CO-SUSTAIN: Literature review on the triggers and management of latent and manifest forms of political participation

Literature review on the triggers and management of latent and manifest forms of political participation Deliverable D2.1 Ref. Ares(2025)3559615 - 02/05/2025 Start date of the project 01/01/2024 Duration of the project 36 months Project’s website https://co-sustain.eu/ Deliverable n° & name D.2.1. Literature review on the triggers and management of latent and manifest forms of political participation Version 1 Work Package n° 2 Due date of the deliverable M15 – 3/31/2025 Beneficiary responsible Instytut Gospodarki Surowcami Mineralnymi i Energią PAN (IGSMiE) Main author(s) Wit Hubert, Wojciech Kowalik, Lidia Gawlik, Monika Pepłowska, Dominik Kryzia, Aleksandra Komorowska (IGSMiE PAN) Nature of the deliverable R Document, report (excluding the periodic and final reports) X DEM Demonstrator, pilot, prototype, plan designs DEC Websites, patents filing, press & media actions, videos, etc. DATA Data sets, microdata, etc. DMP Data management plan ETHICS Deliverables related to ethics issues SECURITY Deliverables related to security issues OTHER Software, technical diagrams, algorithms, models, etc. Dissemination level PU Public, fully open, e.g. web (Deliverables flagged as public will be automatically published in CORDIS project’s page) X SEN Sensitive, limited under the conditions of the Grant Agreement CO – SUSTAIN – Deliverable 2.1 2 / 53 Quality procedure Date Version Reviewer Action 21/03/25 V1.0 Wit Hubert, Wojciech Kowalik, Monika Pepłowska, Lidia Gawlik, Dominik Kryzia, Aleksandra Komorowska (IGSMiE PAN) The first part of the deliverable 23/03/25 V1.1 Aleksandra Komorowska, Wojciech Kowalik, Wit Hubert, Lidia Gawlik, Monika Pepłowska (IGSMiE PAN) Internal review of the first part of the deliverable 30/03/25 V2.0 Wit Hubert, Wojciech Kowalik (IGSMiE PAN) The first version of the deliverable 31/03/25 V2.1 Aleksandra Komorowska, Lidia Gawlik, Wojciech Kowalik, Wit Hubert (IGSMiE PAN) Internal review of the first version of the deliverable 19/04/2025 V2.2 Alessandro Sciullo (UNITO), Review of the deliverable 29/04/2025 V3.0 Wojciech Kowalik, Wit Hubert, Lidia Gawlik, Aleksandra Komorowska The second version of the deliverable 29/04/2025 V3.1 Nona Galvany, Joana Mundó, Flavio Ghilardi, Priscila Rivera (ECO) Second review of the deliverable 30/04/2025 V4.0 Aleksandra Komorowska, Wojciech Kowalik, Wit Hubert (IGSMiE PAN) Final version of the deliverable and submission CO – SUSTAIN – Deliverable 2.1 3 / 53 TABLE OF CONTENT 1. PROJECT ABSTRACT............................................................................................................................6 2. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY....................................................................................................................... 6 3. ABBREVIATIONS.................................................................................................................................7 4. INTRODUCTION................................................................................................................................. 8 5. METHODOLOGY............................................................................................................................... 10 5.1. Identification of papers from scientific repositories (Web of Science, Scopus, Google Scholar)... 10 5.1.1. Scope of identification..........................................................................................................10 5.1.2. Definition of the queries.......................................................................................................11 5.1.3. Results of identification of articles for the literature review................................................ 15 5.2. Screening and selection and quality assessment........................................................................... 19 5.2.1. Management and conduct of the study selection process...................................................20 5.3. Quantitative analysis......................................................................................................................24 6. CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK............................................................................................................. 26 6.1 Transition Theory (TT)..................................................................................................................... 26 6.2. Multi-Level Perspective (MLP)........................................................................................................28 6.3. Strategic Niche Management (SNM)..............................................................................................29 6.4. Technological Innovation System (TIS)........................................................................................... 30 6.5. Transition Management (TM).........................................................................................................30 6.6. Collective Action Initiative (CAI).....................................................................................................31 7. FORMS OF POLITICAL PARTICIPATION...............................................................................................32 8. TRIGGERS OF POLITICAL PARTICIPATION...........................................................................................35 9. STRATEGIES TO FOSTER POLITICAL PARTICIPATION IN SOCIETAL TRANSITION................................... 38 10. CONCLUSION..................................................................................................................................41 10.1. Summary of findings from the literature on triggers, forms, and management strategies of political participation for climate transition..........................................................................................41 10.2. Discussion of implications of the review findings for future research in the field....................... 43 11. REFERENCES...................................................................................................................................45 CO – SUSTAIN – Deliverable 2.1 4 / 53 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1. Flow diagram depicting the study selection process. 20 Figure 2. Criteria definition for study selection (Title & Abstract). 21 Figure 3. Criteria definition for study selection (Full text). 22 Figure 4. Keywords for study selection. 23 Figure 5. First step of the analytical work: Title & Abstract analysis. 23 Figure 6. The second step of the analytical work: Full text analysis. 24 Figure 7. Number of publications in each year. 25 Figure 8. The structure of publishers. 25 Figure 9. Visualisation of keywords network within analysed papers. 27 Figure 10. Latent and manifest political participation 33 LIST OF TABLES Table 1. List of abbreviations. 7 Table 2. Search terms and query strings used for the identification of Aspects of Interest. 12 Table 3. Search strings for Theoretical Frameworks. 14 Table 4. The result of the search in the WoS Database. 15 Table 5. Results of search in Scopus Database. 16 CO – SUSTAIN – Deliverable 2.1 5 / 53 1. PROJECT ABSTRACT In Western democracies, traditional institutional participation is on the decline, while non-institutional participation has been increasing. Non-institutional participation for the climate transition often relies on a prefigurative approach, thus creating spaces to incubate alternative ideas and novel forms of political participation (niches). Empowering these forms of political participation to encourage niche innovations will provoke the radical, yet necessary changes in the socio-technical system for a climate transition. The CO-SUSTAIN project seeks to address this opportunity for a democratic climate transition by defining and testing new democratic pathways, enabling local policymakers to support various and novel forms of political participation and empowering citizens to act for a sustainable transition. To develop a better understanding of political participation linked to environmental, political and societal imperatives, CO-SUSTAIN studies 18 historic examples in six different European countries for each of the latent and manifest forms of political participation underlined by Ekman: involvement, civic engagement, formal political participation, and activism. It uses institutional ethnography and system mapping to understand the dynamics of participation and its management, thus delivering best practices to stimulate and support political participation around these imperatives. These best practices serve to define interventions for solution co-creation in four case studies, one for each form of political participation: involvement through Spanish energy communities, civic engagement through food solidarity in Turin (IT), manifest political participation through participatory processes promoted by the government in Northern Europe (EST, FI) and activism through the Lobau Bleibt social movement (AT). The outputs and outcomes of the deliberations will be assessed to draw conclusions for more democratic climate policymaking across Europe. 2. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This paper reviews the literature on triggers and management of latent and manifest forms in the context of climate transition. The report provides a thorough analysis of existing knowledge on political participation related to environmental, political and social priorities. The method employs a systematic literature review based on the Web of Science, Scopus and Google Scholar databases, with queries built around three main topics: triggers for change, forms of participation and strategies for demanding social change. CADIMA record management software was used for screening and selection, and consistency was maintained through double-independent evaluation based on established criteria. This thorough procedure led to the selection of a group of 77 articles (from the original database of 444 records) for in-depth qualitative and quantitative evaluation. The review explores latent (social involvement and civic engagement) and manifest (formal political participation and activism) forms of political participation. The document outlines several factors that motivate individuals and groups (triggers) to participate politically in climate transition. These encompass the understanding of ecological stresses and the climate emergency, individual encounters with environmental shifts, the impact of current discourses and narratives, efficient communication pathways, as well as community identity and requirements. Additionally, the review examines effective strategies for managing and channelling political participation towards significant action to contrast, manage and mitigate climate change and other societal imperatives. Essential strategies consist of embracing CO – SUSTAIN – Deliverable 2.1 6 / 53 comprehensive and holistic and multi-level governance approaches, outlining explicit governmental objectives and rules, developing supportive environments for varied stakeholder involvement, nurturing a sense of ownership and accountability, setting up clear lines of communication, and formulating impactful narratives. In CO-SUSTAIN, political participation is considered as a component and trigger of systemic changes, and in order to analyse these dynamics, theoretical frameworks like Transition Theory, Multi-Level Perspective, Technological Innovation System, Strategic Niche Management and Transition Management are considered. The results of this literature review suggest several directions for future research, such as the importance of delving deeper into the relationship between latent and manifest forms of participation, combining different theoretical frameworks for a broader understanding, and examining governance strategies that can effectively guide various types of political participation toward specific climate objectives in varied socio-political and cultural settings. 