IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/respol/v50y2021i9s0048733321001190.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

How do new use environments influence a technology's knowledge trajectory? A patent citation network analysis of lithium-ion battery technology

Author

Listed:
  • Malhotra, Abhishek
  • Zhang, Huiting
  • Beuse, Martin
  • Schmidt, Tobias

Abstract

It is important for policymakers and industry practitioners to understand the factors that influence the evolution of a technology's knowledge base, i.e., its knowledge trajectory. The literature on the evolution of technologies and their underlying knowledge bases suggests that technological innovation takes place in an incremental and cumulative manner along certain trajectories. We extend this literature by not only focusing on the influence of the design hierarchy on the evolution of knowledge, but also the influence of emergence of use environments. We focus on the case of lithium-ion battery (LIB) technology from 1970 to 2018. We use a dataset of 101,620 patent families to identify and analyze the LIB industry's core knowledge trajectory. Our results indicate that the emergence of new use environments (in particular, those that require different service characteristics as compared to older use environments) can serve as an important mechanism for increased knowledge generation at the level of the product architecture, increased product innovation, increased technological uncertainty, and increased participation of new actors in the core knowledge trajectory. We discuss implications for practitioners and policy makers interested in understanding factors that influence the relative knowledge positions of firms and nations in complex, multi-purpose technologies.

