IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/teinso/v41y2015icp76-90.html

Challenges for technology diffusion policy to achieve socio-economic goals

Author

Listed:
  • Wydra, Sven

Abstract

The aim of this contribution is to analyze the challenges for technology diffusion policies to achieve expected socio-economic goals and to deduce conclusions for an adequate policy design. Based on hypotheses from theoretical contributions, we review two rather distinct technology fields. One is biobased products, the other health technologies with bioethanol and magnetic resonance imaging respectively as case studies in order to derive rather general insights regarding those policies. The case studies highlight the difficulties in achieving the aimed societal goals by promoting technology diffusion. The dominant innovation design (e.g. techniques or resources used) which diffuses or its application fields (e.g. indication, patient characteristics) differ from those assumed in impact assessments and side-effects which occur in other markets. The direct linkage of policy measures to societal criteria may avoid some of those undesired developments but may have side effects of their own, such as trade distortions or shifting the environmental burden to other activities. However, there is considerable scope for improvement in policy design compared to the status-quo. Overall, a more balanced policy mix regarding various socio-economic goals is vital and unintended side effects have to be considered more in decision making.

Suggested Citation

  • Wydra, Sven, 2015. "Challenges for technology diffusion policy to achieve socio-economic goals," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 41(C), pages 76-90.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:teinso:v:41:y:2015:i:c:p:76-90
    DOI: 10.1016/j.techsoc.2014.12.002
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160791X14000724
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.techsoc.2014.12.002?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

    for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Hertel, Thomas W. & Tyner, Wallace E. & Birur, Dileep K., 2008. "Biofuels for all? Understanding the Global Impacts of Multinational Mandates," 2008 Annual Meeting, July 27-29, 2008, Orlando, Florida 6526, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    2. Productivity Commission, 2005. "Impacts of Advances in Medical Technology in Australia," Research Reports, Productivity Commission, Government of Australia, number 17, January.
    3. Anna J. Wieczorek & Marko P. Hekkert, 2012. "Corrigendum to 'Systemic instruments for systemic innovation problems: A framework for policy makers and innovation scholars'," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 39(6), pages 842-842, December.
    4. Scarlat, Nicolae & Dallemand, Jean-François, 2011. "Recent developments of biofuels/bioenergy sustainability certification: A global overview," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(3), pages 1630-1646, March.
    5. Searchinger, Timothy & Heimlich, Ralph & Houghton, R. A. & Dong, Fengxia & Elobeid, Amani & Fabiosa, Jacinto F. & Tokgoz, Simla & Hayes, Dermot J. & Yu, Hun-Hsiang, 2008. "Use of U.S. Croplands for Biofuels Increases Greenhouse Gases Through Emissions from Land-Use Change," Staff General Research Papers Archive 12881, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    6. Amitabh Chandra & Jonathan Skinner, 2012. "Technology Growth and Expenditure Growth in Health Care," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 50(3), pages 645-680, September.
    7. Timilsina, Govinda R. & Shrestha, Ashish, 2010. "Biofuels : markets, targets and impacts," Policy Research Working Paper Series 5364, The World Bank.
    8. Aghion, Philippe & David, Paul A. & Foray, Dominique, 2009. "Science, technology and innovation for economic growth: Linking policy research and practice in 'STIG Systems'," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(4), pages 681-693, May.
    9. Lawrence H. Goulder & Ian W. H. Parry, 2008. "Instrument Choice in Environmental Policy," Review of Environmental Economics and Policy, Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 2(2), pages 152-174, Summer.
    10. Anna J. Wieczorek & Marko P. Hekkert, 2012. "Systemic instruments for systemic innovation problems: A framework for policy makers and innovation scholars," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 39(1), pages 74-87, February.
    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. Laibach, Natalie & Börner, Jan & Bröring, Stefanie, 2019. "Exploring the future of the bioeconomy: An expert-based scoping study examining key enabling technology fields with potential to foster the transition toward a bio-based economy," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 58(C).
    2. Mariya Dobryakova & Zoya Kotelnikova, 2015. "Social Embeddedness of Technology: Prospective Research Areas," Foresight and STI Governance, National Research University Higher School of Economics, vol. 9(1), pages 6-19.
    3. Harm-Jan Steenhuis & Xin Fang & Tolga Ulusemre, 2020. "Global Diffusion of Innovation during the Fourth Industrial Revolution: The Case of Additive Manufacturing or 3D Printing," International Journal of Innovation and Technology Management (IJITM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 17(01), pages 1-34, February.
    4. Michael P. Schlaile & Sophie Urmetzer & Vincent Blok & Allan Dahl Andersen & Job Timmermans & Matthias Mueller & Jan Fagerberg & Andreas Pyka, 2017. "Innovation Systems for Transformations towards Sustainability? Taking the Normative Dimension Seriously," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(12), pages 1-20, December.
    5. van der Duin, Patrick & Trott, Paul & Ortt, Roland, 2024. "Failed technology management: Introducing ‘future technology myopia’ and how to address it," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 198(C).
    6. Lukovics, Miklós & Flipse, Steven M. & Udvari, Beáta & Fisher, Erik, 2017. "Responsible research and innovation in contrasting innovation environments: Socio-Technical Integration Research in Hungary and the Netherlands," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 172-182.
    7. Amare, Dagninet & Darr, Dietrich, 2023. "Can a sequential analysis provide a more robust understanding of farmers' adoption decisions? An example from an agroforestry adoption study in Ethiopia," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 153(C).
    8. Lindner, Ralf & Daimer, Stephanie & Beckert, Bernd & Heyen, Nils & Koehler, Jonathan & Teufel, Benjamin & Warnke, Philine & Wydra, Sven, 2016. "Addressing directionality: Orientation failure and the systems of innovation heuristic. Towards reflexive governance," Discussion Papers "Innovation Systems and Policy Analysis" 52, Fraunhofer Institute for Systems and Innovation Research (ISI).

