uhe famous metaphor, three-quarters of a century old, due to Kurt Lewin (1890-1947), the founder of psychosociology, describes the three constituent moments of any process of change: the “thaw”, “movement” and, finally, “refreeze”, which makes it possible to avoid any return to the past. This image, used in a classic way in management, indicates in a practical way the path which could lead to the necessary ecological and social transition.
This transition is most often described as a more or less distant horizon. However, the “thaw” has already occurred, induced in particular by the UN summits, the work of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and the very visible manifestations of climate upheaval. It is associated with a new societal paradigm, sustainable development, put forward from elementary school to university, which shakes up the relationships between natural, economic and social sciences, but also between research and action, the scientific world and the media universe. . The “movement” is underway.
The mobilization is diffuse (in administrations, businesses, associations) and polymorphous (from architecture to live performance including “frescoes” and strategic games of the grandes écoles). But the impact remains limited. We can clearly see the difficulty in implementing the Paris agreement (2015) or in moderating local uses of water. Above all, the trajectory remains ambivalent. The currently promoted tandem, combining mega-industry and green engineering, will no more save the planet than the engineering urban planning of the 1960s succeeded in creating “radiant” cities.
The transition to an “economy of the common good”, a new economic and social regime, is proving essential. It is the “refreeze”, that is to say the stabilization of actions which go in this direction, that we must now facilitate.
Adequate social regulation
Can we achieve this in an authoritarian manner, relying solely on regulation by law? The recent reversals of the French government and the European Union in environmental and agricultural matters seem to indicate, on the contrary, that “too many standards kill the standard”. The inflation of voluntarist speeches also causes a saturation effect. Far from the concrete stimulation of the actors, here comes the risk of an environmental berezina.
Can organizational sciences help prevent these pitfalls and think realistically about the problem of “refreezing”? We must start from an understanding of the concrete actions that have promoted change, and then consider adequate social regulation, leading to an accumulation of impacts and a “ratchet effect” making any retreat impossible.
You have 49.14% of this article left to read. The rest is reserved for subscribers.