Q2. What future works have the authors mentioned in the paper "Technological transitions as evolutionary reconfiguration processes: a multi-level perspective and a case-study" ?
Such boundary work deserves more attention in the future.
Technological transitions as evolutionary reconfiguration processes: a multi-level perspective and a case-study
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors address the question of how technological transitions (TT) come about and identify particular patterns and mechanisms in transition processes, defined as major, long-term technological changes in the way societal functions are fulfilled.
About: This article is published in Research Policy.The article was published on 2002-12-01 and is currently open access. It has received 5020 citations till now. The article focuses on the topics: Technological transitions & Evolutionary economics.
Summary (2 min read)
Jump to: [1. Introduction] – [2. An integrative evolutionary multi-level perspective on technological transitions] – [3.1. The emergence of steamships in the context of a dynamic shipping (1780–1845)] – [3.2. High-noon of sailing clippers and steamship take-off in passenger transport (1845–1869)] – [3.3. Competition between steam and sail in freight and wider transformations (1869–1900)] – [4. Analysis and some mechanisms in technological transitions] and [5. Discussion and conclusions]
1. Introduction
- Technological Transitions (TT) are defined as major technological transformations in the way societal functions such as transportation, communication, housing, feeding, are fulfilled.
- Of itself, has no power, does nothing.
- Societal functions are fulfilled by sociotechnical configurations.
- Before addressing this question I will position my paper in the literature, particularly evolutionary economics and technology studies.
2. An integrative evolutionary multi-level perspective on technological transitions
- I briefly outline the multi-level framework, which has been described more elaborately 2 Technical trajectories are not only influenced by engineers, but also by users, policy makers, societal groups, suppliers, scientists, capital banks etc. (Fig. 2).
- Novelties emerge in niches in the context of existing regimes and landscapes with its specific problems, rules and capabilities.
- Landscape changes may put pressure on the regime.
- The major point is that TT occur as the outcome of linkages between developments at multiple levels, represented with vertical dotted arrows.
3.1. The emergence of steamships in the context of a dynamic shipping (1780–1845)
- In the late 18th century, Britain dominated the shipping regime.
- Another major problem in oceanic shipping, particularly for traders and merchants, was the lack ofregularity and predictability.
- These expanding markets stimulated the further emergence of professional shipowners.
- Thus, the first use of oceanic steamships was aimed at improving the communication and co-ordination in the freight shipping regime.
- Important technical trajectories were centred on screw propulsion, iron hulls, more efficient steam engines.
3.2. High-noon of sailing clippers and steamship take-off in passenger transport (1845–1869)
- Extending the length of opium clippers to gain speed, American shipbuilders came up in the 1840s with long cargo-carriers, known as tea clippers.
- This was accompanied by a substantial revision in 1863 of Lloyds Rules, reducing the insurance premiums of iron ships (Harley, 1973).
- The rise of professional shipowners was thus accelerated by the transition to steamships.
- By the mid-1850s more iron ships were built, and shipbuilders began to rise above the experimental stage.
- The compound engine was crucial for steamships on long-distance routes, as it improved coal efficiency, enabling reductions in fuel consumption of 60% (Graham, 1956).
3.3. Competition between steam and sail in freight and wider transformations (1869–1900)
- Passenger transportation continued to be a growth market for steamships and many new liner companies were formed in the 1870s on the Atlantic and in the Indian Ocean (Broeze, 1982).
- Expansion of steamships also occurred in freight transportation.
- After 1874, the distance margin further increased as steam engines continued their efficiency improvements.
- As steamships grew larger, relative transport costs per ton decreased.
- To control competition and minimise destructive rivalries, liner companies created anew market institution: the shipping conference.
4. Analysis and some mechanisms in technological transitions
- The step from niche to regime-level does not occur at once, but gradually, as radical innovations are used in subsequent application domains or market niches, i.e. a cumulation of niches (see alsoLevinthal, 1998).
