How can we understand the role of government in processes of societal transformation, given the complexity of a differentiated polity? Literature shows that a coherent conceptualisation of the role of government in transition processes is lacking. This paper addresses this hiatus by developing an analytical lens drawing on transition studies and governance studies, articulating implications of this combination for agency, power and reflexivity. The lens is empirically tested in a case study where governmental actors played major roles: the termination of natural gas exploitation in the Netherlands. The analysis showed that governmental actors both consolidated dominant practices, and strengthened an issue-based coalition for change. By politicizing side-effects of gas extraction, local governmental actors changed the discursive context of dominant practices, challenging their legitimacy and thus destabilising the regime. At the same time, national government created new institutions to strengthen the legitimacy of dominant practices. The involvement of independent public organisations, the ‘checks and balances’ of the state, proved to be decisive. The paper concludes that the lens sheds light on the discord between local and national strategies to (dis)continue standing practices. By differentiating between levels of government (local, regional, national), and articulating how they use power to take and challenge public decisions, the lens is useful in differentiating ‘the role’ of ‘the state’ in transition processes.