IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/enepol/v105y2017icp236-245.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Navigating the “paradox of openness” in energy and transport innovation: Insights from eight corporate clean technology research and development case studies

Author

Listed:
  • Sovacool, Benjamin K.
  • Jeppesen, Jakob
  • Bandsholm, Jesper
  • Asmussen, Joakim
  • Balachandran, Rakulan
  • Vestergaard, Simon
  • Andersen, Thomas Hauerslev
  • Sørensen, Thomas Klode
  • Bjørn-Thygesen, Frans

Abstract

Using an inductive case study approach drawn from original interview data, this article investigates the innovation approaches among a sample of international energy companies, or corporate firms. It first presents a conceptual framework synthesized from the business studies, entrepreneurship, evolutionary economics, innovation studies, management science, organization studies, political science, and sociology literature. This framework suggests that corporate approaches to clean technology innovation will cut across the four dimensions of organizational multiplicity and stakeholder involvement, information sharing, coordination and control, and market orientation. It then explores how eight firms—the Algal Carbon Conversion Flagship and Aurora Algae (biofuel), DONG and Statoil (carbon capture and storage), Tesla and Volkswagen (electric vehicles), and Siemens and Vestas (offshore wind turbines)—approach clean technology development with “open innovation” attributes mixed with “closed” attributes. Although the study finds striking similarities among the particular approaches embraced by each corporate actor, it also notes that approaches are technology and firm specific, and the potential for different permutations leads to an almost endless number of possible stylistic combinations. The innovation profiles depicted also reveal conflict and competition among various stakeholders, the implication being that corporate innovation in the energy sector remains a conflicted, disjointed, and messy process.