3. ABBREVIATIONS Table 1. List of abbreviations. Abbreviation Definition A7T All seven Theories AoI Aspect of Interest CAI Collective Action Initiative CAoI Common Aspect of Interest CC Context of Climate CO-SUSTAIN Pathways for CO-creation between local authorities and collective actions for a SUSTAINable transition EU European Union FP Form of Participation GA Grant Agreement MLP Multi-Level Perspective PPforCT Public Participation for Climate Transition RES Result = number of articles where the Common Aspect of Interest appears simultaneously with a given theoretical framework SLR Systematic Review of the Literature SNM Strategic Niche Management TF Theoretical Framework STS Socio-Technical System TA Type of Actor TC Triggers of the Change TIS Technological Innovation System TM Transition Management TT Transition Theory CO – SUSTAIN – Deliverable 2.1 7 / 53 4. INTRODUCTION The CO-SUSTAIN project seeks to improve the understanding of the interaction between collective action and transition processes. It aims to explore how groups organise in response to climate, political, and societal imperatives, serving as platforms for political engagement in the development of participatory innovative strategies. Furthermore, the project tries to assess whether these forms of engagement lead to positive changes within the socio-technical system, considering the interplay between opportunities and internal dynamics. The literature review conducts a comprehensive examination of existing knowledge on various forms and dimensions of political participation, with a specific focus on the context of the climate transition. The review aims to identify common patterns and divergences in political participation across EU countries, considering their different institutional contexts and their effects in terms of promoting radical changes in the incumbent socio-technical systems that characterise contemporary society. The literature review is aimed at supporting the ambitions of the CO-SUSTAIN project, the first of which is to extend transformation theory to better understand the catalysts of change for sustainable transformation. Current understanding in the field in fact emphasises that, for effectively addressing climate change, radical shifts towards new socio-technical systems (STS) are essential. Introduced in the 50s (Tirst, 1981), STS concept has been widely adopted and deeply refined over the past decades as an overarching framework to address the dynamics and innovation within societal systems resulting from the interaction and mutual shaping among societal and technological components of the system under scrutiny. The most widely used approach in innovation and sustainability research is based on Transition Theory (TT), which includes frameworks such as the Multi-Level Perspective (MLP), Strategic Niche Management (SNM), Technology Innovation System (TIS), and Transition Management (TM). In STS, innovations typically emerge within protected spaces known as niches, which require support and structural changes to facilitate their expansion. Transition Theories have faced criticism for their narrow focus on technological innovation and their limited attention to politics, power, and cultural meanings, and their evolutionary perspective (Geels, 2019). Therefore, broadening the scope of Transition Theories to include the relevant role of social innovations in sustainability transitions is necessary. It is also important to investigate the diversity of practices employed by a wide range of agents involved in collective action during transitions. Recent initiatives aim to shift from top-down decision-making approaches to those that involve public and stakeholder participation (Edelenbos et al., 2017; Chitsa et al., 2022). The contrasting bottom-up and top-down approaches are increasingly regarded as artificial constructs. Governance structures co-evolve alongside social and ecological environments (Van Assche et al., 2020). Consequently, there is a need to examine participation from the perspective of social learning (Collins & Ison, 2006), and how it evolves with governance structures (Hargreaves et al., 2011; Mees et al., 2019; Wahlund & Palm, 2022). Kanger, Sovacool and Noorkõiv (2020) propose six policy intervention points that contribute to sustainable transformation: 1) stimulating different niches; 2) accelerating niches; 3) destabilising the regime; 4) addressing broader repercussions of regime destabilisation; 5) providing co-management of CO – SUSTAIN – Deliverable 2.1 8 / 53 multiple regime interactions; 6) tilting the landscape. These intervention points enable public participation and have the potential to trigger collective action initiatives (CAI). Political participation is crucial for enabling a shift from top-down, expert-led decision-making to public participation and stakeholder engagement in climate transition. The CO-SUSTAIN project recognises that collective action and citizen initiatives can act as platforms for political participation, prefigurative innovations, and exerting social pressure for change. At the same time, CAI has not yet gained widespread use as a framework in the study of transformative processes, although it shows great potential for understanding of change pathways. The CAI framework is emerging in the context of social movement research (Hassink et al., 2018). The aim of the CO-SUSTAIN project is to bring together theoretical and analytical perspectives and expand knowledge on the mutual influence of collective action and transformative processes. The project also adapts Ekman & Amnå's (2012) categorisation of political participation to broaden the understanding of the potential of citizens' initiatives in relation to transition. With these considerations in mind, the procedure for identifying and selecting articles within the Systematic Literature Review (SLR) included knowledge domains related to: A. the following theoretical frameworks: Transition Theory (TT), Multi-Level Perspective (MLP), Strategic Niche Management (SNM), Technological Innovation System (TIS), Transition Management (TM), Collective Action Initiative (CAI), and Socio-Technical System (STS); and B. aspects of interest relating successively to: Triggers of the Change (TC), different Forms of Participation (FP), distinct Types of social Actors (TA) and Context of the Climate (CC). Two key research questions were also identified to guide the literature review process: ● What forms and dimensions of political participation can be observed in the context of climate transition? ● What common patterns and divergences in political participation can be found across different EU countries? To address these research questions, the remainder of this report is as follows. Section 5 presents a detailed description of the methodology. Section 6 examines the conceptual framework studied in the CO-SUSTAIN project. Section 7 provides a comprehensive review of the triggers of political participation. Section 8 analyses latent and manifest forms of political participation. Section 9 discusses management strategies identified in global literature. Section 10 offers concluding remarks. CO – SUSTAIN – Deliverable 2.1 9 / 53 No of search Number of records found Publication years range All available in the database 2016 – 20251) 2020-20251) 3 Strategic Niche Management (SNM) 382 221 134 4 Technological Innovation System (TIS) 334 180 120 5 Transition Management (TM) 813 414 250 6 Collective Action Initiative (CAI) 3 1 2 7 Socio-Technical System (STS) 659 405 289 8 All 7 theories (A7T) 5 469 2941 2 005 PART III. Common aspect of interest in a specified theoretical framework (RES) V-1 (CAoI) AND (TT) 36 21 16 V-2 (CAoI) AND (MLP) 135 100 70 V-3 (CAoI) AND (SNM) 49 30 19 V-4 (CAoI) AND (TIS) 13 6 6 V-5 (CAoI) AND (TM) 94 53 41 V-6 (CAoI) AND (CAI) 2 1 2 V-7 (CAoI) AND (STS) 12 9 8 V-8 (CAoI) AND (A7T) 316 209 115 1)Repository status as of December 9th, 2024. It should be noted that the total number of articles in steps V-1 to V-7 is greater than the number of articles found in step V-8. This indicates that some articles mentioned more than one theoretical framework. Moreover, it should be stated that some papers already placed in the repository on December 9, 2024, will be published with a publication date in 2025. The final result of WoS database search gives 316 articles from the full WoS database, 209 articles published between 2016 and 2025, of which 115 articles from the years 2020–2025. Table 5. Results of search in Scopus Database. No of search Number of records found Publication years range All available in the database 2016 – 20251) 2020-20251) PART I. Aspect of Interest (AoI) I Triggers of the change (TC) 30 169 840 13 143 545 8 252 815 CO – SUSTAIN – Deliverable 2.1 16 / 53 No of search Number of records found Publication years range All available in the database 2016 – 20251) 2020-20251) II Forms of participation (FP) 29 404 914 11 943 132 7 434,452 III Types of social actor (TA) 41 235 085 16 423 763 10 275 371 IV Context of climate (CC) 1 055 930 629 712 426 775 V Common Aspect of Interest (CAoI) 255 682 170 171 120 513 PART II. Theoretical Framework (TF) 1 Transition Theory (TT) 3 076 1 353 827 2 Multi–Level Perspective (MLP) 916 652 441 3 Strategic Niche Management (SNM) 273 154 79 4 Technological Innovation System (TIS) 599 415 269 5 Transition Management (TM) 972 499 282 6 Collective Action Initiative (CAI) 29 23 19 7 Socio-technical system (STS) 5 135 3 233 1 905 8 All 7 theories (A7T) 10 813 6 208 3 752 PART III. Common aspect of interest in a specified theoretical framework (RES) V-1 (CAoI) AND (TT) 47 31 15 V-2 (CAoI) AND (MLP) 32 26 19 V-3 (CAoI) AND (SNM) 24 12 6 V-4 (CAoI) AND (TIS) 32 16 12 V-5 (CAoI) AND (TM) 69 46 30 V-6 (CAoI) AND (CAI) 1 1 1 V-7 (CAoI) AND (STS) 88 