ArticlePDF Available

Dynamism in policy-affiliated transition intermediaries

May 2022
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 159(112210):1-15

DOI:10.1016/j.rser.2022.112210

License
CC BY 4.0

Authors:

Madis Talmar

Eindhoven University of Technology

Bob Walrave

Eindhoven University of Technology

Rob Raven

Monash University (Australia)

Georges Romme

Eindhoven University of Technology

Transition intermediaries are actors that support socio-technical transition processes by bridging structural deficiencies in a transitioning domain. Previous research has identified what roles transition intermediaries perform and how. However, while transitioning domains are by definition in a state of change, the dynamics of transition intermediaries have hardly been studied. Therefore, we explore what mechanisms are driving change in transition-supportive roles of intermediaries, and what kind of conditions enable an intermediary to be dynamically adaptive in supporting a transitioning domain. These questions are addressed in a longitudinal case study of a major European intermediary in sustainable energy. We find this intermediary changed its transition support activities as a result of the frontline staff continually exploring the needs of transition stakeholders and designing new value offerings in response. These role dynamics are enabled by a structure where the policy principal delegates the choice of support activity and external accountability to the intermediary, which organizes itself in a customer-oriented manner. As such, we conclude that the dynamics in intermediaries’ transition activities arise from the interplay between policy mandate, organizational structure/design, and staff agency.

typology of intermediary roles [5].

…

Interviews per each individual service in the portfolio (including repeat in- terviews with some informants, sequenced according to the clusters in Appendix 3).

…

Figures - uploaded by Georges Romme

Content may be subject to copyright.

Content uploaded by Georges Romme

Content may be subject to copyright.

Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 159 (2022) 112210

Dynamism in policy-afliated transition intermediaries

Madis Talmar

, Bob Walrave

, Rob Raven

, A. Georges L. Romme

Eindhoven University of Technology, Department of Industrial Engineering and Innovation Sciences, P.O. Box 513, 5600 MB, Eindhoven, the Netherlands

Monash University, Monash Sustainable Development Institute, Wellington Rd, Clayton, VIC, 3800, Australia

Utrecht University, Copernicus Institute of Sustainable Development, Heidelberglaan 8, 3584 CS, Utrecht, the Netherlands

ARTICLE INFO

Keywords:

Transition intermediary

Energy transition

Transition policy

Organization design

Longitudinal study

ABSTRACT

Transition intermediaries are actors that support socio-technical transition processes by bridging structural de-

ciencies in a transitioning domain. Previous research has identied what roles transition intermediaries perform

and how. However, while transitioning domains are by denition in a state of change, the dynamics of transition

intermediaries have hardly been studied. Therefore, we explore what mechanisms are driving change in

transition-supportive roles of intermediaries, and what kind of conditions enable an intermediary to be

dynamically adaptive in supporting a transitioning domain. These questions are addressed in a longitudinal case

study of a major European intermediary in sustainable energy. We nd this intermediary changed its transition

support activities as a result of the frontline staff continually exploring the needs of transition stakeholders and

designing new value offerings in response. These role dynamics are enabled by a structure where the policy

principal delegates the choice of support activity and external accountability to the intermediary, which orga-

nizes itself in a customer-oriented manner. As such, we conclude that the dynamics in intermediaries’ transition

activities arise from the interplay between policy mandate, organizational structure/design and staff agency.

1. Introduction

Collaboration between actors is a key condition for accomplishing

transitions in socio-technical domains, such as energy, mobility, or food.

In the uncertain and dynamic conditions of a transition, however,

establishing and running successful collaborations is often hampered by

distrust, lack of previous ties, conicting visions, and diversity in the

technological and organizational backgrounds of the actors involved

[1]. Transition intermediaries are actors that are established to bridge

these and other structural deciencies in transition processes, by facil-

itating the interactions and support needs of other actors in a tran-

sitioning domain [2]. Various studies have identied the roles that

transition intermediaries perform in support of transitions [3–8],

including creating and facilitating networks, investing in new busi-

nesses, and developing human resources for specic transition path-

ways. In previous research, there have also been cues about adaptive

behavior in intermediaries. Studies have found that ecologies of in-

termediaries can change during the course of a transition and that, over

time, some intermediaries can cease to act as one [9,10]. Furthermore,

transition intermediaries have been noted to change their roles over

time and full them “rather uidly as a response to their dynamic

context and internal learning process” [11]. Kivimaa et al. [12] also

suggest that intermediaries, in order to manage conicts and overcome

confusion about their own roles, can reposition themselves over time.

However, research has yet to focus on what we refer to as ‘dyna-

mism’ of an intermediary, that is, understanding how and why indi-

vidual transition intermediaries develop and change their transition-

supportive activities over time; and correspondingly, how to design an

intermediary and its governance in a way that provides optimal support

to a transition in any given phase of the transition. Meanwhile, many

intermediaries operate as policy levers in transition support. Therefore,

knowledge of how to improve an individual intermediary’s temporal

efcacy would be highly valuable, stressing the importance of better

understanding the specic conditions and mechanisms of change.

Correspondingly, we raise the following research question: Under what

conditions and how do policy-afliated transition intermediaries change their

transition-supportive activities?

We performed a longitudinal exploratory case study (spanning

2011–2017) of a major transition intermediary (henceforth: TrInt) in the

European sustainable energy landscape – involving 45 interviews and

the analysis of over 460 archival materials. To inductively identify the

mechanisms and enablers of intermediary dynamism as well as inform a

future research agenda on these topics, we use TrInt as a paradigmatic

* Corresponding author.

E-mail address: m.talmar@tue.nl (M. Talmar).

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/rser

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2022.112210

Received 14 February 2020; Received in revised form 26 January 2022; Accepted 29 January 2022

Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 159 (2022) 112210

case [13]; this case was selected because of its origin in a policy inter-

vention by the European Union, its international scope, and the sub-

stantial diversication of its activities and engaged stakeholders over

time.

Our ndings serve to contribute to the literature on transition in-

termediaries and innovation policy by developing theory on how and

under what conditions intermediation activities change over time. First,

we nd that intermediaries can create signicant complementarities

between the transition-supportive roles that they perform (e.g., cong-

uring and aligning interests, technology assessment and evaluation, in-

vestment in new businesses, etc.) [5]. Second, we articulate the

mechanisms by which the intermediary changes its

transition-supportive activities. Third, we explain how policy gover-

nance, intermediary management and operational activities together

enable the intermediary to continually re-couple itself to a transition

domain. These ndings also inform a future research agenda for inves-

tigating policy-afliated transition intermediaries.

2. Transitions and intermediaries

To effectively deal with major environmental issues, societies need to

transform across their systems of production and consumption – that is,

transition to more sustainable socio-technical congurations [14–16].

Achieving a large-scale transformation of a socio-technical system is,

however, very challenging. An arsenal of transition research has

conceptualized and empirically demonstrated how incumbent

socio-technical congurations are deeply embedded in socio-technical

regimes (referring to dominant ‘rules’ embedded in institutions and in-

frastructures), which are reproduced by incumbent networks of actors

that resist change because of routinized behavior and vested interest in

dominant designs and infrastructures [17]. New innovations (e.g., new

technologies, products and services), emerging in so-called socio--

technical niches, require strategic nurturing and empowerment as well

as integration into larger systems capable of challenging the present

regime [18]. A key issue in this process is that upcoming innovations are

initially underdeveloped, more expensive and less reliable compared to

the vested socio-technical congurations they are assumed to replace

[18]. Furthermore, in organizing activities toward a transition, a diverse

set of actors, including rms, research organizations, policymakers, in-

vestors and users/consumers have to reinvent the way they operate,

collaborate and innovate [3]. Emerging socio-technical congurations

thus experience structural, technological, commercial, as well as orga-

nizational challenges.

In this study, we focus on one prominent type of (policy) intervention

toward overcoming these challenges, namely the transition intermediary

[3,5,6,19,20]. We dene transition intermediaries, following [8], as

“actors and platforms that positively inuence sustainability transition

processes by linking actors and activities, and their related skills and

resources, or by connecting transition visions and demands of networks

of actors with existing regimes in order to create momentum for

socio-technical system change, to create new collaborations within and

across niche technologies, ideas and markets, and to disrupt dominant

unsustainable socio-technical congurations.” As such, in comparison to

the more generic conceptualization of innovation intermediaries [21],

transition intermediation entails a considerable effort facilitating

structural change toward a (desirable) future socio-technical system

conguration.

Previous work in this area suggests such support creates signicant

value for at least two reasons. First, in order to bridge the competi-

tiveness gap between old and new technologies, individual development

initiatives of the latter require strategic support [22]. Here, intermediaries

can perform activities that are difcult to undertake for each initiative

alone, such as gaining access to funding, lobbying, or steering human

resource development [4].

Second, some activities toward furthering a new socio-technical

conguration are, by nature, aggregate level activities [23]: for example,

the building and maintaining of networks that connect the different

stakeholders of the new congurations [24], to external actors such as

funding and legislative bodies [25], and to regime structures [26,27].

While vital to the development of new system congurations, these

activities are typically not in the domain of any particular innovator.

Neither can they be assumed to emerge without dedicated support.

Indeed, intermediaries appear to be valuable to the creation and

dissemination of new socio-technical congurations [5,26,27]. Corre-

spondingly, previous studies have explored the different avors of in-

termediaries across different industrial and institutional contexts [3–6,

28,29] and the mechanisms that complement or conict each other in

connecting specic intermediation activities [30]. By synthesizing

various branches of transition studies, Kivimaa [5] devised and empir-

ically validated a typology of transition intermediary roles (Table 1).

Subsequent work has shown that a particular context is typically

populated by several (transition) intermediaries with different compe-

tencies and business models [30]. As such, one can speak of ‘ecologies of

intermediaries’ in which different intermediaries perform different

subsets of roles: some of which are complementary, some others

competitive [4,8,9,31]. In characterizing ecologies of intermediaries,

various studies [4,9,10] also observed that, over time, some in-

termediaries perish and become replaced by others. As such, at the level

Abbreviations:

CEO Chief Executive Ofcer

EU European Union

NSD New Service Development

PhD Doctor of Philosophy

SME Small and medium-sized enterprises

TrInt Transition Intermediary (referring to the investigated

case organization)

Table 1

A typology of intermediary roles [5].

Articulation of

expectations and

visions

Building social

networks

Learning processes

and exploration at

multiple

dimensions

Other

- Articulation of

needs, expectations

and requirements

(A1)

- Strategy

development (A2)

- Acceleration of the

application and

commercialization of

new technologies

(A3)

- Advancement of

sustainability aims

(A4)

- Creation and

facilitation of

new networks

(N1)

- Gatekeeping

and brokering

(N2)

- Conguring and

aligning

interests (N3)

- Managing

nancial

resources -

nding

potential

funding and

funding

activities (N4)

- Identication

and

management of

human resource

needs (Skills)

(N5)

- Knowledge

gathering,

processing,

generation and

combination (L1)

- Technology

assessment and

evaluation (L2)

- Prototyping and

piloting (L3)

- Investment in

new businesses

(L4)

- Communication

and dissemination

of knowledge (L5)

- Education and

training (L6)

- Provision of

advice and

support (L7)

- Creating

conditions for

learning-by-doing

and using (L8)

- Arbitration based

on neutrality and

trust (O1)

- (Long-term)

project design,

management and

evaluation (O2)

- Policy

implementation

(O3)

- Accreditation and

standard setting

(O4)

- Creating new jobs

(O5)

M. Talmar et al.

Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 159 (2022) 112210

of the entire ecology, some of the dynamics of transition-supporting

intermediaries are known. Research has also observed that in-

termediaries can change their roles over time, and thus reposition

themselves in the face of the unfolding transition [11,12].

However, with previous research adopting a relatively short tem-

poral scope with limited attention for internal dynamics [4,6,32,33],

little is known about how and why individual intermediaries exhibit

dynamism in their activities. This is a major limitation because tran-

sitioning domains are by denition in a state of change, suggesting that

intermediaries can only become effective instruments in transition pol-

icy portfolios [34,35] if they are studied and designed as dynamic sys-

tems. Furthermore, empirical studies have thus far focused on the roles

performed by intermediaries, resulting in a lack of knowledge on how

transition intermediaries are governed and set up as organizational

structures that develop and perform these roles over time [8]. This paper

addresses these shortcomings in earlier work.