    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. Janda, Karel & Kristoufek, Ladislav & Zilberman, David, 2011. "Biofuels: Review of Policies and Impacts," Department of Agricultural & Resource Economics, UC Berkeley, Working Paper Series qt5v1112qr, Department of Agricultural & Resource Economics, UC Berkeley.
    2. Krammer, Sorin M.S., 2017. "Science, technology, and innovation for economic competitiveness: The role of smart specialization in less-developed countries," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 123(C), pages 95-107.
    3. Krammer, Sorin M.S., 2015. "Science, technology and innovation for economic competitiveness: the role of smart specialization in less-developed countries," MPRA Paper 80203, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    4. Kern, Florian & Rogge, Karoline S. & Howlett, Michael, 2019. "Policy mixes for sustainability transitions: New approaches and insights through bridging innovation and policy studies," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(10).
    5. Vermunt, D.A. & Wojtynia, N. & Hekkert, M.P. & Van Dijk, J. & Verburg, R. & Verweij, P.A. & Wassen, M. & Runhaar, H., 2022. "Five mechanisms blocking the transition towards ‘nature-inclusive’ agriculture: A systemic analysis of Dutch dairy farming," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 195(C).
    6. Jonas Heiberg & Bernhard Truffer, 2021. "The emergence of a global innovation system – a case study from the water sector," GEIST - Geography of Innovation and Sustainability Transitions 2021(09), GEIST Working Paper Series.
    7. Alje van Dam & Koen Frenken, 2020. "Vertical vs. Horizontal Policy in a Capabilities Model of Economic Development," Papers in Evolutionary Economic Geography (PEEG) 2037, Utrecht University, Department of Human Geography and Spatial Planning, Group Economic Geography, revised Aug 2020.
    8. Kim, Yeong Jae & Wilson, Charlie, 2019. "Analysing energy innovation portfolios from a systemic perspective," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 134(C).
    9. Cholez, Celia & Pauly, Olivier & Mahdad, Maral & Mehrabi, Sepide & Giagnocavo, Cynthia & Bijman, Jos, 2023. "Heterogeneity of inter-organizational collaborations in agrifood chain sustainability-oriented innovations," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 212(C).
    10. Burghard, Uta & Dütschke, Elisabeth & Caldes, Natalia & Oltra, Christian, 2022. "Cross-border concentrated solar power projects - opportunity or dead end? A study into actor views in Europe," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 163(C).
    11. Verburg, René W. & Verberne, Emma & Negro, Simona O., 2022. "Accelerating the transition towards sustainable agriculture: The case of organic dairy farming in the Netherlands," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 198(C).
    12. Rohe, Sebastian & Oltmer, Marie & Wolter, Hendrik & Gmeiner, Nina & Tschersich , Julia, 2022. "Forever Niche: Why do organic vegetable varieties not diffuse?," Papers in Innovation Studies 2022/8, Lund University, CIRCLE - Centre for Innovation Research.
    13. María Blanco & Marcel Adenäuer & Shailesh Shrestha & Arno Becker, 2012. "Methodology to assess EU Biofuel Policies: The CAPRI Approach," JRC Research Reports JRC80037, Joint Research Centre.
    14. Bellink, Miriam & Verburg, René W., 2023. "A system lock-in blocks the uptake of mixed sustainable Eucalyptus plantations in Brazil," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 134(C).
    15. Chidambaran G. Iyer, 2025. "Diffusion of Digital Payments in India: A Tale of Two Technologies," Journal of Entrepreneurship and Innovation in Emerging Economies, Entrepreneurship Development Institute of India, vol. 11(2), pages 309-324, July.
    16. Danish Ahmad Mir & Christopher N.H. Doll & Robert Lindner & Muhammad Tabish Parray, 2020. "Explaining the Diffusion of Energy-Efficient Lighting in India: A Technology Innovation Systems Approach," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(21), pages 1-16, November.
    17. Iyabo Adeola Olanrele & Adedoyin I. Lawal & Ezekiel Oseni & Ahmed Oluwatobi Adekunle & Bukola, B. Lawal-Adedoyin & Crystal O. Elleke & Racheal Ojeka-John & Henry Nweke-Love, 2020. "Accessing the Impacts of Contemporary Development in Biofuel on Agriculture, Energy and Domestic Economy: Evidence from Nigeria," International Journal of Energy Economics and Policy, Econjournals, vol. 10(5), pages 469-478.
    18. Sven Wydra, 2019. "Value Chains for Industrial Biotechnology in the Bioeconomy-Innovation System Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(8), pages 1-16, April.
    19. Fieldsend, Andrew F. & Varga, Eszter & Biró, Szabolcs & Von Münchhausen, Susanne & Häring, Anna Maria, 2022. "Multi-actor co-innovation partnerships in agriculture, forestry and related sectors in Europe: Contrasting approaches to implementation," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 202(C).
    20. Kivimaa, Paula & Boon, Wouter & Hyysalo, Sampsa & Klerkx, Laurens, 2019. "Towards a typology of intermediaries in sustainability transitions: A systematic review and a research agenda," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(4), pages 1062-1075.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    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:eee:teinso:v:41:y:2015:i:c:p:76-90. 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: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/technology-in-society .

    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.