61 40 V-8 (CAoI) AND (A7T) 276 185 118 1)Repository status as of December 9th, 2024. The final result of the Scopus database search gives 276 articles from the full Scopus database, 185 articles that were published in the years 2016–2025, of which 118 articles were published in the years 2020–2025. CO – SUSTAIN – Deliverable 2.1 17 / 53 It was decided that, out of the three time frames of the published articles considered for analysis, the detailed analysis would cover articles published in the years 2016–2025. There were two arguments to justify this decision. The first one was the rational use of the research team's capabilities to read, analyse, and describe in detail a certain number of publications. Moreover, it was observed that the development of theoretical frameworks has been particularly evident in recent years. For example, in the WoS database, in the entire period from 1945 to 2015 (almost 70 years), 107 articles concerning the thematic scope of interest were published, while in the last 10 years, as many as 209. Similar proportions were observed in the Scopus database, i.e. 91 articles from the years 1945–2015 and 185 from the years 2016–2025. After a preliminary analysis of the selected articles, the literature review team concluded that the highly specialised WoS and Scopus databases do not index the journals in which the first papers related to specific theoretical frameworks are often published. The premise for such thinking was the fact that the list of citations of articles selected from the WoS and Scopus databases contained many items that were not indexed in these databases. Therefore, in order to fill the gap, it was decided to also search the Google Scholar platform for articles on the analysed theoretical frameworks in relation to issues related to the social aspects of climate change. The search was limited to publications from the years 2016–2025. The query was: (“Transition Theory” OR “Multi*Level Perspective” OR “Strategic Niche Management” OR “Technological Innovation System” OR “Transition Management” OR “Collective Action Initiative” OR “Socio*Technical System”) AND (climat* OR change OR crisis OR soci*). Initially, 398 results were obtained in Google Scholar. From the listed publications, those written in a language other than English were eliminated. As a result, 171 publications remained. In the next step, the following types of publications were eliminated: 1) Books that were not freely available because they had to be purchased, 2) Publications that had less than five citations, 3) Publications that, at first glance, were not thematically related to the analysed problem. Finally, 50 publications were added to the collection of texts chosen for the final analysis. The final set of publications gathered at this stage of the selection procedure consisted of 444 items distributed as follows: ● 209 articles selected from the Web of Science database, ● 185 articles selected from the Scopus database, ● 50 articles selected from the Google Scholar database. From each database, a selected set of records describing each article in detail was exported in RIS format, suitable for use by specialistic analytical software. CO – SUSTAIN – Deliverable 2.1 18 / 53 A check for duplication was necessary, given that the items originated from separate searches, and the relevance of the articles to the research questions required assessment. The process of cleaning and further selection of the identified items was subsequently carried out during the screening and selection phase described in Section 5.2. 5.2. Screening and selection and quality assessment The following two phases of the methodology, namely the (2) screening and selection and the (3) quality assessment, were performed with the use of the CADIMA software. CADIMA is a free web tool that supports the conduction and documentation of systematic literature reviews and systematic maps without topic restrictions (CADIMA, 2025). It enables efficient collaboration among research teams worldwide, with no limits on the number of reviewers at different review stages. The platform offers features such as automatic duplicate removal, record allocation for screening, bulk PDF upload, and detailed review process documentation. It is important to note that literature reviews do not include steps specific to meta-analyses, such as data extraction, critical appraisal, or data synthesis. The CADIMA software was used because it facilitates systematic literature reviews by providing a structured workflow, enabling transparent documentation of the selection process, and allowing for efficient collaboration between reviewers. The review team uploaded three sets of records of chosen articles (found as described in section 5.1) into CADIMA software and the programme has identified and removed duplicated articles. Figure 1 illustrates the study selection process. The flow diagram shows the stages of the work in CADIMA, divided into individual selection steps. These steps are described in detail in the following subsection. The flow diagram shows that, initially, 444 records retrieved in the form of RIS files obtained from queries in scientific databases (Web of Science, Scopus, Google Scholar) were entered into CADIMA. After removing duplicates, 410 records remained, which were screened at the title/abstract level, resulting in 158 exclusions based on the adopted criteria. Subsequently, the eligibility of 252 full-text articles was assessed, of which 175 were excluded on the basis of not meeting the criteria, which ultimately led to the inclusion of 77 full-text articles. CO – SUSTAIN – Deliverable 2.1 19 / 53 Figure 1. Flow diagram depicting the study selection process. 5.2.1. Management and conduct of the study selection process A preliminary set of criteria was established following thorough analysis and expert consultations within the team, ensuring that the selection process was well-founded and aligned with the study's objectives. Following internal discussions within the review team, the criteria were refined and tested for consistency. This consistency check involved two reviewers independently applying the criteria to the title and abstract of a randomly selected sample of records. CADIMA facilitated the assessment of inter-reviewer agreement by calculating a kappa value. The selection process in CADIMA was carried out independently by two reviewers, who were different from the person responsible for the repository analysis (Sections 4–5.2). Initially, the Kappa test2 results were unsatisfactory (Kappa = 0.54), which necessitated refining the selection criteria and repeating the 2 In CADIMA, the Kappa test is used to assess the consistency between reviewers in applying selection criteria for including studies in a systematic review. In particular, it measures the level of consistency or credibility between reviewers in deciding whether a study should be included based on certain criteria. A high kappa value indicates that reviewers are in agreement, suggesting that the selection criteria are being applied consistently. CO – SUSTAIN – Deliverable 2.1 20 / 53 test. The Kappa test was performed solely on titles and abstracts based on a sample of 10 texts randomly selected by CADIMA. Ultimately, after these adjustments, the final Kappa test result reached an optimal level of Kappa = 1. The Kappa test is a statistical measure that assesses the agreement between two or more raters, accounting for the possibility of random chance. A Kappa value of 1 indicates perfect agreement, while a value of 0 means no better agreement than random chance. A negative value suggests worse than random agreement. At this point, specific inclusion criteria were established to assess whether a record was eligible for inclusion in the review process. A set of three criteria was defined to be applied in two stages: first, to the title and abstract, and second, to the full text. At each stage, two reviewers independently and concurrently assessed the records. Any discrepancies were subsequently discussed and resolved jointly. Criteria definition for study selection “Title & abstract” are presented in Figure 2 and for “Full text” in Figure 3. For the evaluation of the literature (study selection “Title & Abstract”), three inclusion criteria were established: Aspect of Interest (AoI), Theoretical Framework (TF), and Context of Climate (CC). Each of these criteria had to be met for a record to be included in the review process. This stage qualitatively verified that selection based on string searches of scientific databases was effective. At each stage of assessment, two reviewers independently evaluated the texts, selecting one of three possible responses for each criterion: yes, no, or unclear. Only records that received a "yes" from both reviewers on all three criteria proceeded to the next stage. In cases of discrepancies, the reviewers discussed their evaluations to reach a consensus. Figure 2. Criteria definition for study selection (Title & Abstract). CO – SUSTAIN – Deliverable 2.1 21 / 53 Figure 3. Criteria definition for study selection (Full text). At the full-text review stage, additional exclusion criteria were applied to determine whether a record should be retained in the review process. These criteria included: 1. Focus on PPforCT (Public Participation for Climate Transition) in a too broader context – The study addressed PPforCT, but in a context too broad to be relevant for the review. 2. Explicit focus on PPforCT (too narrow) – The study focused on PPforCT, but in a way that was too narrow or specific, limiting its applicability to the broader review objectives. 3. Full text not available – The study was identified as relevant, but the full text was not obtainable. 4. Full text not accessible – The full text existed but was inaccessible due to paywalls or other restrictions. At this stage, each record was independently assessed by two reviewers, who could select one of two responses for each criterion: "yes" or "no". A single "yes" from either reviewer led to the exclusion of the record. In cases where assessments differed, the reviewers discussed their decisions to reach a consensus. As part of the preparatory work in CADIMA, the two reviewers jointly proposed the introduction of keywords (Figure 4). These keywords were not used as formal inclusion or exclusion criteria but served as a supplementary tool to support the reading process. They remained marked in each text, helping reviewers navigate the content more efficiently. Additionally, they influenced the order in which texts were presented to reviewers, prioritising the most relevant ones first. CO – SUSTAIN – Deliverable 2.1 22 / 53 Figure 4. Keywords for study selection. All the steps outlined above constitute the preparatory work, while the following section focuses on the analytical work carried out by the reviewers. In the first step of the analytical work, following the preparatory phase, the two reviewers examined 410 titles and abstracts. The analysis of a sample text from this stage is presented in Figure 5. Figure 5. First step of the analytical work: Title & Abstract analysis. CO – SUSTAIN – Deliverable 2.1 23 / 53 In the second step of the analytical work, the two reviewers examined 252 titles and abstracts. Many of the texts were unavailable or inaccessible. The analysis of a sample text from the second step is presented in Figure 6. Figure 6. The second step of the analytical work: Full text analysis. As a result of the reviewers' work, who read and analysed a total of 410 scientific articles within CADIMA, 77 articles were ultimately selected, forming the basis for further detailed work and quantitative analysis. At the stage of quantitative and qualitative analysis of the final corpus of academic articles, we used the following tools (applications and software): VOSviewer (keyword network map), SciSpace (creation of tabular queries for occurrences of theories under review), MaxQDA (advanced key phrase search), Zotero (reference management), and DeepL (translation and language accuracy). 