3. Material and methods

To enable a deep empirical exploration, we performed a longitudinal

study of the intermediary TrInt, including a total of eighteen case studies

of individual service development instances [36]. TrInt is a major

intermediary in the area of sustainable energy, established as a

public-private partnership that is funded partly by the European Union

(EU) and partly by annual partnership contributions by a wide range of

industrial stakeholders. Following the denition adopted from Ref. [8],

we considered TrInt as an instance of a transition intermediary for three

reasons. First, its mission was to contribute to a transition toward a

sustainable energy future for Europe, in particular by integrating and

enhancing the knowledge triangle of industry, research and education.

To full that mission, TrInt facilitated network building and collabora-

tions among hundreds of energy domain stakeholders. Second, when

interviewing representatives of TrInt, we noted that supporting the

European energy transition was consistently mentioned as a motivation

for action on behalf of TrInt at both the managerial and operational

level. Third, the EU has explicitly mandated TrInt to support promising

innovations across different sustainable energy technology areas, implying

a systems approach involving multiple technologies and markets.

For this study, the TrInt case features a highly relevant context in two

ways. First, we adopt a longitudinal view on the evolution of this

intermediary, providing an opportunity to observe how its activities

changed over time. Second, TrInt is an intermediary established as a

deliberate policy intervention: it was created with the specic mandate

from both public and private stakeholders to support innovation in

sustainable energy [10]. Accordingly, the case provides opportunities

for developing a deep understanding of the governance and manage-

ment of transition intermediaries as policy instruments.

For the TrInt study, we collected data via interviews, archival ma-

terials and participant observations, spanning the period of 2011–2017.

As primary data sources, we conducted a total of 45 semi-structured

interviews in the period from June 2013 to July 2017, in ve different

locations where TrInt operates. In selecting informants, a key heuristic

arose from the early observation that TrInt packages its support activ-

ities into distinct service offerings; notably, the term ‘service’ here is not

restricted to a transaction with customers.

Accordingly, based on a

preliminary list of TrInt’s services, the aim was to invite for each TrInt

service at least one interviewee with rst-hand experience in developing

or providing the particular service (see Table 2). For most services, we

were able to reduce single-respondent bias by triangulating across

multiple interviewees [37]. Furthermore, interview transcripts were

supplemented with archival materials in the form of minutes of super-

visory and executive board meetings, annual business plans, internal

correspondence, and external communication materials. A total of 463

documents were collected and analyzed, spanning over 4000 pages. This

longitudinal research design (across four years) serves to study the

mechanisms underlying the dynamics in transition support activities in

real-time, thereby also limiting retrospective bias [38].

For conducting the interviews, we developed a semi-structured

interview protocol including three major blocks of questions. Firstly,

given that TrInt structured its activities around specic services, we

developed a set of questions about the development and provision of

services, synthesized from the service development framework of

Froehle and Roth [39]. For each service, we inquired about: (a) the

description of the service, (b) the motivation for developing the service,

process and timeline of developing the service, (e) connections of the

service with the other services of TrInt, (f) involved and impacted

stakeholders (both internal and external), (g) the impact of the service to

the role of TrInt in the European energy landscape, and (h) the (inten-

ded) impact of the service to the energy transition.

Secondly, we inquired about the organizational and governance

conditions surrounding service development in TrInt at the level of each

particular service, including (i) the origin of the mandate for developing

Table 2

Interviews per each individual service in the portfolio (including repeat in-

terviews with some informants, sequenced according to the clusters in Appendix

3).

Service description Interviews Prole of informants

1. Early-stage venture

support

interviews

Four location managers

; ve supported

entrepreneurs; three venturing ofcers

2. Innovation project

support for ventures

interviews

Two location managers; technology

ofcer; project manager; venturing

ofcer

3. Scaling support for

ventures

interviews

Two location managers

4. Due diligence on

entrepreneurial teams

1 interview Service manager

5. Industrialization

support

interviews

Service manager; team member

6. Innovation project

support

interviews

Four location managers; two project

managers; technology ofcer; supported

entrepreneur

7. Organizational culture

assessment

1 interview Service manager

8. Corporate innovation

support

interviews

Two location managers; service

manager; two team members

9. New business concepts

competition

interviews

Service manager; team member

10. Talent matching 2

interviews

Three education ofcers

11. Master programs 3

interviews

Three education ofcers

12. PhD program 2

interviews

Two education ofcers

13. (Online) community 1 interview Service manager

14. Matchmaking events 4

interviews

Two location managers; supported

entrepreneur

15. International

networking event

interviews

Two location managers; supported

entrepreneur

16. Thematic reports 2

interviews

Two technology ofcers

17. New technology

impact estimation

interviews

Technology ofcer; service manager

18. Initial market

development

interviews

Service manager; technology ofcer;

location manager; project manager

A location manager is the CEO of a TrInt ofce in a particular geographic

area, such as Scandinavia.

In identifying any separate service in TrInt, we assumed the following two

conditions: (a) a service has a distinctive value proposition oriented to external

stakeholders (i.e., offerings for internal users were excluded) that may be

provided free of charge, and (b) a service has a distinct title and a commonly

acknowledged description within TrInt. For condentiality reasons, we refer to

all services by labels that are indicative of their nature but differ from their

ofcial labels in TrInt.

M. Talmar et al.

Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 159 (2022) 112210

each service, (ii) the accompanying budget allocation and conditions,

(iii) oversight of the service development process by TrInt managers,

and (iv) any links the service development had with the overall gover-

nance of TrInt. Thirdly, in case of interviewees holding managerial po-

sitions (i.e., ve location managers), we further inquired about how the

overall governance over the service portfolio and the service develop-

ment process at TrInt was performed.

Building on data from question blocks one and two, triangulated

with document analysis performed in NVivo along the categories a-h and

i-iv dened above, we composed an individual service development

narrative for each of the services of TrInt. The resulting narratives were

then coded using the framework of intermediary roles [5], simulta-

neously distinguishing the specic roles of transition intermediation and

the stakeholder engagement in accomplishing these roles as featured in

each service. The purpose of this coding effort regarding our two

research questions was to establish a standardized indicator of the level

of dynamism within and across services; as well as to identify any pat-

terns in how the intermediary creates value to stakeholders across

services.

In a parallel data analysis effort, we explored the governance and

organizational conditions for designing new services in TrInt. Here, we

used the second and third block of interview data and archival materials,

to code the respective sections for a separate narrative about the con-

ditions for new service development and service portfolio composition

at TrInt.

4. Dynamism in services to stakeholders

The empirical analysis spans, with one exception, all services iden-

tied in the TrInt service portfolio. The inception of the services ranges

from before the period researched (i.e., 2011), to being in a prototype

stage at the end of the research period in July 2017. In particular, the

portfolio of TrInt in 2011 (outlined in Appendix 1) included four distinct

services which engaged four main classes of external stakeholders:

ventures, SMEs, research organizations, and university students. Over

time, a total of 14 novel services were added, engaging extant stake-

holder classes in new ways or addressing two new stakeholders as

explicit targets of services: investors and corporations. In Appendix 1

(for 2011) and Appendix 3 (for 2017), the services in the TrInt portfolio

have been coded with regard to the transition-supportive roles toward

the six stakeholder classes. In Appendix 2, each included service is

briey described. The following subsections serve to explore how and

why the transition-supportive role combinations of TrInt evolved over

time.

4.1. Facilitating ventures and investors

Throughout the period studied, sustainable energy ventures were

one of the key stakeholder classes for TrInt. A location manager

explained: “[Supporting ventures] is particularly important in the eld

of energy. Traditionally, energy is dominated by big players. So, a small

startup has a huge challenge. Not only to prove that their idea is good,

but also to convince why should a multi-billion utility buy from a small

company … There you need muscles … [TrInt] can be that muscle.”

In 2011, TrInt provided one distinct service toward that end: early-

stage venture support (#1 in Appendix 1). A central aim of TrInt here

was to breed new energy ventures that commercialize sustainable

technologies (A3) and create jobs (O5). Both aims were directly related

to TrInt’s policy mandate (A4, O3). The service frequently involved an

investment by TrInt in the venture (L4), which then mostly operated as

an enabler for the venture to survive and engage in extensive learning-

by-doing (L8). As the CEO of TrInt put it, “Our business model is not to

give just money. But to give services … and also a bit of money.”

In non-monetary support, TrInt focused on supporting individuals or

entrepreneurial teams mainly in the form of entrepreneurial training

(L6), extensive advice (L7) and building the network of potential

partners around the venture (N1). All of these served to empower the

teams to build their own individual path to success. The service may also

include instances of arbitration (O1), managing human resource needs

(N5), gatekeeping and brokering (N2), and support to nding additional

funds (N4). However, which roles are accomplished and how these roles

are combined in the service was dependent on the need of a venture at

any certain moment, which suggests TrInt was rather exible in the

embodiment of different roles within the service.

At the same time, in its original composition in 2011, the support

program for early-stage ventures appeared to have two signicant

shortcomings. First, as a location manager described: “If you have an

idea … it always needs development inside the company … You still

need focused money to develop your offer. The [early-stage support

program] is great for advice and contacts, but you still need to do

technical development.” That is, the investment of TrInt in each venture

was often seen as insufcient, and many ventures thus struggled to

develop and complete a physical prototype (L3), which in the case of

energy applications is often costly. Second, with a focus on early-stage

ventures, the program lacked both nancial and advisory scope to

provide support for scaling up. As such, even though TrInt was able to

systematically breed new ventures, their impact in terms of market-

readiness was perceived as sub-optimal. As result, TrInt explored the

development of several new services.

One of these services (scaling support: #3 in Appendices 2 and 3) was

developed, starting in 2013, as a “next step after [early-stage venture

support] to small companies that have been operating for some years

and are now willing to grow and to diversify to new business lines, or to

become international” (location manager). Within this service, TrInt

would still be able to invest in the venture (L3), but would often serve as

a broker for raising external funds from investors (N2). Brokering was

also an important part of the service via matchmaking that TrInt orga-

nized in a targeted way with their network partners in selected (future)

markets (N1) for the ventures. In accomplishing this service, the Euro-

pean scope of TrInt was thus particularly useful.

The second new service was a dedicated service created in response

to “the question of start-ups to have money for building a prototype”

(location manager). In particular, using the innovation project support

service (#7, see below) as a base, TrInt designed a support scheme that

would bridge the product development funding gap for ventures. The

resulting innovation project support for ventures (see Appendix 2, ser-

vice #2) was thus one that created a pathway between the offerings of

services #1 and #6, providing “a way to speed up the step from business

creation to innovation …” (venturing ofcer).

Meanwhile, a growing number of TrInt staff members felt that a

rigorous methodology to assess the strength of applicants for TrInt

support was needed, particularly with regard to the entrepreneurial

competencies of venture teams. A suitable methodology would be

instrumental in making better decisions about whether to accept a

certain venture for support (internal advice). Furthermore, it would

tailor the subsequent support program to the individual needs of the

venture (L7). Correspondingly, in 2012 TrInt started putting together a

service of due diligence on entrepreneurial teams (#4), and simulta-

neously explored the need of such a service in the venture capital

community in sustainable energy. In particular, “after we got positive

initial feedback, we selected [one of the biggest sustainable energy VC

rms] and did a pilot with them to rene the tool … Now, every time

they do an investment, they call us rst” (service manager). As a result,

#4 TrInt positioned itself, by 2017, as the standard for team assessment

in the sustainable energy industry (A1; O4). The service connected the

roles of giving advice to investors on whether and how to support a

venture (L7) and feedback to ventures themselves about their develop-

mental needs (L7). This is also the only service in the TrInt portfolio that

explicitly targeted investors as main stakeholders.