- A similar example in the transition in factories from steam engines to electric motors is that electric motors were initially placedbetween the factory’s steam engine and the line shaft to improve regularity (Devine, 1983).
- What initially may appear as a revolution turns out to be the outcome of a series of adaptations and changes over time (Summerton, 1994).
- The steamship transition was not just a story of markets and technologies.
5. Discussion and conclusions
- To answer the question how TT come about, I described a new perspective, based on insights from evolutionary economics and technology studies.
- These linkages are maintained and reproduced by the alignment and co-ordination of different actor groups.
- I have shown in the case-study that steamships were initially used to improve the sailing ship regime, e.g. as steam tugs and mail steamers.
- Breakthroughs of innovations thus depend on processes on the level of regimes and landscapes, i.e. they are context-dependent.
- Empirical analyses with the multi-level perspective can do justice to the complexity of real-world developments.
Did you find this useful? Give us your feedback
Figures (10)
Fig. 4. The dynamics of sociotechnical change (Rip and Kemp, 1996; Kemp et al., 2001). 
Fig. 8. The Great Britain (1843). 
Fig. 10. Trajectory of niche-cumulation for the breakthrough of steamships. 
Fig. 1. Elements from the sociotechnical configuration in transportation. 
Fig. 5. A dynamic multi-level perspective on TT. 
Fig. 9. The Great Eastern, 1858. 
Fig. 6. British fleets of steamships and sailing ships (data are based onVille, 1990, 68–71). 
Fig. 2. The multi-actor network involved in sociotechnical regimes. 
Fig. 7. The Rising Star of 1822 (Fletcher, 1910: 130). 
Fig. 3. Multiple levels as a nested hierarchy.
Citations
More filters
TL;DR: In this paper, a typology of four transition pathways: transformation, reconfiguration, technological substitution, and de-alignment and re-alignments is presented, which differ in combinations of timing and nature of multi-level interactions.
3,926 citations
Cites background from "Technological transitions as evolut..."
...9) (Geels, 2002)....
[...]
...regime transformation (Van e Poel, 2003), technological revolutions (Perez, 2002), echnological transitions (Geels, 2002), system innovaion (Elzen et al....
[...]
...For adaptation they distinguish two dimen- F.W. Geels, J. Schot / Research Policy 36 (2007) 399–417 401 sitions (adapted from Geels, 2002, p. 1263). s c o s t f m p ‘ e l r o s a ions: (a) availability of resources (factor endowments, apabilities, knowledge) and (2) degree of coordination f…...
[...]
...To counter this bias, I think more explicit attention needs to be paid to ongoing processes at the regime and landscape level” (Geels, 2002, p. 1261)....
[...]
...…on transitions and system changes has expanded nder different terms, e.g. regime transformation (Van e Poel, 2003), technological revolutions (Perez, 2002), echnological transitions (Geels, 2002), system innovaion (Elzen et al., 2004; Geels, 2005a) and transition anagement (Rotmans et al., 2001)....
[...]
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors make four contributions to the approach by addressing some open issues in the sectoral systems of innovation (SOSI) approach, namely, explicitly incorporating the user side in the analysis, suggesting an analytical distinction between systems, actors involved in them, and the institutions which guide actor perceptions and activities.
3,221 citations
Cites background or methods from "Technological transitions as evolut..."
...Geels / Research Policy 33 (2004) 897–920...
[...]
...One way forward is to allow for different routes in systems innovations and transitions (Geels, 2002b; Berkhout et al., 2004)....
[...]
...It has been applied to the analysis of the transition from sailing ships to steamships (Geels, 2002a) and the transition from horse-and-carriage to automobiles and from propeller-aircraft to turbojets (Geels, 2002b)....
[...]
...I will only briefly outline the multi-level framework, which has been described more elaborately elsewhere (Rip and Kemp, 1998; Kemp et al., 2001; Geels, 2002a, b)....
[...]
