Conference Theme

The Urgency of Navigating Tensions in Sustainability Transitions

The 16th International Sustainability Transitions Conference (IST’25) comes at a pivotal moment in the global response to climate change. One decade after the 2015 Paris Agreement, the international community is still searching for a climate solution that balances adequacy, equity, and effective implementation to avert catastrophic global warming. Meanwhile, the increase in average global temperatures surpassed 1.5ºC in 2024. Its consequences are already visible in the form of heatwaves, droughts, and storms, which are increasingly frequent, longer, and stronger, as anticipated by climate science, signaling the intensifying urgency of the climate crisis.

Despite significant progress in renewable energy technologies, such as wind, solar PV, and electric vehicles, global emissions continue to rise, and the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) are regressing. Geopolitical crises have exposed the vulnerability of countries and heightened concerns about energy security (Bento et al., 2024). Moreover, political developments such as the expected withdrawal of the United States from the Paris Agreement under the Trump administration, alongside the weakening of climate targets and commitments by several major businesses, have further eroded global momentum. These trends highlight the increased complexity and the importance of considering the institutional, organizational, technical, social, and political aspects of deep changes in sociotechnical systems (Markard et al., 2012).

The climate urgency underscores the critical need for a rapid and deep transformation of production and consumption systems. Structural change is central to achieving such transformations, defined as the fundamental reconfiguration of production and consumption systems that underpin crucial services like transport, thermal comfort, and sustenance. Technological innovation can drive structural change both between and within sectors, as exemplified by electrification’s pervasive impact and innovations like planes and cars reshaping transportation systems and urban planning (Grubler, 2003). Historically, these transformations have been preceded by periods of heightened expectation and financial speculation (Perez, 2002). However, deep socio and political change come often with tensions as pointed by several theories such as Marx’s materialistic conceptualization (Freeman, 2019). In today’s case, there is growing evidence that structural change is fraught with tensions and trade-offs (e.g., Andersen et al., 2023). For instance, instances of rapid transitions (like solar-PV or electric vehicles) are often modular, but not always necessarily deep or system-wide. This thus challenges the assumptions of early (and some ongoing) transitions research that structural change can be simultaneously fast, deep, and broad.

The IST’25 conference theme focuses on exploring these dilemmas, conflicts, and opportunities to advance sustainability transitions that align with the urgent demands of climate and sustainability goals.

Exploring Conflicts in Scale, Scope, and Speed

Sustainability transitions frequently involve conflicts between scale, scope, and speed. While modular solutions such as solar PV and EVs have scaled rapidly, confirming previous analysis (Wilson et al., 2020), their impact on systemic change can be limited as they often reinforce existing pathways. For example, the adoption of millions of EVs did not solve the mobility problems in the cities. Conversely, technology and behavioral innovations like electrification and shift to public and shared transport would have a much larger effect in decarbonizing mobility, while reducing oil dependency and enhancing security of supply (Bento et al., 2024). Similarly, rapid transitions can create significant inequities, as wealthier regions may accelerate their transitions while leaving less well-off regions behind. Indeed, the trade-offs are not only technical but also socio-political—such as the resistance to phasing out fossil fuels in economies reliant on oil or coal. Structural change must therefore grapple with these tensions, balancing technological innovation with the socioeconomic realities and impacts. For example, coal mining communities in regions such as Germany or South Africa face economic displacement (Markard et al., 2024), while some oil-exporting nations struggle with destabilized economies, highlighting the need for contextual consideration in developing strategies to mitigate these tensions.

Unintended Consequences of Structural Change

Even well-intentioned transitions can have unintended consequences or side effects, raising the specter of “unsustainable transitions.” While renewable energy technologies are critical to reducing emissions, their rapid deployment can strain resources and create new dependencies. The extraction of lithium and cobalt for EV batteries, for example, raises concerns about environmental degradation and social exploitation, particularly in regions with fragile ecosystems or vulnerable communities (Sovacool et al., 2020). Many of the supply chains associated with clean energy technologies are concentrated in a few regions, creating new vulnerabilities and dependencies. For example, in 2022, China concentrated 75% global manufacturing capacity of EV batteries and 80% of installed capacity for producing solar PV modules (IEA, 2023). Similarly, renewable energy infrastructure, such as wind farms and solar plants, may disrupt local ecologies or provoke social opposition. On the other hand, innovations such as Sports Utility Vehicles (SUVs) and space tourism follow overconsumption patterns and keep societies less sustainable, being examples of so-called “unsustainabilities” (Markard et al., 2023). These examples reveal a paradox: sustainability transitions, in their current form, often replicate the extractive, overconsumption and inequitable dynamics they aim to replace. The uncertain impacts of Artificial Intelligence could provide a recent illustration. Addressing these dilemmas requires a more nuanced understanding of the complex interactions between technological, institutional, social, and ecological systems.

Opportunities for pushing the knowledge frontiers

To navigate these challenges, this conference calls for deeper empirical and theoretical engagement with the conflicts and opportunities in sustainability transitions. Bridging the gaps between speed, equity, and systemic depth requires interdisciplinary research and cross-sector collaboration. Crossovers between traditional fields such as geography, economics, sociology, politics, and emerging approaches, such as sustainable finance, polycentric governance and just transitions frameworks, offer promising pathways to address these dilemmas. Furthermore, alternative models of progress—such as degrowth or post-growth paradigms—challenge conventional assumptions about growth and offer transformative possibilities. IST’25 aims to foster dialogue and innovation to advance the frontiers of sustainability research and practice, providing actionable insights to accelerate equitable and systemic transitions.

References

Andersen, A. D., Geels, F. W., Coenen, L., Hanson, J., Korsnes, M., Linnerud, K., … & Wiebe, K. (2023). Faster, broader, and deeper! Suggested directions for research on net-zero transitions. Oxford Open Energy, 2, oiad007.

Bento, N., Grubler, A., Boza-Kiss, B., De Stercke, S., Krey, V., McCollum, D. L., … & Alves, T. (2024). Leverage demand-side policies for energy security. Science, 383(6686), 946-949.

Freeman, C. (2019). History, co-evolution and economic growth. Industrial and Corporate Change, 28(1), 1-44.

Grubler, A. (2003). Technology and Global Change. Cambridge University Press.

IEA (2023), The State of Clean Technology Manufacturing, IEA, Paris https://www.iea.org/reports/the-state-of-clean-technology-manufacturing

Markard, J., Isoaho, K., & Widdel, L. (2023). Discourses around decline: Comparing the debates on coal phase-out in the UK, Germany and Finland. In Technologies in Decline: Socio-Technical Approaches to Discontinuation and Destabilisation (pp. 119-144). Routledge.

Markard, J., Raven, R., & Truffer, B. (2012). Sustainability transitions: An emerging field of research and its prospects. Research Policy, 41(6), 955-967.

Perez, C. (2002). Technological revolutions and financial capital: The dynamics of bubbles and golden ages. In Technological revolutions and financial capital. Edward Elgar Publishing.

Sovacool, B.K., Ali, S.H. & Bazilian, M. et al. (2020). Sustainable minerals and metals for a low-carbon future. Science, 367(6473), 30–33.

Wilson, C., Grubler, A., Bento, N., Healey, S., De Stercke, S., & Zimm, C. (2020). Granular technologies to accelerate decarbonization. Science, 368(6486), 36-39.