M. Talmar et al.

Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 159 (2022) 112210

4.2. Facilitating SMEs and research organizations

Throughout the period under study, a central service in the TrInt

portfolio (by share in annual budget) was innovation project support

(#6 in Appendix 1). The focus in this service was to facilitate the

development of new products/services based on innovative sustainable

energy technologies. As such, the primary role embodied in this service

was the acceleration of the application and commercialization of new

technologies (role A3). The two main stakeholders engaged in this ac-

celeration were SMEs and research organizations, although depending

on the particular project, engagement from ventures, corporations and

students would also be possible.

The service assumed that applications for support were made by pre-

established partnerships (as opposed to individual organizations). To-

ward that end, TrInt facilitated the creation of new networks (N1), an

activity which often benetted from an explicit search and brokerage

effort by TrInt (N2). Once a promising partnership emerged, TrInt

further facilitated the alignment of the actors in designing, managing

and evaluating a project (O2), involving also formal technology

assessment (L2). As another condition for receiving support, each

innovation project had to be afliated with the thematically dened

expectations for the respective technology area. Sculpting and updating

such expectations in the form of a technology roadmap (A2), as a frame

of reference for innovation activities, was thus a key means by which

TrInt articulated needs, expectations and requirements (A1) toward

enacting policy in sustainable energy (O3).

Once a partnership was established and an innovation project

formulated, further support might be granted by TrInt in the form of an

investment (against a projected return) toward accomplishing the

project (N4). Meanwhile, funding was also not the only type of support

provided: TrInt also advised (L7) the partners by non-monetary means,

such as supporting the development of intellectual property strategy,

market research, or matching the project to potential customers (N2). In

the course of executing the project, the stakeholders themselves would

heavily engage in learning-by-doing activities (L8), including proto-

typing and piloting (L3). Innovation projects served to create new jobs in

the industry (O5), and in case any issues emerged between the project

partners, TrInt could serve as an arbiter (O1) to keep the project on

track. This service is also the only service of TrInT that targets research

organizations as a main stakeholder, although they are otherwise

engaged in other services (see appendix 3).

Upon requests from ventures that had some success in niche markets,

TrInt initiated the development of an industrialization support service

(#5) early 2017, in order to systematically bring down the price of new

energy products and thus move from niches to mass market success. The

service manager explained it as follows: “Industrialization is the nal

step … As a result, the energy efciency in Europe will improve more

than some small company only selling a couple of units of their products

… If you don’t raise this phase in growth, all the previous ones will be

mis-investments.” With the service still being developed mid-2017, the

nal service composition remained open, but initial explorations indi-

cated a need to focus on a combination of brokering between the ven-

tures/SMEs, investors and other strong commercialization partners

(N2); and advisory services concerning production set-up, supply chain

and operations management (L7). Additional investments in these rms

were likely needed as well (L4), but TrInt aimed here to broker (N2) in

raising additional capital (N4) from external sources (investors) rather

than invest itself.

A recurrent shortcoming in supporting innovation project, noted by

TrInt staff, was that many organizations were often not culturally ready

to engage in open innovation initiatives with outside parties. In

response, early 2016 TrInt initiated the development of a workshop-

based service to assess and advise (L7) both SMEs and corporations

concerning the innovativeness of their organizational culture (service

#7). By accomplishing that role, TrInt sought to contribute to the human

resource development in energy rms (N5).

4.3. Facilitating corporations

While corporations were involved in TrInt services #1, #3 and #6 as

either project partners or clients to ventures in the period 2011–2014,

TrInt did not offer any services to corporations as the main stakeholder.

In 2014, several corporations explicitly requested support from TrInt. A

location manager explained: “The trigger was the question from a

strategy meeting with our corporate shareholders. [They said that] in-

cremental innovation we can do ourselves, but please come with a

program where you can help us with radical innovation”. Receiving this

signal, TrInt designed a tailored program offered to energy corporations

in developing new sustainable business via collaborative innovation. In

doing so, the corporation would be matched with other stakeholders

(ventures, SMEs, researchers) from the TrInt network (N1) to develop a

common vision (A2, N3) on the future development paths within a so-

cietal domain, such as housing. The program subsequently facilitated a

process of innovation focused on integrating the complementary tech-

nologies/products/services of many organizations in new transition of-

ferings. Brokering (N2) the different parties was central in

accomplishing this, while the specic approach adopted could vary

signicantly from case to another. In different instances of the service,

TrInt’s support focused on, for instance (a) organizing innovation

challenges (accomplishing roles L1, L2, L5, L7 and L8) that lead to

collaborative innovation projects (A3, N4, O2); or (b) performing busi-

ness development activities (N1, N2, N3, L1, L2, L5, L7 and L8) leading

to the set-up and investment in new businesses (N4, L4); or (c) orga-

nizing alignment workshops toward new network ties (N1, N2, N3) that

would facilitate future collaborations between various parties.

Furthermore, the service involves support (L7) regarding organizational

issues around innovation management.

Brokering (N2) was also pivotal to another TrInt service, which

focused on connecting corporations (or occasionally SMEs) to upcoming

talent from TrInt’s educational programs (see below) in the context of

new business concept competitions (service #9). In such a competition,

organized together with a specic corporation, students would propose

and develop new sustainable energy business concepts for this corpo-

ration, serving as new options for the corporation’s product/service

portfolio (L7). For the students, a business concept competition was an

educational experience involving training and coaching by the company

(L6, L7) as well as structurally developing ideas for what may become a

real business (L8). From a human resource point of view (N5), both sides

appeared to benet from the connections made between corporations

and upcoming talent.

Finally, in accommodating the interest of a substantial pool of stu-

dents and alumni from TrInt’s educational programs (see below), TrInt

started in 2017 with offering a talent matching service to corporations/

SMEs. The core role accomplished with this service was gatekeeping and

brokering (N2) candidates with particular skill sets to established rms

for internships, graduation projects and jobs. Moreover, engaging with

corporations and SMEs provided feedback to the educational programs

of TrInt as well as articulated expectations (A1) on the skills that the

industry desired from its future employees (N5).

4.4. Facilitating (future) engineers

Engaging the future workforce in acting toward the energy transition

remained a substantial part of the TrInt service portfolio throughout the

period studied. The two main vehicles developed for this purpose were

extra-curricular educational and personal development programs for

master students (service #11) and PhD researchers (#12). The CEO of

TrInt: “We are trying to create this elite of game changers that will be

wired differently … They are the ones changing the game in sustainable

energy.” As such, most of the entrants to these programs were engi-

neering students, who were educated (L6) in practice-oriented courses

on sustainable energy technologies and entrepreneurship (L8). A key

aim for TrInt here was to breed a substantial number of future engineers

M. Talmar et al.

Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 159 (2022) 112210

that would share a strong belief in cleaner technologies and (corporate)

entrepreneurship as a mode of action to change the world (N5). In

steering these programs, TrInt relied on input from the human resource

needs of the industry (A1, N5), whilst guiding universities and research

centers to develop appropriate courses toward these needs (A1). The

talent pool created in this manner provided the basis of several new

services (e.g., #10, #11, #14) for other stakeholders.

4.5. Facilitating several stakeholders simultaneously

In addition to substantially growing the total number of services, a

key difference between the TrInt portfolios in 2011 and 2017 is the

addition of services with a transition-supportive prole toward all or

most of the stakeholders simultaneously. We identied six of such ser-

vices (#13–18), all of which featured signicant complementarities with

other TrInt services.

Two of these services, the matchmaking event (#14) and the

(annual) international networking event (#15), were created respec-

tively in 2012 and 2013 to facilitate the creation of new ties among the

different stakeholders of the energy domain (N1), ideally leading to new

opportunities for all parties. In the case of service #14, an explicit format

was used, including formal evaluation of each other (L2) and a series of

facilitated matchmaking episodes (N2). In service #15, the network

facilitation role was more implicit, arising mostly from the involvement

of a substantial number of participants (over 650 in 2016) and the use of

a ‘trade fair’ event for new energy technologies/products/services. At

the same time, this event served as a major international industry forum

for sustainable energy, including a conference where industrial partici-

pants shared their expectations (A1) on a number of topics, including

technological and market developments, human resource needs, and

legislative issues (A2, N5).

Another TrInt service that engaged stakeholders from all classes was

the release of thematic reports (#16). With the rst report released in

2014, “the objective we had was thought leadership … it’s showing

what we know and that we know what we are doing” (technology of-

cer). As such, the aim of releasing reports in various technology areas

was driven by the aim to increase TrInt’s legitimacy and centrality in the

sustainable energy domain. However, in accomplishing that goal, the

quality of gathering, processing and disseminating knowledge (L1, L5)

would have to be very high, which is why a thematic report could serve

as an effective means to align expectations (A1) on future technological

developments in a particular thematic eld. Furthermore, as a tech-

nology ofcer explains “as we received such high-level interest, we

decided to take the cost models [in the report] and to put them to web

format.” This became the basis for service #17, which allowed in-

novators to accurately estimate the impact of their technological in-

vention on the cost of energy (L2). With that, TrInt created a standard

(O4) that various stakeholders could use as a reference framework to

calculate the impact of a certain technology.

Building heavily on its educational programs, TrInt initiated a formal

community in 2015 to unite various change agents in sustainable en-

ergy. An alumnus of TrInt’s master school, later serving as the com-

munity manager, explained: “While being a student on the program, I

got to see the potential of connecting the students and the alumni … in a

certain structure, better than just if they meet randomly. [The CEO of

TrInt] liked that idea, but actually offered me to connect not only the

educational part, but all the people in the whole TrInt network.”

As such, service #13 was initiated as the platform for networking

(N1) and communication (L5) among students and alumni of TrInt,

within one larger community that united various location-based groups

(both off- and online). Later changes to the service extended this com-

munity by including (on invitation) ventures, SMEs and corporations. As

such, the activity basis of the community was broadened to feature

talent matchmaking (part of service #10); organize ofine events such

as company-led workshops, lectures and gatherings; and as a forum for

advising each other (L7).

Finally, in terms of the number of transition-supportive roles and

stakeholders involved, the most elaborate service in the portfolio of

TrInt was initial market development (#18). This was a service

providing a tailored set of activities necessary to bridge a signicant

market failure in energy-related application/service markets. Here,

TrInt itself acted as an integrator of multiple technologies and business

models toward bridging a market gap. The project manager of one such

project explained, “[TrInt] puts together a concept … and starts to build

it, and a company around it … we take all the risk: the technical, the

nancial, the managerial.” The acceleration of technology commer-

cialization was thus performed simultaneously on a whole range of

related innovations (A3), which often originated from the other services

of TrInt. The aim was to create a new standard in an energy domain (O4)

by means of funding and building an operational service (L4). It

involved the generation of a strategy for addressing the market gap (A2),

one that would encompass the expectations and requirements (A1)

across the providers of necessary technological capabilities (L2). Here a

TrInt-governed project team (O2) that typically involved student engi-

neers (N5, O5) would attempt to align the interests (N3) in an emerging

network of critical parties (N1) toward execution. The process followed

a typical iterative development path characterized by learning-by-doing

(L8) and piloting (L3) toward a viable operational business.

5. Enablers to dynamism

As is evident, there was signicant dynamism in how TrInt supported

the six classes of energy transition stakeholders. Over time, TrInt

launched more services to accomplish more transition-supportive roles

toward a larger number of stakeholders. In this section, we explore in

more detail the conditions that enabled TrInt to increase its portfolio of

services and transition-supportive roles in a highly diverse manner.

These enabling conditions are described at two levels: the organizational

level and the policy level.

5.1. Organizational level

There appears to be no single formal process in TrInt to gain insights

in which services to develop and how to better support stakeholders.

Instead, TrInt draws mainly on their staff (and afliates, such as sub-

contracted mentors) to signal, analyze and propose new services, or

improvements to existing ones, based on their experience in working

directly with the stakeholders. A location manager emphasized the

importance of a proactive sense of urgency: “I have very often stated to

employees here that our system is nished 70%, so we need to develop

30%. Please do something.” Another location manager noted: “What we

see is that our impact to energy transition is limited if we do not continue

extending our offers … we need to respond to market failures.” Impulses

to take action can come from different personal routines. For example, a

project manager found value in linking departments by “just always

trying to be there when other departments have internal meetings to

listen to the needs.” A location manager also observed that “we gain

insight from quarterly meetings with start-ups.” Similarly, another

location manager picked up ideas “purely by being in the market and

being responsive to what you hear when you are approached. It’s not

very difcult … It’s only standing on the oor and listening to what you

hear.”