Suggested Citation

  • Malhotra, Abhishek & Zhang, Huiting & Beuse, Martin & Schmidt, Tobias, 2021. "How do new use environments influence a technology's knowledge trajectory? A patent citation network analysis of lithium-ion battery technology," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(9).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:respol:v:50:y:2021:i:9:s0048733321001190
    DOI: 10.1016/j.respol.2021.104318
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0048733321001190
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.respol.2021.104318?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. Hobday, Mike, 1998. "Product complexity, innovation and industrial organisation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 26(6), pages 689-710, February.
    2. Daniel Nepelski & Giuditta De Prato, 2020. "Technological complexity and economic development," Review of Development Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 24(2), pages 448-470, May.
    3. Smith, Adrian & Raven, Rob, 2012. "What is protective space? Reconsidering niches in transitions to sustainability," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(6), pages 1025-1036.
    4. Frenken, Koen & Saviotti, Paolo P. & Trommetter, Michel, 1999. "Variety and niche creation in aircraft, helicopters, motorcycles and microcomputers," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 28(5), pages 469-488, June.
    5. Roberto Fontana & Alessandro Nuvolari & Bart Verspagen, 2009. "Mapping technological trajectories as patent citation networks. An application to data communication standards," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 18(4), pages 311-336.
    6. Battke, Benedikt & Schmidt, Tobias S. & Stollenwerk, Stephan & Hoffmann, Volker H., 2016. "Internal or external spillovers—Which kind of knowledge is more likely to flow within or across technologies," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(1), pages 27-41.
    7. Andrew Davies, 1997. "The Life Cycle of a Complex Product System," International Journal of Innovation Management (ijim), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 1(03), pages 229-256.
    8. Kaplan, Sarah & Tripsas, Mary, 2008. "Thinking about technology: Applying a cognitive lens to technical change," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(5), pages 790-805, June.
    9. G. M.P. Swann, 2009. "The Economics of Innovation," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 13211.
    10. Utterback, James M & Abernathy, William J, 1975. "A dynamic model of process and product innovation," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 3(6), pages 639-656, December.
    11. Franco Malerba & Richard Nelson & Luigi Orsenigo & Sidney Winter, 2007. "Demand, innovation, and the dynamics of market structure: The role of experimental users and diverse preferences," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 17(4), pages 371-399, August.
    12. Shobha S. Das & Andrew H. Van de Ven, 2000. "Competing with New Product Technologies: A Process Model of Strategy," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 46(10), pages 1300-1316, October.
    13. Zachary P. Cano & Dustin Banham & Siyu Ye & Andreas Hintennach & Jun Lu & Michael Fowler & Zhongwei Chen, 2018. "Batteries and fuel cells for emerging electric vehicle markets," Nature Energy, Nature, vol. 3(4), pages 279-289, April.
    14. Felipe, Jesus & Kumar, Utsav & Abdon, Arnelyn & Bacate, Marife, 2012. "Product complexity and economic development," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 23(1), pages 36-68.
    15. Lee, Keun & Malerba, Franco, 2017. "Catch-up cycles and changes in industrial leadership:Windows of opportunity and responses of firms and countries in the evolution of sectoral systems," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(2), pages 338-351.
    16. Nemet, Gregory F. & Johnson, Evan, 2012. "Do important inventions benefit from knowledge originating in other technological domains?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(1), pages 190-200.
    17. Suarez, Fernando F., 2004. "Battles for technological dominance: an integrative framework," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(2), pages 271-286, March.
    18. Klepper, Steven, 1996. "Entry, Exit, Growth, and Innovation over the Product Life Cycle," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 86(3), pages 562-583, June.
    19. Björn Nykvist & Måns Nilsson, 2015. "Rapidly falling costs of battery packs for electric vehicles," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 5(4), pages 329-332, April.
    20. Clark, Kim B., 1985. "The interaction of design hierarchies and market concepts in technological evolution," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 14(5), pages 235-251, October.
    21. John Sutton & Daniel Trefler, 2016. "Capabilities, Wealth, and Trade," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 124(3), pages 826-878.
    22. Funk, Jeffrey L., 2003. "Standards, dominant designs and preferential acquisition of complementary assets through slight information advantages," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(8), pages 1325-1341, September.
    23. Stephan, Annegret & Schmidt, Tobias S. & Bening, Catharina R. & Hoffmann, Volker H., 2017. "The sectoral configuration of technological innovation systems: Patterns of knowledge development and diffusion in the lithium-ion battery technology in Japan," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(4), pages 709-723.
    24. O. Schmidt & A. Hawkes & A. Gambhir & I. Staffell, 2017. "The future cost of electrical energy storage based on experience rates," Nature Energy, Nature, vol. 2(8), pages 1-8, August.
    25. Murmann, Johann Peter & Frenken, Koen, 2006. "Toward a systematic framework for research on dominant designs, technological innovations, and industrial change," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(7), pages 925-952, September.
    26. J.-M. Tarascon & M. Armand, 2001. "Issues and challenges facing rechargeable lithium batteries," Nature, Nature, vol. 414(6861), pages 359-367, November.
    27. Windrum, Paul & Birchenhall, Chris, 1998. "Is product life cycle theory a special case? Dominant designs and the emergence of market niches through coevolutionary-learning," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 9(1), pages 109-134, March.
    28. Shiu-Wan Hung & An-Pang Wang, 2010. "Examining the small world phenomenon in the patent citation network: a case study of the radio frequency identification (RFID) network," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 82(1), pages 121-134, January.
    29. Ron Adner & Daniel Levinthal, 2001. "Demand Heterogeneity and Technology Evolution: Implications for Product and Process Innovation," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 47(5), pages 611-628, May.
