IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/respol/v45y2016i2p427-441.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Patterns of innovation and organizational demography in emerging sustainable fields: An analysis of the chemical sector

Author

Listed:
  • Epicoco, Marianna

Abstract

This paper examines the patterns of environmental innovation in the chemical sector and focuses in particular on detecting whether the rise of sustainable chemistry technologies (SCT) has stimulated the emergence of new organizations. This question is important to assess the extent to which SCT are sustaining the technological advantage of industry incumbents or are creating opportunities for new firms aspiring to develop radically new environmental innovations. We found that SCT still represent a relatively low proportion of chemical technologies and that they have not stimulated, in a significant way, the emergence of new firms. However, the importance of new firms has grown in the last 20 years and their technologies seem to have a higher potential of radicalness than incumbents’ technologies. This indicates that, although incumbents’ advantage remains strong, a small group of young firms has started to weaken such advantage. Moreover, the important role played by research organizations in generating SCT may signal that technological opportunities are expanding and that some governments, in particular the US government, are committed to develop SCT. These results suggest that, if supported by effective policies, technological ferment in the field, which at the present appears still limited, has a potential of growth.

Suggested Citation

  • Epicoco, Marianna, 2016. "Patterns of innovation and organizational demography in emerging sustainable fields: An analysis of the chemical sector," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(2), pages 427-441.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:respol:v:45:y:2016:i:2:p:427-441
    DOI: 10.1016/j.respol.2015.10.013
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0048733315001663
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.respol.2015.10.013?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 look for a different version below or search for a different version of it.