Once a staff member identied a need or an opportunity for a new

offering, the next step was to raise the idea with either a board member

or directly with the CEO. In case of a favorable rst assessment, these

managers would provide the employee with a small number of resources

to create a proposal for a new service development project. A technology

ofcer provided an example: “There was a need identied within a

working group in TrInt. One of [the members] then took the lead

identifying a key partner and a methodology [for what later became

service #17]. He came back to the management with a budget and it was

agreed.” If the proposal was deemed valuable and feasible, in the next

M. Talmar et al.

Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 159 (2022) 112210

phase, the executive board assigned a small team to develop the new

service. This team typically involved one, but more often two location

managers (to create an early international link), as well as several em-

ployees or sub-contracted afliates.

The task in the development period, which usually lasted 12–18

months, was to further research, design, build and validate the new

service with targeted stakeholders. In some cases, this process was

relatively straightforward and resulted in a standardized offer. In service

#7 for instance, the TrInt development team outsourced an external

consultancy agency to develop a methodology for the culture assessment

of organizations. That methodology was then converted to a standard-

ized workshop format, which was run several times non-commercially to

improve the service based on real-time feedback. Subsequently, the

service was integrated in the TrInt portfolio. In another service (#8), the

experimentation period featured two vastly different cases of support for

corporate innovation, each of which allowed TrInt to experiment with a

different set of stakeholder classes and perform a tailored set of transi-

tion roles. At a later stage, after several commercial applications, this

service appeared to remain highly tailor-made (to corporate clients).

Interviewees serving as team-members in developing a new TrInt

service reported a high level of discretion in the development period. In

this respect, TrInt’s managers highly appreciated the idea of developing

each new service in an iterative manner. On the other hand, each team

was expected to thoroughly validate the service within the available

time and budget, and arrive at an evidence-based proposal for the ex-

ecutive board.

Such an experimental logic in developing new services greatly ben-

ets from staff with an entrepreneurial orientation. A project manager

described the organizational culture as follows: “There is a high-risk

appetite in doing different things and exploring new possibilities.”

While this might not apply to all employees, “there are quite some

people in [TrInt] that have good ideas and don’t hesitate to try to

convince their direct manager. Or maybe the CEO directly. And there are

resources for such people” (technology ofcer). Nevertheless, as a

location manager explained, the headquarter of TrInt tried to maintain a

balance: “If you allow too much freedom, there will be too many un-

structured local solutions. All of a sudden you spend too much money.”

Thus, new service development teams were also expected to deliver

solutions that are valuable and scalable across the various geographic

locations of TrInt.

5.2. Policy level

Of the total annual budget of TrInt, about 20% originated from the

EU, based on an annual business plan. As a project manager explained,

“the best way to ensure [that there are resources for your service] is to

have the idea included in the annual business plan.” At the EU policy

level, this annual planning process was the main arena for communi-

cating about and obtaining (some) control on TrInt’s services. In this

process, TrInt had the opportunity to include changes in its services, as

long as these complied to its overall purpose and featured some aspect of

novelty: “We’ve freedom to develop new vehicles, but we need to report

them to [our EU-afliated governance body] … So, there are several

requirements from our policy governance side, for instance innova-

tiveness … And when we put it in the business plan, it needs to be logical

for us to develop such a service” (location manager).

Thus, it was TrInt’s responsibility toward the policymaker to develop

and propose ideas for new services as well as to conduct the analyses and

testing that justied the addition of a new service. Evidently, the

ongoing development of the service portfolio was restricted by resource

boundaries, as observed by a location manager: “Everything we do has

to be supported. For example, you have to help the ventures get through.

If you don’t have the time and the manpower to support, then it falls

through … that’s why we need to focus in what services to have.”

Accordingly, TrInt management needed to decide how attention was

divided between existing services and developing new ones. At a higher

level, the EU policy body measured the impact of TrInt on an annual

basis, and allocated the budget for the next year based on the impact

delivered in the two preceding years.

Fig. 1 provides a summary of the structure of organizing transition

support activities, which spans across the policy, managerial and oper-

ational layers of the organization. Especially at the interface of the

frontline operations and key stakeholders, this structure gives rise to

frontline employees dynamically adjusting support activities in search of

a t with the needs of external transition stakeholders.

6. Discussion and implications

This paper explores under what conditions and how policy-afliated

transition intermediaries change their transition-supportive activities.

We conducted an in-depth case study of a prominent energy transition

intermediary TrInt. We found that, over time, TrInt dynamically

recoupled itself to the transition by actively designing new services,

based on deliberate explorations of the needs of stakeholders; and by

attempting to nd an optimal conguration for each new service

through experimental development with targeted stakeholders. We also

found that these change mechanisms were enabled by an organizational

design which connects the policy principal, the managerial, and the

operational layer of TrInt in a particular way. Specically, two organi-

zational interfaces apparently need to be aligned for intermediary

dynamism to emerge (see Fig. 1): the interface between the policy

principal and the intermediary, and the interface between the

Fig. 1. The structure of organizing transition support activities at TrInt.

M. Talmar et al.

Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 159 (2022) 112210

intermediary management and operational staff. In this section, we

discuss the conguration of these two interfaces as well as the impli-

cations of our ndings for theory, innovation policy, and future

research.

6.1. Interface between policy principal and intermediary

The case organization TrInt effectively had a mandate to decide

which type of transition-support activities to design and perform, as long

as these activities tted within its general mission. In this regard, agency

theory would argue that such a broad mandate might enable TrInt to

engage in opportunistic behavior, some of which is likely to contradict

or exceed the interests of the policy principal (i.e., the EU) [40,41].

Interestingly, this is precisely what appears to have turned TrInt into a

successful intermediary. That is, TrInt had substantial managerial

discretion to decide upon specic ways to support its stakeholders. But

the policy principal connected that discretion to accountability on the

impact and future ambition of its activities, used as the basis for sub-

sequent resource allocations to TrInt. With these incentives to create

impact and ambition, it became important for TrInt to not merely pro-

vide support activities, but to create substantial value (for stakeholders)

in doing so, in order to elicit a growing number of requests for support

[42]. Correspondingly, the seemingly loose mandate actually enabled

TrInt to make a signicant effort in satisfying individual stakeholders as

well as growing and diversifying the pool of targeted stakeholders.

As such, a delegation model in which the authority to choose the

specic course of action as well as the responsibility for impact are

passed from the policy principal to the intermediary is potentially a

necessary condition for making the latter dynamically adaptive in its

support to a transitioning domain. As a transition unfolds and stake-

holder needs evolve, this model both enables and incentivizes the

intermediary to respond in a bottom-up manner, by dynamically chang-

ing its service offerings in search of an improved t with its stakeholders.

This blueprint for organizing intermediary support fundamentally

differs from two other approaches in transition policy studies: (a) the

approach in which the needs of the transitioning domain are monitored

to facilitate deliberate policy interventions that steer intermediaries in a

top-down manner [8]; and (b) the approach in which individual support

schemes are informed by a wide-scale visioning (e.g., roadmapping)

effort performed across different stakeholder classes [43] or by facili-

tating bottom-up niche experimentation [16]. Because our study is

limited to a single case, it is beyond the scope of this paper to determine

which model delivers the highest transformative impact and/or the best

use of public resources. However, given that the EU and many nations

have been establishing a substantial number of transition in-

termediaries, it appears critical that they are enabled to continually (re)

align their activities to changing external needs – as a cost-efcient

approach to provide continued policy support to transitioning domains.

Furthermore, our ndings suggest a transition intermediary becomes

more effective if it is able to exploit synergies between its services,

leverage its roles, and take advantage of an established collaboration

network. These conditions take considerable time and effort to produce,

and appear not to transfer well across the boundaries of different in-

termediaries. Transition intermediaries can thus be thought of as (very)

long-term policy interventions, which makes it particularly important

that these organizations develop the capability to dynamically re-prole

and adapt themselves. Since TrInt has been successful in extending its

support across several different niches at different stages of maturity, the

aforementioned dynamic capability to re-couple to a domain may

constitute a major driver of sustaining an intermediary’s relevance, also

across different development phases of the technological niche(s) they

are afliated to Ref. [10].

Our ndings give rise to further research at the interface of policy

principals and transition intermediaries. It was beyond the scope of this

study to compare the service offerings of TrInt to other available support

schemes. By consequence, one important question to be addressed in

future work is whether giving substantial managerial discretion to in-

termediaries raises the hazard of multiple intermediaries developing

overlapping support offerings, thereby possibly reducing the efciency

of public resource use. This also implies future studies need to address

intermediary ecologies [9], with a particular focus on comparing and

evaluating entire delegation congurations across multiple inter-

mediaries—in terms of their complementarities, redundancy, and

impact of resource use. Future studies of intermediary ecologies should

also seek to identify additional trade-offs in policy-governed in-

termediaries; for example, the trade-off between establishing fewer, but

more broadly scoped and longer-lasting intermediaries versus increas-

ingly specialized (in time and scope) ones.

A central claim in transition studies is that structural resistance in

socio-technical domains tends to slow down transition processes [14].

The effect was not observed in the TrInt case per se, but we would hy-

pothesize that the governance model adopted (by the EU) for TrInt may

indeed lead the intermediary to focus on the path of least resistance in

the transitioning domain, for example by focusing on the commerciali-

zation of more mature socio-technical congurations at the expense of

more radical early-stage ones. Consequently, one could argue that

responsive and exible intermediaries may, over time, increasingly

distance themselves from their overall transition-support mission.

Future research can scrutinize and assess this potential effect.

6.2. Interface of management and operations

In uncovering the mechanisms leading to intermediary dynamism,

we explored how TrInt operationalizes the mandate received from the

policy principal. Here, we found that managers staffed the frontline of

the intermediary with entrepreneurially oriented personnel, capable of

sensing new needs arising among stakeholders. TrInt then encouraged

researching stakeholder needs at a deeper level and (potentially)

developing service offerings in response. When perceived as potentially

impactful, these service development efforts were adequately resourced.

But TrInt’s management also required any new service to be well-

validated in terms of value (for stakeholders) and scalability. As such,

the service development teams were motivated to adopt an iterative

process involving experimental interactions with stakeholders in

(increasingly mature) service provision situations. Overall, these pro-

cesses and underlying conditions of service development appear to be

similar to best practices in business organizations [44].

A similar insight arises regarding how intermediaries make choices

about which transition-supportive roles to embed in a service [8].

Among the roles previously identied [5], more than one alternative

pathway for stakeholder support often exists. For example, an inter-

mediary can choose to fund stakeholders directly (L4) or to mediate the

funding of others (N4). The choice of role congurations is to some

extent determined by available resources, but TrInt also deliberately

tested (potential) role combinations to determine which would generate

the highest value. Furthermore, some of these services required a level of

customizability, in which support roles became embedded in each

instance of service provision (e.g., venture support) and a standard set of

needs shared by multiple stakeholders was absent. As such, with regard

to staff capabilities and exibility of offerings, intermediaries need to be

highly professional and adaptive in order to be able to maximize value

for their stakeholders.

M. Talmar et al.

Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 159 (2022) 112210

This nding also invites future work on viewing transition in-

termediaries as organizations, implying they are subject to (among

others) choices regarding structure, stafng, incentives, processes, and

organizational culture [45], which, combined, inuence organizational

effectiveness.

7. Conclusion

In various attempts to scale up the energy transition, intermediaries

have become a prominent component in the policy mix of transition

support. But allocating public resources to intermediaries comes at

signicant opportunity cost, which raises the bar for intermediaries to

deliver actual impact. In a continuously changing transition environ-

ment, intermediary actors need to be (come) adaptive and responsive to

the changing needs of the transition stakeholders they serve.

