IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/enepol/v38y2010i11p7358-7369.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Public R&D and commercialization of energy-efficient technology: A case study of Japanese projects

Author

Listed:
  • Kimura, Osamu

Abstract

Are public R&D programs really effective in developing innovative technologies? How many technologies developed in these programs have been successfully commercialized? What are the key factors for successful commercialization and diffusion in the market? This paper tries to answer these questions by examining the Japanese experience of public R&D in demand-side energy efficiency, focusing on two major projects conducted in the 1980s and 1990s. It is found that of the 34 technologies developed in the two projects, only seven have been commercialized so far, four of those seven have only a very limited number of installations, and only one has a growing market. The results show that, while public R&D investments have a high risk of failure, they can bring new technologies to the market after a certain lead time. In addition, several factors resulting in the success or failure of commercialization/diffusion are identified, such as long-term R&D support by the government, a marketing strategy to respond to and influence market demand, and combination of R&D and deployment policy.

Suggested Citation

  • Kimura, Osamu, 2010. "Public R&D and commercialization of energy-efficient technology: A case study of Japanese projects," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(11), pages 7358-7369, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:enepol:v:38:y:2010:i:11:p:7358-7369
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301-4215(10)00626-9
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    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. Salter, Ammon J. & Martin, Ben R., 2001. "The economic benefits of publicly funded basic research: a critical review," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 30(3), pages 509-532, March.
    2. Sperling, Daniel, 2001. "Public-private technology R&D partnerships: lessons from US partnership for a new generation of vehicles," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 8(4), pages 247-256, October.
    3. Margolis, Robert M. & Kammen, Daniel M., 1999. "Evidence of under-investment in energy R&D in the United States and the impact of Federal policy," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 27(10), pages 575-584, October.
    4. Sperling, Dan, 2001. "Public-private technology R&D partnerships: lessons from US partnership for a new generation of vehicles," University of California Transportation Center, Working Papers qt2q59d0bz, University of California Transportation Center.
    5. K. J. Arrow, 1971. "The Economic Implications of Learning by Doing," Palgrave Macmillan Books, in: F. H. Hahn (ed.), Readings in the Theory of Growth, chapter 11, pages 131-149, Palgrave Macmillan.
    6. Jaffe, Adam B. & Newell, Richard G. & Stavins, Robert N., 2005. "A tale of two market failures: Technology and environmental policy," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 54(2-3), pages 164-174, August.
    7. von Hippel, Eric & Tyre, Marcie J., 1995. "How learning by doing is done: problem identification in novel process equipment," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 24(1), pages 1-12, January.
    8. Kamp, Linda M. & Smits, Ruud E. H. M. & Andriesse, Cornelis D., 2004. "Notions on learning applied to wind turbine development in the Netherlands and Denmark," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(14), pages 1625-1637, September.
    9. Sagar, Ambuj D. & van der Zwaan, Bob, 2006. "Technological innovation in the energy sector: R&D, deployment, and learning-by-doing," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(17), pages 2601-2608, November.
    10. Sperling, Daniel, 2001. "Public-Private Technology R&D Partnerships: Lessons from US Partnership for a New Generation of Vehicles," Institute of Transportation Studies, Working Paper Series qt2218n7mv, Institute of Transportation Studies, UC Davis.
    11. Egmond, C. & R. Jonkers & Kok, G., 2006. "Target group segmentation makes sense: If one sheep leaps over the ditch, all the rest will follow," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(17), pages 3115-3123, November.
    12. Geller, Howard & Harrington, Philip & Rosenfeld, Arthur H. & Tanishima, Satoshi & Unander, Fridtjof, 2006. "Polices for increasing energy efficiency: Thirty years of experience in OECD countries," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(5), pages 556-573, March.
    13. Grubler, Arnulf & Nakicenovic, Nebojsa & Victor, David G., 1999. "Dynamics of energy technologies and global change," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 27(5), pages 247-280, May.
    14. Geller, Howard & McGaraghan, Scott, 1998. "Successful government-industry partnership: the US Department of Energy's role in advancing energy-efficient technologies," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 26(3), pages 167-177, February.
    15. Scherer, F. M. & Harhoff, Dietmar, 2000. "Technology policy for a world of skew-distributed outcomes," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 29(4-5), pages 559-566, April.
    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. Mijung Jung & Yi-beck Lee & Heesang Lee, 2015. "Classifying and prioritizing the success and failure factors of technology commercialization of public R&D in South Korea: using classification tree analysis," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 40(5), pages 877-898, October.
    2. Polzin, Friedemann, 2017. "Mobilizing private finance for low-carbon innovation – A systematic review of barriers and solutions," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 525-535.
    3. Zahra Sorori Eshliki & Mojtaba Fallahnejad & Mehrdad Zolfi & Saber Khalili Esbouei, 2015. "Application of the Fuzzy Logic in Explanation of Effective Factors on Commercialization of Products (Empirical Evidence: Knowledge-Based Business of Incubators Centers of Iran North Region)," International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, Human Resource Management Academic Research Society, International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, vol. 5(5), pages 115-126, May.
    4. Marco Amendola & Francesco Lamperti & Andrea Roventini & Alessandro Sapio, 2023. "Energy efficiency policies in an agent-based macroeconomic model," LEM Papers Series 2023/20, Laboratory of Economics and Management (LEM), Sant'Anna School of Advanced Studies, Pisa, Italy.
    5. Proskuryakova, L. & Kovalev, A., 2015. "Measuring energy efficiency: Is energy intensity a good evidence base?," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 138(C), pages 450-459.