5.3. Quantitative analysis The final step of the methodology was aimed at providing a quantitative analysis of the final selection of papers. Figure 7 presents the number of publications over the years from 2016 to 2025. The highest number of publications was recorded in 2018, reaching 20. In the following years (2019–2021), the number of publications was significantly lower, but it increased again in 2022, exceeding 12. The publication count remained relatively high in 2023 and 2024, whereas 2025 shows a noticeable decline (because the search was done at the end of 2024 year, so only some articles were already indexed in the databases, while the majority of them will be published and indexed in 2025 year). This quantitative corpus description, based on CADIMA results, highlights the fluctuations in the number of publications over time, which may indicate periods of greater research activity in a particular field. The peaks in publication numbers might correspond to increased funding, research interest, or significant developments in the domain. On the other hand, the lower numbers in certain years could be attributed CO – SUSTAIN – Deliverable 2.1 24 / 53 to changes in research priorities, funding availability, or external factors such as global stress events. For 2025, the observed publication count does not fully reflect the total number of expected publications but rather represents the state as of December 9th, 2024. Figure 7. Number of publications in each year. Figure 8 presents the distribution of publications across different publishers. The highest number of publications was from Elsevier. Figure 8. The structure of publishers. CO – SUSTAIN – Deliverable 2.1 25 / 53 In the view proposed in the SLR, Collective Action Initiatives are organised efforts that bring together a wide range of stakeholders, especially from the private sector, to address complex issues such as corruption or energy transition, with the primary goal of improving the business climate or achieving common goals through joint efforts. In the framework of the energy transition, CAIs are crucial, as they promote the decentralisation and democratisation of energy systems via inclusive processes that involve a range of stakeholders, such as citizens, municipalities, and businesses (Petrovics et al., 2022; 2024). These efforts aim to align economic, social, and environmental demands, thus aiding low-carbon energy shifts and enhancing community empowerment (Petrovics et al., 2022). CAIs are characterised by value dynamics – which explore value sets brought together by different socio-technical components (Melnyk et al., 2023). They often benefit from supportive policy frameworks and serve as a form of social innovation dedicated to achieving more democratic decision-making, empowering communities, and promoting values such as sustainability, equity, and social justice (Petrovics et al., 2024). 7. FORMS OF POLITICAL PARTICIPATION Forms of political participation can be broadly defined as citizens' legal activities aimed at influencing government decisions, political outcomes, or the broader political sphere (Verba et al., 1980). These activities also include those designed to influence civil society or social behaviour patterns (Norris, 2002), which brings political participation closer to the term civic engagement (Zukin, 2006). An important element closely related to political participation is political trust. Since the researchers allow two opposing hypotheses about the negative and positive relationship between these two dimensions, in a small sense, it can be considered as a type (form) of political participation: based on the lack of political trust (Gamson, 1968) or can be a consequence of high political trust (Almond & Verba, 2016). There is also a third hypothesis (form), according to which the effect of political trust on political participation depends on the interaction with the sense of political awareness (Hooghe & Marien, 2013). An important addition to the definition of political/citizen participation is its voluntary dimension (Huntington & Nelson, 1997) and (community) involvement (Dahl, 1976), which is one of the essences of democratic systems. These activities can be categorised into latent and manifest with two levels of political behaviour (individual or collective) (Ekman & Amnå, 2012), which is crucial for understanding the full spectrum of citizen engagement and is the main axis of the theoretical framework of the CO-SUSTAIN project3. 3 Further details about this taxonomy are provided in the Deliverable 1.2 of the CO-SUSTAIN project. CO – SUSTAIN – Deliverable 2.1 32 / 53 Figure 10. Latent and manifest political participation (source: https://co-sustain.eu/historic-examples; based on: Ekman & Amnå, 2012) Latent political participation refers to less direct or 'pre-political' (Talò & Mannarini, 2015) forms of engagement, encompassing an individual's readiness and willingness to take political action (Ekman & Amnå, 2012). In other words, latent participation involves indirect engagement that shapes political awareness. Ekman and Amnå (2012) conceptualise latent participation as having two main forms: ● Social Involvement (Attention). ● Civic Engagement (Action). Manifest political participation refers to direct, observable actions aimed at influencing government decisions and political outcomes (Ekman & Amnå, 2012; Talò & Mannarini, 2015), and directly targets political institutions or decision-making processes. Ekman and Amnå (2012) categorise manifest political participation into two main forms: ● Formal political participation. ● Activism (extra-parliamentary participation): legal or illegal4. Another important dimension of political participation is whether it is conventional (voting, lobbying, campaigning) or unconventional (protests, boycotts, civil disobedience) (Barnes and Kaase, 1981; Stockemer, 2014) and whether it is legal or illegal (legal extra-parliamentary activities, illegal extra-parliamentary activities) (Ekman & Amnå, 2012). This nomenclature often implies a negative view of less traditional activities. Therefore, it is worth mentioning the typology based on the results of multidimensional scaling, which identifies two main axes. The first dimension refers to actions ‘within the 4 For a detailed description of the concept by Joakim Ekman & Erik Amnå, see Deliverable 1.2 of the CO-SUSTAIN project. CO – SUSTAIN – Deliverable 2.1 33 / 53 system’ versus ‘outside the system,’ and the second refers to actions ‘progressive’ versus ‘conservative’ (Sabucedo & Arce, 1991). The intersection of these two axes finally leads to the identification of four forms of political participation defined by ‘electoral persuasion’, ‘conventional participation’, ‘violent participation’, and ‘direct non-violent participation’ (Sabucedo & Arce, 1991, p. 100). Based on the literature collected in SLR, several analyses that are saturated with examples of latent forms of political participation can be identified. An illustration of civic engagement (action) is the work of Julie MacArthur (MacArthur, 2016), who studies energy transition activities in Canada and Denmark, to illustrate both the promise and the challenge of public engagement and the role of political culture in shaping participation, which may indirectly involve political party dynamics. Hidden forms of political participation are reflected in civic engagement, such as participatory budgeting, where residents co-decide on the distribution of resources. Another example is civic control through direct management of resources, e.g. community energy projects, which enable citizen partial control through direct ownership of assets and thus control of part of the energy sector. Such mechanisms democratise decision-making processes, reducing the dominance of political and economic elites. Social involvement (attention), as a latent form of political participation, manifests through heterogeneous collective practices that engage individuals in addressing public issues, such as energy-related challenges, by shaping meanings, knowledge, and social organisation. Such conclusions can be drawn from the results of a systematic mapping of 30 cases of the UK energy system transitions between 2010 and 2015 carried out by Chilversa, Palletta and Hargreaves (Chilvers et al., 2018). These participatory practices, including citizen science, protests, and digital democracy, highlight the interconnectedness between individuals, material infrastructures, and political processes, influencing socio-technical change through both resistance and collaboration. Energy participation practices are significantly influenced by the motivating factors of the energy system as a constitution. ‘This includes prevailing constitutional relations between citizens, science and the state and hegemonic imaginaries of scientific and economic progress’ (Chilvers et al., 2018, p. 208). As illustrations for the manifested forms of political participation, some case studies are presented, based on SLR. It should be emphasised that there are far fewer examples of manifested forms of participation, and when they appear, they are based on evaluations of existing transformation policies. An example of this is a study of transition modes in the region of Western Macedonia (Greece) (Topaloglou & Ioannidis, 2022). Here, the researchers, focusing on a critical evaluation of the transition policy model at the central, regional and local levels of government, noted that the imbalance between regime and niche actors leads to inadequacies in terms of legitimacy, inclusiveness, public involvement and, ultimately, the overall effectiveness of policies. That is, the shift toward networked social structures, driven by economic, technological, demographic and climate change, creates complex formal and informal linkages that produce