In this study, we explored the mechanisms and conditions by which a

major policy-afliated intermediary has been able to recongure its

service portfolio to continually respond to the needs of transition

stakeholders. Most notably, the ability of an intermediary to re-couple

itself to a transitioning domain apparently assumes a particular set-up

of balancing a exible mandate with accountability between the pol-

icy principal, the management, and the operational staff of the inter-

mediary. This delegation model enables the intermediary to internally

structure itself in a stakeholder-oriented way, leading to continual

bottom-up service innovation.

Accordingly, transition intermediaries may indeed play a crucial role

in enacting transition policy in both international and national arenas.

However, to actually deliver on their transitional promise, it is impor-

tant to allow these organizations to make their own decisions on the

portfolio of support services offered. Only over a substantial period of

time can an intermediary learn to form strong relationships with tran-

sition stakeholders, converge to specic congurations of impactful

activities, and develop signicant synergies between activities.

Credit author statement

Madis Talmar: Conceptualization; Investigation; Data curation;

Formal analysis; Writing – original draft; Visualization. Bob Walrave:

Conceptualization; Funding acquisition; Methodology; Formal analysis;

Writing – review & editing. Rob Raven: Conceptualization; Writing –

review & editing. Georges Romme: Funding acquisition; Methodology;

Writing – review & editing.

Declaration of competing interest

The authors declare that they have no known competing nancial

interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to inuence

the work reported in this paper.

Acknowledgements

The study was performed as part of the Erasmus Mundus Joint

Doctorate SELECT+‘Environmental Pathways for Sustainable Energy

Systems’. This project has been funded by the Education, Audiovisual

and Culture Executive Agency (EACEA) (Nr 2012–0034) of the Euro-

pean Commission. The publication reects the views only of the authors

and the Commission cannot be held responsible for any use which may

be made of the information contained therein. We are thankful to dr.

Freek Meulman for his assistance in collecting data.

Appendix 1

The initial service portfolio of TrInt across engaged stakeholders and intermediary roles in December 2011.

Services

CL Articulation of expectation & visions (A) Building social networks (N) Learning processes and exploration (L) Other (O)

V I M C R S V I M C R S V I M C R S V I M C R S

1. Early stage

venture

support

V A1

(N5)

(N1)

(N2)

(N4)

(N1)

(N2)

(N1)

(N2)

(N1) (N2) L2

L4 L6

L7 L8

(L2)

(L4)

(O1) (O1) (O1) (O1)

(O5)

6. Innovation

project

support

M (A1)

(A2)

(A3)

(A1)

(A2)

(A3)

(A1)

(A2)

(A3)

(N1)

(N2)

(N3)

(N4)

(N1)

(N2)

(N3)

(N4)

(N1)

(N2)

(L2)

(L3)

(L7)

(L8)

(L2)

(L3)

(L7)

(L8)

(L2)

(L3)

(L7)

(L8)

(O1)

(O2)

(O5)

(O1)

(O2)

(O5)

11. Master

programs

S A1 A1 A1 A1 (N1)

(N2)

(N5)

(N1)

(N2)

(N5)

(N1)

(N2)

(N1)

(N2)

(N1)

(N2)

L6 L7

12. PhD

program

S A1 A1 A1 A1

(N1)

(N2)

(N5)

(N1)

(N2)

(N5)

(N1)

(N2)

(N1)

(N2)

(N1)

(N2)

L6 L7

- transition roles coded according to Ref. [5], see Table 1;

- V - ventures, I - investors/nanciers, SM - small/medium sized enterprises, C - corporations, R - research organizations; S - students;

- indirect or infrequent engagement is represented in brackets;

- via the mandate of TrInt, A4 and O3 are implicitly embedded into almost all services, and thus omitted;

- codes shown in underlined bold express the core focus of each service;

- column CL stands for the cluster of main stakeholders engaged in each service.

M. Talmar et al.

Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 159 (2022) 112210

Appendix 2

Description of TrInt services across the period 2011–2017.

Name of new service Description of service Motivation for development (External) stakeholders involved Complementarities with other services

1. Early stage

venture support

An accelerator program for sustainable

energy entrepreneurs. Involves the

assessment of business ideas, tailored

business services, support in nding

external capital and investment by

TrInt against a share in the venture.

Tailored business services may include

for example training, IP and legal

consultancy, partner and client

matching, access to laboratories,

technical expertise and access to

networking events. This service was

part of the TrInt portfolio at the

beginning of the studied period.

Service was present at beginning of

period studied

Starting (non-incorporated)

entrepreneurs and ventures (as target

clients), investors, SMEs and

incumbent corporations (as potential

partners to the ventures), students (as

employees).

Attracts starting entrepreneurs with the

possibility to naturally move from early

stage support to scaling support (#3) and

potentially to #5. Services #14 and #15

serve as platforms to nding customers,

investors and partners. Team selection

and tailored support is based on service

#4. If eld of operations is in renewable

energy technologies, ventures can take

use of service #9. New recruits are

frequently graduates of services #11 and

#12.

2. Innovation

project support

for ventures

Providing funding and mentor support

to ventures for product development,

with focus on technical prototype

development. Development started in

2012.

Several portfolio ventures voiced the

lack of nancial and executive support

to prototyping activities. Meanwhile,

the innovation project support service

format was deemed administratively

too burdening for the context of

ventures.

Ventures (as target clients), research

organizations, investors, SMEs and

incumbent corporations (as potential

partners to the ventures).

Fullling a deciency in the other

venture support programs by TrInt. The

service was later incorporated into the

venture support programs (#1 and #3)

as an optional extra.

3. Scaling support

for ventures

A support program for established

ventures toward scaling their activities

to new business lines, new markets,

new customer segments or new

production capabilities. Includes

tailored business services, support in

nding external capital and

(occasionally) investment by TrInt

against a share in the venture.

Development started in 2013.

It was voiced by some ventures and

SMEs that the support they need is of

different nature than offered by early

stage venture support (service #1).

Ventures and SMEs (as target clients),

research organizations, investors,

SMEs and incumbent corporations (as

potential partners to the ventures).

Serves as an extension to service #1,

although does not assume the venture to

have been afliated to #1 rst. Similar

other complementarities as listed for

service #1.

4. Due diligence on

entrepreneurial

teams

An assessment methodology for

assessing the strength of a venture

team, either toward better informed

investment/funding decisions, or

toward developing personalized

support programs. Development

started in 2012.

Developed initially to respond to the

internal need to assess venture teams

across a wide array of characteristics.

Shortly after, it was market tested and

proved to be generic also for external

investors/funding agencies who

became clients of the service.

Ventures and investors (such as

business angels, venture capital,

accelerators/incubators and

governmental programs) as the two

sides of the assessment.

Provides input for decision making for all

other services that involve team

interactions, but in particular for services

#1 and #3.

5. Industrialization

support

Support strong ventures and SMEs that

already have viable sustainable energy

products to systematically bring down

the cost of these products. The aim is to

bridge niche products to mainstream

markets. Includes a variety of advisory

services and brokering for external

capital. Development started

beginning of 2017.

Several new energy technology

ventures and SMEs voiced that they

were struggling to scale up due to their

product being too expensive to sell to

mass markets. Furthermore,

unsuccessful attempts to raise

additional capital led the

entrepreneurs to claim a lack of scale-

up oriented funding in the sustainable

energy domain.

Established ventures, SMEs (as target

clients), investors (as key enablers to

execution), other SMEs and

incumbent corporations (as potential

partners and customers).

Logical next step to offering services #1,

#2 and #3. Once a venture has matured

by reaching a viable product, it can

receive support in scaling up their

production and supply chain capabilities.

This is benecial to TrInt if the venture is

already afliated to them from a

previous program.

6. Innovation

project support

Support program for international

consortia-based innovation projects

which aim to commercialize

innovative sustainable energy

technology in new products/services.

The support program entails

investments in product development,

and a variety of other services such as

partner matching, advice on

intellectual property, market analysis

and customer matching. Guidelines for

innovation project teams are set by

TrInt in thematically based technology

roadmaps, which new projects are

expected to afliate to. This service

was part of the TrInt portfolio at the

beginning of the studied period.

Service was present at beginning of

researched period

Research organizations and SMEs (as

supported consortium members),

occasionally ventures and

corporations. Students frequently run

thesis projects or nd employment in

the service of a particular innovation

project.

Takes use of ideas and workforce

emerging from services #11 and #12.

Services #14 and #15 serve as platforms

to nding customers, investors and

partners.

7. Organizational

culture

assessment

A workshop-based service to assess the

organizational culture of a company in

terms of readiness for collaborative

(open) innovation. Enables

Developed initially to respond to the

internal need of TrInt to assess

potential organization constellations

for service #6. Later, it was identied

Incumbent corporations (as target

clients), SMEs and research

organizations (applying for TrInt

support).

Enables TrInt to estimate the potential

success of operationalizing

collaborations (predominantly) going

into service #6 and to strengthen ties

(continued on next page)

M. Talmar et al.

Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 159 (2022) 112210

(continued)

Name of new service Description of service Motivation for development (External) stakeholders involved Complementarities with other services

organizations to gain feedback for self-

reection. Occasionally used for the

assessment of organizations for

external purposes (e.g., a funding

decision). Development started

beginning of 2016.

that external stakeholders can benet

from the service as an exercise in self-

reection.

with corporations (for services #8, #9

and #10).

8. Corporate

innovation

support

Establish strategic partnerships with

energy corporations with the purpose

of developing radically new business at

the interface of TrInt and a

corporation. Involve the TrInt network

in the development of such businesses

toward creating successful

collaborations between TrInt network

partners and the corporation.

Potentially co-fund the resultant

business cases. Development started in

2015.

Several corporations requested for a

service that is targeted to increasing

their innovation capabilities in the

transitioning energy landscape, in

particular for radically new

innovation.

Incumbent energy corporations (as

target clients), ventures, SMEs (as

integrated into specic new business

development initiatives).

Occasionally engages also students

and researchers (as sources of

innovative concepts).

The service creates input into other

services: #1, #6 and #18. Existing TrInt

portfolio ventures and projects can be

integrated into emerging business cases,

which then serve as scaling opportunities

for these ventures and projects.

9. New business

concepts

competition

Organizing new business concepts

competitions among students on behalf

of an industrial partner. As result, the

industrial partner can identify new

opportunities for products/services,

and potential talent. Service

development started in 2015.

As part of developing challenge-based

education in master programs, several

major corporations were rst invited

to post innovation challenges. Upon

the success of these initiatives, a

particular major corporation voiced

the interest to organize a separate

(extra-curricular) challenge

competition.

Incumbent corporations and trade

associations (as target clients), SMEs

as secondary clients, students (as

participants).

Connecting master and PhD students as

talent to major industry. Scout potential

ideas for other services, in particular #1,

#6, #8, and #18.

10. Talent matching Service package offered to

corporations/SMEs, granting access to

the talent pool of TrInt students and

alumni. Service entails the advertising

of vacancies in the corporation, access

to TrInt (online) community for direct

communication with the students and

alumni, as well as participation at

student events. Service development

started in 2016.

Students on TrInt programs frequently

articulate the need for internship and

graduation thesis positions, as well as

for jobs post-graduation. On the other

side, several major corporations

showed interest for nding new

employees, and willingness to pay for

their TrInt-supplied education.

Incumbent corporations/SMEs (as

target clients) and students/alumni

(as supply of talent).

Connecting master and PhD students/

alumni from services #11 and #12 as

talent to major industry. Receiving

feedback for bettering the education

programs #11 and #12.

11. Master programs Educational program for master

students with interest in making an

impact in sustainable energy. Within

the program, students receive courses

and a variety of supplementary

personal development services (such as

coaching, mediation for industry

placement during thesis, and

international mobility) on top of their

regular master education. TrInt

maintains several themes of master

programs, but each has the underlying

aim to complement the standard

engineering-oriented education with

entrepreneurial skills. This service was

part of the TrInt portfolio at the

beginning of the studied period.

Service was present at beginning of

researched period

Master students (as target clients),

ventures/SMEs/corporations (as

offering thesis topic opportunities

and jobs), research organizations (as

developing new courses for the

program).

Systematically trains entrepreneurially

dispositioned (mostly) engineers as

potential contributors to TrInt other

services, such as #1, #6, #8, #9, #10,

and #18. Master students form a bulk of

the community in service #13.