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors identify the intellectual contours of this emerging field by conducting a review of basic conceptual frameworks, together with bibliographical analysis of 540 journal articles in the field.
2,406 citations
TL;DR: It is described that the emergence of a new innovation system and changes in existing innovation systems co-evolve with the process of technological change, and a method for systematically mapping those processes taking place in innovation systems and resulting in technological change is proposed.
2,263 citations
Cites background from "Technological transitions as evolut..."
...This is also the central idea of the Multi Level Model [16]....
[...]
TL;DR: The multi-level perspective (MLP) has emerged as a fruitful middle-range framework for analysing socio-technical transitions to sustainability as discussed by the authors. But the MLP also received constructive criticisms.
Abstract: The multi-level perspective (MLP) has emerged as a fruitful middle-range framework for analysing socio-technical transitions to sustainability. The MLP also received constructive criticisms. This paper summarises seven criticisms, formulates responses to them, and translates these into suggestions for future research. The criticisms relate to: (1) lack of agency, (2) operationalization of regimes, (3) bias towards bottom-up change models, (4) epistemology and explanatory style, (5) methodology, (6) socio-technical landscape as residual category, and (7) flat ontologies versus hierarchical levels.
1,976 citations
Cites background from "Technological transitions as evolut..."
...…interplay of developments at three analytical levels: niches (the locus for radical innovations), socio-technical regimes (the locus of established practices and associated rules that stabilize existing systems), and an exogenous sociotechnical landscape (Rip and Kemp, 1998; Geels, 2002, 2005a)....
[...]
...The usefulness of the MLP has been illustrated with many historical case studies of transitions, such as in land transport (Geels, 2005a), shipping (Geels, 2002), cargo handling (Van Driel and Schot, 2005), as well as in sewers and sanitation, clean water (drinking, washing, bathing), aviation,…...
[...]
References
More filters
Posted Content•
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors developed an evolutionary theory of the capabilities and behavior of business firms operating in a market environment, including both general discussion and the manipulation of specific simulation models consistent with that theory.
Abstract: This study develops an evolutionary theory of the capabilities and behavior of business firms operating in a market environment. It includes both general discussion and the manipulation of specific simulation models consistent with that theory. The analysis outlines the differences between an evolutionary theory of organizational and industrial change and a neoclassical microeconomic theory. The antecedents to the former are studies by economists like Schumpeter (1934) and Alchian (1950). It is contrasted with the orthodox theory in the following aspects: while the evolutionary theory views firms as motivated by profit, their actions are not assumed to be profit maximizing, as in orthodox theory; the evolutionary theory stresses the tendency of most profitable firms to drive other firms out of business, but, in contrast to orthodox theory, does not concentrate on the state of industry equilibrium; and evolutionary theory is related to behavioral theory: it views firms, at any given time, as having certain capabilities and decision rules, as well as engaging in various ‘search' operations, which determines their behavior; while orthodox theory views firm behavior as relying on the use of the usual calculus maximization techniques. The theory is then made operational by the use of simulation methods. These models use Markov processes and analyze selection equilibrium, responses to changing factor prices, economic growth with endogenous technical change, Schumpeterian competition, and Schumpeterian tradeoff between static Pareto-efficiency and innovation. The study's discussion of search behavior complicates the evolutionary theory. With search, the decision making process in a firm relies as much on past experience as on innovative alternatives to past behavior. This view combines Darwinian and Lamarkian views on evolution; firms are seen as both passive with regard to their environment, and actively seeking alternatives that affect their environment. The simulation techniques used to model Schumpeterian competition reveal that there are usually winners and losers in industries, and that the high productivity and profitability of winners confer advantages that make further success more likely, while decline breeds further decline. This process creates a tendency for concentration to develop even in an industry initially composed of many equal-sized firms. However, the experiments conducted reveal that the growth of concentration is not inevitable; for example, it tends to be smaller when firms focus their searches on imitating rather than innovating. At the same time, industries with rapid technological change tend to grow more concentrated than those with slower progress. The abstract model of Schumpeterian competition presented in the study also allows to see more clearly the public policy issues concerning the relationship between technical progress and market structure. The analysis addresses the pervasive question of whether industry concentration, with its associated monopoly profits and reduced social welfare, is a necessary cost if societies are to obtain the benefits of technological innovation. (AT)
22,566 citations
Book•
12 Oct 2017
TL;DR: The theory of economic development was first published in 1911 by Schumpeter as discussed by the authors, who argued that economics is a natural self-regulating mechanism when undisturbed by "social and other meddlers." In his preface he argues that despite weaknesses, theories are based on logic and provide structure for understanding fact.
