Beyond deconstruction. a reconstructive perspective on sustainability transition governance

- The epistemological issues that underlie critical debates on transition management require more attention.
- Certain critiques on transition management are inherently based on a 'deconstructive' logic.
- Transition management has an inherent deconstructive power which has hitherto been insufficiently specified.
- In addition, transition management aims to go 'beyond deconstruction' towards 'reconstruction'.
- A 'reconstructive approach' can inspire an epistemological grounding for transition management and transitions studies more generally.

This paper reviews criticisms of sustainability transition studies, using transition management (TM) as a case study. While these criticisms have yielded theoretical progress, underlying epistemological issues remain. Contrasting the TM approach to complexity with other more deconstructive views on complexity, it becomes clear that some criticisms on TM are inherently based on a deconstructive questioning of whether complex systems can be influenced into a desired direction. The authors build on those critiques to argue that TM needs to clarify how (1) TM itself harbours deconstructive power (hitherto insufficiently specified), while (2) at the same time having an explicit ambition to 'go beyond' deconstruction. To that end, this paper proposes a 'reconstructive approach' as an epistemological grounding for transition studies. This reconstructive approach is elaborated on three grounds: (1) a research focus beyond 'is' versus 'ought' towards 'can be', (2) interpretative research and reflexivity, and (3) a 'phronetic' understanding of sustainability.