IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/enepol/v151y2021ics0301421521000628.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A spatial perspective on the legitimacy of a technological innovation system: Regional differences in onshore wind energy

Author

Listed:
  • Rohe, Sebastian
  • Chlebna, Camilla

Abstract

Legitimacy is a key function within Technological Innovation Systems (TIS), influencing the development and diffusion of novel technologies such as onshore wind energy. By combining insights from TIS and from organization studies, we provide theoretical and empirical underpinnings to ‘legitimacy’, a concept often defined superficially and mapped at an aggregate, national level. We add a spatial perspective by comparing dimensions of legitimacy between two heterogenous regions in Germany. They have similar diffusion trajectories of wind energy but differ in structural features (socio-economic factors and TIS elements). To capture place-specific institutions and dynamics influencing regional legitimacy, we focus on decision makers and their perception of the TIS. Even though politicians and civil servants are crucial for wind development in their constituent regions and are thus important contextual actors to the TIS, their perspective has been mostly neglected. Applying a comprehensive, mixed methods approach, we conducted an online survey among these decision makers and complemented the insights with qualitative expert interviews. Our analysis shows that pragmatic and moral dimensions of legitimacy are particularly susceptible to place-specific influences. These spatially sensitive insights have been missing from the debate on legitimacy so far and might inform policy directed at advancing technological legitimacy in certain regions.

