IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/joevec/v17y2007i4p371-399.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Demand, innovation, and the dynamics of market structure: The role of experimental users and diverse preferences

Author

Listed:
  • Franco Malerba
  • Richard Nelson
  • Luigi Orsenigo
  • Sidney Winter

Abstract

The history of a number of industries is marked by a succession of eras, associated with different dominant technologies. Within any era, industry concentration tends to grow. Particular eras are broken by the introduction of a new technology which, while initially inferior to the established one in the prominent uses, has the potential to become competitive. In many cases new entrants survive and grow, and the large established firms do not make the transition. In other cases the established firms are able to switch over effectively, and compete in the new era. This paper explores a model which generates this pattern and has focussed on the characteristics of the demand. We argue that the ability of the new firms exploring the new technology to survive long enough to get that technology effectively launched depends on the existence of fringe markets which the old technology does not serve well, or experimental users, or both. Established firms initially have little incentive to adopt the new technology, which initially is inferior to the technology they have mastered. New firms generally cannot survive in head-to-head conflict with established firms on the market well served by the latter. The new firms need to find a market that keeps them alive long enough so that they can develop the new technology to a point where it is competitive on the main market. Niche markets, or experimental users, can provide that space.
(This abstract was borrowed from another version of this item.)

Suggested Citation

  • 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.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:joevec:v:17:y:2007:i:4:p:371-399
    DOI: 10.1007/s00191-007-0060-x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/s00191-007-0060-x
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s00191-007-0060-x?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. Winter, Sidney G., 1984. "Schumpeterian competition in alternative technological regimes," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 5(3-4), pages 287-320.
    2. Arthur, W Brian, 1989. "Competing Technologies, Increasing Returns, and Lock-In by Historical Events," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 99(394), pages 116-131, March.
    3. David, Paul A, 1985. "Clio and the Economics of QWERTY," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 75(2), pages 332-337, May.
    4. 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.
    5. Akerlof, George A & Yellen, Janet L, 1985. "Can Small Deviations from Rationality Make Significant Differences to Economic Equilibria?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 75(4), pages 708-720, September.
    6. Mowery,David C. & Nelson,Richard R. (ed.), 1999. "Sources of Industrial Leadership," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521645201.
    7. Malerba, Franco, et al, 1999. "'History-Friendly' Models of Industry Evolution: The Computer Industry," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 8(1), pages 3-40, March.
    8. 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.
    9. Metcalfe, J.S. & James, Andrew & Mina, Andrea, 2005. "Emergent innovation systems and the delivery of clinical services: The case of intra-ocular lenses," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(9), pages 1283-1304, November.
    10. Pier P. Saviotti, 1996. "Technological Evolution, Variety and the Economy," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 727.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Albert Faber & Koen Frenken, 2008. "Models in evolutionary economics and environmental policy: Towards an evolutionary environmental economics," Innovation Studies Utrecht (ISU) working paper series 08-15, Utrecht University, Department of Innovation Studies, revised Apr 2008.
    2. 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.
    3. Malerba, Franco, 2007. "Innovation and the dynamics and evolution of industries: Progress and challenges," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 25(4), pages 675-699, August.
    4. 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.
    5. Christian Garavaglia & Franco Malerba & Luigi Orsenigo & Michele Pezzoni, 2013. "Technological Regimes and Demand Structure in the Evolution of the Pharmaceutical Industry," Economic Complexity and Evolution, in: Andreas Pyka & Esben Sloth Andersen (ed.), Long Term Economic Development, edition 127, pages 61-94, Springer.
    6. Malerba, Franco, 2002. "Sectoral systems of innovation and production," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 31(2), pages 247-264, February.
    7. Sun Hi Yoo & DongKyu Won, 2018. "Simulation of Weak Signals of Nanotechnology Innovation in Complex System," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(2), pages 1-14, February.
    8. 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.
    9. Richard R. Nelson & Sidney G. Winter, 2002. "Evolutionary Theorizing in Economics," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 16(2), pages 23-46, Spring.
    10. Paul Windrum & Chris Birchenhall, 2005. "Structural change in the presence of network externalities: a co-evolutionary model of technological successions," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 15(2), pages 123-148, January.
    11. Jürgen Essletzbichler & David L. Rigby, 2010. "Generalized Darwinism and Evolutionary Economic Geography," Chapters, in: Ron Boschma & Ron Martin (ed.), The Handbook of Evolutionary Economic Geography, chapter 2, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    12. Andrea Bonaccorsi & Paola Giuri, 2003. "Increasing Returns and Network Structure in the Evolutionary Dynamics of Industries," Chapters, in: Pier Paolo Saviotti (ed.), Applied Evolutionary Economics, chapter 3, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    13. Ron Martin & Peter Sunley, 2010. "The Place of Path Dependence in an Evolutionary Perspective on the Economic Landscape," Chapters, in: Ron Boschma & Ron Martin (ed.), The Handbook of Evolutionary Economic Geography, chapter 3, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    14. Murat YILDIZOGLU, 2009. "Evolutionary approaches of economic dynamics (In French)," Cahiers du GREThA (2007-2019) 2009-16, Groupe de Recherche en Economie Théorique et Appliquée (GREThA).
    15. Safarzyńska, Karolina & Frenken, Koen & van den Bergh, Jeroen C.J.M., 2012. "Evolutionary theorizing and modeling of sustainability transitions," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(6), pages 1011-1024.
    16. Davide Consoli, 2003. "The evolution of retail banking services in United Kingdom: a retrospective analysis," Industrial Organization 0310002, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    17. Pier Saviotti & Andreas Pyka, 2011. "Generalized barriers to entry and economic development," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 21(1), pages 29-52, February.
    18. Alessandro Caiani, 2017. "Innovation Dynamics and Industry Structure Under Different Technological Spaces," Italian Economic Journal: A Continuation of Rivista Italiana degli Economisti and Giornale degli Economisti, Springer;Società Italiana degli Economisti (Italian Economic Association), vol. 3(3), pages 307-341, November.
    19. Giovanni Dosi & Richard Nelson, 2013. "The Evolution of Technologies: An Assessment of the State-of-the-Art," Eurasian Business Review, Springer;Eurasia Business and Economics Society, vol. 3(1), pages 3-46, June.
    20. Frenken, Koen, 2006. "A fitness landscape approach to technological complexity, modularity, and vertical disintegration," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 17(3), pages 288-305, September.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    O30; L10; L60;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • O30 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - General
    • L10 - Industrial Organization - - Market Structure, Firm Strategy, and Market Performance - - - General
    • L60 - Industrial Organization - - Industry Studies: Manufacturing - - - General

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:spr:joevec:v:17:y:2007:i:4:p:371-399. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.