Abstract: Schumpeter proclaims in this classical analysis of capitalist society first published in 1911 that economics is a natural self-regulating mechanism when undisturbed by "social and other meddlers." In his preface he argues that despite weaknesses, theories are based on logic and provide structure for understanding fact. Of those who argue against him, Schumpeter asks a fundamental question: "Is it really artificial to keep separate the phenomena incidental to running a firm and the phenomena incidental to creating a new one?" In his answers, Schumpeter offers guidance to Third World politicians no less than First World businesspeople. In his substantial new introduction, John E. Elliott discusses the salient ideas of The Theory of Economic Development against the historical background of three great periods of economic thought in the last two decades.
9,828 citations
"Technological transitions as evolut..." refers background in this paper
...Keywords: Technological transitions; Regime shifts; Evolutionary theory; Multi-level analysis; Sailing ships and steamships...
[...]
...In the second view, evolution is a process of unfolding, creating ‘new combinations’ (Schumpeter, 1934, p. 66), resulting in paths and trajectories....
[...]
TL;DR: In this article, the authors investigate the patterns of technological evolution and their impact on environmental conditions and find that technological change within a product class will be characterized by long periods of incremental change punctuated by discontinuities, and the locus of innovation will differ for competence destroying and competence-enhancing technological changes.
Abstract: Investigates the patterns of technological evolution and their impact on environmental conditions. Seven hypotheses are offered in order to demonstrate that technology is a central force in shaping the environments within which organizations operate. These hypotheses are: (1) technological change within a product class will be characterized by long periods of incremental change punctuated by discontinuities; (1a) technological discontinuities are either competence enhancing (build on existing skills and know-how) or competence destroying (require fundamentally new skills and competences); (2) the locus of innovation will differ for competence destroying and competence-enhancing technological changes. Competence-destroying discontinuities will be initiated by new entrants, while competence-enhancing discontinuities will be initiated by existing firms; (3) competitive uncertainty will be higher after a technological discontinuity than before discontinuity; (4) environmental munificence (i.e., resource availability and support for growth) will be higher after a technological discontinuity than before the discontinuity; (5) competence-enhancing discontinuities will be associated with decreased entry-to-exit ratios and decreased interfirm sales variability (thus strengthening product leaders and increasing barriers to entry). These patterns will be reversed for competence-destroying discontinuities; (6) successive competence-enhancing discontinuities will be associated with smaller increases in uncertainty and munificence; and (7) those organizations that initiate major technological innovations will have higher growth rates than other firms in the product class. Data were collected from U.S. firms in three product classes, domestic scheduled passenger airline transport, Portland cement manufacture, and minicomputer manufacture, from the year of the niche market's inception through 1980. Results indicate that after the three niche openings, there were six competence-enhancing technological discontinuities and two competence-destroying discontinuities in total. Each of these discontinuities had a far greater impact on a key measure of cost or performance than more incremental technological events. In addition, except for the period following the introduction of semiconductor memory in minicomputers, the ability of experienced industry observers to predict demand following technological disruptions was far worse than prior to the disruption. Demand growth following the discontinuity was significantly higher than it was immediately prior to the discontinuity, which had an enormous impact on product-class demand. Also, the ratio of entries to exits was higher in each of the five years before a competence-enhancing discontinuity than during the five subsequent years, though none of the differences is statistically significant. Though market variability in sales growth was expected, it was found that some firms' sales grew explosively while other firms experienced sales declines. It is also suggested that as technology matures, successive competence-enhancing discontinuities increase both uncertainty and munificence, but not as much as those discontinuities that preceded them in establishing the product class. Finally, early adopters of technology were found to experience more growth than other firms. Using three different product types, with a wide range of years from inception, it is shown that technology does evolve through long periods of incremental change punctuated by relatively rare innovations that radically improve the state of the art. Although these incidences of change are rare, they stand out clearly and have significantly altered competitive environments. (SFL)
5,839 citations
Book•
01 Jan 1988
TL;DR: The functional source of innovation general patterns economic explanation shifting and predicting the sources of innovation innovation as a distributed process is discussed in this paper, where users as innovators are considered as the innovators.