Suggested Citation

  • Rohe, Sebastian & Chlebna, Camilla, 2021. "A spatial perspective on the legitimacy of a technological innovation system: Regional differences in onshore wind energy," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 151(C).
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:enepol:v:151:y:2021:i:c:s0301421521000628
    DOI: 10.1016/j.enpol.2021.112193
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301421521000628
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.enpol.2021.112193?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. Jobert, Arthur & Laborgne, Pia & Mimler, Solveig, 2007. "Local acceptance of wind energy: Factors of success identified in French and German case studies," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(5), pages 2751-2760, May.
    2. K. Matthias Weber & Bernhard Truffer, 2017. "Moving innovation systems research to the next level: towards an integrative agenda," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press and Oxford Review of Economic Policy Limited, vol. 33(1), pages 101-121.
    3. Walker, Chad & Stephenson, Laura & Baxter, Jamie, 2018. "“His main platform is ‘stop the turbines’ ”: Political discourse, partisanship and local responses to wind energy in Canada," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 123(C), pages 670-681.
    4. Smith, Adrian & Raven, Rob, 2012. "What is protective space? Reconsidering niches in transitions to sustainability," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(6), pages 1025-1036.
    5. Hoen, Ben & Firestone, Jeremy & Rand, Joseph & Elliot, Debi & Hübner, Gundula & Pohl, Johannes & Wiser, Ryan & Lantz, Eric & Haac, T. Ryan & Kaliski, Ken, 2019. "Attitudes of U.S. Wind Turbine Neighbors: Analysis of a Nationwide Survey," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 134(C).
    6. Marcel Bednarz & Tom Broekel, 2020. "Pulled or pushed? The spatial diffusion of wind energy between local demand and supply," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 29(4), pages 893-916.
    7. Binz, Christian & Harris-Lovett, Sasha & Kiparsky, Michael & Sedlak, David L. & Truffer, Bernhard, 2016. "The thorny road to technology legitimation — Institutional work for potable water reuse in California," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 103(C), pages 249-263.
    8. Andersen, Allan Dahl & Markard, Jochen, 2020. "Multi-technology interaction in socio-technical transitions: How recent dynamics in HVDC technology can inform transition theories," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 151(C).
    9. Carlsson, B & Stankiewicz, R, 1991. "On the Nature, Function and Composition of Technological Systems," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 1(2), pages 93-118, April.
    10. Wustenhagen, Rolf & Wolsink, Maarten & Burer, Mary Jean, 2007. "Social acceptance of renewable energy innovation: An introduction to the concept," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(5), pages 2683-2691, May.
    11. Gosens, Jorrit & Lu, Yonglong, 2013. "From lagging to leading? Technological innovation systems in emerging economies and the case of Chinese wind power," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 234-250.
    12. Hanna Martin & Lars Coenen, 2015. "Institutional Context and Cluster Emergence: The Biogas Industry in Southern Sweden," European Planning Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 23(10), pages 2009-2027, October.
    13. Musiolik, Jörg & Markard, Jochen & Hekkert, Marko, 2012. "Networks and network resources in technological innovation systems: Towards a conceptual framework for system building," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 79(6), pages 1032-1048.
    14. Broekel, Tom & Alfken, Christoph, 2015. "Gone with the wind? The impact of wind turbines on tourism demand," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 506-519.
    15. Devine-Wright, Patrick & Batel, Susana & Aas, Oystein & Sovacool, Benjamin & Labelle, Michael Carnegie & Ruud, Audun, 2017. "A conceptual framework for understanding the social acceptance of energy infrastructure: Insights from energy storage," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 107(C), pages 27-31.
    16. Christian Binz & Bernhard Truffer & Lars Coenen, 2016. "Path Creation as a Process of Resource Alignment and Anchoring: Industry Formation for On-Site Water Recycling in Beijing," Economic Geography, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 92(2), pages 172-200, April.
    17. Hoppmann, Joern & Anadon, Laura Diaz & Narayanamurti, Venkatesh, 2020. "Why matter matters: How technology characteristics shape the strategic framing of technologies," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(1).
    18. Sovacool, Benjamin K. & Lakshmi Ratan, Pushkala, 2012. "Conceptualizing the acceptance of wind and solar electricity," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 16(7), pages 5268-5279.
    19. Jeremy Firestone & Hannah Kirk, 2019. "A strong relative preference for wind turbines in the United States among those who live near them," Nature Energy, Nature, vol. 4(4), pages 311-320, April.
    20. Fast, Stewart & Mabee, Warren, 2015. "Place-making and trust-building: The influence of policy on host community responses to wind farms," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 81(C), pages 27-37.
    21. Markard, Jochen & Truffer, Bernhard, 2008. "Technological innovation systems and the multi-level perspective: Towards an integrated framework," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(4), pages 596-615, May.
    22. Dermont, Clau & Ingold, Karin & Kammermann, Lorenz & Stadelmann-Steffen, Isabelle, 2017. "Bringing the policy making perspective in: A political science approach to social acceptance," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 108(C), pages 359-368.
    23. Bergek, Anna & Jacobsson, Staffan & Carlsson, Bo & Lindmark, Sven & Rickne, Annika, 2008. "Analyzing the functional dynamics of technological innovation systems: A scheme of analysis," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(3), pages 407-429, April.
    24. Wolsink, Maarten, 2007. "Planning of renewables schemes: Deliberative and fair decision-making on landscape issues instead of reproachful accusations of non-cooperation," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(5), pages 2692-2704, May.
