# Toward Climate-Neutral Heavy Industry: An Analysis of Industry Transition Roadmaps
## 4 Discussion  
### Breadth and Depth of Industry Transition Roadmaps  
As highlighted earlier, the literature on transitions and transformations acknowledges it as being multi-faceted and context-specific [28], consisting not only of technological shifts but also shifts in norms, institutions, paradigms, mindsets, and priorities [46; 47; 48]. For example, the IPCC identifies enabling conditions for system transitions as including finance, technological innovation, strengthened policy instruments, institutional capacity, multilevel governance, and changes in human behavior and lifestyles [49]. Therefore, we conceptualize industry transitions as being socio-technical in nature and involving multiple, co-evolving elements, including not only technologies but also markets, policies, infrastructures, and social behavior [27]. In particular, the role of government policy has been highlighted as fundamental to incentivizing decarbonization of industry [50]. Studies have also highlighted the non-neutral nature of transitions and transformations, with the worldviews and framings of specific actors determining what solutions are proposed [51]. As such, roadmaps, interpreted as strategic visions of transitions as set out by key actors, are themselves a manifestation of these different perspectives and framings. Our comparative analysis of industry transition roadmaps enables us to investigate the extent to which countries' perspectives incorporate the multi-faceted approach to transitions called for by the literature, by evaluating the extent to which different requirements--from policy levers to finance needs to technology demands--were included. Our results indicate two interesting points of discussion. Firstly, all sampled roadmaps contain a broad degree of comprehensiveness across the three categories of requirements, indicating that the roadmaps generally reflect the multi-faceted approach to transitions called for in the literature. However, our analysis reveals that no single roadmap covers all three categories of requirements in detail. They often remain more focused on one category in detail, whilst only more briefly mentioning requirements in other categories. As such, there is some indication here of roadmaps being comprehensive and multi-faceted in principle but not when it comes to detailed actionable requirements for implementation. Secondly, our analysis of roadmaps indicates a bias toward policy levers, with policy not only being the most frequently cited of the three categories of requirements but also being included in the most detail compared to requirements in the other two categories. This indicates the need for strong policies and government action to create the enabling environment for decarbonization and roadmap implementation, in addition to commercially viable technology and readily available finance. This finding is in line with research highlighting the importance of policy mixes in catalyzing industry decarbonization [52; 53; 54]. At the same time, this bias could be reflective of the actors involved in roadmapping processes. As the results indicate, most roadmaps analyzed were developed by industry