Climate & Environmentarticle2026-09-20

Governing green enabling megaprojects: reconciling transformative risk-taking with megaproject delivery discipline

Open access0 citations

Abstract

This paper introduces green enabling megaprojects (GEMs) to characterize an increasingly important class of infrastructure for climate change mitigation. GEMs are large-scale green infrastructure projects whose primary value lies in enabling broader socio-technical transformation through subsequent adoption, diffusion, and scaling. GEMs sit at the intersection of two distinct literatures and governance imperatives: mission-oriented innovation policy (MOIP), which emphasizes public-sector transformative risk-taking under deep uncertainty, and megaproject management (MPM), which emphasizes megaproject delivery discipline in the face of the persistent iron law of megaprojects: “Over budget, over time, under benefits, over and over again.” Whereas other missions or megaprojects may privilege one imperative, we argue that GEMs require both. Transformative risk-taking is necessary because governments must act before transformative effects can be known with confidence; delivery discipline is necessary because cost escalation, delays, and benefit shortfalls can undermine the economic feasibility required for diffusion and scaling. We therefore ask how these imperatives can be reconciled in governing GEMs. We develop an integrated GEM governance framework from the MOIP and MPM literatures and assess it through a qualitative case study of the Danish energy islands, drawing on 13 interviews and document review. We find that the reconciliation challenge permeated governance challenges involving economic feasibility and state commitment, public-sector capacity and capabilities, politically-determined timelines, and external dependencies. The two imperatives also share important governance requirements, creating substantial scope for reconciliation. Drawing on the framework and case, we identify five principles of reconciliation for balancing transformative potential, economic feasibility, and risk in governing GEMs.

// Source

View paper (DOI)Open access versionOpenAlexEnergy Research & Social SciencePublished 2026-09-20

Authors: Tyler Hansen, Lena Kitzing

Institutions: Technical University of Denmark