IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/tefoso/v91y2015icp179-193.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Examining open-endedness of expectations in emerging technological fields: The case of cellulosic ethanol

Author

Listed:
  • Gustafsson, Robin
  • Kuusi, Osmo
  • Meyer, Martin

Abstract

The promises and visions arising from scientific discoveries, technological breakthroughs, and the emergence of technological fields are by nature uncertain and inaccurate. This paper suggests that a reasonable way to expose more accurately the conditions of incomplete knowledge, imperfect inference, and open-endedness surrounding emerging technological fields is to look at actors' shared expectations or common guiding images that function as scenarios. A rigorous theoretical framework and a methodological approach that exposes in a more accurate way foundations and generalizations underlying guiding images in emerging technological fields is developed. We undertake co-classification analysis of patent data, content analysis of patents, and analysis of firm communication in order to map, analytically distinguish generalizations, and judge (using domain experts) the foundations of competing guiding images in the emerging field of cellulosic bioethanol. We uncover two competing guiding images, an ‘expectation-based’ guiding image of ‘cellulose ethanol manufacturing’, and a more radical development, an ‘anticipation-based’ guiding image of ‘plant self-production’. Further, we identify a wild card, that of algae-based photosynthetic ethanol production. Together the exposure and the analysis of the foundations of two competing guiding images and a wild card in the field of cellulose ethanol provide previously unmatched substantiation of open-endedness of expectations in an emergent technological field.

Suggested Citation

  • Gustafsson, Robin & Kuusi, Osmo & Meyer, Martin, 2015. "Examining open-endedness of expectations in emerging technological fields: The case of cellulosic ethanol," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 91(C), pages 179-193.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:tefoso:v:91:y:2015:i:c:p:179-193
    DOI: 10.1016/j.techfore.2014.02.008
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0040162514000572
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.techfore.2014.02.008?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. Kuusi, Osmo, 1999. "Expertise in the Future Use of Generic Technologies," Research Reports 59, VATT Institute for Economic Research.
    2. M.J. Cobo & A.G. López-Herrera & E. Herrera-Viedma & F. Herrera, 2011. "Science mapping software tools: Review, analysis, and cooperative study among tools," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 62(7), pages 1382-1402, July.
    3. Amin, Ash & Roberts, Joanne, 2008. "Knowing in action: Beyond communities of practice," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(2), pages 353-369, March.
    4. Dou, Henri & Bai, Ying, 2007. "A rapid analysis of Avian Influenza patents in the Esp@cenet® database - R&D strategies and country comparisons," World Patent Information, Elsevier, vol. 29(1), pages 26-32, March.
    5. Douglas K. R. Robinson & Martin Ruivenkamp & Arie Rip, 2007. "Tracking the evolution of new and emerging S&T via statement-linkages: Vision assessment in molecular machines," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 70(3), pages 831-858, March.
    6. Hyunseok Park & Janghyeok Yoon & Kwangsoo Kim, 2012. "Identifying patent infringement using SAO based semantic technological similarities," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 90(2), pages 515-529, February.
    7. Lombardi, Mauro, 2003. "The evolution of local production systems: the emergence of the "invisible mind" and the evolutionary pressures towards more visible "minds"," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(8), pages 1443-1462, September.
    8. Ávila-Robinson, Alfonso & Miyazaki, Kumiko, 2013. "Dynamics of scientific knowledge bases as proxies for discerning technological emergence — The case of MEMS/NEMS technologies," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 80(6), pages 1071-1084.
    9. Engelsman, E. C. & van Raan, A. F. J., 1994. "A patent-based cartography of technology," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 23(1), pages 1-26, January.
    10. Breschi, Stefano & Lissoni, Francesco & Malerba, Franco, 2003. "Knowledge-relatedness in firm technological diversification," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(1), pages 69-87, January.
    11. Osmo Kuusi & Martin Meyer, 2007. "Anticipating technological breakthroughs: Using bibliographic coupling to explore the nanotubes paradigm," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 70(3), pages 759-777, March.
    12. Pilkington, Alan & Dyerson, Romano & Tissier, Omid, 2002. "The electric vehicle:: Patent data as indicators of technological development," World Patent Information, Elsevier, vol. 24(1), pages 5-12, March.
    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. Samira Ranaei & Arho Suominen & Alan Porter & Stephen Carley, 2020. "Evaluating technological emergence using text analytics: two case technologies and three approaches," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 122(1), pages 215-247, January.
    2. Rotolo, Daniele & Hicks, Diana & Martin, Ben R., 2015. "What is an emerging technology?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(10), pages 1827-1843.
    3. Serhat Burmaoglu & Olivier Sartenaer & Alan Porter & Munan Li, 2019. "Analysing the theoretical roots of technology emergence: an evolutionary perspective," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 119(1), pages 97-118, April.
    4. Puccetti, Giovanni & Giordano, Vito & Spada, Irene & Chiarello, Filippo & Fantoni, Gualtiero, 2023. "Technology identification from patent texts: A novel named entity recognition method," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 186(PB).