    25. Jonas Heiberg & Christian Binz & Bernhard Truffer, 2020. "The Geography of Technology Legitimation. How multi-scalar legitimation processes matter for path creation in emerging industries," Papers in Evolutionary Economic Geography (PEEG) 2034, Utrecht University, Department of Human Geography and Spatial Planning, Group Economic Geography, revised Aug 2020.
    26. Scherhaufer, Patrick & Höltinger, Stefan & Salak, Boris & Schauppenlehner, Thomas & Schmidt, Johannes, 2017. "Patterns of acceptance and non-acceptance within energy landscapes: A case study on wind energy expansion in Austria," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 109(C), pages 863-870.
    27. Bergek, Anna, 2010. "Levelling the playing field? The influence of national wind power planning instruments on conflicts of interests in a Swedish county," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(5), pages 2357-2369, May.
    28. Maryann Feldman & Nichola Lowe, 2018. "Policy and collective action in place," Cambridge Journal of Regions, Economy and Society, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 11(2), pages 335-351.
    29. Andersson, Johnn & Hellsmark, Hans & Sandén, Björn A., 2018. "Shaping factors in the emergence of technological innovations: The case of tidal kite technology," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 132(C), pages 191-208.
    30. Lotte M. Lutz & Daniel J. Lang & Henrik Von Wehrden, 2017. "Facilitating Regional Energy Transition Strategies: Toward a Typology of Regions," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(9), pages 1-17, September.
    31. Reusswig, Fritz & Braun, Florian & Heger, Ines & Ludewig, Thomas & Eichenauer, Eva & Lass, Wiebke, 2016. "Against the wind: Local opposition to the German Energiewende," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(C), pages 214-227.
    32. Rao, Hayagreeva, 2004. "Institutional activism in the early American automobile industry," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 19(3), pages 359-384, May.
    33. Bento, Nuno & Fontes, Margarida, 2019. "Emergence of floating offshore wind energy: Technology and industry," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 99(C), pages 66-82.
    34. Binz, Christian & Truffer, Bernhard, 2017. "Global Innovation Systems—A conceptual framework for innovation dynamics in transnational contexts," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(7), pages 1284-1298.
    35. Markard, Jochen & Wirth, Steffen & Truffer, Bernhard, 2016. "Institutional dynamics and technology legitimacy – A framework and a case study on biogas technology," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(1), pages 330-344.
    36. Chlebna, Camilla & Mattes, Jannika, 2019. "When the novelty fades – Socio-technical, spatial and temporal dimensions of regional energy transitions," Papers in Innovation Studies 2019/6, Lund University, CIRCLE - Centre for Innovation Research.
    37. Anna Bergek, 2019. "Technological innovation systems: a review of recent findings and suggestions for future research," Chapters, in: Frank Boons & Andrew McMeekin (ed.), Handbook of Sustainable Innovation, chapter 11, pages 200-218, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    38. Markard, Jochen & Hoffmann, Volker H., 2016. "Analysis of complementarities: Framework and examples from the energy transition," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 111(C), pages 63-75.
    39. Mattes, Jannika & Huber, Andreas & Koehrsen, Jens, 2015. "Energy transitions in small-scale regions – What we can learn from a regional innovation systems perspective," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 255-264.
    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. Rohe, Sebastian & Chlebna, Camilla, 2022. "The evolving role of networking organizations in advanced sustainability transitions," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 183(C).
    2. Dehler-Holland, Joris & Okoh, Marvin & Keles, Dogan, 2022. "Assessing technology legitimacy with topic models and sentiment analysis – The case of wind power in Germany," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 175(C).
    3. Losacker, Sebastian & Heiden, Stefanie & Liefner, Ingo & Lucas, Henning, 2023. "Rethinking bioeconomy innovation in sustainability transitions," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 74(C).
    4. McKenna, R. & Mulalic, I. & Soutar, I. & Weinand, J.M. & Price, J. & Petrović, S. & Mainzer, K., 2022. "Exploring trade-offs between landscape impact, land use and resource quality for onshore variable renewable energy: an application to Great Britain," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 250(C).
    5. Weiss, Daniel & Nemeczek, Fabian, 2021. "A text-based monitoring tool for the legitimacy and guidance of technological innovation systems," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 66(C).
    6. Xu, Bin, 2023. "Exploring the sustainable growth pathway of wind power in China: Using the semiparametric regression model," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 183(C).
    7. Dong, Weiwei & Zhao, Guohua & Yüksel, Serhat & Dinçer, Hasan & Ubay, Gözde Gülseven, 2022. "A novel hybrid decision making approach for the strategic selection of wind energy projects," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 185(C), pages 321-337.
    8. Rohe, Sebastian & Oltmer, Marie & Wolter, Hendrik & Gmeiner, Nina & Tschersich , Julia, 2022. "Forever Niche: Why do organic vegetable varieties not diffuse?," Papers in Innovation Studies 2022/8, Lund University, CIRCLE - Centre for Innovation Research.
    9. Jonas Heiberg & Bernhard Truffer, 2021. "Overcoming the harmony fallacy: How values shape the course of innovation systems," GEIST - Geography of Innovation and Sustainability Transitions 2021(03), GEIST Working Paper Series.
    10. Loewen, Bradley, 2022. "Revitalizing varieties of capitalism for sustainability transitions research: Review, critique and way forward," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 162(C).
    11. Losacker, Sebastian, 2022. "‘License to green’: Regional patent licensing networks and green technology diffusion in China," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 175(C).
    12. Knauf, Jakob & le Maitre, Julia, 2023. "A matter of acceptability? Understanding citizen investment schemes in the context of onshore wind farm development," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 175(C).