system imbalances (Topaloglou & Ioannidis, 2022). Also appearing in the collected base are examples of how the formation of grassroots niches often depends on the capacity of established organisations. A paper analysing governance innovations for sustainable development in Seoul cites Wolfram (2017), who provides examples of networking and management of grassroots initiatives (legal activism) in the context of urban development. CO – SUSTAIN – Deliverable 2.1 34 / 53 An interesting example of network-based political participation (a collective form of activism) is the study of local governance initiatives in greenspace in urban areas (Aalbers et al., 2019). Here, the researchers, based on 14 case studies from the Netherlands, noted that integrating green space with social and economic development can be successful when the agreement of niche initiatives with the municipality is in line with the current social climate and the chosen political direction (Aalbers et al., 2019). An important aspect of the debate is the issue of formal paths to political participation, such as membership in trade unions or parties. The authors of a study on gendered power asymmetries in the United Kingdom and the United States (Braunger & Walk, 2022) in the context of coal transitions note that these institutions of formal participation are often exclusive, and a dimension such as gender can be exclusionary to mass participation. Forms of political participation encompass diverse strategies, from grassroots activism to policy engagement, as seen in groups like Brazil’s Landless Workers Movement, the New York food movement, and the Sustainable Ecovillage Movement, which leverage advocacy, coalition-building, and institutional mobilisation to drive systemic change. These efforts highlight the interplay between grassroots initiatives and mainstream institutions, demonstrating how relational, dispositional, and structural powers shape socio-technical transitions through sustained, multifaceted participation (Ilieva & Hernandez, 2018). An important dimension that determines the form of political participation is the direction of the flow of mobilisation factors. This reflects the presence of innovations (mobilisation of resources to effect change) that may follow either a ‘bottom-up’ or ‘top-down’ trajectory. In studying three differently scaled German bottom-up renewable energy initiatives to address this gap, David and Schönborn (2018) found that during the adoption phase, the analysed narratives travel easily. They sometimes shift away from their original participatory ideals toward promoting socio-technical systems. This observation provides evidence that transformational directions can change during the process (David & Schönborn, 2018). Finally, it is worth noting the relationship between different forms of participation and the role of actors interacting with each other and the implications this has for the motivation system of active citizens. As seen in the results of research based on qualitative interviews with citizens active in sustainable development in seven European countries (Fischer et al., 2018), individual actions influenced by education and awareness of sustainability also contribute to political engagement. In addition, formal governance processes such as regulation and decentralisation facilitate broader collective action. These diverse forms of participation highlight the dynamic interactions between citizens, governments and other actors in developing sustainability initiatives (Fischer et al., 2018). 8. TRIGGERS OF POLITICAL PARTICIPATION The reasons why individuals and groups undertake different forms of civic engagement or politics have a variety of backgrounds and have been the subject of many studies in the social sciences, political sciences and psychology. One broader definition is offered by Putnam, indicating that civic engagement is ‘people's connections with the life of their communities, not merely politics’ (Putnam, 1995, p. 665). Looking for a stricter definition of political participation, one cannot ignore the work of Verba, Scholzman and Brady (1995), in which they indicate that political participation gives society members in democratic CO – SUSTAIN – Deliverable 2.1 35 / 53 systems ‘an opportunity to communicate information to government officials about their concerns and preferences and put pressure on them to respond. [...] It is the activity that has the intent or effect of influencing government action – either directly by affecting the making’ (Verba et al., 1995, pp. 37–38). The authors point to three key groups of triggers as predictors of political participation. The first factor relates to access to resources that enable individuals to participate in political processes. These include appropriate knowledge, skills and competencies, time, as well as financial resources. The second factor is related to an individual's motivation to become active. This is also referred to as psychological commitment and is related to issues such as the level of interest in an issue or a sense of agency and effectiveness. The third and final aspect is linked to the so-called ‘recruitment networks’ through which an individual is introduced to politics or encouraged to participate. These can be leaders, interest groups, and parties or social movements, non-governmental and civil society organisations (Verba et al., 1995). With regard to recruitment networks, Florence Passy adds an important perspective by pointing out the important role of broadly defined social networks in building engagement in collective action initiatives, but also by pointing out that different forms of participation are associated with different motivational characteristics (Passy, 2006). An interesting view on factors that increase the motivation to engage in civic and political activities was provided by Bert Klandermans (1997). These factors affect the individual directly and are the main source of demand for participation. The first reason why participation in a movement may be attractive to people is related to their desire to change their position, situation or conditions in which they find themselves. This type Klandermans refers to as instrumentality and relates it to those forms of participation that are associated with attempts to influence the political or social environment. Instrumentality is linked to resource mobilisation and can be analysed based on theories such as political process and social movement theory, expectancy-value, or rational choice theories. Willingness to engage is also linked to identity and refers to treating engagement as a manifestation of identification with a group. This is because individuals are also inclined to engage because of their desire to act as members of their group. Understanding this aspect is made possible, among other things, by social-psychological theories of social identity or those of sociological concepts that discuss collective identity as one of the elements of social involvement. The reasons why an individual engages in civic and political activities are linked to ideology, which, in this case, is used to express one's feelings, and views or make sense of one's world. Thus, it is a form of seeking meaning and manifesting one's beliefs. Explaining this sphere of factors is explored by psychological theories of social cognition and emotion, as well as approaches that analyse social movements from a meaningful, emotional, moral reasoning, cultural or narrative perspective (Klandermans 1997). Klandermans treats each of these three sources of involvement (instrumentality, identity, ideology) equally, indicating that the analysis of the triggers of political activity should not ignore any of these outlined perspectives (Klandermans, 1997). In his research, Klandermans also uses the metaphor of demand and supply in the context of political participation and especially political protest. As he points out, ‘The demand-side of participation requires studies of such phenomena as socialisation, grievance formation, causal attribution, and the formation of collective identity. The study of the supply side of CO – SUSTAIN – Deliverable 2.1 36 / 53 participation concerns such matters as action repertoires, the effectiveness of social movements, the frames and ideologies movements stand for, and the constituents of identification they offer. Mobilisation is the process that links demand and supply. Mobilisation is the marketing mechanism of the social movement domain, and thus the study of mobilisation concerns such matters as the effectiveness of (persuasive) communication, the influence of social networks, and the perceived costs and benefits of participation’ (Klandermans, 2007, p. 361). Thus, viewed from the perspective of collective action initiatives without the likelihood of engagement in public affairs materialising is a combination of these three factors. Sometimes, social discontent or disagreement is unlikely to become institutionalised in the form of collective action unless there is a leader or organisation capable of staging any action. However, no organisation can succeed if its goals and demands are not supported by citizens. Finally, a proper, effective mobilisation campaign is necessary for the two sides to come together (Klandermans, 2007). An important dimension of analysing the papers included in the literature review in terms of triggers for collective initiatives is also the identification of hotspots, i.e., specific issues, concerns or, most generally, reasons why the need for interest, engagement and formal participation or activism in the context of the climate imperative may be growing in individuals. The flashpoints triggering engagement are linked to environmental pressures, including the wide range of climate and environmental consequences that human activities lead to. Many researchers point to the fact that creating awareness as an initiating factor is a key element (Chilvers et al., 2018; David & Schönborn, 2018; Kuhmonen et al., 2024; Preston, 2024). Awareness of the worsening climate crisis forms the basis for building the belief that significant social change is needed (Fischer et al., 2018). This awareness emerges as a result of various factors, which will be discussed below. Rositsa T. Ilieva and Andreas Hernandez (2018) point out that issues of climate change-induced disruption of existing food production, distribution and consumption processes are also an important trigger for engagement. The authors analyse three case studies, highlighting initiatives from the US, Brazil and Senegal. While each case presents a different story of collective initiatives, their common denominator is environmental pressures and their consequences for feelings of deprivation, deepening exclusion and social, economic or health inequalities, as well as the lack of representation that is a source of motivation to act for change (Goddard & Farrelly, 2018; Ilieva & Hernandez, 