    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. Upstill, Garrett & Hall, Peter, 2018. "Estimating the learning rate of a technology with multiple variants: The case of carbon storage," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 121(C), pages 498-505.
    2. Jin, Wei & Zhang, ZhongXiang, "undated". "Product Homogeneity, Knowledge Spillovers, and Innovation: Why Energy Sector is Perplexed by a Slow Pace of Technological Progress," Working Papers 249504, Australian National University, Centre for Climate Economics & Policy.
    3. Gianluca ORSATTI, 2019. "Public R&D and green knowledge diffusion:\r\nEvidence from patent citation data," Cahiers du GREThA (2007-2019) 2019-17, Groupe de Recherche en Economie Théorique et Appliquée (GREThA).
    4. Wei Jin & ZhongXiang Zhang, 2017. "The tragedy of product homogeneity and knowledge non-spillovers: explaining the slow pace of energy technological progress," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 255(1), pages 639-661, August.
    5. Bossink, Bart, 2020. "Learning strategies in sustainable energy demonstration projects: What organizations learn from sustainable energy demonstrations," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 131(C).
    6. Lund, Henrik & Clark II, Woodrow W., 2008. "Sustainable energy and transportation systems introduction and overview," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 16(2), pages 59-62, June.
    7. Vasileios Zikos, 2010. "R&D Collaboration Networks in Mixed Oligopoly," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 77(1), pages 189-212, July.
    8. Adrien Hervouet & Michel Trommetter, 2020. "Public-private R&D partnerships: A solution to increase knowledge sharing in R&D cooperation," Working Papers hal-02906270, HAL.
    9. Taylor, Margaret, 2008. "Beyond technology-push and demand-pull: Lessons from California's solar policy," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 30(6), pages 2829-2854, November.
    10. Elia, A. & Taylor, M. & Ó Gallachóir, B. & Rogan, F., 2020. "Wind turbine cost reduction: A detailed bottom-up analysis of innovation drivers," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 147(C).
    11. Stokes, Leah C., 2013. "The politics of renewable energy policies: The case of feed-in tariffs in Ontario, Canada," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 56(C), pages 490-500.
    12. Mazzucato, Mariana & Semieniuk, Gregor, 2018. "Financing renewable energy: Who is financing what and why it matters," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 127(C), pages 8-22.
    13. De Cian, Enrica & Buhl, Johannes & Carrara, Samuel & Michela Bevione, Michela & Monetti, Silvia & Berg, Holger, 2016. "Knowledge Creation between Integrated Assessment Models and Initiative-Based Learning - An Interdisciplinary Approach," MITP: Mitigation, Innovation and Transformation Pathways 249784, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei (FEEM).
    14. Kyunam Kim & Eunnyeong Heo & Yeonbae Kim, 2017. "Dynamic Policy Impacts on a Technological-Change System of Renewable Energy: An Empirical Analysis," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 66(2), pages 205-236, February.
    15. Tian Tang & David Popp, 2014. "The Learning Process and Technological Change in Wind Power: Evidence from China's CDM Wind Projects," NBER Working Papers 19921, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    16. Tian Tang & David Popp, 2014. "The Learning Process and Technological Change in Wind Power: Evidence from China's CDM Wind Projects," CESifo Working Paper Series 4705, CESifo.
    17. Schoots, K. & Kramer, G.J. & van der Zwaan, B.C.C., 2010. "Technology learning for fuel cells: An assessment of past and potential cost reductions," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(6), pages 2887-2897, June.
    18. Wei Jin & ZhongXiang Zhang, 2014. "Explaining the Slow Pace of Energy Technological Innovation: Why Market Conditions Matter," CCEP Working Papers 1401, Centre for Climate & Energy Policy, Crawford School of Public Policy, The Australian National University.
    19. Lehmann, Paul & Gawel, Erik, 2013. "Why should support schemes for renewable electricity complement the EU emissions trading scheme?," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 597-607.
    20. Hochman, Gal & Zilberman, David, 2021. "Optimal environmental taxation in response to an environmentally-unfriendly political challenger," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 106(C).

    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:enepol:v:38:y:2010:i:11:p:7358-7369. 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/enpol .

    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.