transitions (to sustainability), and the multi-level perspective, Res. Policy 39 (4) (2010) 495-510.

[444] F.W. Geels, Micro-foundations of the Multi-Level Perspective on socio-technical transitions: Developing a multi-dimensional model of agency through crossovers between social constructivism, evolutionary economics and neo-institutional theory, Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 152 (2020).

[445] A. Abbott, Chaos of Disciplines, The University of Chicago Press, Chicago and London, 2001.

[446] Jean Lebel, Robert McLean, A better measure of research from the global south, Nature 5 (2018) 23-26.

[447] M.A. Max-Neef, Foundations of transdisciplinarity, Ecol. Econ. 53 (2005) 5-16.