2018). Often, the trigger is the desire to pursue one's own needs or protect one's interests (Braunger & Walk, 2022; Wolfram, 2017). Consciousness is thus born out of a concrete, individual experience shaping or reinforcing values such as caring, solidarity and social commitment (Melnyk et al., 2023). This, in turn, triggers a belief in the need for meaningful social change, which can catalyse political participation and activism, especially when the government is perceived to be ineffective in implementing key changes (Fischer et al., 2018; Melnyk et al., 2023). An example is the social movement triggered by the lack of consideration of the climate imperative in modernisation plans (Torrens et al., 2018). Experience can also be shaped as a result of a significant historical event affecting the consciousness of society as a whole. An example is the Chernobyl disaster, cited in David and Schönborn (2018), which has served as a significant trigger for activism against nuclear energy, motivating individuals to engage in local energy solutions. CO – SUSTAIN – Deliverable 2.1 37 / 53 Some of the papers indicate the important role of existing discourses and narratives in creating awareness of an issue and motivation to act (Birat, 2020). Kuchmonen et al. (2024) show, using the example of social discourses related to ethics, the environment, health, food security and global markets in the context of food systems, that discourses can trigger changes in preferences and consumption habits, motivating individuals to engage in activism against commercial animal production (Kuhmonen et al., 2024). Interesting insights into the role of narratives and discourses are introduced by David & Schönborn (2018), showing how a proper framing of energy transitions pointing to the importance of civil society's participation as a key factor for the success of transitions can trigger formal political participation. Discourses and narratives can thus contribute to raising awareness and motivation for individual and collective climate and environmental action (Preston, 2024), creating niches and fostering knowledge development: the creation, sharing and application of information and experiences (Schiller et al., 2023). At the same time, the negative framing of actions in support of sustainable transformation within prevailing discourses and narratives can lead to social mobilisation and different forms of engagement to stop change and defend the different elements that make up the regime (Braunger & Walk, 2022; Petrović, 2023) or deter action, as happened in the Gladstone region, where the portrayal of renewable energy as a threat to jobs led to a reluctance of community members to engage with environmental issues (Goddard & Farrelly, 2018). The various communication channels through which knowledge and information are shared, for example, through the presence of a topic in the media or through ongoing educational activities, play a key role in shaping and disseminating community narratives and discourses. An example is the creation of awareness among farmers about sustainable practices in the agricultural sector through media messages, public extension services and education programmes, which stimulated engagement and reduced prejudices, serving as a trigger for political participation (Yildiztekin & Erol, 2022). A final important source of motivation and trigger for engagement that emerges from the analysis of the research described in the corpus of articles is the issue of identity and community. Wolfram's text indicates that the emergence of grassroots initiatives in urban contexts is often triggered by the need to address self-defined community needs, which fosters interest and engagement among residents (Wolfram, 2017). The role of social networks and grassroots initiatives is also recognised by David & Schönborn (2018), concluding that the establishment of local initiatives often relies on social capital, such as community networks and voluntary actions, which can enhance civic engagement and participation. 9. STRATEGIES TO FOSTER POLITICAL PARTICIPATION IN SOCIETAL TRANSITION The holistic strategies for managing and directing political participation towards meaningful transition processes to address climate imperatives present in the texts analysed refer most closely to existing frameworks, which are described in Section 6. Much attention is thus given to creating conditions that foster innovation and collaboration through the creation of protected spaces for experimentation, through mechanisms for networking actors and appropriately designed public support, present in Transition Management, Strategic Niche Management or Technological Innovation Systems. However, conclusions and recommendations based on the results of the research, case study analysis and desk research provide more nuanced insights. They show, above all, how the individual assumptions of CO – SUSTAIN – Deliverable 2.1 38 / 53 these frameworks are implemented and how specific actions and practices affect political participation, especially those related to sustainable transformation. These insights, derived from the analysis of 77 papers included in the literature review, are presented below in several thematic categories. The first of the relevant aspects discussed in the texts is related to the strategy of policy enactment and governance. In their analytical paper, Topaloglou & Ioannidis (2022) argue for a holistic view of the transition process because of its long-term impact and the profound environmental, social and economic transformations it entails. According to the quoted authors, the transition process is so complex and multifaceted that it cannot be properly carried out by delegating tasks to specific bodies and creating structures for top-down management of the transition and implementation of policies. Instead, they propose the introduction of differentiated policies within multi-level and multi-scale governance, introducing a hybrid or bottom-up approach instead of the ineffective and limiting legitimacy, inclusiveness, and public engagement top-down approach. This, according to the authors, enables the integration of activities across levels of government and increases local control over the process by taking into account multiple perspectives and goals, while bottom-up governance increases community engagement (Hoicka et al. 2022; Topaloglou & Ioannidis, 2022). Arguments about the need for a holistic view of transition processes are shared by a team of researchers analysing the carbon-neutral transition in Kyoto. They point out that ensuring coherence between climate policies and other public policies at different levels of governance is essential to driving change in energy systems (Kobashi et al., 2025). Topaloglou & Ioannidis (2022), already cited, as well as Fridahl & Johansson (2017), also point to the important role played by the government as a coordinator in setting clear goals and introducing regulations that guide stakeholder action and stimulating innovation. Ashford & Hall (2018) also look at the role of government in a similar way, stating that governments should play an active role in setting clear and binding climate targets and in creating regulations that guide action and mobilise public support for the transition. The paper also argues that regulation-induced innovation is likely to result in many significant changes, suggesting that stringent regulation can stimulate fundamental product and process innovations (Ashford & Hall, 2018). The role of regulation in sustainable transition is also mentioned by Preston (2024), indicating that legal developments, such as court decisions that recognise the duty of care regarding climate change, can inspire individuals and organisations to take action, thereby increasing formal political participation. The study by Schiller et al. (2023) is another example of the role of government and formal regulation in managing the transition. In analysing the process of agricultural evolution in Nicaragua towards agroecology, they concluded that the institutionalisation of agroecology into national law and the creation of dedicated multi-stakeholder networks provided a formal framework that encouraged political participation and activism among farmers and organisations. The second aspect that very often resonates in the papers analysed in the literature review relates to the creation of an enabling environment for stakeholder engagement and participation. The key issue here is to organise deliberative processes with the inclusion of as wide and diverse a group of stakeholders as possible and keeping in mind vulnerable groups and those in opposition to change (Arlati, 2024; Braunger & Walk, 2022; Hirt et al., 2020; Kivimaa & Kern, 2016; Ko et al., 2019; Kobashi et al., 2025; Kuss & Nicholas, 2022; MacArthur, 2016; Poelsma et al., 2025). Ensuring broad access for diverse social actors in transformational decision-making increases the legitimacy and acceptance of actions and involvement in CO – SUSTAIN – Deliverable 2.1 39 / 53 policy-making that takes into account different perspectives (Jørgensen et al., 2022; Van Der Voorn et al., 2023). This is particularly important in the context of ensuring transitional justice, the provision of which is a strong mobilising factor (Jenkins et al., 2018). In the case of transformation processes involving, for example, a shift away from the use of existing technology or raw materials, and thus a significant violation of the economic interests of specific occupational groups and sectors historically dominated by large industry, it is very important to involve trade unions in supporting a just transition and ensuring adequate support for workers (Braunger & Walk, 2022; Goddard & Farrelly, 2018). Furthermore, an understanding of the local socio-political and cultural context is crucial for political participation in climate transition efforts and transition governance (Frantzeskaki, 2022). In the literature reviewed, the aspect of ownership and responsibility towards climate transition initiatives is also highlighted several times. Reviewing the findings of the studies, it can be seen that there is a feedback loop between participation and ownership. Empowering communities and local stakeholders increases the sense of ownership (Braunger & Walk, 2022; David & Schönborn, 2018; Melnyk et al., 2023; Topaloglou & Ioannidis, 2022). At the same time, when communities have a greater sense of ownership, e.g., in terms of transformational pathways developed together, responsibility for emerging infrastructure or implemented policies, their involvement and active participation in transformational processes increases (Ko et al., 2019; Narjabadifam et al., 2023). It is also important to create appropriate information and communication procedures. This includes establishing clear communication channels, and broad and free access to information, thus empowering stakeholders and