    30. Martinelli, Arianna, 2012. "An emerging paradigm or just another trajectory? Understanding the nature of technological changes using engineering heuristics in the telecommunications switching industry," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(2), pages 414-429.
    31. Schmidt, Tobias S. & Battke, Benedikt & Grosspietsch, David & Hoffmann, Volker H., 2016. "Do deployment policies pick technologies by (not) picking applications?—A simulation of investment decisions in technologies with multiple applications," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(10), pages 1965-1983.
    32. Bart Verspagen, 2007. "Mapping Technological Trajectories As Patent Citation Networks: A Study On The History Of Fuel Cell Research," Advances in Complex Systems (ACS), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 10(01), pages 93-115.
    33. Gaétan de Rassenfosse & Hélène Dernis & Geert Boedt, 2014. "An Introduction to the Patstat Database with Example Queries," Australian Economic Review, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research, vol. 47(3), pages 395-408, September.
    34. Malhotra, Abhishek & Schmidt, Tobias S. & Huenteler, Joern, 2019. "The role of inter-sectoral learning in knowledge development and diffusion: Case studies on three clean energy technologies," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 146(C), pages 464-487.
    35. Zvi Griliches, 1998. "Patent Statistics as Economic Indicators: A Survey," NBER Chapters, in: R&D and Productivity: The Econometric Evidence, pages 287-343, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    36. Hoppmann, Joern & Peters, Michael & Schneider, Malte & Hoffmann, Volker H., 2013. "The two faces of market support—How deployment policies affect technological exploration and exploitation in the solar photovoltaic industry," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(4), pages 989-1003.
    37. C. A. Hidalgo & B. Klinger & A. -L. Barabasi & R. Hausmann, 2007. "The Product Space Conditions the Development of Nations," Papers 0708.2090, arXiv.org.
    38. Koen Frenken, 2006. "Technological innovation and complexity theory," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 15(2), pages 137-155.
    39. Geels, Frank W., 2004. "From sectoral systems of innovation to socio-technical systems: Insights about dynamics and change from sociology and institutional theory," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(6-7), pages 897-920, September.
    40. Gino Cattani, 2006. "Technological pre-adaptation, speciation, and emergence of new technologies: how Corning invented and developed fiber optics," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 15(2), pages 285-318, April.
    41. Bekkers, Rudi & Martinelli, Arianna, 2012. "Knowledge positions in high-tech markets: Trajectories, standards, strategies and true innovators," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 79(7), pages 1192-1216.
    42. Basberg, Bjorn L., 1987. "Patents and the measurement of technological change: A survey of the literature," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 16(2-4), pages 131-141, August.
    43. Pierpaolo Andriani & Gino Cattani, 2016. "Exaptation as source of creativity, innovation, and diversity: introduction to the Special Section," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 25(1), pages 115-131.
    44. Ganco, Martin, 2017. "NK model as a representation of innovative search," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(10), pages 1783-1800.
    45. 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.
    46. Frenken, Koen & Leydesdorff, Loet, 2000. "Scaling trajectories in civil aircraft (1913-1997)," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 29(3), pages 331-348, March.
    47. Koen Frenken & Alessandro Nuvolari, 2004. "The early development of the steam engine: an evolutionary interpretation using complexity theory," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 13(2), pages 419-450, April.
    48. Nemet, Gregory F., 2009. "Demand-pull, technology-push, and government-led incentives for non-incremental technical change," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(5), pages 700-709, June.
    49. Thanh-Dong Pham & Byeong-Kyu Lee & Chi Hyeon Lee & Minh Viet Nguyen, 2015. "Emission Control Technology," Chapters, in: Farhad Nejadkoorki (ed.), Current Air Quality Issues, IntechOpen.
    50. Nightingale, Paul, 2004. "Technological capabilities, invisible infrastructure and the un-social construction of predictability: the overlooked fixed costs of useful research," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(9), pages 1259-1284, November.
    51. 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.
    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. Gnekpe, Christian & Plantec, Quentin, 2023. "Regulatory push-pull and technological knowledge dynamics of circular economy innovation," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 196(C).
    2. Liu, Weiwei & Tao, Yuan & Bi, Kexin, 2022. "Capturing information on global knowledge flows from patent transfers: An empirical study using USPTO patents," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(5).
    3. Boutillier, Sophie & Laperche, Blandine & Lebert, Didier & Elouaer-Mrizak, Sana, 2023. "A systemic analysis of the technological trajectory at company level based on patent data: The case of Sanofi's vaccine technology," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 124(C).
    4. Zhenfu Li & Yixuan Wang & Zhao Deng, 2022. "Research on Evolution Characteristics and Factors of Nordic Green Patent Citation Network," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(13), pages 1-21, June.
    5. Plantec, Quentin & Deval, Marie-Alix & Hooge, Sophie & Weil, Benoit, 2023. "Big data as an exploration trigger or problem-solving patch: Design and integration of AI-embedded systems in the automotive industry," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 124(C).
    6. Pierre Barbaroux & Victor Santos Paulino, 2022. "Why do motives matter? A demand-based view of the dynamics of a complex products and systems (CoPS) industry," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 32(4), pages 1175-1204, September.
    7. Ba, Zhichao & Ma, Yaxue & Cai, Jinyao & Li, Gang, 2023. "A citation-based research framework for exploring policy diffusion: Evidence from China's new energy policies," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 188(C).
    8. Metzger, Philipp & Mendonça, Sandro & Silva, José A. & Damásio, Bruno, 2023. "Battery innovation and the Circular Economy: What are patents revealing?," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 209(C), pages 516-532.
    9. Na Zhang & Chao Sun & Min Xu & Xuemei Wang & Jia Deng, 2023. "Catching Up of Latecomer Economies in ICT for Sustainable Development: An Analysis Based on Technology Life Cycle Using Patent Data," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(11), pages 1-29, June.

