and the growth of the ‘transitions network’ (www.transitionnetwork.org) over the
past decade points towards grassroots innovation as a force for green transformations
from below in the global North. Despite the profound structural barriers holding
back these initiatives from generating wider political change, proponents continue
to celebrate ‘the power of just doing stuff’ (Hopkins, 2013).
Studies of community agriculture projects, a ‘grassroots innovation’ as defined
by Seyfang and Smith (2007), have pointed to the plurality of objectives motivating
communal growing – beyond environmental sustainability to include support for
disability, education, health and community, confidence, welfare and skills (White
and Stirling, 2013). Under these circumstances, the authors point to external funding
programmes as ‘windows of opportunity’ that brought diverse intermediary actors
together in collaborative ways – even if conflicting positions re-entrench once
funding comes to an end (White and Stirling, 2013). Such examples can be seen
either as inserting policy fixes (public support for non-government actors to work
towards policy objectives) or instances of political mobilization (the opportunities
that such initiatives present for communities and wider actors to position themselves
in relation to oppositional regimes that perpetuate structures of unsustainable and
socially exclusive systems of food production).
Power to do innovation, power over innovation and
democratic transformations
Historical reflection on earlier grassroots innovation movements, like those for
socially useful production, turns attention to the power relations that will matter
for these more recent initiatives and a need to address power when considering
green ‘transformations from below’. Grassroots innovation can range from a
necessary response to social challenges, to an accessible and fun way to express
creativity. Across this diverse range of activity, people are exercising a power to
innovate. However, when some of those grassroots innovations seek wider
influence (and not all do), then the same people can still struggle to obtain spaces
and resources to be innovative because they lack power over the agendas of elite
innovation institutions, such as those determining which innovations attract
investment for production and marketing, and under what social criteria.
Of course, in trying to go about innovations for sustainability in ways quite
different from elite institutions, and struggling precisely due to the power of those
prevailing institutions, then grassroots innovations reveal in very visible and practical
ways some of the structural constraints to green transformations from below.
Grassroots innovations provide a practical critique of prevailing economic, social
and political relations in innovation, but they also point to some alternative
possibilities, were those structural constraints to be challenged more powerfully
and effectively. It is no coincidence that some grassroots innovations have in the
past become emblematic for wider social movements seeking wider and deeper
changes, such as environmentalists, feminists, post-development activists. Socially
useful production was emblematic in its time, but others have included wind energy,
Green transformations from below? 115
past decade points towards grassroots innovation as a force for green transformations
from below in the global North. Despite the profound structural barriers holding
back these initiatives from generating wider political change, proponents continue
to celebrate ‘the power of just doing stuff’ (Hopkins, 2013).
Studies of community agriculture projects, a ‘grassroots innovation’ as defined
by Seyfang and Smith (2007), have pointed to the plurality of objectives motivating
communal growing – beyond environmental sustainability to include support for
disability, education, health and community, confidence, welfare and skills (White
and Stirling, 2013). Under these circumstances, the authors point to external funding
programmes as ‘windows of opportunity’ that brought diverse intermediary actors
together in collaborative ways – even if conflicting positions re-entrench once
funding comes to an end (White and Stirling, 2013). Such examples can be seen
either as inserting policy fixes (public support for non-government actors to work
towards policy objectives) or instances of political mobilization (the opportunities
that such initiatives present for communities and wider actors to position themselves
in relation to oppositional regimes that perpetuate structures of unsustainable and
socially exclusive systems of food production).
Power to do innovation, power over innovation and
democratic transformations
Historical reflection on earlier grassroots innovation movements, like those for
socially useful production, turns attention to the power relations that will matter
for these more recent initiatives and a need to address power when considering
green ‘transformations from below’. Grassroots innovation can range from a
necessary response to social challenges, to an accessible and fun way to express
creativity. Across this diverse range of activity, people are exercising a power to
innovate. However, when some of those grassroots innovations seek wider
influence (and not all do), then the same people can still struggle to obtain spaces
and resources to be innovative because they lack power over the agendas of elite
innovation institutions, such as those determining which innovations attract
investment for production and marketing, and under what social criteria.
Of course, in trying to go about innovations for sustainability in ways quite
different from elite institutions, and struggling precisely due to the power of those
prevailing institutions, then grassroots innovations reveal in very visible and practical
ways some of the structural constraints to green transformations from below.
Grassroots innovations provide a practical critique of prevailing economic, social
and political relations in innovation, but they also point to some alternative
possibilities, were those structural constraints to be challenged more powerfully
and effectively. It is no coincidence that some grassroots innovations have in the
past become emblematic for wider social movements seeking wider and deeper
changes, such as environmentalists, feminists, post-development activists. Socially
useful production was emblematic in its time, but others have included wind energy,
Green transformations from below? 115