The life cycle of technological innovation systems

Markard, Jochen

doi:10.1016/j.techfore.2018.07.045

Cited by 170 publications

(116 citation statements)

References 79 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

110

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…TIS scholars have tended to focus on specific technologies within a country (Hudson et al, 2011;Jacobsson & Karltorp, 2013;. The TIS has also typically been applied to the early formative phase of an innovation system rather than its full lifecycle through growth, maturity and senescence (Markard, 2018).…”

Section: Analytical Framework For Innovation Systemsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Analysing energy innovation portfolios from a systemic perspective

Kim

Wilson

2019

Energy Policy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A systemic perspective on energy innovation is required to design effective portfolios of directed innovation activity. We contribute a standardised set of technology-specific indicators which describe processes throughout the energy technology innovation system, ranging from patents and publications to policy mixes, collaborative activity, and market share. Using these indicators, we then conceptualise and develop benchmark tests for three portfolio design criteria: balance, consistency, and alignment. Portfolio balance refers to the relative emphasis on specific technologies. Portfolio consistency refers to the relative emphasis on related innovation system processes. Portfolio alignment refers to the relative emphasis on innovation system processes for delivering targeted outcomes. We demonstrate the application of these benchmark tests using data for the EU's Strategic Energy Technology (SET) Plan which spans six technology fields. We find the SET Plan portfolio generally performs well particularly in areas over which portfolio managers have direct influence such as RD&D funding. However we also identify potential areas of imbalance, inconsistency, and misalignment which warrant further attention and potential redress by portfolio managers. Overall, we show how energy innovation portfolios can be analysed from a systemic perspective using a replicable, standardised set of measures of diverse innovation system processes.

show abstract

Section: Analytical Framework For Innovation Systemsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Analysing energy innovation portfolios from a systemic perspective

Kim

Wilson

2019

Energy Policy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In the TIS approach, the development of a new technology results from the positive fulfilment of seven functions: entrepreneurial activities, knowledge development, knowledge diffusion, search guidance, market formation, resource mobilisation, and advocacy and legitimacy creation (Bergek et al 2008;Hekkert et al 2007). More recently, Markard (2018) introduced a TIS life-cycle framework that distinguishes between four stages of development, i.e. formation, growth, maturity and decline.…”

Section: 2 Transition Framework: An Overviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Transition heuristic frameworks in research on agro-food sustainability transitions

Bilali

2018

Environ Dev Sustain

106

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The agro-food system needs a genuine sustainability transition to achieve sustainable food and nutrition security in the face of climate change, population growth, ecosystem degradation and increasing resource scarcity. Agro-food sustainability transitions refer to transformation processes needed to move towards sustainable agriculture and food systems. There is a broad range of theoretical and conceptual frameworks that have been used to understand and promote transition towards sustainability. These include the multi-level perspective (MLP) on socio-technical transitions, transition management (TM), strategic niche management (SNM), technological innovation system (TIS) and social practice approach (SPA). The paper analyses the use of these heuristic frameworks in research on agro-food sustainability transitions. A search carried out in March 2018 on Scopus yielded 791 documents, and 127 research articles underwent a systematic review. Results show that more than three-fifths of research papers dealing with sustainability transitions in agriculture, food processing, distribution and consumption use at least one of the five heuristic frameworks (MLP, TM, SNM, TIS and SPA). The MLP is the most prominent framework in research on agro-food sustainability transitions, followed by TM, SPA, SNM and then TIS. Nevertheless, MLP is increasingly complemented with frameworks that focus on humanrelated and social factors (SPA), management and governance (TM, SNM) or agency and interactions between actors (TIS) in sustainability transitions processes. Therefore, the paper makes the case for more integration of transition frameworks in order to better nurture and foster transitions towards sustainable agro-food systems.

show abstract

“…In addition, paying close attention to landscape and regime developments highlights the role of context and complementary technologies in explaining the pathway of a particular technology. These are issues TIS tends to miss (Markard 2018).…”

Section: Adapting the Mlp To Specific Technology And Country Contextsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Empirical application of the multi-level perspective: tracing the history of ground-source heat pumps systems in Finland

Lauttamäki

Hyysalo

2019

Sustainability: Science, Practice and Policy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The emergence and evolution of more sustainable technologies and related industrial fields is a core concern for sustainability transitions scholars. This interest is accentuated as it has become evident that the upscaling of transition-relevant technologies follows different pathways in varying national and geographic contexts. The usual research approach to studying such industry-field dynamics in particular contexts has been to use the technological innovation systems (TIS) framework, focusing on the emergence of functioning TISs. The current calls for life-cycle TIS and the few existing examples of operationalizing the multi-level perspective (MLP) in a more focused way underscore the need to better account for the contextual specifics, contingencies, and later phases in the proliferation of transition technologies. We elaborate on the benefits of using the MLP in long-term analyses of transition technologies by examining the history of ground-source heat pump (GSHP) systems in Finland from the era of the energy crises in the 1970s until the present day. The investigation reveals how the present success of GSHPs has not followed just from simple innovation-system dynamics or niche-regime landscape relations but is also a result of variations and extent of landscape pressure as well as unplanned support from neighboring niche technologies.

show abstract

The life cycle of technological innovation systems

Cited by 170 publications

References 79 publications

Analysing energy innovation portfolios from a systemic perspective

Analysing energy innovation portfolios from a systemic perspective

Transition heuristic frameworks in research on agro-food sustainability transitions

Empirical application of the multi-level perspective: tracing the history of ground-source heat pumps systems in Finland

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About