    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. 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.
    2. 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.
    3. Gnekpe, Christian & Plantec, Quentin, 2023. "Regulatory push-pull and technological knowledge dynamics of circular economy innovation," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 196(C).
    4. Malhotra, Abhishek & Schmidt, Tobias S. & Huenteler, Joern, 2019. "The role of inter-sectoral learning in knowledge development and diffusion: Case studies on three clean energy technologies," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 146(C), pages 464-487.
    5. Stephan, Annegret & Schmidt, Tobias S. & Bening, Catharina R. & Hoffmann, Volker H., 2017. "The sectoral configuration of technological innovation systems: Patterns of knowledge development and diffusion in the lithium-ion battery technology in Japan," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(4), pages 709-723.
    6. Hipp, Ann & Binz, Christian, 2020. "Firm survival in complex value chains and global innovation systems: Evidence from solar photovoltaics," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(1).
    7. 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).
    8. Martin Kalthaus, 2020. "Knowledge recombination along the technology life cycle," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 30(3), pages 643-704, July.
    9. Junmo Kim & Juneseuk Shin, 2018. "Mapping extended technological trajectories: integration of main path, derivative paths, and technology junctures," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 116(3), pages 1439-1459, September.
    10. Triulzi, Giorgio & Alstott, Jeff & Magee, Christopher L., 2020. "Estimating technology performance improvement rates by mining patent data," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 158(C).
    11. van Rijnsoever, Frank J. & van den Berg, Jesse & Koch, Joost & Hekkert, Marko P., 2015. "Smart innovation policy: How network position and project composition affect the diversity of an emerging technology," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(5), pages 1094-1107.
    12. Marlene O’Sullivan, 2020. "Industrial life cycle: relevance of national markets in the development of new industries for energy technologies – the case of wind energy," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 30(4), pages 1063-1107, September.
    13. Battke, Benedikt & Schmidt, Tobias S. & Stollenwerk, Stephan & Hoffmann, Volker H., 2016. "Internal or external spillovers—Which kind of knowledge is more likely to flow within or across technologies," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(1), pages 27-41.
    14. Funk, Jeffery, 2009. "Components, systems and discontinuities: The case of magnetic recording and playback equipment," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(7), pages 1192-1202, September.
    15. Martinelli, Arianna, 2012. "An emerging paradigm or just another trajectory? Understanding the nature of technological changes using engineering heuristics in the telecommunications switching industry," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(2), pages 414-429.
    16. Doblinger, Claudia & Surana, Kavita & Li, Deyu & Hultman, Nathan & Anadón, Laura Díaz, 2022. "How do global manufacturing shifts affect long-term clean energy innovation? A study of wind energy suppliers," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(7).
    17. Epicoco, Marianna, 2013. "Knowledge patterns and sources of leadership: Mapping the semiconductor miniaturization trajectory," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(1), pages 180-195.
    18. Markard, Jochen, 2020. "The life cycle of technological innovation systems," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 153(C).
    19. Narayanan, V.K. & Chen, Tianxu, 2012. "Research on technology standards: Accomplishment and challenges," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(8), pages 1375-1406.
    20. Murmann, Johann Peter & Frenken, Koen, 2006. "Toward a systematic framework for research on dominant designs, technological innovations, and industrial change," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(7), pages 925-952, September.

    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:50:y:2021:i:9:s0048733321001190. 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.