IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/tefoso/v213y2025ics0040162525000411.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Enhancing foresight models with network science: Measuring innovation feedbacks within the Chain-Linked Model

Author

Listed:
  • Ho, Martin
  • Price, Henry C.W.
  • Evans, Tim S.
  • O’Sullivan, Eoin

Abstract

A granular understanding of innovation dynamics is crucial for forecasting how and when different actors within the innovation system can make valuable contributions. Existing theoretical foundations of the foresight practice are largely qualitative and often oversimplify the innovation process. While foresight practitioners acknowledge the existence of knowledge feedback loops, these feedback loops are rarely quantified systematically in empirical forecasting studies. Innovators and funders tend to choose their dyadic relationships but rarely have visibility over the wider, dynamic innovation network. This study enriches innovation theories for the foresight practice by leveraging multilayer citation networks to explore innovation translation pathways, achieved by integrating data from market entries, clinical trials, patents, publications, funders, and grants over a 70-year period. Our analysis shows shifts in the order, prevalence, and tipping points of translation activities as technologies mature, with granularity not described in previous studies. We also examine the distinct funding patterns of major public and private entities throughout this maturation process, revealing their unique contributions and enriching sociotechnical explanations of innovation processes. This study improves the explainability of technology forecasting through innovation theories by reconstructing micro-technical innovation dynamics from first principles.