citizens. Co-creative consultation and decentralised policy-making structures can make governance mechanisms more effective and participation in the climate transition more informed (Topaloglou & Ioannidis, 2022). Similarly, awareness-raising campaigns (Irshaid et al., 2021) and educational programmes (Yildiztekin & Erol, 2022) have a similarly pro-participatory and engagement-enhancing impact. Petrovincs et al. (2024) complement the above indications with a further element of democratised knowledge distribution and transfer of best practices between initiatives and social actors. Finally, it is also worth mentioning the element of strategy employed to direct and channel political participation towards meaningful climate transition, already mentioned when describing the triggers of political participation. It is about creating the right narrative and managing the discourse. The sources analysed emphasise the importance of creating legitimacy through discourse to foster the development of innovation and demonstrate its importance in effective governance to effectively channel political participation. This involves articulating a favourable vision or expectation that emphasises the relationship of innovation to the wider system or landscape environment (Arlati, 2024; Hoicka et al., 2022). Mintrom & Rogers (2022) further point out that developing narratives that support ongoing action can keep actor networks focused on their goals and the necessary steps to achieve them, thereby channelling political participation effectively. While the authors cited above highlight the importance of discourse created from the position of actors managing transformative processes, David & Schönborn (2018) also point to the important role of bottom-up energy transition narratives. According to the cited researchers, this can effectively channel CO – SUSTAIN – Deliverable 2.1 40 / 53 political participation by emphasising civil society's role in local energy futures, thereby mobilising citizens to engage in decision-making processes. Byrne et al. (2018) look at narratives from a different perspective, showing through the example of a study of solar PV development in Kenya that discourses and linguistic framing can also serve to advance vested interests that do not necessarily support a sustainable and just transition. This perspective is also supported by the findings of Antal (2019). 10. CONCLUSION The Systematic Literature Review delves into the key role of political participation in defining and implementing strategies to address climate imperatives by analysing its forms, triggers and governance strategies. Behind the review conducted was a strong normative conviction that understanding these interrelated elements is essential to empowering citizens and enabling local decision-makers to support effective climate action. The document also has a practical value for the CO-SUSTAIN project and is intended as a theoretical knowledge bridge between the two empirical phases: the historical examples and the case studies5. The methodology adopted for the SLR included searching through scientific repositories, such as Web of Science, Scopus and Google Scholar, using specific search terms (search strings) related to change triggers, forms of participation, types of social actors and climate context. CADIMA software was used to screen, remove duplicates and manage the study selection process, which included two reviewers independently applying inclusion and exclusion criteria at the title/abstract and full-text levels. In addition, software such as VOSviewer (keyword association map), SciSpace (creation of tabular queries for occurrences of theories under review), MaxQDA (advanced key phrase search), Zotero (reference management), and DeepL (translation and language correctness) were used in the analysis process. The collected experience suggests the conclusion that despite the high development of tools based on artificial intelligence (AI) solutions, for the time being, it is not possible (using the above tools) to automate the process of providing a systematic literature review. 10.1. Summary of findings from the literature on triggers, forms, and management strategies of political participation for climate transition The study distinguishes between latent and manifest forms of political participation. Latent participation includes less direct engagement, such as social involvement (attention) and civic engagement (action), which shape political awareness and can indirectly influence political processes, which is essentially a reiteration of the project's core taxonomy by Ekman and Amnå (2012). Examples include citizen science, participatory budgeting, and community energy projects. Manifest participation involves direct, observable actions aimed at influencing government decisions, categorised as formal political participation and activism (extra-parliamentary participation). The review also acknowledges the spectrum of participation from conventional to unconventional, and legal to illegal actions (Barnes & Kaase, 1981; Stockemer, 2014). Understanding these diverse forms is significant as it reveals the 5 https://co-sustain.eu/about/ CO – SUSTAIN – Deliverable 2.1 41 / 53 Gregg, J. S., Bolwig, S., Sciullo, A., Arrobbio, O., Hubert, W., Ivask, N., Iturriza, I. J., Meynaerts, E., Novaresio, A., Polo-Alvarez, L., Vizinho, A., & Van Der Waal, E. (2023). How can energy become a community endeavor in Europe? Consortium benchmarking strategies for the mobilization of collective action initiatives. Energy Research & Social Science, 98, 103005. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2023.103005 Gruba, M. C., Denes, D., Lobo, R. C. G., & Isaak, A. J. (2022). Circular Economy Initiatives: Strategic Implications, Resource Management, and Entrepreneurial Innovation in a Brazilian Craft Beer Ecosystem during the COVID Era. Sustainability, 14(19), 11826. https://doi.org/10.3390/su141911826 Hargreaves, T., Haxeltine, A., Longhurst, N. & G. Seyfang. (2011.) Sustainability Transitions from the Bottom-up: Civil Society, the Multi-level Perspective and Practice Theory. CSERGE Working paper 2011-01, https://www.econstor.eu/obitstream/10419/48796/1/662352246.pdf. Hassink, J., Grin, J., & W. Hulsink (2018) Enriching the multi-level perspective by better understanding agency and challenges associated with interactions across system boundaries. The case of care farming in the Netherlands: Multifunctional agriculture meets health care. Journal of Rural Studies, 57, 186-196 & Törnberg, A. (2018). Combining transition studies and social movement theory: towards a new research agenda. Theory and Society, 47(3): 381–408. http://www.jstor.org/stable/44981900. Hekkert, M. P., Suurs, R. A. A., Negro, S. O., Kuhlmann, S., & Smits, R. E. H. M. (2007). Functions of innovation systems: A new approach for analysing technological change. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 74(4), 413–432. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2006.03.002 Hirt, L. F., Schell, G., Sahakian, M., & Trutnevyte, E. (2020). A review of linking models and socio-technical transitions theories for energy and climate solutions. Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions, 35, 162–179. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eist.2020.03.002 Hoicka, C. E., Zhao, Y., McMaster, M.-L., & Das, R. R. (2022). Diffusion of demand-side low-carbon innovations and socio-technical energy system change. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Transition, 2, 100034. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rset.2022.100034 Hooghe, M., & Marien, S. (2013). A COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF THE RELATION BETWEEN POLITICAL TRUST AND FORMS OF POLITICAL PARTICIPATION IN EUROPE. European Societies, 15(1), 131–152. https://doi.org/10.1080/14616696.2012.692807 Huntington, S. P., & Nelson, J. M. (1997). No easy choice: Political participation in developing countries (Facs). UMI. Ilieva, R. T., & Hernandez, A. (2018). Scaling-Up Sustainable Development Initiatives: A Comparative Case Study of Agri-Food System Innovations in Brazil, New York, and Senegal. Sustainability, 10(11), 4057. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10114057 CO – SUSTAIN – Deliverable 2.1 48 / 53 Irshaid, J., Mochizuki, J., & Schinko, T. (2021). Challenges to local innovation and implementation of low-carbon energy-transition measures: A tale of two Austrian regions. Energy Policy, 156, 112432. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2021.112432 Jacobsson, S., & Johnson, A. (2000). The diffusion of renewable energy technology: An analytical framework and key issues for research. Energy Policy, 28(9), 625–640. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0301-4215(00)00041-0 Jenkins, K., Sovacool, B. K., & McCauley, D. (2018). Humanizing sociotechnical transitions through energy justice: An ethical framework for global transformative change. Energy Policy, 117, 66–74. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2018.02.036 Jørgensen, G., Fryd, O., Lund, A. A., Andersen, P. S., & Herslund, L. (2022). Nature-based climate adaptation projects, their governance and transitional potential-cases from Copenhagen. Frontiers in Sustainable Cities, 4, 906960. https://doi.org/10.3389/frsc.2022.906960 Kanger, L., Sovacool, B. K., Noorkõiv, M. (2020). Six policy intervention points for sustainability transitions: A conceptual framework and a systematic literature review. Research Policy, 49(7), 104072. Kemp, R., Loorbach, D., & Rotmans, J. (2007). Transition management as a model for managing processes of co-evolution towards sustainable development. International Journal of Sustainable Development & World Ecology, 14(1), 78–91. https://doi.org/10.1080/13504500709469709 Kemp, R., Schot, J. & Hoogma, R. (1998). Regime shifts to sustainability through processes of niche formation: The approach of strategic niche management. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 10(2), 175–198. https://doi.org/10.1080/09537329808524310 Kern, F. (2012). Using the multi-level perspective on socio-technical transitions to assess innovation policy. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 79(2), 298–310. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2011.07.004 Kivimaa, P., & Kern, F. (2016). Creative destruction or mere niche support? Innovation policy mixes for sustainability transitions. Research Policy, 45(1), 205–217. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2015.09.008 Klandermans, B. (1997). The social psychology of protest. Blackwell. Klandermans, B. (2007). The Demand and Supply of Participation: Social-Psychological Correlates of Participation in Social Movements. In D. A. Snow, S. A. Soule, & H. Kriesi (Eds.), The Blackwell Companion to Social Movements (pp. 360–379). Blackwell Publishing Ltd. https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470999103.ch16 Ko, Y., Barrett, B. F. D., Copping, A. E., Sharifi, A., Yarime, M., & Wang, X. (2019). Energy Transitions Towards Low Carbon Resilience: Evaluation of Disaster-Triggered Local and Regional Cases. Sustainability, 11(23), 6801. