IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/unm/umamer/1999010.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Unlocking a lock-in: towards a model of technological succession

Author

Listed:
  • Windrum, Paul

    (MERIT)

Abstract

This paper has three objectives. First, it seeks to set an agenda in which technologicalsuccessions can be meaningfully discussed. Second, it aims to establish the necessaryconditions under which a technological succession may occur. Third, in establishing thisset of conditions, the paper identifies some useful analytical tools which could beemployed in a formal model of technological transitions.Opening up the research agenda on transition phases from established to newtechnologies is a key issue in discussions of technological evolution and its impacts onsociety and the environment. Given the increasing returns to adoption enjoyed by anestablished technology, it is necessary to investigate the conditions under which it ispossible for technological succession to occur. In so doing, the paper takes on board theimportant insights into increasing returns to adoption and path dependency made by thelock-in literature but places these within a new, more general, historical setting.A number of steps need to be taken when preparing the ground for a formal model oftechnological succession. First, one must have a clear definition of the elementsnecessary to operationalise the concept of succession in the social domain. Second, thepaper offers an interpretation of previous work on socio-technology paradigms, wherebythese are viewed as a set of coupled selection mechanisms that shape the rate anddirection of technological innovation. Third, a socio-technical matrix approach is used inorder to appreciate the way in which agents – with heterogeneous preferences – comparerival technologies and make their selections. Finally there is a discussion of factors thatmay produce inertia to technological switching. With these elements in place, the paperargues, we can begin to explain how technological learning generates long period ofstasis punctuated by sudden bursts of rapid technological change.

