IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/joevec/v31y2021i2d10.1007_s00191-020-00697-1.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Dominant design and evolution of technological trajectories: The case of tank technology, 1915–1998

Author

Listed:
  • Jinkuk Kim

    (Republic of Korea Army
    Seoul National University)

  • Jungsub Yoon

    (Seoul National University
    Science and Technology Policy Institute)

  • Jeong-Dong Lee

    (Seoul National University)

Abstract

This study examines the evolution of product-based technological trajectories by linking technology and socioeconomic factors. Products evolve to adapt to market conditions in a manner similar to biological evolution, and form a constant trajectory under the influence of the current technological paradigm. This study analyzes the changes in technological trajectories after the emergence of a dominant design in the core weapon of the army—armored tanks. Based on a case study of the evolution of tanks between 1915 and 1998 and the application of principal component analysis (PCA, to transform technological characteristics of tanks into product performance) and K-means clustering (to classify the types of tanks based on the PCA), we find that tanks have evolved into a common pattern of product evolution and the main battle tank concept plays a role as the dominant design. In addition, military tactical doctrines and capability requirements are used to explain the socioeconomic factors at the core of the technological paradigm behind tank development. We argue that the interaction between science, technology, and the social element is responsible for product evolution. In the case of tanks, moreover, we show that the product evolution process follows continuous changes in the technological trajectory resulting from technological advances. This study also derives policy implications for weapons system acquisition.