    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. Alfonso Ávila-Robinson & Shintaro Sengoku, 2017. "Tracing the knowledge-building dynamics in new stem cell technologies through techno-scientific networks," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 112(3), pages 1691-1720, September.
    2. Tom Broekel & Lars Mewes, 2017. "Analyzing the impact of R&D policy on regional diversification," Papers in Evolutionary Economic Geography (PEEG) 1726, Utrecht University, Department of Human Geography and Spatial Planning, Group Economic Geography, revised Sep 2017.
    3. David Rigby, 2012. "The Geography of Knowledge Relatedness and Technological Diversification in U.S. Cities," Papers in Evolutionary Economic Geography (PEEG) 1218, Utrecht University, Department of Human Geography and Spatial Planning, Group Economic Geography, revised Oct 2012.
    4. Alessandra Colombelli & Francesco Quatraro, 2013. "New Firm Formation and the properties of local knowledge bases: Evidence from Italian NUTS 3 regions," Working Papers hal-00858989, HAL.
    5. Serhat Burmaoglu & Olivier Sartenaer & Alan Porter & Munan Li, 2019. "Analysing the theoretical roots of technology emergence: an evolutionary perspective," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 119(1), pages 97-118, April.
    6. Lars Mewes & Tom Broekel, 2020. "Subsidized to change? The impact of R&D policy on regional technological diversification," The Annals of Regional Science, Springer;Western Regional Science Association, vol. 65(1), pages 221-252, August.
    7. Dieter F. Kogler & Jürgen Essletzbichler & David L. Rigby, 2017. "The evolution of specialization in the EU15 knowledge space," Journal of Economic Geography, Oxford University Press, vol. 17(2), pages 345-373.
    8. Matias Nehuen Iglesias, 2021. "The Overlooked Insights from Correlation Structures in Economic Geography," Papers in Evolutionary Economic Geography (PEEG) 2105, Utrecht University, Department of Human Geography and Spatial Planning, Group Economic Geography, revised Jan 2021.
    9. Antonelli Cristiano & Colombelli Alessandra, 2013. "Knowledge cumulability and complementarity in the knowledge generation function," Department of Economics and Statistics Cognetti de Martiis. Working Papers 201305, University of Turin.
    10. Katsuyuki Kaneko & Yuya Kajikawa, 2023. "Novelty Score and Technological Relatedness Measurement Using Patent Information in Mergers and Acquisitions: Case Study in the Japanese Electric Motor Industry," Global Journal of Flexible Systems Management, Springer;Global Institute of Flexible Systems Management, vol. 24(2), pages 163-177, June.
    11. Maryann Feldman & Dieter Kogler & David Rigby, 2013. "rKnowledge: The Spatial Diffusion of rDNA Methods," Papers in Evolutionary Economic Geography (PEEG) 1311, Utrecht University, Department of Human Geography and Spatial Planning, Group Economic Geography, revised Aug 2013.
    12. Alessandra Colombelli & Gianluca Orsatti & Francesco Quatraro, 2021. "Local knowledge composition and the emergence of entrepreneurial activities across industries: evidence from Italian NUTS-3 regions," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 56(2), pages 613-635, February.
    13. Emanuele Pugliese & Lorenzo Napolitano & Andrea Zaccaria & Luciano Pietronero, 2019. "Coherent diversification in corporate technological portfolios," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(10), pages 1-22, October.
    14. Jeff Alstott & Giorgio Triulzi & Bowen Yan & Jianxi Luo, 2017. "Mapping technology space by normalizing patent networks," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 110(1), pages 443-479, January.
    15. Emanuele Pugliese & Lorenzo Napolitano & Andrea Zaccaria & Luciano Pietronero, 2017. "Coherent diversification in corporate technological portfolios," Papers 1707.02188, arXiv.org.
    16. Higham, Kyle & Contisciani, Martina & De Bacco, Caterina, 2022. "Multilayer patent citation networks: A comprehensive analytical framework for studying explicit technological relationships," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 179(C).
    17. Hofmann, Peter & Keller, Robert & Urbach, Nils, 2019. "Inter-technology relationship networks: Arranging technologies through text mining," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 143(C), pages 202-213.
    18. Colombelli, Alessandra & Krafft, Jackie & Quatraro, Francesco, 2013. "Properties of knowledge base and firm survival: Evidence from a sample of French manufacturing firms," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 80(8), pages 1469-1483.
    19. Alessandra Colombelli & Francesco Quatraro, 2014. "The persistence of firms' knowledge base: a quantile approach to Italian data," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 23(7), pages 585-610, October.
    20. Suominen, Arho & Toivanen, Hannes & Seppänen, Marko, 2017. "Firms' knowledge profiles: Mapping patent data with unsupervised learning," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 115(C), pages 131-142.

    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:tefoso:v:91:y:2015:i:c:p:179-193. 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.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/00401625 .

    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.