Suggested Citation

  • Sovacool, Benjamin K. & Jeppesen, Jakob & Bandsholm, Jesper & Asmussen, Joakim & Balachandran, Rakulan & Vestergaard, Simon & Andersen, Thomas Hauerslev & Sørensen, Thomas Klode & Bjørn-Thygesen, Fran, 2017. "Navigating the “paradox of openness” in energy and transport innovation: Insights from eight corporate clean technology research and development case studies," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 105(C), pages 236-245.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:enepol:v:105:y:2017:i:c:p:236-245
    DOI: 10.1016/j.enpol.2017.02.033
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301421517301052
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.enpol.2017.02.033?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Eric von Hippel, 1986. "Lead Users: A Source of Novel Product Concepts," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 32(7), pages 791-805, July.
    2. Antoncic, Bostjan & Hisrich, Robert D., 2001. "Intrapreneurship: Construct refinement and cross-cultural validation," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 16(5), pages 495-527, September.
    3. Sovacool, Benjamin K., 2009. "Resolving the impasse in American energy policy: The case for a transformational R&D strategy at the U.S. Department of Energy," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 13(2), pages 346-361, February.
    4. Richard Heede, 2014. "Tracing anthropogenic carbon dioxide and methane emissions to fossil fuel and cement producers, 1854–2010," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 122(1), pages 229-241, January.
    5. Krister Andersson & Elinor Ostrom, 2008. "Analyzing decentralized resource regimes from a polycentric perspective," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 41(1), pages 71-93, March.
    6. Allen, Robert C., 1983. "Collective invention," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 4(1), pages 1-24, March.
    7. Henkel, Joachim, 2006. "Selective revealing in open innovation processes: The case of embedded Linux," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(7), pages 953-969, September.
    8. Geels, Frank W. & Schot, Johan, 2007. "Typology of sociotechnical transition pathways," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(3), pages 399-417, April.
    9. Sovacool, Benjamin K. & Enevoldsen, Peter, 2015. "One style to build them all: Corporate culture and innovation in the offshore wind industry," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 402-415.
    10. Keld Laursen, 2012. "Keep searching and you'll find: what do we know about variety creation through firms' search activities for innovation?," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 21(5), pages 1181-1220, October.
    11. Heptonstall, Philip & Gross, Robert & Greenacre, Philip & Cockerill, Tim, 2012. "The cost of offshore wind: Understanding the past and projecting the future," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(C), pages 815-821.
    12. Bruno Cassiman & Reinhilde Veugelers, 2002. "R&D Cooperation and Spillovers: Some Empirical Evidence from Belgium," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 92(4), pages 1169-1184, September.
    13. Jaffe, Adam B. & Stavins, Robert N., 1994. "The energy paradox and the diffusion of conservation technology," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 16(2), pages 91-122, May.
    14. Ekboir, Javier M., 2003. "Research and technology policies in innovation systems: zero tillage in Brazil," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(4), pages 573-586, April.
    15. Geels, Frank W., 2002. "Technological transitions as evolutionary reconfiguration processes: a multi-level perspective and a case-study," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 31(8-9), pages 1257-1274, December.
    16. von Hippel, Eric, 1987. "Cooperation between rivals: Informal know-how trading," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 16(6), pages 291-302, December.
    17. Laursen, Keld & Salter, Ammon J., 2014. "The paradox of openness: Appropriability, external search and collaboration," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(5), pages 867-878.
    18. Charlie Wilson & Arnulf Grubler & Kelly S. Gallagher & Gregory F. Nemet, 2012. "Marginalization of end-use technologies in energy innovation for climate protection," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 2(11), pages 780-788, November.
    19. Kaldellis, J.K. & Kapsali, M., 2013. "Shifting towards offshore wind energy—Recent activity and future development," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 136-148.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Smirnova, Olga & Strumsky, Deborah & Qualls, Ashley C., 2021. "Do federal regulations beget innovation? Legislative policy and the role of executive orders," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 158(C).
    2. Wenqing Zhang & Jingrong Dong, 2023. "The Polarization Effect and Mechanism of China’s Green Finance Policy on Green Technology Innovation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(13), pages 1-26, June.
    3. Mendoza, Joan Manuel F. & Gallego-Schmid, Alejandro & Velenturf, Anne P.M. & Jensen, Paul D. & Ibarra, Dorleta, 2022. "Circular economy business models and technology management strategies in the wind industry: Sustainability potential, industrial challenges and opportunities," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 163(C).
    4. Sovacool, Benjamin K. & Noel, Lance & Orsato, Renato J., 2017. "Stretching, embeddedness, and scripts in a sociotechnical transition: Explaining the failure of electric mobility at Better Place (2007–2013)," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 123(C), pages 24-34.
    5. Dall-Orsoletta, Alaize & Romero, Fernando & Ferreira, Paula, 2022. "Open and collaborative innovation for the energy transition: An exploratory study," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 69(C).