12. PhD program An educational program toward PhD

researchers to complement their

normal educational track. Within the

program, PhD students receive courses

and a variety of supplementary

personal development services (such as

access to networking events and

international mobility). The

underlying aim is to incept PhDs with

entrepreneurial skills and a clear path

to commercializing the technologies

emerging from their research

activities. This service was part of the

Service was present at beginning of

researched period

PhD students (as target clients),

ventures/SMEs/corporations (as

offering industrial partnerships in

research, and/or jobs), research

organizations (as developing new

courses for the program).

Systematically breeds entrepreneurially

dispositioned (mostly) PhD engineers as

potential contributors to TrInt other

services, such as #1, #6, #8, #9, #10,

and #18.

(continued on next page)

M. Talmar et al.

Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 159 (2022) 112210

Appendix 3

The service portfolio of TrInt across engaged stakeholders and

intermediary roles (July 2017).

(continued)

Name of new service Description of service Motivation for development (External) stakeholders involved Complementarities with other services

TrInt portfolio at the beginning of the

studied period.

13. (Online)

community

An online communication platform to

unite the community around TrInt.

First aimed to unite the students and

alumni, but later incorporated other

stakeholders classes as well. The

community is a major communication

channel for TrInt and facilitates several

other services. Development started in

2015.

Developed rst based on the signal

from the student/alumni community

to be formally better connected in

order to remain actively involved with

peers after graduation. Initial events

and online platform demonstrated

additional opportunities for

integrating also other stakeholder

classes.

Students/alumni (as original

members), ventures/SMEs/

corporations (invited later to extend

the community reach).

Within-community communication

channel for practically all other TrInt

services and for peer-to-peer advice.

However, includes dedicated sections for

supporting services #9, #10, #11 and

#12.

14. Matchmaking

event

A methodology (and execution) for

organizing networking events in a

structured and efcient manner. The

purpose of the events is to facilitate

collaboration between the different

stakeholders to sustainable energy

solutions, including ventures, SMEs,

incumbents and investors. The event

format involves several rounds of

organized networking based on peer

assessment to pitches. Development

started in 2012.

Developed to respond to a need voiced

both externally and internally in TrInt

that there need to be systematic ways

for (locally oriented) matchmaking in

the energy industry.

Ventures, SMEs, investors,

corporations as potential

collaboration partners, policymakers

and investors (all target clients).

Serve as a platform to nding customers,

investors and partners for projects and

ventures afliated to services #1, #2,

#3, #6, and #18.

15. International

networking event

Organizing an annual pan-European

networking event to connect

corporations, ventures, policy-makers

and SMEs on sustainable energy. The

event also involves a trade fair, a

conference and pitching sessions. First

took place in 2013.

Developed to respond to a need voiced

both externally and internally in TrInt

that there need to be systematic ways

for international matchmaking in the

energy industry.

Incumbent corporations, ventures,

investors, SMEs, policymakers,

researchers (as target clients).

The service provides a platform for the

afliates of other services (#1, #2, #3,

#5, #6, #18) in exhibiting their

innovation.

16. Thematic

reports

Industry reports stating the present and

future developments in various

sustainable energy themes, such as

solar photovoltaic, wind energy and

regulation in electricity markets. The

purpose is to align expectations across

various stakeholders and delineate

particular development pathways

toward higher penetration of

sustainable energy in Europe. Total six

reports published in the period

2014–2017.

Being a network-oriented

organization, the individual services

and the overall prominence of TrInt in

the European energy landscape are

heavily dependent on exercising

thought leadership. In order to

demonstrate that and to invite external

organizations to its programs, TrInt

started composing thematic reports.

Ventures, SMEs, corporations,

investors, legislators, research

organizations and students (as target

clients).

Meant as support material to the whole

network around TrInt. In that capacity

complementary to many other services,

in particular services #3, #5, #6, #8,

#17, #18. Shares the same

methodological base as service #17.

17. New technology

impact estimation

A modeling methodology (tool) that

enables the estimation of energy cost

reduction from any specic innovation

in renewable energy technologies. As

such, the tool allows technologists to

demonstrate potential impact of what

they are working on, for example to

convince funding or cooperation

partners. Development started in 2014.

Developed to respond to the internal

need of TrInt to (1) measure the

potential impact of current and future

supported technology-based ventures

and projects, and (2) externally

demonstrate thought leadership of

TrInt. Received positive feedback in

both capacities, which led to an

externally-oriented service.

Research centers, students (as current

main clients of the service), ventures,

corporations and industry

representatives (as occasional

clients).

Enables TrInt to estimate potential value

of applicants to services #1, #3 and #6,

and to enhance the value of existing

portfolio ventures/projects by allowing

them to demonstrate their impact.

Legitimacy for thought leadership

indirectly reinforces all TrInt services.

18. Initial market

development

In case there is a market failure around

accomplishing specic desirable

(transition) products/services, TrInt

can internalize the development of

such products/services toward

building an operational business.

When successful operations are

achieved, the operation is transferred

to an incumbent partner. Development

started in 2014.

Opportunities for creating value by

complex integration were presented to

incumbent organizations in the energy

domain, but were considered too risky.

TrInt nevertheless considered that

accomplishing certain transition

products/services is valuable, and

decided thus to internalize the

development of such.

Ventures and SMEs (as providers of

components to be integrated);

students (as accomplishing the

integration); incumbent corporations

(as transfer partners); investors (as

potential enablers).

Provides new opportunities for

companies afliated to TrInt via services

such as #1, #3, #6. Service #8 can lead

to the initiation of an initial market

development project.

M. Talmar et al.

Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 159 (2022) 112210

Services/Stk.hold.

CL Articulation of expectation & visions (A) Building social networks (N) Learning processes and exploration (L) Other (O)

V I M C R S V I M C R S V I M C R S V I M C R S

1. Early stage

venture support

V A1

(N5)

(N1)

(N2)

(N4)

(N1)

(N2)

(N1)

(N2)

(N1) (N2) L2

(L2)

(L4)

(O1) (O1) (O1) (O1)

(O5)

2. Innovation project

support for

ventures (not

active any more in

2017)

V A3 (A3) (A3) N1

(N1)

(N2)

(N4)

(N1)

(N2)

(N4)

(L6)

(L2)

(L3)

(L4)

(L6)

(L7)

(L8)

(L2)

(L3)

(L4)

(L6)

(L7)

(L8)

(O2)

(O5)

(O1)

(O2)

(O5)

(O1)

(O2)

(O5)

3. Scaling support for

ventures

V A1

(N1)

(N2)

(N1)

(N2)

(N1)

(N2)

(N5)

(L1)

(L2)

(L2) (L2) O1

(O1) (O1) (O1) (O1)

(O5)

4. Due diligence on

entrepreneurial

teams

V A1 A1 (A1) N4

N4 (N4)

(N5)

L7 L7 (L7) O1

(O1)

(O4) I

6. Industrialization

support

V A3 A3 N1

(N1)

(N2)

(N3)

(N4)

(L4)

(O2)

(O1) (O1) (O5)

8. Innovation project

support

M (A1)

(A3)

(A1)

(A3)

(A1)

(A3)

(N1)

(N2)

(N3)

(N4)

(N1)

(N2)

(N3)

(N4)

(N1)

(N2)

(L2)

(L3)

(L7)

(L8)

(L2)

(L3)

(L7)

(L8)

(L2)

(L3)

(L7)

(L8)

(O1)

(O2)

(O5)

(O1)

(O2)

(O5)

10. Organizational

culture assessment

M N5 N5 (N5) L7 L7 (L7)

12. Corporate

innovation support

C A1

(A1)

(A2)

(A3)

(N1)

(N2)

(N3)

(N4)

(L1)

(L2)

(L3)

(L4)

(L5)

(L7)

(L8)

(O1)

(O2)

(O5)

16. New business

concepts

competition

C (A3) A3 A3 (N2)

(N3)

(N5)

(L2)

(L7)

(O5) (O5) (O5)

18. Talent matching C A1 A1 A1 (N2)

(N3)

(N5)

(O1) O1 O1

20. Master programs S A1 A1 A1 A1 (N1)

(N2)

(N5)

(N1)

(N2)

(N5)

(N1)

(N2)

(N1)

(N2)

(N1)

(N2)

21. PhD program S A1 A1 A1 A1

(N1)

(N2)

(N5)

(N1)

(N2)

(N5)

(N1)

(N2)

(N1)

(N2)

(N1)

(N2)

22. (Online)

community

(N1)

(N5)

(L5)

(L6)

(L7)

(L5)

(L6)

(L7)

(L5)

(L6)

(L7)

A3 A3 A3 (A3) (A3) O1 O1 O1 (O1) (O1)

(continued on next page)

M. Talmar et al.

Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 159 (2022) 112210

References

[1] Hermans F, Van Apeldoorn D, Stuiver M, Kok K. Niches and networks: explaining

network evolution through niche formation processes. Res Pol 2013;42(3):613–23.

[2] Moss T. Intermediaries and the governance of sociotechnical networks in

transition. Environ Plann 2009;41(6):1480–95.

[3] Van Lente H, Hekkert M, Smits R, Van Waveren B. Roles of transition

intermediaries in transition processes. Int J Innovat Manag 2013;7(3):247–79.

[4] Klerkx L, Leeuwis C. Establishment and embedding of innovation brokers at

different innovation system levels: insights from the Dutch agricultural sector.

Technol Forecast Soc Change 2009;76(6):849–60.

[5] Kivimaa P. Government-afliated intermediary organisations as actors in system-

level transitions. Res Pol 2014;43(8):1370–80.

[6] Polzin F, von Flotow P, Klerkx L. Addressing barriers to eco-innovation: exploring

the nance mobilisation functions of institutional innovation intermediaries.

Technol Forecast Soc Change 2016;3:34–46.

[7] Nolden C, Barnes J, Nicholls. J. Community energy business model evolution: a

review of solar photovoltaic developments in England. Ren Sust En Rev 2020;122:

109722.

[8] Kivimaa P, Boon W, Hyysalo S, Klerkx L. Towards a typology of intermediaries in

sustainability transitions: a systematic review and a research agenda. Res Pol 2019;

48(4):1062–75.

[9] Hargreaves T, Hielscher S, Seyfang G, Smith A. Grassroots innovations in

community energy: the role of intermediaries in niche development. Global

Environ Change 2013;23(5):868–80.

[10] Kivimaa P, Martiskainen M. Dynamics of policy change and intermediation: the

arduous transition towards low-energy homes in the United Kingdom. En Res Soc

Sci 2018;44:83–99.

[11] Manders TN, Wieczorek AJ, Verbong GPJ. Complexity, tensions, and ambiguity of

intermediation in a transition context: the case of Connecting Mobility. Environ

Innov Soc Transit 2020;34:183–208.

[12] Kivimaa P, Bergek A, Matschoss K, van Lente H. Intermediaries in accelerating

transitions: introduction to the special issue. Environ Innov Soc Transit 2020;36:

372–7.

[13] Flyvbjerg B. Five misunderstandings about case-study research. Qual Inq 2006;12

(2):219–45.

[14] Geels FW. From sectoral systems of innovation to socio-technical systems: insights

about dynamics and change from sociology and institutional theory. Res Pol 2004;

33(6–7):897–920.

[15] Geels FW. The multi-level perspective on sustainability transitions: responses to

seven criticisms. Environ Innov Soc Transit 2011;1(1):24–40.

[16] Kemp R, Schot J, Hoogma R. Regime shifts to sustainability through processes of

niche formation: the approach of strategic niche management. Technol Anal Strat

Manag 1998;10(2):175–98.

[17] Markard J, Raven RPJM, Truffer B. Sustainability transitions: an emerging eld of

research and its prospects. Res Pol 2012;41(6):955–67.

[18] Smith A, Raven RPJM. What is protective space? Reconsidering niches in

transitions to sustainability. Res Pol 2012;41(6):1025–36.

[19] Backhaus J. Intermediaries as innovating actors in the transition to a sustainable

energy system. Cent Eur J Pub Pol 2010;4(1):86–108.