Suggested Citation

  • Ho, Martin & Price, Henry C.W. & Evans, Tim S. & O’Sullivan, Eoin, 2025. "Enhancing foresight models with network science: Measuring innovation feedbacks within the Chain-Linked Model," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 213(C).
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:tefoso:v:213:y:2025:i:c:s0040162525000411
    DOI: 10.1016/j.techfore.2025.124010
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0040162525000411
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.techfore.2025.124010?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. Christopher L. Benson & Christopher L. Magee, 2015. "Technology structural implications from the extension of a patent search method," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 102(3), pages 1965-1985, March.
    2. Farmer, J. Doyne & Lafond, François, 2016. "How predictable is technological progress?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(3), pages 647-665.
    3. Park, Hyunkyu & Phaal, Rob & Ho, Jae-Yun & O'Sullivan, Eoin, 2020. "Twenty years of technology and strategic roadmapping research: A school of thought perspective," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 154(C).
    4. Utterback, James M & Abernathy, William J, 1975. "A dynamic model of process and product innovation," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 3(6), pages 639-656, December.
    5. Zhou, Yuan & Dong, Fang & Kong, Dejing & Liu, Yufei, 2019. "Unfolding the convergence process of scientific knowledge for the early identification of emerging technologies," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 144(C), pages 205-220.
    6. Rosenberg, Nathan, 1963. "Technological Change in the Machine Tool Industry, 1840–1910," The Journal of Economic History, Cambridge University Press, vol. 23(4), pages 414-443, December.
    7. Andersen, Allan Dahl & Andersen, Per Dannemand, 2014. "Innovation system foresight," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 88(C), pages 276-286.
    8. Lichtenberg, Frank R., 1986. "Energy prices and induced innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 15(2), pages 67-75, April.
    9. Block, Carolin & Wustmans, Michael & Laibach, Natalie & Bröring, Stefanie, 2021. "Semantic bridging of patents and scientific publications – The case of an emerging sustainability-oriented technology," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 167(C).
    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. Rotolo, Daniele & Hicks, Diana & Martin, Ben R., 2015. "What is an emerging technology?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(10), pages 1827-1843.
    12. William Bonvillian & Richard Atta, 2011. "ARPA-E and DARPA: Applying the DARPA model to energy innovation," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 36(5), pages 469-513, October.
    13. Narin, Francis & Hamilton, Kimberly S. & Olivastro, Dominic, 1997. "The increasing linkage between U.S. technology and public science," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 26(3), pages 317-330, October.
    14. Jennifer L Woolley & Nydia MacGregor, 2022. "Science, technology, and innovation policy timing and nanotechnology entrepreneurship and innovation," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 17(3), pages 1-24, March.
    15. repec:nas:journl:v:115:y:2018:p:2329-2334 is not listed on IDEAS
    16. Banholzer, Nicolas & Behrens, Vanessa & Feuerriegel, Stefan & Heinrich, Sebastian & Rammer, Christian & Schmoch, Ulrich & Seliger, Florian & Wörter, Martin, 2019. "Knowledge spillovers from product and process inventions in patents and their impact on firm performance. End report," ZEW Expertises, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research, number 222367.
    17. Mowery, David & Rosenberg, Nathan, 1993. "The influence of market demand upon innovation: A critical review of some recent empirical studies," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 22(2), pages 107-108, April.
    18. Fleck, James, 1994. "Learning by trying: the implementation of configurational technology," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 23(6), pages 637-652, November.
    19. Bronwyn H. Hall & Nathan Rosenberg (ed.), 2010. "Handbook of the Economics of Innovation," Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, Elsevier, edition 1, volume 1, number 1.
    20. Kleinknecht, Alfred & Verspagen, Bart, 1990. "Demand and innovation: Schmookler re-examined," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 19(4), pages 387-394, August.
    21. Featherston, Charles R. & O'Sullivan, Eoin, 2017. "Enabling technologies, lifecycle transitions, and industrial systems in technology foresight: Insights from advanced materials FTA," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 115(C), pages 261-277.
    22. Furman, Jeffrey L. & Porter, Michael E. & Stern, Scott, 2002. "The determinants of national innovative capacity," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 31(6), pages 899-933, August.
    23. Richard R. Nelson, 1959. "The Simple Economics of Basic Scientific Research," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 67(3), pages 297-297.
    24. Philippe Larrue, 2021. "The design and implementation of mission-oriented innovation policies: A new systemic policy approach to address societal challenges," OECD Science, Technology and Industry Policy Papers 100, OECD Publishing.
    25. Maruccia, Ylenia & Solazzo, Gianluca & Del Vecchio, Pasquale & Passiante, Giuseppina, 2020. "Evidence from Network Analysis application to Innovation Systems and Quintuple Helix," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 161(C).
    26. Scherer, F M, 1982. "Demand-Pull and Technological Invention: Schmookler Revisited," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 30(3), pages 225-237, March.
    27. Nemet, Gregory F., 2009. "Demand-pull, technology-push, and government-led incentives for non-incremental technical change," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(5), pages 700-709, June.
    28. Bonnin Roca, Jaime & O'Sullivan, Eoin, 2020. "Seeking coherence between barriers to manufacturing technology adoption and innovation policy," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 230(C).
    29. Singh, Anuraag & Triulzi, Giorgio & Magee, Christopher L., 2021. "Technological improvement rate predictions for all technologies: Use of patent data and an extended domain description," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(9).
    30. Rosenberg, Nathan, 1969. "The Direction of Technological Change: Inducement Mechanisms and Focusing Devices," Economic Development and Cultural Change, University of Chicago Press, vol. 18(1), pages 1-24, Part I Oc.
    31. Tassey, Gregory, 1991. "The functions of technology infrastructure in a competitive economy," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 20(4), pages 345-361, August.
    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. Park, Inchae & Triulzi, Giorgio & Magee, Christopher L., 2022. "Tracing the emergence of new technology: A comparative analysis of five technological domains," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 184(C).
    2. Dario Guarascio & Mario Pianta & Francesco Bogliacino, 2017. "Export, R&D and New Products: A Model and a Test on European Industries," Economic Complexity and Evolution, in: Andreas Pyka & Uwe Cantner (ed.), Foundations of Economic Change, pages 393-432, Springer.
    3. Huenteler, Joern & Ossenbrink, Jan & Schmidt, Tobias S. & Hoffmann, Volker H., 2016. "How a product’s design hierarchy shapes the evolution of technological knowledge—Evidence from patent-citation networks in wind power," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(6), pages 1195-1217.
    4. Waßenhoven, Anna & Rennings, Michael & Laibach, Natalie & Bröring, Stefanie, 2023. "What constitutes a “Key Enabling Technology” for transition processes: Insights from the bioeconomy's technological landscape," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 197(C).
    5. Nemet, Gregory F., 2009. "Demand-pull, technology-push, and government-led incentives for non-incremental technical change," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(5), pages 700-709, June.
    6. Antonelli, Cristiano & Gehringer, Agnieszka, 2015. "Knowledge externalities and demand pull: The European evidence," Economic Systems, Elsevier, vol. 39(4), pages 608-631.
    7. Antonelli Cristiano & Gehringer Agnieszka, 2013. "Demand pull and technological flows within innovation systems: the intra-European evidence," Department of Economics and Statistics Cognetti de Martiis. Working Papers 201303, University of Turin.
    8. Jin, Wei & Zhang, ZhongXiang, 2014. "Explaining the Slow Pace of Energy Technological Innovation Why Market Conditions Matter?," Energy: Resources and Markets 165758, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei (FEEM).
    9. 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.
    10. Hoppmann, Joern & Wu, Geng & Johnson, Jillian, 2021. "The impact of demand-pull and technology-push policies on firms’ knowledge search," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 170(C).
    11. Andreas Hein & Maximilian Schreieck & Manuel Wiesche & Markus Böhm & Helmut Krcmar, 2019. "The emergence of native multi-sided platforms and their influence on incumbents," Electronic Markets, Springer;IIM University of St. Gallen, vol. 29(4), pages 631-647, December.
    12. Cohen, Wesley M., 2010. "Fifty Years of Empirical Studies of Innovative Activity and Performance," 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 129-213, Elsevier.
    13. Mark Knell & Simone Vannuccini, 2022. "Tools and concepts for understanding disruptive technological change after Schumpeter," Jena Economics Research Papers 2022-005, Friedrich-Schiller-University Jena.
    14. Singh, Anuraag & Triulzi, Giorgio & Magee, Christopher L., 2021. "Technological improvement rate predictions for all technologies: Use of patent data and an extended domain description," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(9).
    15. Kancs, d’Artis & Siliverstovs, Boriss, 2016. "R&D and non-linear productivity growth," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(3), pages 634-646.
    16. Hoppmann, Joern, 2021. "Hand in hand to Nowhereland? How the resource dependence of research institutes influences their co-evolution with industry," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(2).
    17. Becker Wolfgang & Peters Jürgen, 2005. "Innovation Effects of Science-Related Technological Opportunities / Innovationseffekte von technologischen Möglichkeiten aus dem Wissenschaftsbereich: Theoretical Considerations and Empirical Findings," Journal of Economics and Statistics (Jahrbuecher fuer Nationaloekonomie und Statistik), De Gruyter, vol. 225(2), pages 130-150, April.
    18. Ludovic Dibiaggio & Lionel Nesta & Simone Vannuccini, 2024. "European Sovereignty in Artificial Intelligence: A Competence-Based Perspective," Working Papers hal-04841182, HAL.
    19. Cristiano Antonelli & Alessandra Colombelli, 2013. "Knowledge Cumulability and Complementarity in the Knowledge Generation Function," GREDEG Working Papers 2013-08, Groupe de REcherche en Droit, Economie, Gestion (GREDEG CNRS), Université Côte d'Azur, France.
    20. Migliori, Stefania & De Massis, Alfredo & Maturo, Fabrizio & Paolone, Francesco, 2020. "How does family management affect innovation investment propensity? The key role of innovation impulses," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 113(C), pages 243-256.

    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:213:y:2025:i:c:s0040162525000411. 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.