Suggested Citation

  • Windrum, Paul, 1999. "Unlocking a lock-in: towards a model of technological succession," Research Memorandum 010, Maastricht University, Maastricht Economic Research Institute on Innovation and Technology (MERIT).
  • Handle: RePEc:unm:umamer:1999010
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.merit.unu.edu/publications/rmpdf/1999/rm1999-010.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Joseph Farrell & Garth Saloner, 1985. "Standardization, Compatibility, and Innovation," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 16(1), pages 70-83, Spring.
    2. 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.
    3. Utterback, James M. & Suarez, Fernando F., 1993. "Innovation, competition, and industry structure," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 22(1), pages 1-21, February.
    4. Winter, Sidney G., 1984. "Schumpeterian competition in alternative technological regimes," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 5(3-4), pages 287-320.
    5. 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.
    6. Katz, Michael L & Shapiro, Carl, 1986. "Technology Adoption in the Presence of Network Externalities," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 94(4), pages 822-841, August.
    7. S. Chan Choi & Wayne S. Desarbo & Patrick T. Harker, 1990. "Product Positioning Under Price Competition," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 36(2), pages 175-199, February.
    8. Swann, Peter, 1990. "Product competition and the dimensions of product space," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 8(2), pages 281-295, June.
    9. Utterback, James M & Abernathy, William J, 1975. "A dynamic model of process and product innovation," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 3(6), pages 639-656, December.
    10. David, Paul A, 1985. "Clio and the Economics of QWERTY," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 75(2), pages 332-337, May.
    11. Shy, Oz, 1996. "Technology revolutions in the presence of network externalities," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 14(6), pages 785-800, October.
    12. A. Bassanini & G. Dosi, 1998. "Competing Technologies, International Diffusion and the Rate of Convergence to a Stable Market Structure," Working Papers ir98012, International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis.
    13. Abhijit V. Banerjee, 1992. "A Simple Model of Herd Behavior," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 107(3), pages 797-817.
    14. 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.
    15. G. C. Archibald & B. Curtis Eaton, 1989. "Two Applications of Characteristics Theory," Palgrave Macmillan Books, in: George R. Feiwel (ed.), The Economics of Imperfect Competition and Employment, chapter 12, pages 409-436, Palgrave Macmillan.
    16. Islas, Jorge, 1997. "Getting round the lock-in in electricity generating systems: the example of the gas turbine," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 26(1), pages 49-66, March.
    17. Katz, Michael L & Shapiro, Carl, 1985. "Network Externalities, Competition, and Compatibility," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 75(3), pages 424-440, June.
    18. Brian Arthur, W. & Ermoliev, Yu. M. & Kaniovski, Yu. M., 1987. "Path-dependent processes and the emergence of macro-structure," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 30(3), pages 294-303, June.
    19. Abernathy, William J. & Clark, Kim B., 1985. "Innovation: Mapping the winds of creative destruction," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 14(1), pages 3-22, February.
    20. Foray, Dominique & Grubler, Arnulf, 1990. "Morphological analysis, diffusion and lockout of technologies: Ferrous casting in France and the FRG," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 19(6), pages 535-550, December.
    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. Marechal, Kevin, 2007. "The economics of climate change and the change of climate in economics," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(10), pages 5181-5194, October.
    2. Lepratte, Leandro, 2011. "Sistemas sociotécnicos, innovación y desarrollo [Sociotechnical systems, innovation and development]," MPRA Paper 33559, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    3. Kevin Marechal & Nathalie Lazaric, 2010. "Overcoming inertia: insights from evolutionary economics into improved energy and climate policies," Climate Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 10(1), pages 103-119, 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. Windrum, Paul & Birchenhall, Chris, 2002. "Technological diffusion, welfare and growth: technological succession in the presence of network externalities," Research Memorandum 038, Maastricht University, Maastricht Economic Research Institute on Innovation and Technology (MERIT).
    2. Cecere, Grazia & Corrocher, Nicoletta & Battaglia, Riccardo David, 2015. "Innovation and competition in the smartphone industry: Is there a dominant design?," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(3), pages 162-175.
    3. Andreas Pyka & Paul Windrum, 2003. "The self-organisation of strategic alliances," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 12(3), pages 245-268.
    4. Narayanan, V.K. & Chen, Tianxu, 2012. "Research on technology standards: Accomplishment and challenges," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(8), pages 1375-1406.
    5. 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.
    6. A. Bassanini & G. Dosi, 1998. "Competing Technologies, International Diffusion and the Rate of Convergence to a Stable Market Structure," Working Papers ir98012, International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis.
    7. Oz Shy, 2011. "A Short Survey of Network Economics," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 38(2), pages 119-149, March.
    8. Liangjie Zhao & Wenqi Duan, 2014. "Simulating the Evolution of Market Shares: The Effects of Customer Learning and Local Network Externalities," Computational Economics, Springer;Society for Computational Economics, vol. 43(1), pages 53-70, January.
    9. Papachristos, George, 2017. "Diversity in technology competition: The link between platforms and sociotechnical transitions," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 291-306.
    10. Grazia Cecere & Nicoletta Corrocher & Cédric Gossart & Muge Ozman, 2014. "Lock-in and path dependence: an evolutionary approach to eco-innovations," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 24(5), pages 1037-1065, November.
    11. Marechal, Kevin, 2007. "The economics of climate change and the change of climate in economics," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(10), pages 5181-5194, October.
    12. 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.
    13. Heli Koski & Tobias Kretschmer, 2004. "Survey on Competing in Network Industries: Firm Strategies, Market Outcomes, and Policy Implications," Journal of Industry, Competition and Trade, Springer, vol. 4(1), pages 5-31, March.
    14. Witt, Ulrich, 1997. ""Lock-in" vs. "critical masses" -- Industrial change under network externalities," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 15(6), pages 753-773, October.
    15. Kornish, Laura J., 2006. "Technology choice and timing with positive network effects," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 173(1), pages 268-282, August.
    16. Sillanpää, Antti & Laamanen, Tomi, 2009. "Positive and negative feedback effects in competition for dominance of network business systems," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(5), pages 871-884, June.
    17. Suarez, Fernando F., 2004. "Battles for technological dominance: an integrative framework," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(2), pages 271-286, March.
    18. Jullien, Bruno, 2001. "Competing with Network Externalities and Price Discrimination," CEPR Discussion Papers 2883, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    19. Vialle, Pierre & Song, Junjie & Zhang, Jian, 2012. "Competing with dominant global standards in a catching-up context. The case of mobile standards in China," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(10), pages 832-846.
    20. den Hartigh, E. & Langerak, F. & Commandeur, H.R., 2002. "The Effects of Self-Reinforcing Mechanisms on Firm Performance," ERIM Report Series Research in Management ERS-2002-46-MKT, Erasmus Research Institute of Management (ERIM), ERIM is the joint research institute of the Rotterdam School of Management, Erasmus University and the Erasmus School of Economics (ESE) at Erasmus University Rotterdam.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    economics of technology ;

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:unm:umamer:1999010. 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: Leonne Portz (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/meritnl.html .

    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.