[20] Hodson M, Marvin S. Can cities shape socio-technical transitions and how would

we know if they were? Res Pol 2010;39(4):477–85.

[21] Howells J. Intermediation and the role of intermediaries in innovation. Res Pol

2006;35(5):715–28.

[22] Raven RPJM, Kern F, Verhees B, Smith A. Niche construction and empowerment

through socio-political work. A meta-analysis of six low-carbon technology cases.

Environ Innov Soc Transit 2016;18:164–80.

[23] Geels FW, Raven RPJM. Non-linearity and expectations in niche-development

trajectories: ups and downs in Dutch biogas development (1973–2003). Technol

Anal Strat Manag 2006;18(3–4):375–92.

[24] Raven RPJM. Strategic niche management for biomass (PhD Thesis). Eindhoven:

Eindhoven University of Technology; 2005.

[25] Stewart J, Hyysalo S. Intermediaries, users and social learning in technological

innovation. Int J Innovat Manag 2008;12(3):295–325.

[26] Elzen B, Van Mierlo B, Leeuwis C. Anchoring of innovations: assessing Dutch efforts

to harvest energy from glasshouses. Environ Innov Soc Transit 2012;5:1–18.

[27] Fischer L-B, Newig J. Importance of actors and agency in sustainability transitions:

a systematic exploration of the literature. Sustainability 2016;8(5):476.

[28] Glied T, Hoicka CE, Jackson N. Innovation intermediaries accelerating

environmental sustainability transitions. J Clean Prod 2018;174(10):1247–61.

[29] Nolden C, Sorrell S, Polzin F. Catalysing the energy service market: the role of

intermediaries. En Pol 2016;98:420–30.

[30] Kampelmann S, Van Hollebeke S, Vandergert P. Stuck in the middle with you: the

role of bridging organisations in urban regeneration. Ecol Econ 2016;129:82–93.

[31] Klerkx L, Aarts N. The interaction of multiple champions in orchestrating

innovation networks: conicts and complementarities. Technovation 2013;33(6):

193–210.

[32] Hamann R, April K. On the role and capabilities of collaborative intermediary

organisations in urban sustainability transitions. J Clean Prod 2013;50:12–21.

[33] Seyfang G, Hielscher S, Hargreaves T, Martiskainen M, Smith A. A grassroots

sustainable energy niche? Reections on community energy in the UK. Environ

Innov Soc Transit 2014;13:21–44.

[34] Kivimaa P, Kern F. Creative destruction or mere niche support? Innovation policy

mixes for sustainability transitions. Res Pol 2014;45(1):205–17.

[35] Rogge KS, Reichardt K. Policy mixes for sustainability transitions: an extended

concept and framework for analysis. Res Pol 2016;45(8):1620–35.

(continued)

23. Matchmaking

event

(N1)

(N2)

(N3)

(N1)

(N2)

(N3)

(L2)

(L5)

(L2)

(L5)

24. International

networking event

(A1)

(A2)

(A3)

(N1)

(N2)

(N3)

(N4)

(N5)

O1 O1 O1 O1 (O1)

25. Thematic reports A1

A1 A1

N3 N3 N3 N3 N3 N3 L1

26. New technology

impact estimation

A3 A3 A3 A3 A3 A3 N3 N3 N3 N3 N3 N3 L1

O4 O4 O4 O4 O4 O4

27. Initial market

development

(A1)

(A2)

(A3)

(A1)

(A2)

(A3)

(A1)

(A2)

(A3)

(N2)

(N3)

(N4)

(L2)

(L4)

(L2)

(L7)

(L8)

(L2)

(L7)

(L8)

(O1) O1

(O1)

(O2)

(O4)

(O5)

(O1)

(O4)

- transition roles coded according to Ref. [5], see Table 1.

- V - ventures, I - investors/nanciers, M −small/medium sized enterprises, C - corporations, R - research organizations; S - students.

- indirect or infrequent engagement is represented in brackets.

- via the mandate of TrInt, A4 and O3 are implicitly embedded into almost all services, and thus omitted.

- codes shown in underlined bold express the core focus of each service.

- column CL stands for the cluster of main stakeholders engaged in each service. Green stands for services that engage all or almost all stakeholder classes.

M. Talmar et al.

Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 159 (2022) 112210

[36] Yin RK. Case study research, design and methods. third ed. Newbury Park: Sage

Publications; 2003.

[37] Eisenhardt KM. Building theories from case study research. Acad Manag Rev 1989;

14(4):532–50.

[38] Golden BR. The past is the past—or is it? The use of retrospective accounts as

indicators of past strategy. Acad Manag J 1992;35(4):848–60.

[39] Froehle CM, Roth AV. A resource-process framework of new service development.

Prod Manag 2007;16(2):169–88.

[40] Braun D. Lasting tensions in research policy-making—a delegation problem. Sci

Publ Pol 2003;30(5):309–21.

[41] Williamson OE. Markets and hierarchies: analysis and antitrust implications. New

York/London: Free Press; 1975.

[42] Braun D. Who governs intermediary agencies? Principal-Agent relations in

research policy-making. J Publ Pol 1993;13(2):135–62.

[43] Kemp R, Loorbach D, Rotmans J. Transition management as a model for managing

processes of co-evolution toward sustainable development. Int J Sustain Dev World

Ecol 2007;14(1):78–91.

[44] Garud R, Gehman J, Kumaraswamy A. Complexity arrangements for sustained

innovation: lessons from 3M corporation. Organ Stud 2011;32(6):737–67.

[45] Burton RM, Obel B. Strategic organizational diagnosis and design: the dynamics of

t. third ed. New York: Springer Science+Business Media; 2004.

M. Talmar et al.

Spare or transform? Agency frames in transition intermediaries

Article

Full-text available

Jul 2024
J CLEAN PROD

Intermediaries of transition to sustainability: influences and perspectives

Article

Full-text available

Oct 2022

Objetivo: Esta investigação teve como objetivo compreender o papel dos intermediários nas transições sociotécnicas para a sustentabilidade, segundo a literatura de 2010 a 2022.Metodologia: Para isso, foi realizada uma revisão sistemática da literatura a partir do Methodi Ordinatio que resultou na análise de 42 artigos considerados mais relevantes de acordo com o tema abordado.Originalidade/Relevância: As transições para a sustentabilidade e intermediários configuram-se como um campo de pesquisa emergente. Esse estudo é, portanto, relevante ao identificar os avanços na produção científica, evidenciando aspectos intrínsecos ao assunto, além de lacunas para pesquisas futuras. Resultados: Com base na caracterização dos estudos, os resultados mostram um crescimento nas publicações nos últimos anos, sendo a maior expansão a partir de 2018. O foco foi maior em pesquisas empíricas, com destaque para transições sustentáveis no setor de energia, seguido dos setores industrial, agrícola, de mobilidade e transporte e construção civil. Além disso, verificou-se que os atores intermediários podem contribuir de diferentes maneiras para transições de sustentabilidade. Eles desenvolvem papeis de apoio à inovação, financiamento de projetos, gestão de redes, articulação de expectativas das partes interessadas, difusão do conhecimento, mobilização de recursos, transferência de tecnologia, alinhamento de objetivos e apoio a implementação e renovação de políticas, por exemplo.Contribuições sociais para a gestão: Entender o processo no qual os intermediários se configuram nas transições para a sustentabilidade é fundamental para compreender as alterações de natureza ambiental, social e econômica nos mais diversos setores na contemporaneidade.

Do intermediaries have blind spots? Mapping the activity lifecycle of an energy efficiency programme

Article

Full-text available

Jul 2023

Fuentes de financiación: factores de análisis en la toma de decisiones

Article

Full-text available

Jul 2022

Fernando Adolfo Fierro Celis

El presente artículo quiere establecer los factores que debe conocer los gerentes financieros o directores de empresas para la realización de los procesos de fuentes de financiación de las organizaciones. Se desarrolla bajo tres aspectos: el primero esboza la relación de la financiación con las tres grandes cuentas generadas en el estado de situación financiera. El segundo aspecto presenta el flujo de coordinación entre lo que se financia (costo) y donde se debe invertir la empresa (rentabilidad). Para terminar, se relaciona las decisiones de operación inversión y financiación. El resultado es que el director conozca los factores que inciden en la toma de decisiones en el momento de escoger las fuentes de financiación. Se pretende como fin responder la pregunta de investigación: ¿cuáles son las fuentes de financiación que tiene el CEF en la organización? Este proceso se enmarca en el tipo de investigación cualitativa, con la metodología de revisión documental de los diferentes trabajos académicos propuestos hasta el momento. Para consolidar este documento, se pretenden desarrollar tres grandes objetivos; el primero hace referencia a identificar las diferentes fuentes de financiación dentro de la organización, el segundo objetivo es conocer las fuentes fuera de la organización y como tercer objetivo es establecer los usos mediante la toma de decisiones en las fuentes de financiación. Como resultado principal que se deriva del presente trabajo, es que las personas que se dedican a la administración del recurso financiero conozcan los factores principales internos como externos y busquen la mejor decisión de inversión con el fin de maximizar la rentabilidad de la organización.

Embedding Transformative Innovation into Mission-Oriented Policy and Innovation Districts: The Case of Melbourne

Chapter

Full-text available

Jan 2025

This chapter presents key interventions to provide a step-change in the understanding of innovation, from orthodox to transformative, in the development of local government public policy in the Melbourne Innovation District (MID) City North, Australia. Innovation refers to the introduction of new technological, organisational, and social solutions in response to problems and challenges that arise in existing social, economic, and environmental settings. A step-change is necessary as traditional innovation practice is not currently fit for purpose to deliver a more inclusive and sustainable society. To illustrate this step-change, we reference the MID City North with the key actors including the City of Melbourne (CoM) and two universities (University of Melbourne and RMIT). The MID City North, established in 2017, is a maturing initiative that has evolved over a period of time punctuated by considerable disruptions, particularly the Australian bushfire (Black Summer 2019–2020) catastrophe and the COVID-19 pandemic. We argue these disruptions are a catalyst for change and therefore an important context for the social shaping of the evolving policy discourse relevant to the MID City North. Both disruptions were powerful pressures, as well as windows of opportunity, to effect policy reform mainly by the key actor: the CoM. We propose four key interventions to build on the policy-reform momentum to better develop pathways to deliver on transformative innovation in policy, specifically for the MID City North and the CoM. These interventions are key because they foster the establishment of favourable policy mixes supporting innovation for the transformative change required for cities transitioning towards sustainability.

Transitioning to a Circular Economy: Understanding the Circular Economy Ecosystem in Victoria, Australia

Chapter

Full-text available

Dec 2024

Australia’s journey towards a circular economy is in its initial stage. Demand for resources is putting pressure on Australia’s urban environments, which house over 75% of the country’s population and account for over 80% of national GDP. Until 2018, recyclable waste was largely exported to other countries for processing. This has now changed and has led to national and state-based discussions on more effective reprocessing of waste resources. This chapter aims to present findings based on research conducted to understand the current circular economy ecosystem in the state of Victoria (Australia) to support its plans for waste reduction and transition to a circular economy. A mixed-methods approach was taken, comprising desktop research, interviews with key actors, and a survey targeting a wide range of businesses. It was found that there was no consistent or systemic understanding of the concept of the circular economy; rather, the narrative revolved around waste management and recycling. For transitioning to a circular economy, a systematic shift is needed, supported by a clear policy directive, financial outlay, technical know-how, education, awareness, engagement, and collaboration across traditional isolated sectors.

Create and strengthening innovation ecosystem: roles of policy-affiliated transition intermediaries in latecomers

Article

Oct 2024
JSTPM

Purpose This study aims to explore the functions of policy-affiliated intermediaries and their roles in driving innovation in latecomers. Design/methodology/approach Latecomers have recently recognized the significance of an innovation ecosystem in transitioning to an innovation-driven economy. However, these countries encounter various market and system failures, making policy-affiliated transition intermediaries crucial in orchestrating innovation ecosystems. To achieve this, this study used a case study of a policy-affiliated intermediary and conducted interviews with 19 managers. The results from the content analysis revealed that innovation intermediaries in latecomers perform more comprehensive duties than those mentioned in the literature in the transition to innovation-based development. Findings Results show that the most important of policy-affiliated innovation intermediaries’ roles is orientation to the government and private sector market, attracting the participation of the private sector through the implementation of tax credits and the development of the corporate innovation ecosystem, developing science and technology parks, developing laboratory research infrastructure, supporting prominent and capable professors to create innovation networks, developing innovation zones around research institutions and leading universities and developing international scientific cooperation. These are new and important functions that innovation intermediaries should play in the transition process. Originality/value The research found that the innovation intermediary acts as a change agent in the mental model of other executive and decision-making bodies. Also result shows that this intermediaries can play more roles than what is mentioned in the literature for the development of innovation.