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11236801 CO – SUSTAIN – Deliverable 2.1 49 / 53 Kobashi, T., Zusman, E., Taniguchi, M., & Yarime, M. (2025). Facilitating a carbon neutral transition in Kyoto: Initiatives on rooftop photovoltaics integrated with electric vehicles. Technology in Society, 80, 102774. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techsoc.2024.102774 Kohl, C., McIntosh, E. J., Unger, S., Haddaway, N. R., Kecke, S., Schiemann, J., & Wilhelm, R. (2018). Online tools supporting the conduct and reporting of systematic reviews and systematic maps: A case study on CADIMA and review of existing tools. Environmental Evidence, 7(1), 8. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13750-018-0115-5 Kuhmonen, T., Kuhmonen, I., & Huuskonen, A. (2024). Sustainability-driven regime shifts in Complex Adaptive Systems: The case of animal production and food system. Sustainable Production and Consumption, 52, 469–486. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spc.2024.11.022 Kuss, P., & Nicholas, K. A. (2022). A dozen effective interventions to reduce car use in European cities: Lessons learned from a meta-analysis and transition management. Case Studies on Transport Policy, 10(3), 1494–1513. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cstp.2022.02.001 Lee, J., Park, G., & Kim, K. (2022). Transition failure strengthening regime stability in socio-technical systems: A case study of shared mobility market in South Korea. Telematics and Informatics, 70, 101814. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tele.2022.101814 Loorbach, D. (2010). Transition Management for Sustainable Development: A Prescriptive, Complexity-Based Governance Framework. Governance, 23(1), 161–183. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0491.2009.01471.x MacArthur, Julie. L. (2016). Challenging public engagement: Participation, deliberation and power in renewable energy policy. Journal of Environmental Studies and Sciences, 6(3), 631–640. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13412-015-0328-7 Markard, J., Hekkert, M., & Jacobsson, S. (2015). The technological innovation systems framework: Response to six criticisms. Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions, 16, 76–86. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eist.2015.07.006 Meadowcroft, J. (2009). What about the politics? Sustainable development, transition management, and long-term energy transitions. Policy Sciences, 42(4), 323–340. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11077-009-9097-z Mees Heleen L.P. & Uittenbroek, Caroline J. & Hegger, Dries L.T. & Driessen, Peter P.J. (2019). From citizen participation to government participation: An exploration of the roles of local governments in community initiatives for climate change adaptation in the Netherlands. Environmental Policy and Governance, 29(4): 1-11. Melnyk, A., Cox, H., Ghorbani, A., & Hoppe, T. (2023). Value dynamics in energy democracy: An exploration of community energy initiatives. Energy Research & Social Science, 102, 103163. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2023.103163 CO – SUSTAIN – Deliverable 2.1 50 / 53 Mintrom, M., & Rogers, B. C. (2022). How can we drive sustainability transitions? Policy Design and Practice, 5(3), 294–306. https://doi.org/10.1080/25741292.2022.2057835 Moradi, A., & Vagnoni, E. (2018). A multi-level perspective analysis of urban mobility system dynamics: What are the future transition pathways? Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 126, 231–243. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2017.09.002 Narjabadifam, N., Fouladvand, J., & Gül, M. (2023). Critical Review on Community-Shared Solar—Advantages, Challenges, and Future Directions. Energies, 16(8), 3412. https://doi.org/10.3390/en16083412 Norris, P. (2002). Democratic Phoenix: Reinventing Political Activism (1st ed.). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511610073 Passy, F. (2006). Socialization, Connection, and The Structure/Agency Gap: A Specification of The Impact of Networks on Participation in Social Movements. Mobilization: An International Quarterly, 6(2), 173–192. https://doi.org/10.17813/maiq.6.2.v6u4wg67x87w943h Petrovics, D., Giezen, M., & Huitema, D. (2022). Towards a deeper understanding of up-scaling in socio-technical transitions: The case of energy communities. Energy Research & Social Science, 94, 102860. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2022.102860 Petrovics, D., Huitema, D., Giezen, M., & Vis, B. (2024). Scaling mechanisms of energy communities: A comparison of 28 initiatives. Global Environmental Petrović, E. K. (2023). Sustainability Transition Framework: An Integrated Conceptualisation of Sustainability Change. Sustainability, 16(1), 217. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16010217 Poelsma, F., Moser, S., Wymann Von Dach, S., & Breu, T. (2025). Bridging the gap between conceptualization and implementation of transition experiments: Insights from a transdisciplinary research project in the Swiss Alps. Sustainability: Science, Practice and Policy, 21(1), 2438422. https://doi.org/10.1080/15487733.2024.2438422 Preston, B. J. (2024). Changing climate law and governance: A multi-level perspective. Global Policy, 15(S5), 8–19. https://doi.org/10.1111/1758-5899.13196 Putnam, R. D. (1995). Tuning In, Tuning Out: The Strange Disappearance of Social Capital in America. PS: Political Science & Politics, 28(4), 664–683. https://doi.org/10.2307/420517 Rip, A., & Kemp, R. (1998). Technological change. In Human choice and climate change: Vol. II, Resources and Technology (pp. 327–399). Battelle Press. https://research.utwente.nl/en/publications/technological-change Rotmans, J., Kemp, R., & Van Asselt, M. (2001). More evolution than revolution: Transition management in public policy. Foresight, 3(1), 15–31. https://doi.org/10.1108/14636680110803003 CO – SUSTAIN – Deliverable 2.1 51 / 53 Sabucedo, J. M., & Arce, C. (1991). Types of political participation: A multidimensional analysis. European Journal of Political Research, 20(1), 93–102. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-6765.1991.tb00257.x Schiller, K. J. F., Klerkx, L., Salazar Centeno, D. J., & Poortvliet, P. M. (2023). Developing the agroecological niche in Nicaragua: The roles of knowledge flows and intermediaries. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 120(47), e2206195120. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2206195120 Smith, A. (2007). Translating Sustainabilities between Green Niches and Socio-Technical Regimes. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 19(4), 427–450. https://doi.org/10.1080/09537320701403334 Smith, A., Voß, J.-P., & Grin, J. (2010). Innovation studies and sustainability transitions: The allure of the multi-level perspective and its challenges. Research Policy, 39(4), 435–448. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2010.01.023 Stockemer, D. (2014). What drives unconventional political participation? A two level study. The Social Science Journal, 51(2), 201–211. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soscij.2013.10.012 Stranks, J. W. (2007). Human factors and behavioural safety (Reprint). Routledge, Butterworth-Heinemann. Strzałkowski, A. (2018). Implikacje teorii praktyk społecznych, perspektywy wielopoziomowej i podejścia behawioralnego dla badań użytecznych w polityce klimatycznej. Przegląd Socjologiczny, 67(4), 117–140. https://doi.org/10.26485/PS/2018/67.4/6 Talò, C., & Mannarini, T. (2015). Measuring Participation: Development and Validation the Participatory Behaviors Scale. Social Indicators Research, 123(3), 799–816. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-014-0761-0 Trist, E. L. (1981). The evolution of socio-technical systems (Vol. 2, p. 1981). Toronto: Ontario Quality of Working Life Centre. Topaloglou L. and Ioannidis L. (2022). From transition management towards just transition and place-based governance. Τhe case of Western Macedonia in Greece. Journal of Entrepreneurship, Management and Innovation, 18(3), 37–74. https://doi.org/10.7341/20221832 Torrens, J., Johnstone, P., & Schot, J. (2018). Unpacking the Formation of Favourable Environments for Urban Experimentation: The Case of the Bristol Energy Scene. Sustainability, 10(3), 879. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10030879 Van Assche, K., Beunen, R., Gruezmacher, M. & M. Duineveld (2020). Rethinking strategy in environmental governance. Journal of Environmental Policy & Planning, 22(5): 695-708. Van Der Voorn, T., Quist, J., Svenfelt, Å., Kok, K., Hickman, R., Sheppard, S., Kanyama, A. C., & Banister, D. (2023). Advancing participatory backcasting for climate change adaptation planning using 10 cases from 3 continents. Climate Risk Management, 42, 100559. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.crm.2023.100559 CO – SUSTAIN – Deliverable 2.1 52 / 53 van Stekelenburg, J., & Klandermans, B. (2013). The social psychology of protest. Current Sociology, 61(5–6), 886–905. https://doi.org/10.1177/0011392113479314 Verba, S., Nie, N. H., & Kim, J.-O. (1980). Participation and political equality: A seven-nation comparison (Repr). Univ. Pr. Verba, S., Schlozman, K. L., & Brady, H. E. (1995). Voice and Equality: Civic Voluntarism in American Politics. Harvard University Press. https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctv1pnc1k7 Wahlund, M. & J. Palm (2022). The role of energy democracy and energy citizenship for participatory energy transitions: A comprehensive review. Energy Research & Social Science, 87, 102482. Warbroek, B., Hoppe, T., Coenen, F., & Bressers, H. (2018). The Role of Intermediaries in Supporting Local Low-Carbon Energy Initiatives. Sustainability, 10(7), 2450. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10072450 Wolfram, M. (2017). Grassroots Niches in Urban Contexts: Exploring Governance Innovations for Sustainable Development in Seoul. Procedia Engineering, 198, 622–641. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proeng.2017.07.116 Yiğit Barut, T., & Arslan Selçuk, S. (2024). Holistic Approach to Niche Formation: A Case on Transition to Nearly Zero-Energy Buildings in Türkiye. Buildings, 14(6), 1565. https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings14061565 Yildiztekin, M. Y., & Erol, D. (2022). Building network for innovation and proximity in local development; sustainable farming initiatives in Izmir. Sociologia Ruralis, 62(4), 726–745. https://doi.org/10.1111/soru.12404 Zukin, C. (Ed.). (2006). A new engagement? Political participation, civic life, and the changing American citizen. Oxford Univ. Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195183177.001.0001 CO – SUSTAIN – Deliverable 2.1 53 / 53