Bridging the old and the new in sustainability transitions: The role of transition intermediaries in facilitating urban experimentation

As experimentation with niche innovations confronts the old with the new, intermediaries are important to bridge innovative niches and established regimes. While there is a broad literature on experimentation to foster urban sustainability transitions, there is limited understanding of intermediaries acting as facilitators and translators. Previous studies of transition intermediaries in urban experimentation adopt a scaling-centric focus, which rests on the assumption that novelty emerges within niches and impacts regimes through processes of scaling-up. By contrast, this study shifts towards a reconfiguration perspective to move beyond the niche-regime dichotomy and provide a more fine-grained conception of how novelty emerges in-between niches and regimes, as well as through within-regime dynamics. This is to build a dialogue between the literature on urban experimentation and the literature on intermediaries in sustainability transitions. It is to shed light on the ambigious and heterogeneous nature of regime actors: they do not only reproduce path dependencies, but can also facilitate path creation. It implies a shift from a meso- towards a micro-level of analysis, which reveals the variety of intermediaries and their interactions. The study provides an empirical exploration of niche and regime intermediaries in local experimentation by analysing the transdisciplinary research project “Dresden – City of the Future: Empowering Citizens, Transforming Cities!”. The qualitative case study follows an explorative approach, which provides empirical insights on intermediaries’ activities that could not be anticipated during the initial research design. The interaction between niche and regime intermediaries shows the importance of recognising the dialectic nature of change from below and change from above. While niche intermediaries acted more as visionaries, knowledge brokers and advocates of change, regime intermediaries acted more as guides and facilitators, creating a shared institutional infrastructure and coordinating local-level activities. It reveals the (dis)empowering dynamics that underlie niche-regime interaction but also power struggles regime intermediaries are confronted with. These findings provide insights for governance strategies to strengthen the position of transition intermediaries. They suggest that the work of intermediaries should no longer be hidden and informal but recognised as an essential part of transition governance. A variety