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Smith, Adrian & Raven, Rob, 2012. "What is protective space? Reconsidering niches in transitions to sustainability," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(6), pages 1025-1036.
    2. Berggren, Christian & Magnusson, Thomas & Sushandoyo, Dedy, 2015. "Transition pathways revisited: Established firms as multi-level actors in the heavy vehicle industry," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(5), pages 1017-1028.
    3. Georg Graevenitz & Stefan Wagner & Dietmar Harhoff, 2013. "Incidence and Growth of Patent Thickets: The Impact of Technological Opportunities and Complexity," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 61(3), pages 521-563, September.
    4. Epicoco, Marianna & Oltra, Vanessa & Maïder Saint, Jean, 2014. "Knowledge dynamics and sources of eco-innovation: Mapping the Green Chemistry community," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 81(C), pages 388-402.
    5. Epicoco, Marianna, 2013. "Knowledge patterns and sources of leadership: Mapping the semiconductor miniaturization trajectory," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(1), pages 180-195.
    6. Roberto Fontana & Alessandro Nuvolari & Hiroshi Shimizu & Andrea Vezzulli, 2013. "Schumpeterian Patterns of Innovation and the Sources of Breakthrough Inventions: Evidence from a Data-set of R&D Awards," Economic Complexity and Evolution, in: Andreas Pyka & Esben Sloth Andersen (ed.), Long Term Economic Development, edition 127, pages 313-340, Springer.
    7. Vanessa Oltra & Maïder Saint Jean, 2007. "Incrementalism of environmental innovations versus paradigmatic change: a comparative study of the automotive and chemical industries," Post-Print hal-00155039, HAL.
    8. Sterzi, Valerio, 2013. "Patent quality and ownership: An analysis of UK faculty patenting," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(2), pages 564-576.
    9. Giovanni Dosi & Marco Grazzi, 2009. "Energy, Development and the Environment: An Appraisal Three Decades After the ‘Limits to Growth’ Debate," Chapters, in: Andreas Pyka & Uwe Cantner & Alfred Greiner & Thomas Kuhn (ed.), Recent Advances in Neo-Schumpeterian Economics, chapter 2, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    10. Geels, Frank W. & Schot, Johan, 2007. "Typology of sociotechnical transition pathways," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(3), pages 399-417, April.
    11. Breschi, Stefano & Malerba, Franco & Orsenigo, Luigi, 2000. "Technological Regimes and Schumpeterian Patterns of Innovation," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 110(463), pages 388-410, April.
    12. Bronwyn H. Hall & Adam B. Jaffe & Manuel Trajtenberg, 2001. "The NBER Patent Citation Data File: Lessons, Insights and Methodological Tools," NBER Working Papers 8498, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    13. Bergek, Anna & Berggren, Christian & Magnusson, Thomas & Hobday, Michael, 2013. "Technological discontinuities and the challenge for incumbent firms: Destruction, disruption or creative accumulation?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(6), pages 1210-1224.
    14. Manuel Trajtenberg & Rebecca Henderson & Adam Jaffe, 1997. "University Versus Corporate Patents: A Window On The Basicness Of Invention," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 5(1), pages 19-50.
    15. Frank T. Rothaermel, 2001. "Incumbent's advantage through exploiting complementary assets via interfirm cooperation," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 22(6‐7), pages 687-699, June.
    16. Nelson, Andrew & Earle, Andrew & Howard-Grenville, Jennifer & Haack, Julie & Young, Doug, 2014. "Do innovation measures actually measure innovation? Obliteration, symbolic adoption, and other finicky challenges in tracking innovation diffusion," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(6), pages 927-940.
    17. Malerba, Franco, 2002. "Sectoral systems of innovation and production," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 31(2), pages 247-264, February.
    18. Christensen, Clayton M. & Rosenbloom, Richard S., 1995. "Explaining the attacker's advantage: Technological paradigms, organizational dynamics, and the value network," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 24(2), pages 233-257, March.
    19. Nameroff, T. J. & Garant, R. J. & Albert, M. B., 2004. "Adoption of green chemistry: an analysis based on US patents," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(6-7), pages 959-974, September.
    20. Pavitt, Keith, 1984. "Sectoral patterns of technical change: Towards a taxonomy and a theory," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 13(6), pages 343-373, December.
    21. Ansari, Shahzad (Shaz) & Krop, Pieter, 2012. "Incumbent performance in the face of a radical innovation: Towards a framework for incumbent challenger dynamics," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(8), pages 1357-1374.
    22. Methe, David & Swaminathan, Anand & Mitchell, Will, 1996. "The Underemphasized Role of Established Firms as the," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 5(4), pages 1181-1203.
    23. Joshua Lerner, 1994. "The Importance of Patent Scope: An Empirical Analysis," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 25(2), pages 319-333, Summer.
    24. Breschi, Stefano & Lissoni, Francesco & Malerba, Franco, 2003. "Knowledge-relatedness in firm technological diversification," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(1), pages 69-87, January.
    25. Lori Rosenkopf & Atul Nerkar, 2001. "Beyond local search: boundary‐spanning, exploration, and impact in the optical disk industry," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 22(4), pages 287-306, April.
    26. Marianna Epicoco, 2013. "Knowledge patterns and sources of leadership: Mapping the semiconductor miniaturization trajectory," Post-Print hal-03381305, HAL.
    27. Keith Smith, 2009. "Climate change and radical energy innovation: the policy issues," Working Papers on Innovation Studies 20090101, Centre for Technology, Innovation and Culture, University of Oslo.
    28. Fabrizio Cesaroni & Alfonso Gambardella & Walter Garcia-Fontes & Myriam Mariani, 2001. "The Chemical Sector al System. Firms, markets, institutions and the processes of knowledge creation and diffusion," LEM Papers Series 2001/17, Laboratory of Economics and Management (LEM), Sant'Anna School of Advanced Studies, Pisa, Italy.
    29. Mina, A. & Ramlogan, R. & Tampubolon, G. & Metcalfe, J.S., 2007. "Mapping evolutionary trajectories: Applications to the growth and transformation of medical knowledge," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(5), pages 789-806, June.
    30. Malerba, Franco & Orsenigo, Luigi, 1996. "Schumpeterian patterns of innovation are technology-specific," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 25(3), pages 451-478, May.
    31. Markard, Jochen & Raven, Rob & Truffer, Bernhard, 2012. "Sustainability transitions: An emerging field of research and its prospects," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(6), pages 955-967.
    32. Epicoco, Marianna & Oltra, Vanessa & Maïder Saint, Jean, 2014. "Knowledge dynamics and sources of eco-innovation: Mapping the Green Chemistry community," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 81(C), pages 388-402.
    33. Rosenberg, Nathan, 1969. "The Direction of Technological Change: Inducement Mechanisms and Focusing Devices," Economic Development and Cultural Change, University of Chicago Press, vol. 18(1), pages 1-24, Part I Oc.
    34. Barberá-Tomás, David & Jiménez-Sáez, Fernando & Castelló-Molina, Itziar, 2011. "Mapping the importance of the real world: The validity of connectivity analysis of patent citations networks," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(3), pages 473-486, April.
    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. Rixiao Cui & Juanru Wang, 2022. "Shaping sustainable development: External environmental pressure, exploratory green learning, and radical green innovation," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 29(3), pages 481-495, May.
    2. Alessandra Perri & Daniela Silvestri & Francesco Zirpoli, 2019. "Technology evolution in the global automotive industry: a patent-based analysis," Working Papers 04, Department of Management, Università Ca' Foscari Venezia.
    3. Zhu, Chen & Qiu, Zhiyi & Liu, Fengjun, 2021. "Does innovation stimulate employment? Evidence from China," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 94(C), pages 1007-1017.
    4. Rixiao Cui & Juanru Wang & Cong Zhou, 2023. "Exploring the linkages of green transformational leadership, organizational green learning, and radical green innovation," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 32(1), pages 185-199, January.