Suggested Citation

  • Jinkuk Kim & Jungsub Yoon & Jeong-Dong Lee, 2021. "Dominant design and evolution of technological trajectories: The case of tank technology, 1915–1998," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 31(2), pages 661-676, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:joevec:v:31:y:2021:i:2:d:10.1007_s00191-020-00697-1
    DOI: 10.1007/s00191-020-00697-1
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s00191-020-00697-1
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s00191-020-00697-1?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. Peine, Alexander, 2008. "Technological paradigms and complex technical systems--The case of Smart Homes," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(3), pages 508-529, April.
    2. Karvonen, Matti & Kässi, Tuomo, 2013. "Patent citations as a tool for analysing the early stages of convergence," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 80(6), pages 1094-1107.
    3. Bonaccorsi, Andrea & Giuri, Paola, 2000. "When shakeout doesn't occur: The evolution of the turboprop engine industry," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 29(7-8), pages 847-870, August.
    4. 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.
    5. Christensen, Clayton, 1997. "Patterns in the evolution of product competition," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 15(2), pages 117-127, April.
    6. 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.
    7. Coccia, Mario & Wang, Lili, 2015. "Path-breaking directions of nanotechnology-based chemotherapy and molecular cancer therapy," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 94(C), pages 155-169.
    8. G.M. Peter Swann, 2001. "special issue: The demand for distinction and the evolution of the prestige car," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 11(1), pages 59-75.
    9. 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.
    10. Geels, Frank W., 2002. "Technological transitions as evolutionary reconfiguration processes: a multi-level perspective and a case-study," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 31(8-9), pages 1257-1274, December.
    11. Loet Leydesdorff & Floortje Alkemade & Gaston Heimeriks & Rinke Hoekstra, 2015. "Patents as instruments for exploring innovation dynamics: geographic and technological perspectives on “photovoltaic cells”," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 102(1), pages 629-651, January.
    12. Cheng, Ching-Hsue & Lin, Yin, 2002. "Evaluating the best main battle tank using fuzzy decision theory with linguistic criteria evaluation," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 142(1), pages 174-186, October.
    13. Utterback, James M. & Suarez, Fernando F., 1993. "Innovation, competition, and industry structure," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 22(1), pages 1-21, February.
    14. Verhoeven, Dennis & Bakker, Jurriën & Veugelers, Reinhilde, 2016. "Measuring technological novelty with patent-based indicators," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(3), pages 707-723.
    15. Bonen, Z., 1981. "Evolutionary behavior of complex sociotechnical systems," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 10(1), pages 26-44, January.
    16. Corredoira, Rafael A. & Banerjee, Preeta M., 2015. "Measuring patent's influence on technological evolution: A study of knowledge spanning and subsequent inventive activity," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(2), pages 508-521.
    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. Lee, Won Sang & Han, Eun Jin & Sohn, So Young, 2015. "Predicting the pattern of technology convergence using big-data technology on large-scale triadic patents," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 100(C), pages 317-329.
    2. Patrick Wolf & Tobias Buchmann, 2021. "Analyzing development patterns in research networks and technology," Review of Evolutionary Political Economy, Springer, vol. 2(1), pages 55-81, April.
    3. Kathryn Rudie Harrigan & Maria Chiara Guardo & Bo Cowgill, 2017. "Multiplicative-innovation synergies: tests in technological acquisitions," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 42(5), pages 1212-1233, October.
    4. Dejing Kong & Jianzhong Yang & Lingfeng Li, 2020. "Early identification of technological convergence in numerical control machine tool: a deep learning approach," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 125(3), pages 1983-2009, December.
    5. Alessandri, Enrico, 2023. "Identifying technological trajectories in the mining sector using patent citation networks," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 80(C).
    6. Davide Castellani & Giovanni Marin & Sandro Montresor & Antonello Zanfei, 2020. "Foreign Direct Investments and Regional Specialization in Environmental Technologies," SEEDS Working Papers 0620, SEEDS, Sustainability Environmental Economics and Dynamics Studies, revised Apr 2020.
    7. 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.
    8. Jonathan H. Ashtor, 2019. "Investigating Cohort Similarity as an Ex Ante Alternative to Patent Forward Citations," Journal of Empirical Legal Studies, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 16(4), pages 848-880, December.
    9. Yoon, Jungsub & Lee, Jeong-Dong & Hwang, Seogwon, 2022. "Episodic change: A new approach to identifying industrial transition," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 115(C).
    10. 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).
    11. Mariani, Manuel Sebastian & Medo, Matúš & Lafond, François, 2019. "Early identification of important patents: Design and validation of citation network metrics," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 146(C), pages 644-654.
    12. Deyu Li & Floor Alkemade & Koen Frenken & Gaston Heimeriks, 2023. "Catching up in clean energy technologies: a patent analysis," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 48(2), pages 693-715, April.
    13. Subtil Lacerda, Juliana & van den Bergh, Jeroen C.J.M., 2020. "Effectiveness of an ‘open innovation’ approach in renewable energy: Empirical evidence from a survey on solar and wind power," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 118(C).
    14. 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.
    15. Martin Ho & Henry CW Price & Tim S Evans & Eoin O'Sullivan, 2023. "Order in Innovation," Papers 2302.13076, arXiv.org.
    16. Bhatt, Priyanka C. & Lai, Kuei-Kuei & Drave, Vinayak A. & Lu, Tzu-Chuen & Kumar, Vimal, 2023. "Patent analysis based technology innovation assessment with the lens of disruptive innovation theory: A case of blockchain technological trajectories," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 196(C).
    17. Baum, Christopher F. & Lööf, Hans & Stephan, Andreas & Viklund-Ros, Ingrid, 2022. "Innovation by start-up firms: The role of the board of directors for knowledge spillovers," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(1).
    18. Yuan Zhou & Meijuan Pan & Frauke Urban, 2018. "Comparing the International Knowledge Flow of China’s Wind and Solar Photovoltaic (PV) Industries: Patent Analysis and Implications for Sustainable Development," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(6), pages 1-34, June.
    19. Kathryn Rudie Harrigan & Maria Chiara Guardo & Elona Marku, 2018. "Patent value and the Tobin’s q ratio in media services," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 43(1), pages 1-19, February.
    20. Giovanni Dosi & Xiaodan Yu, 2018. "Capabilities Accumulation and Development: What History Tells the Theory," LEM Papers Series 2018/27, Laboratory of Economics and Management (LEM), Sant'Anna School of Advanced Studies, Pisa, Italy.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Technological trajectory; Product evolution; Principal component analysis; Tank technology;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • O31 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Innovation and Invention: Processes and Incentives
    • O33 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Technological Change: Choices and Consequences; Diffusion Processes

    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:31:y:2021:i:2:d:10.1007_s00191-020-00697-1. 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.