Abstract: Chapter 1: The functional source of innovation general patterns economic explanation shifting and predicting the sources of innovation innovation as a distributed process. Chapter 2: Users as innovators. Chapter 3: Variations in the functional source of innovation. Chapter 4: Why does the functional source of innovation vary? How do innovators benefit from innovations? Do benefit expectations differ? Chapter 5: The hypothesis in testable form methods five empirical studies discussion. Chapter 6: Shifting the functional source of innovation. Chapter 7: Root of the problem: market research constrained by user experience Lead users as a solution testing the method discussion. Chapter 8: Innovation cooperation between competing firms applications for innovation management.
5,805 citations
Posted Content•
TL;DR: Schumpeter as discussed by the authors argued that economic development is the key to explaining the features of modern economic life, such as consumption, factors and means of production, labor, value, prices, cost, exchange, money as a circulating medium, and exchange value of money.
Abstract: Schumpeter first reviews the basic economic concepts that describe the recurring economic processes of a commercially organized state in which private property, division of labor, and free competition prevail. These constitute what Schumpeter calls "the circular flow of economic life," such as consumption, factors and means of production, labor, value, prices, cost, exchange, money as a circulating medium, and exchange value of money. The principal focus of the book is advancing the idea that change (economic development) is the key to explaining the features of a modern economy. Schumpeter emphasizes that his work deals with economic dynamics or economic development, not with theories of equilibrium or "circular flow" of a static economy, which have formed the basis of traditional economics. Interest, profit, productive interest, and business fluctuations, capital, credit, and entrepreneurs can better be explained by reference to processes of development. A static economy would know no productive interest, which has its source in the profits that arise from the process of development (successful execution of new combinations). The principal changes in a dynamic economy are due to technical innovations in the production process. Schumpeter elaborates on the role of credit in economic development; credit expansion affects the distribution of income and capital formation. Bank credit detaches productive resources from their place in circular flow to new productive combinations and innovations. Capitalism inherently depends upon economic progress, development, innovation, and expansive activity, which would be suppressed by inflexible monetary policy. The essence of development consists in the introduction of innovations into the system of production. This period of incorporation or adsorption is a period of readjustment, which is the essence of depression. Both profits of booms and losses from depression are part of the process of development. There is a distinction between the processes of creating a new productive apparatus and the process of merely operating it once it is created. Development is effected by the entrepreneur, who guides the diversion of the factors of production into new combinations for better use; by recasting the productive process, including the introduction of new machinery, and producing products at less expense, the entrepreneur creates a surplus, which he claims as profit. The entrepreneur requires capital, which is found in the money market, and for which the entrepreneur pays interest. The entrepreneur creates a model for others to follow, and the appearance of numerous new entrepreneurs causes depressions as the system struggles to achieve a new equilibrium. The entrepreneurial profit then vanishes in the vortex of competition; the stage is set for new combinations. Risk is not part of the entrepreneurial function; risk falls on the provider of capital. (TNM)
4,458 citations