The article by Elizabeth Shove and Gordon Walker discusses the challenges and complexities of transition management in the context of achieving sustainability. They argue that while the concept of transition management is appealing, it is deeply rooted in system thinking and often overlooks the political and practical realities of implementing change. The authors caution against the notion that transition management can be a simple, linear process, emphasizing the need to address the politics of transition, the management of transition management itself, and the potential for unintended or counterproductive transitions. Key points include: 1. **Transition Politics**: The authors highlight the political nature of defining and managing transitions, noting that the process of abstraction and the role of managers are often overlooked. They argue that the politics of transition management are underplayed and that the goals and visions of sustainability are not always inclusive or democratic. 2. **Managing Transition Management**: They question the effectiveness of reflexive governance in managing complex, uncertain processes involving multiple stakeholders. They suggest that the literature on transition management often fails to address the dynamics of everyday life and the role of consumers in innovation. 3. **Missing Transitions**: The authors point out that models of transition management tend to focus on positive, sustainable transitions while neglecting negative or counterproductive ones. They argue that a more comprehensive approach should consider both positive and negative trajectories. 4. **Transitions in Practice**: They critique the focus on technical systems and infrastructures in transition management, suggesting that it overlooks the broader social and cultural dimensions of change. They emphasize the importance of understanding the practices and routines of daily life. In conclusion, Shove and Walker advocate for a more nuanced and critical approach to transition management, recognizing the limitations and complexities involved in steering societal and environmental change. They call for a broader and more inclusive understanding of innovation and change, and suggest that the illusion of agency and the potential for positive outcomes, even in the face of significant challenges, remains a crucial motivator for action.The article by Elizabeth Shove and Gordon Walker discusses the challenges and complexities of transition management in the context of achieving sustainability. They argue that while the concept of transition management is appealing, it is deeply rooted in system thinking and often overlooks the political and practical realities of implementing change. The authors caution against the notion that transition management can be a simple, linear process, emphasizing the need to address the politics of transition, the management of transition management itself, and the potential for unintended or counterproductive transitions. Key points include: 1. **Transition Politics**: The authors highlight the political nature of defining and managing transitions, noting that the process of abstraction and the role of managers are often overlooked. They argue that the politics of transition management are underplayed and that the goals and visions of sustainability are not always inclusive or democratic. 2. **Managing Transition Management**: They question the effectiveness of reflexive governance in managing complex, uncertain processes involving multiple stakeholders. They suggest that the literature on transition management often fails to address the dynamics of everyday life and the role of consumers in innovation. 3. **Missing Transitions**: The authors point out that models of transition management tend to focus on positive, sustainable transitions while neglecting negative or counterproductive ones. They argue that a more comprehensive approach should consider both positive and negative trajectories. 4. **Transitions in Practice**: They critique the focus on technical systems and infrastructures in transition management, suggesting that it overlooks the broader social and cultural dimensions of change. They emphasize the importance of understanding the practices and routines of daily life. In conclusion, Shove and Walker advocate for a more nuanced and critical approach to transition management, recognizing the limitations and complexities involved in steering societal and environmental change. They call for a broader and more inclusive understanding of innovation and change, and suggest that the illusion of agency and the potential for positive outcomes, even in the face of significant challenges, remains a crucial motivator for action.