    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. Marianna Epicoco, 2016. "Patterns of innovation and organizational demography in emerging sustainable fields: An analysis of the chemical sector," Post-Print hal-03381224, HAL.
    2. Huenteler, Joern & Ossenbrink, Jan & Schmidt, Tobias S. & Hoffmann, Volker H., 2016. "How a product’s design hierarchy shapes the evolution of technological knowledge—Evidence from patent-citation networks in wind power," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(6), pages 1195-1217.
    3. Dosi, Giovanni & Nelson, Richard R., 2010. "Technical Change and Industrial Dynamics as Evolutionary Processes," 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 51-127, Elsevier.
    4. Huenteler, Joern & Schmidt, Tobias S. & Ossenbrink, Jan & Hoffmann, Volker H., 2016. "Technology life-cycles in the energy sector — Technological characteristics and the role of deployment for innovation," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 104(C), pages 102-121.
    5. Thomas Magnusson & Viktor Werner, 2023. "Conceptualisations of incumbent firms in sustainability transitions: Insights from organisation theory and a systematic literature review," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 32(2), pages 903-919, February.
    6. Stephan, Annegret & Bening, Catharina R. & Schmidt, Tobias S. & Schwarz, Marius & Hoffmann, Volker H., 2019. "The role of inter-sectoral knowledge spillovers in technological innovations: The case of lithium-ion batteries," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 148(C).
    7. 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).
    8. Weigelt, Carmen & Lu, Shaohua & Verhaal, J. Cameron, 2021. "Blinded by the sun: The role of prosumers as niche actors in incumbent firms’ adoption of solar power during sustainability transitions," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(9).
    9. Apa, Roberta & De Noni, Ivan & Orsi, Luigi & Sedita, Silvia Rita, 2018. "Knowledge space oddity: How to increase the intensity and relevance of the technological progress of European regions," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(9), pages 1700-1712.
    10. Rakas, Marija & Hain, Daniel S., 2019. "The state of innovation system research: What happens beneath the surface?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(9), pages 1-1.
    11. Kivimaa, Paula & Kern, Florian, 2016. "Creative destruction or mere niche support? Innovation policy mixes for sustainability transitions," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(1), pages 205-217.
    12. Barbieri, Nicolò & Marzucchi, Alberto & Rizzo, Ugo, 2020. "Knowledge sources and impacts on subsequent inventions: Do green technologies differ from non-green ones?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(2).
    13. Bergek, Anna & Berggren, Christian & Magnusson, Thomas & Hobday, Michael, 2013. "Technological discontinuities and the challenge for incumbent firms: Destruction, disruption or creative accumulation?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(6), pages 1210-1224.
    14. Jongho Lee & Keun Lee, 2021. "Is the fourth industrial revolution a continuation of the third industrial revolution or something new under the sun? Analyzing technological regimes using US patent data [Vertical integration and ," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 30(1), pages 137-159.
    15. Quintana-Garci­a, Cristina & Benavides-Velasco, Carlos A., 2008. "Innovative competence, exploration and exploitation: The influence of technological diversification," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(3), pages 492-507, April.
    16. Turnheim, Bruno & Geels, Frank W., 2019. "Incumbent actors, guided search paths, and landmark projects in infra-system transitions: Re-thinking Strategic Niche Management with a case study of French tramway diffusion (1971–2016)," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(6), pages 1412-1428.
    17. Nhat Strøm-Andersen, 2019. "Incumbents in the Transition Towards the Bioeconomy: The Role of Dynamic Capabilities and Innovation Strategies," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(18), pages 1-20, September.
    18. Maria Chiara Di Guardo & Kathryn Rudie Harrigan & Elona Marku, 2019. "M&A and diversification strategies: what effect on quality of inventive activity?," Journal of Management & Governance, Springer;Accademia Italiana di Economia Aziendale (AIDEA), vol. 23(3), pages 669-692, September.
    19. Cheng Wang & Tao Lv & Rongjiang Cai & Jianfeng Xu & Liya Wang, 2022. "Bibliometric Analysis of Multi-Level Perspective on Sustainability Transition Research," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(7), pages 1-31, March.
    20. Geels, Frank W. & Kern, Florian & Fuchs, Gerhard & Hinderer, Nele & Kungl, Gregor & Mylan, Josephine & Neukirch, Mario & Wassermann, Sandra, 2016. "The enactment of socio-technical transition pathways: A reformulated typology and a comparative multi-level analysis of the German and UK low-carbon electricity transitions (1990–2014)," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(4), pages 896-913.

    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:respol:v:45:y:2016:i:2:p:427-441. 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/respol .

    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.