    6. Cristina Prieto & Sonia Fereres & Luisa F. Cabeza, 2020. "The Role of Innovation in Industry Product Deployment: Developing Thermal Energy Storage for Concentrated Solar Power," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(11), pages 1-19, June.
    7. Abdol Majid Saadat Nezhad & Tahmoures Sohrabi & Nasrollah Shadnoosh & Abbas Toloie Eshlaghy, 2017. "A New Approach to Challenges of Venture Capital in Financing the Industrial Clusters through Cooperative Models and Venture Funds in Iran," International Journal of Economics and Financial Issues, Econjournals, vol. 7(6), pages 111-119.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Laursen, Keld & Salter, Ammon J., 2014. "The paradox of openness: Appropriability, external search and collaboration," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(5), pages 867-878.
    2. Arora, Ashish & Athreye, Suma & Huang, Can, 2016. "The paradox of openness revisited: Collaborative innovation and patenting by UK innovators," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(7), pages 1352-1361.
    3. Haeussler, Carolin, 2009. "The Economics of Knowledge Regulation: An Empirical Analysis of Knowledge Flows," Discussion Papers in Business Administration 8971, University of Munich, Munich School of Management.
    4. Franke, Nikolaus & Shah, Sonali, 2003. "How communities support innovative activities: an exploration of assistance and sharing among end-users," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(1), pages 157-178, January.
    5. Roman Teplov & Ekaterina Albats & Daria Podmetina, 2019. "What Does Open Innovation Mean? Business Versus Academic Perceptions," International Journal of Innovation Management (ijim), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 23(01), pages 1-33, January.
    6. Kesidou, Effie & Szirmai, Adam, 2008. "Local Knowledge Spillovers, Innovation and Economic Performance in Developing Countries: A discussion of alternative specifications," MERIT Working Papers 2008-033, United Nations University - Maastricht Economic and Social Research Institute on Innovation and Technology (MERIT).
    7. Alkemade & Simona Negro & Neil Thompson & Marko Hekkert, 2011. "Towards a micro-level explanation of sustainability transitions: entrepreneurial strategies," Innovation Studies Utrecht (ISU) working paper series 11-01, Utrecht University, Department of Innovation Studies, revised Apr 2011.
    8. Filippo Randelli, 2013. "The role of consumers in the transition towards sustainability. The case of food supply," Working Papers - Economics wp2013_14.rdf, Universita' degli Studi di Firenze, Dipartimento di Scienze per l'Economia e l'Impresa.
    9. Honghui Zhu & Jinmeng Lee & Xiaojun Yin & Meiling Du, 2023. "The Effect of Open Innovation on Manufacturing Firms’ Performance in China: The Moderating Role of Social Capital," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(7), pages 1-15, March.
    10. Pant, Laxmi Prasad, 2016. "Paradox of mainstreaming agroecology for regional and rural food security in developing countries," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 111(C), pages 305-316.
    11. James Bessen, 2010. "Communicating Technical Knowledge," Working Papers 1001, Research on Innovation.
    12. Sorrell, Steve, 2015. "Reducing energy demand: A review of issues, challenges and approaches," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 47(C), pages 74-82.
    13. Scuotto, Veronica & Beatrice, Orlando & Valentina, Cillo & Nicotra, Melita & Di Gioia, Leonardo & Farina Briamonte, Massimiliano, 2020. "Uncovering the micro-foundations of knowledge sharing in open innovation partnerships: An intention-based perspective of technology transfer," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 152(C).
    14. Martie-Louise Verreynne & Rui Torres de Oliveira & John Steen & Marta Indulska & Jerad A. Ford, 2020. "What motivates ‘free’ revealing? Measuring outbound non-pecuniary openness, innovation types and expectations of future profit growth," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 124(1), pages 271-301, July.
    15. Randelli, Filippo, 2015. "The Role Of Consumers In The Transition Towards A Sustainable Food Supply. The Case Of Gruppi Di Acquisto Solidale (Solidarity Purchasing Groups) In Italy," International Journal of Food and Agricultural Economics (IJFAEC), Alanya Alaaddin Keykubat University, Department of Economics and Finance, vol. 3(4), pages 1-12, October.
    16. Potts, Jason & Kastelle, Tim, 2017. "Economics of innovation in Australian agricultural economics and policy," Economic Analysis and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 54(C), pages 96-104.
    17. Goulet, Frédéric, 2021. "Characterizing alignments in socio-technical transitions. Lessons from agricultural bio-inputs in Brazil," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 65(C).
    18. Block, Jörn H. & Henkel, Joachim & Schweisfurth, Tim G. & Stiegler, Annika, 2016. "Commercializing user innovations by vertical diversification: The user–manufacturer innovator," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(1), pages 244-259.
    19. Arora, Ashish & Gambardella, Alfonso, 2010. "The Market for Technology," Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, in: Bronwyn H. Hall & Nathan Rosenberg (ed.), Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 0, pages 641-678, Elsevier.
    20. Alessandro Comai, 2020. "A new approach for detecting open innovation in patents: the designation of inventor," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 45(6), pages 1797-1822, December.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:enepol:v:105:y:2017:i:c:p:236-245. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/enpol .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.