Exploring the functions of place-based intermediation in the governance of sustainability transitions

Article

Full-text available

Jun 2024

While literature on transition intermediation is burgeoning, the implications of a sensitivity to "place" in transition intermediation remain ill understood. In this paper, we empirically explore the dynamics of "place-based transition intermediation", through a case study of the 'Dune farmers' in the Netherlands. The farmers initiated a collaboration that serves as a bottom-up, non-state intermediary organization. The case shows the opportunities and intricacies of transition governance through place-based intermediation. We articulate six functions of intermediaries used in such place-sensitive transition governance: (1) Empowerment through cultivating local identity; (2) Constructing place-based relational capital; (3) Developing regional innovative capacity in a place-based innovation system; (4) Stimulating place-based learning; (5) Concretizing transition governance; and (6) Representing place-based networks. We conclude that place-based intermediation deserves attention, both in research and policy, to improve transition governance and help accelerate place-sensitive transition processes towards sustainable futures.

Forging a sharper blade: A design science research approach for transition studies

Article

Sep 2023

The role of local community empowerment in the digital transformation of rural tourism development in the Philippines

Article

Aug 2023
Tech Soc

Mark Chris M. Lapuz

Complexity, tensions, and ambiguity of intermediation in a transition context: The case of Connecting Mobility

Article

Full-text available

Mar 2020

In this paper, we demonstrate the complexity of intermediation in practice. Intermediaries are seen as crucial actors in a transition process, but so far the transition intermediary literature has had a positive bias towards their role. We mobilize strong structuration theory to develop an analytical perspective that captures how complexity, tensions, and ambiguity influence the transition intermediary’s role and activities. We apply the perspective to the case of Connecting Mobility, a transition intermediary in the Dutch smart mobility field. Results show that Connecting Mobility has fulfilled several transition intermediary roles to different degrees, both simultaneously and sequentially, but they also experienced difficulties in fulfilling these. We conclude that the roles and the engagement of transition intermediaries in meaningful activities are a response to their dynamic context and internal learning processes. As an additional consequence, a single transition intermediary’s direct impact on the overall transition process should not be overstated.

Community energy business model evolution: A review of solar photovoltaic developments in England

Article

Full-text available

Feb 2020
RENEW SUST ENERG REV

The ongoing energy system transformation process is placing citizens and communities at the heart of future energy systems. To date, their participation has focused on the ownership and control of renewable energy installations facilitated by supportive national policies. Yet across many European countries, policies that have previously supported the deployment of small-scale renewable projects are being withdrawn. Social innovation and the evolution of business models are needed if citizen participation is to continue and succeed in this new policy landscape. At the same time, few business models stand still. This paper reviews the evolution of community energy business models in England to provide insights into the potential of community participation in the energy system post subsidies. Concentrating on community solar photovoltaic projects as the cornerstone technology, this review identifies and critique three archetypal business models as sequentially dominating English community renewable energy to date. Using insights from both Science and Technology Studies and Transaction Cost Economics, it explores the drivers and origin of these models as well as resulting community benefits. Looking forwards and by reviewing current activity, this paper identifies new intermediary actors as playing a key role in facilitating and brokering new, increasingly complicated and commercial community energy business models. We argue that this marks a significant break from the past and may, in time, offer more opportunities for community participation in energy system transformation. Moreover, it offers some communities the possibility of staying small and retaining their more radical potential.

Towards a typology of intermediaries in sustainability transitions: A systematic review and a research agenda

Article

Full-text available

Oct 2018
RES POLICY

Intermediary actors have been proposed as key catalysts that speed up change towards more sustainable socio-technical systems. Research on this topic has gradually gained traction since 2009, but has been complicated by the inconsistency regarding what intermediaries are in the context of such transitions and which activities they focus on, or should focus on. We briefly elaborate on the conceptual foundations of the studies of intermediaries in transitions, and how intermediaries have been connected to different transition theories. This shows the divergence – and sometimes a lack – of conceptual foundations in this research. In terms of transitions theories, many studies connect to the multi-level perspective and strategic niche management, while intermediaries in technological innovation systems and transition management have been much less explored. We aim to bring more clarity to the topic of intermediaries in transitions by providing a definition of transition intermediaries and a typology of five intermediary types that is sensitive to the emergence, neutrality and goals of intermediary actors as well as their context and level of action. Some intermediaries are specifically set up to facilitate transitions, while others grow into the role during the process of socio-technical change. Based on the study, as an important consideration for future innovation governance, we argue that systemic and niche intermediaries are the most crucial forms of intermediary actors in transitions, but they need to be complemented by a full ecology of intermediaries, including regime-based transition intermediaries, process intermediaries and user intermediaries.

Dynamics of policy change and intermediation: The arduous transition towards low-energy homes in the United Kingdom

Article

Full-text available

Oct 2018

The transition towards low-energy buildings in the United Kingdom is challenging. Several policy changes have affected the actions and agency of actors. Drawing on the sustainability transitions literature, we analyse the development of the low-energy homes niche, focusing on the dynamics between intermediary organisations and policy development for low-energy homes. Based on rich interview and secondary data, we note how the existence and activities of transition intermediaries are enabled or curtailed by policy changes. We identify niche development phases along with the position and activities of intermediary organisations. In the predevelopment phase, non-state transition intermediaries have formed when government policy has been weak or market-based. During takeoff , targeted policy initiatives have created protective spaces and stimulated the emergence of new intermediaries aiming to consolidate the niche. State-affiliated intermediaries have been established as part of active energy efficiency policy, but later ceased to exist or became privatised. Existing organisations have adopted intermediary functions to advance low-energy homes in response to policy. Furthermore, intermediaries have on occasion influenced policy development, often through cooperation among an ecology of intermediaries. In conclusion, we raise questions regarding intermediaries in the changing governance context.

Innovation intermediaries accelerating environmental sustainability transitions

Article

Full-text available

Nov 2017
J CLEAN PROD

Institutions in the United States are undergoing modifications that present direct challenges for the environment and society and may result in institutional uncertainty and instability. This article explores whether innovation intermediaries can be employed as a key component of a strategy to create a window of opportunity for green job creation, infrastructure changes, and technological innovation in response to these types of institutional modifications. Based on a systematic literature review, this article outlines a framework that combines institutional modifications with technological innovation and infrastructure development as part of an economic development strategy. Important findings are that connections between innovation intermediaries, such as incubator and accelerator centers, niche actors, such as green champions, and regime actors, such as policy entrepreneurs, show potential to contribute to a green economic development strategy but require further examination for the specific roles played by policy entrepreneurs to help create the conditions for scaling niche experiments and simultaneously disrupting the regime. The key contribution is in defining the role of sustainability-oriented innovation intermediaries at linking local, state and business actions in order to scale-up and influence green economic development in a politically feasible manner during times of institutional uncertainty and instability.

Catalysing the energy service market: The role of intermediaries

Article

Full-text available

Sep 2016
ENERG POLICY

The UK market for energy service contracts is expanding, owing in part to the emergence of intermediaries for those contracts in different parts of the public sector. These intermediaries combine a legal framework for establishing contracts with an organisational framework that facilitates contract negotiation and execution. This paper examines the nature and operation of these intermediaries in more detail, including their achievements to date and their similarities and differences. It uses ideas from transaction cost economics to develop a theoretical model of the contracting decision and shows how intermediary organisations can lower the transaction costs incurred by both clients and contractors, thereby increasing the viability of contracting. The paper argues that intermediaries can play an important role in expanding the market for energy service contracts, and hence in delivering costeffective energy efficiency improvements throughout the public sector.

Stuck in the middle with you: The role of bridging organisations in urban regeneration

Article

Full-text available

Sep 2016
ECOL ECON

The literature on the governance of social-ecological systems increasingly recognizes a key role of bridging organisations (BOs) in transition processes towards sustainability. BOs can be defined as facilitators who allow for interorganisational collaboration. Our paper provides a more nuanced understanding of specific BO activities and their contributions towards urban sustainability. Our analysis is based on applying three complementary methodological angles (drawing on geolocalised data, interviews and action research) to 20 years of urban renovation investments in the city-region of Brussels. We distinguish between multi-scale, multi-actor and multi-dimensional tensions in urban renovation programmes and link these tensions to bridging challenges for BOs. Results suggest that the corresponding three types of bridging roles form a trilemma rather than a trilogy: the BOs in study have mediated one tension by de facto exacerbating another. Lessons from action research suggest that a wider use of temporality and shared language to communicate about urban renovation projects could attenuate the bridging trilemma.

Policy mixes for sustainability transitions: An extended concept and framework for analysis

Article

Full-text available

May 2016
RES POLICY

Reaching a better understanding of the policies and politics of transitions presents a main agenda item in the emerging field of sustainability transitions. One important requirement for these transitions, such as the move towards a decarbonized energy system, is the redirection and acceleration of technological change, for which policies play a key role. In this regard, several studies have argued for the need to combine different policy instruments in so-called policy mixes. However, existing policy mix studies often fall short of reflecting the complexity and dynamics of actual policy mixes, the underlying politics and the evaluation of their impacts. In this paper we take a first step towards an extended, interdisciplinary policy mix concept based on a review of the bodies of literature on innovation studies, environmental economics and policy analysis. The concept introduces a clear terminology and consists of the three building blocks elements, policy processes and characteristics, which can be delineated by several dimensions. Based on this, we discuss its application as analytical framework for empirical studies analyzing the impact of the policy mix on technological change. Throughout the paper we illustrate the proposed concept by using the example of the policy mix for fostering the transition of the German energy system to renewable power generation technologies. Finally, we derive policy implications and suggest avenues for future research.

Intermediaries in accelerating transitions: Introduction to the special issue

Article

Apr 2020

Sociotechnical transitions are complex processes that imply far-reaching technological, institutional and cultural changes. Transition intermediaries have emerged as potentially powerful actors and entities to speed up transitions. As much previous literature on intermediaries in transitions has focused on emergence, in this special issue, we focus on intermediaries in the acceleration phase of transitions. The contributions address different domains, with specific focus on different parts of the energy production and consumption system. The contributions cover three themes: intermediary actors in the diffusion of new solutions, in policy change, and systemic intermediaries. We end by making three observations regarding intermediation in the acceleration of sustainability transitions: new types of stakeholders coming into transition processes requiring new forms of intermediation; contestation and tensions becoming stronger, creating new challenges for intermediaries, and; potential confusion within intermediary actors.

Building theories from case study research

Article

Jan 2002

- This paper describes the process of inducting theory using case studies from specifying the research questions to reaching closure. Some features of the process, such as problem definition and construct validation, are similar to hypothesis-testing research. Others, such as within-case analysis and replication logic, are unique to the inductive, case-oriented process. Overall, the process described here is highly iterative and tightly linked to data. This research approach is especially appropriate in new topic areas. The resultant theory is often novel, testable, and empirically valid. Finally, framebreaking insights, the tests of good theory (e.g., parsimony, logical coherence), and convincing grounding in the evidence are the key criteria for evaluating this type of research.

Dynamism in policy-affiliated transition intermediaries

Abstract and Figures

Recommended publications

Monash Faculty of Information Technology

Intermediary role dynamics in system-level transitions: A case from energy transition

Decarbonising industry supply chains: Incumbent-oriented transition intermediation for industry ener...

The politics of intermediation in transitions: Conflict and contestation over energy efficiency poli...

Complexity, tensions, and ambiguity of intermediation in a transition context: The case of Connectin...

Intermediating policy for transitions towards net-zero energy buildings