PhD Defence Angie Ruiz Robles | Unlocking Systemic Change: A Socio-Technical Perspective on Sustainable Innovation in the Asphalt Paving Sector

Unlocking Systemic Change: A Socio-Technical Perspective on Sustainable Innovation in the Asphalt Paving Sector

Angie Ruiz Robles is a PhD student in the department Market Dynamics. (Co)Promotors are prof.dr.ir. A.G. Doree; prof.dr.ir. L. Volker; dr.ir. J. Vinke-de Kruijf and mr.dr.ir. J.M. Oliveira dos Santos from the faculty of Engineering Technology of the University of Twente.

The asphalt paving sector plays an integral role in transportation systems and is crucial for facilitating mobility and economic growth, especially in urbanizing societies. Driven by societal demands and international agreements, the sector faces increasing pressure to transition toward sustainability. Governments worldwide, including the Netherlands, have prioritized the adoption of sustainable innovations to achieve ambitious climate neutrality and circularity targets by 2050. Despite these efforts, the sector continues to face persistent challenges in scaling up such innovations. 

This research addresses why sustainable innovations fail to achieve widespread implementation in the asphalt paving sector with a focus on the socio-technical dynamics that shape this stagnation. Existing literature on innovation, especially in the infrastructure domain, predominantly emphasizes technical aspects, leaving social and institutional elements underexplored. Furthermore, while the role of social elements—such as actors' interactions and institutional arrangements—in innovation processes has been recognized, there is limited understanding of how these elements interact to influence the pace and outcomes of innovation processes. This research approaches this gap by exploring how the interaction of socio-technical elements shapes the process behind implementing innovations. Specifically, it aims to answer the following question: What socio-technical dynamics hinder the implementation of sustainable innovations in the asphalt paving sector, and what strategies could the sector use to accelerate this implementation? 

This research focuses on the Netherlands, where the government has committed to achieving climate neutrality by 2050 and pledges to adopt sustainable approaches across different industries, including the asphalt paving sector. Despite these ambitions, the Dutch asphalt paving sector continues to face significant challenges in adopting sustainable innovations at scale. This makes the Netherlands a compelling case to examine how ambitious sustainability goals clash with practical implementation challenges. 

The research adopts a systems thinking approach, integrating qualitative System Dynamics with insights from transition studies. It is structured into three stages: 1) problem articulation and system conceptualization, 2) formulation of dynamic hypotheses, and 3) strategy design. Qualitative methods have been applied across all stages, including semi-structured interviews with key actors across public clients, contractors, consultants, and researchers, along with thematic analysis of policy documents, official programs, progress reports, and advisory documents. Additionally, Total Interpretive Structural Modeling (TISM), and Causal Loop Diagrams (CLDs) have been used to structure and analyze the data. 

The results of stage 1 are presented in Chapter 2. Using the Multi-Level Perspective (MLP), the Multi-Actor Perspective (MaP), and insights from innovation studies, this chapter characterizes the key socio-technical elements shaping innovation processes in the Dutch asphalt paving sector. Thematic analysis reveals that sustainable innovations remain confined to the niche level, struggling to gain traction and achieve widespread implementation within the regime. This misalignment is influenced by both structural and institutional factors, which reinforce the stabilization of traditional practices. Specifically, this chapter identifies the critical role of actor interactions in shaping the innovation process, emphasizing the importance of collaboration and complementary actions among government, market, and third-sector actors such as research institutions. Government actors emerge as the most influential ones, given their extensive involvement across multiple stages of the innovation process, fulfilling roles as clients, framework setters, and evaluators. Insights also point out key barriers, such as ineffective coordination, critical gaps in testing procedures, and the lack of comprehensive monitoring mechanisms at the project and sector levels. 

The results of stage 2 are presented in Chapters 3 and 4. Chapter 3 builds on the findings from Chapter 2 by examining the interconnections between socio-technical barriers, recognizing them not as isolated challenges but as components of a highly interdependent system. Using TISM, socio-technical barriers are categorized into driving, linking, and dependent clusters based on their relationships and systemic influence. Driving barriers include lack of trust, absence of information exchange, and lack of access to testing locations. These barriers amplify other challenges and perpetuate systemic stagnation. Linking barriers—such as lack of system monitoring, lack of harmonization, and lack of a clear perception of benefits—connect multiple systemic elements, making them critical leverage points for intervention. Finally, dependent barriers, such as conservative assessment criteria and low involvement of experts, require broader systemic changes to be addressed. This analysis highlights the importance of targeting linking barriers to trigger cascading effects throughout the system. 

In Chapter 4, the focus shifts from the barriers themselves to the causal dynamics that perpetuate them. Using CLDs, this chapter uncovers three systemic feedback loops that reinforce stagnation and hinder the transition to sustainability: 1) Project-centric loops reflect the sector’s focus on short-term project deliverables, which conflict with long-term sustainability objectives, limiting the scaling of innovations; 2) Conservative mindset loops draw attention to the risk-averse culture that dominates the sector, discouraging experimentation and the adoption of innovative practices, particularly due to uncertainties around the long-term performance of sustainable innovations; and 3) Collective knowledge-building loops highlight a lack of mechanisms for knowledge exchange, monitoring, and shared learning, which lead to inefficiencies, further misaligning policies, practices, and innovation efforts. 

The results of stage 3 are presented in Chapter 5. Drawing from an action-oriented research project, this chapter identifies strategies that can accelerate the implementation of sustainable innovations in the Dutch asphalt paving sector. Using Donella Meadows' leverage points framework, this chapter identifies 25 interventions grouped into five key themes: converging toward sustainable innovations, cross-project purchasing, facilitating innovative solutions, shared data use and knowledge integration, and managing scarce space. The results underscore the importance of restructuring the system's operational framework (i.e., its rules, processes, and data structures) as a critical step toward sustainability. The interventions aim to shift the Dutch asphalt paving sector from siloed, cost-driven practices to more collaborative, value-driven approaches by targeting these systemic elements. 

In conclusion, this research identifies three interconnected socio-technical patterns that hinder the implementation of sustainable innovations in the asphalt paving sector. First, sector traits—including high operational demands, long service-life requirements, and dependency on traditional materials—create a conservative environment that prioritizes stability over experimentation. Second, fragmentation across all levels disrupts systemic progress. The project-centric business model isolates efforts, while inconsistencies in assessment criteria and tendering procedures across regional and local authorities create redundancies and inefficiencies. Third, the sector’s limited capacity to build and utilize collective knowledge exacerbates these challenges. Fragmented data-sharing mechanisms and monitoring systems hinder the generation of critical insights on the performance and impacts of innovations, and the absence of key actors’ roles, such as coordination roles, further weakens alignment and collaboration. 

Accelerating the implementation of sustainable innovations in the asphalt paving sector requires addressing these socio-technical dynamics through targeted interventions that strengthen systemic capabilities. This research underscores the importance of 1) Redefining the scope and boundaries of innovation processes to move beyond the dominant project-centric business model; 2) Fostering self-organization capabilities by promoting innovation roles that coordinate and align diverse actors; and 3) Improving data management and harmonization to ensure informed decision-making and shared accountability. By addressing this, the sector can achieve gradual progress in fostering sustainable innovation while laying the groundwork for more profound systemic transformations. Ultimately, this research not only provides a comprehensive understanding of the systemic barriers to sustainable innovation in the asphalt paving sector but also offers actionable strategies to speed up its transition toward sustainability.