    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. Sebastian Rohe & Jannika Mattes, 2021. "What about the regional level? Regional configurations of Technological Innovation Systems," PEGIS geo-disc-2021_01, Institute for Economic Geography and GIScience, Department of Socioeconomics, Vienna University of Economics and Business.
    2. Attila Havas & Doris Schartinger & K. Matthias Weber, 2022. "Innovation Studies, Social Innovation, and Sustainability Transitions Research: From mutual ignorance towards an integrative perspective?," CERS-IE WORKING PAPERS 2227, Institute of Economics, Centre for Economic and Regional Studies.
    3. Yap, Xiao-Shan & Truffer, Bernhard, 2019. "Shaping selection environments for industrial catch-up and sustainability transitions: A systemic perspective on endogenizing windows of opportunity," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(4), pages 1030-1047.
    4. Weiss, Daniel & Nemeczek, Fabian, 2021. "A text-based monitoring tool for the legitimacy and guidance of technological innovation systems," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 66(C).
    5. Gordon, Joel A. & Balta-Ozkan, Nazmiye & Nabavi, Seyed Ali, 2022. "Beyond the triangle of renewable energy acceptance: The five dimensions of domestic hydrogen acceptance," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 324(C).
    6. Rohe, Sebastian & Chlebna, Camilla, 2022. "The evolving role of networking organizations in advanced sustainability transitions," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 183(C).
    7. Binz, Christian & Truffer, Bernhard, 2017. "Global Innovation Systems—A conceptual framework for innovation dynamics in transnational contexts," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(7), pages 1284-1298.
    8. Haley, Brendan, 2018. "Integrating structural tensions into technological innovation systems analysis: Application to the case of transmission interconnections and renewable electricity in Nova Scotia, Canada," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(6), pages 1147-1160.
    9. Alexandra Frangenheim & Michaela Trippl & Camilla Chlebna, 2018. "Beyond the 'single path view': Inter-path relationships in regional contexts," PEGIS geo-disc-2018_06, Institute for Economic Geography and GIScience, Department of Socioeconomics, Vienna University of Economics and Business.
    10. Steffen S. Bettin, 2020. "Electricity infrastructure and innovation in the next phase of energy transition—amendments to the technology innovation system framework," Review of Evolutionary Political Economy, Springer, vol. 1(3), pages 371-395, November.
    11. Markard, Jochen, 2020. "The life cycle of technological innovation systems," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 153(C).
    12. Hojckova, Kristina & Ahlborg, Helene & Morrison, Gregory M. & Sandén, Björn, 2020. "Entrepreneurial use of context for technological system creation and expansion: The case of blockchain-based peer-to-peer electricity trading," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(8).
    13. Jonas Heiberg & Bernhard Truffer, 2021. "The emergence of a global innovation system – a case study from the water sector," GEIST - Geography of Innovation and Sustainability Transitions 2021(09), GEIST Working Paper Series.
    14. Rohe, Sebastian & Oltmer, Marie & Wolter, Hendrik & Gmeiner, Nina & Tschersich , Julia, 2022. "Forever Niche: Why do organic vegetable varieties not diffuse?," Papers in Innovation Studies 2022/8, Lund University, CIRCLE - Centre for Innovation Research.
    15. Jonas Heiberg & Bernhard Truffer, 2021. "Overcoming the harmony fallacy: How values shape the course of innovation systems," GEIST - Geography of Innovation and Sustainability Transitions 2021(03), GEIST Working Paper Series.
    16. Manuel Gardt & Tom Broekel & Philipp Gareis, 2021. "Blowing against the winds of change? The relationship between anti-wind initiatives and wind turbines in Germany," Papers in Evolutionary Economic Geography (PEEG) 2119, Utrecht University, Department of Human Geography and Spatial Planning, Group Economic Geography, revised Jun 2021.
    17. Hübner, Gundula & Leschinger, Valentin & Müller, Florian J.Y. & Pohl, Johannes, 2023. "Broadening the social acceptance of wind energy – An Integrated Acceptance Model," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 173(C).
    18. Andersen, Allan Dahl & Markard, Jochen, 2020. "Multi-technology interaction in socio-technical transitions: How recent dynamics in HVDC technology can inform transition theories," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 151(C).
    19. Jonas Heiberg & Christian Binz & Bernhard Truffer, 2020. "Assessing transitions through socio-technical network analysis – a methodological framework and a case study from the water sector," Papers in Evolutionary Economic Geography (PEEG) 2035, Utrecht University, Department of Human Geography and Spatial Planning, Group Economic Geography, revised Aug 2020.
    20. Dehler-Holland, Joris & Okoh, Marvin & Keles, Dogan, 2022. "Assessing technology legitimacy with topic models and sentiment analysis – The case of wind power in Germany," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 175(C).

    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:151:y:2021:i:c:s0301421521000628. 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.