IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v12y2019i1p313-d303581.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Adopting an Actor Analysis Framework to a Complex Technology Innovation Project: A Case Study of an Electric Road System

Author

Listed:
  • Qiuchen Wang

    (School of Engineering Sciences in Chemistry, Biotechnology and Health, KTH Royal Institute of Technology, 114 28 Stockholm, Sweden)

  • Jannicke Baalsrud Hauge

    (School of Industrial Technology and Technology and Management, KTH Royal Institute of Technology, 114 28 Stockholm, Sweden)

  • Sebastiaan Meijer

    (School of Engineering Sciences in Chemistry, Biotechnology and Health, KTH Royal Institute of Technology, 114 28 Stockholm, Sweden)

Abstract

An electric road system (ERS) is a transportation solution that provides electricity for fully electric vehicles while in motion. This solution might contribute to sustainable transportation by overcoming range anxiety problems that fully electric vehicles, especially heavy vehicles, have encountered due to battery technology limitations. However, large-scale ERS implementations are challenging, both technically and socially. An ERS is not only an engineering project, but also a complex technology innovation system composed of multiple subsystems and stakeholders, which requires an interdisciplinary means of aligning relations, problems, and solutions. In the policy analysis domain, researchers have developed actor analysis methods to support policy making processes. Actor analysis methods can provide an analytical reflection in solving complex multi-actor policy making challenges that ERSs are also facing. To uncover the complexity of multiple subsystems and stakeholders involved in an ERS, this paper applied a method to align system characteristics with the stakeholders’ perceptions to understand multi-stakeholder contexts in complex technology innovation projects. Desk research was first conducted to summarise ERS characteristics. Then, the dynamic actor network analysis method framework was adopted to establish an action, factor, goal (AFG) list, which was revised by independent researchers. Next, the AFG list was used to collect the perceptions of the ERS stakeholders, expressed as AFG selections and causal links through stakeholder interviews. The resulting AFG list was iterated through two rounds of interviews and then validated in a Swedish ERS case workshop. The results from this methodology showed that the actor analysis method can not only be applied to policy analysis domains, but can also be applied to technology innovation complex systems, using the electric road system as a case study, to help uncover the ERS complexity from the concerns of stakeholders and to secure a pathway towards sustainable technology implementation.

Suggested Citation

  • Qiuchen Wang & Jannicke Baalsrud Hauge & Sebastiaan Meijer, 2019. "Adopting an Actor Analysis Framework to a Complex Technology Innovation Project: A Case Study of an Electric Road System," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(1), pages 1-35, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:12:y:2019:i:1:p:313-:d:303581
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/1/313/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/1/313/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Snyder, Hannah, 2019. "Literature review as a research methodology: An overview and guidelines," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 104(C), pages 333-339.
    2. Jiang, Ruth & Kleer, Robin & Piller, Frank T., 2017. "Predicting the future of additive manufacturing: A Delphi study on economic and societal implications of 3D printing for 2030," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 117(C), pages 84-97.
    3. Mats Zackrisson & Christina Jönsson & Wilhelm Johannisson & Kristin Fransson & Stefan Posner & Dan Zenkert & Göran Lindbergh, 2019. "Prospective Life Cycle Assessment of a Structural Battery," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(20), pages 1-14, October.
    4. Aarti Singh & Sushil & Samarjit Kar & Dragan Pamucar, 2019. "Stakeholder Role for Developing a Conceptual Framework of Sustainability in Organization," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(1), pages 1-16, January.
    5. Cascetta, Ennio & Pagliara, Francesca, 2008. "Integrated railways-based policies: The Regional Metro System (RMS) project of Naples and Campania," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 15(2), pages 81-93, March.
    6. Manuel E. Morales & Arnaud Diemer, 2019. "Industrial Symbiosis Dynamics, a Strategy to Accomplish Complex Analysis: The Dunkirk Case Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(7), pages 1-18, April.
    7. Leon M. Hermans & Scott W. Cunningham, 2013. "Actor Models for Policy Analysis," International Series in Operations Research & Management Science, in: Wil A. H. Thissen & Warren E. Walker (ed.), Public Policy Analysis, edition 127, chapter 0, pages 185-213, Springer.
    8. Jui-Che Tu & Chun Yang, 2019. "Key Factors Influencing Consumers’ Purchase of Electric Vehicles," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(14), pages 1-22, July.
    9. Ezekiel Chinyio & Akintola Akintoye, 2008. "Practical approaches for engaging stakeholders: findings from the UK," Construction Management and Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 26(6), pages 591-599.
    10. Cascetta, Ennio & Cartenì, Armando & Pagliara, Francesca & Montanino, Marcello, 2015. "A new look at planning and designing transportation systems: A decision-making model based on cognitive rationality, stakeholder engagement and quantitative methods," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(C), pages 27-39.
    11. Manuel Morales & Arnaud Diemer, 2019. "Industrial Symbiosis Dynamics, a Strategy to Accomplish Complex Analysis: The Dunkirk Case Study," Post-Print hal-02127581, HAL.
    12. Manuel Morales & Arnaud Diemer, 2019. "Industrial Symbiosis Dynamics, a Strategy to Accomplish Complex Analysis: The Dunkirk Case Study [Dynamique de la symbiose industrielle, une stratégie pour réaliser une analyse complexe: l'étude de," Post-Print hal-02539477, HAL.
    13. Pettigrew, Simone & Cronin, Sophie L., 2019. "Stakeholder views on the social issues relating to the introduction of autonomous vehicles," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 81(C), pages 64-67.
    14. Chen, Feng & Taylor, Nathaniel & Kringos, Nicole, 2015. "Electrification of roads: Opportunities and challenges," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 150(C), pages 109-119.
    15. Song, Jinbo & Sun, Yan & Jin, Lulu, 2017. "PESTEL analysis of the development of the waste-to-energy incineration industry in China," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 80(C), pages 276-289.
    16. Ivan Mareev & Dirk Uwe Sauer, 2018. "Energy Consumption and Life Cycle Costs of Overhead Catenary Heavy-Duty Trucks for Long-Haul Transportation," Energies, MDPI, vol. 11(12), pages 1-18, December.
    17. Hermans, Leon M. & Thissen, Wil A.H., 2009. "Actor analysis methods and their use for public policy analysts," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 196(2), pages 808-818, July.
    18. Bob Castelein & Ron van Duin & Harry Geerlings, 2019. "Identifying Dominant Stakeholder Perspectives on Sustainability Issues in Reefer Transportation. A Q-Method Study in the Port of Rotterdam," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(12), pages 1-21, June.
    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. Wang, Qiuchen & Liu, Hongyi & Ore, Fredrik & Wang, Lihui & Hauge, Jannicke Baalsrud & Meijer, Sebastiaan, 2023. "Multi-actor perspectives on human robotic collaboration implementation in the heavy automotive manufacturing industry - A Swedish case study," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 72(C).
    2. Qiuchen, Wang & Jannicke, Hauge Baalsrud & Sebastiaan, Meijer, 2022. "The complexity of stakeholder influence on MaaS: A study on multi-stakeholder perspectives in Shenzhen self-driving mini-bus case," Research in Transportation Economics, Elsevier, vol. 94(C).

    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. Angela Neves & Radu Godina & Susana G. Azevedo & João C. O. Matias, 2019. "Current Status, Emerging Challenges, and Future Prospects of Industrial Symbiosis in Portugal," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(19), pages 1-23, October.
    2. Fabiana Liar Agudo & Barbara Stolte Bezerra & José Alcides Gobbo & Luis Alberto Bertolucci Paes, 2022. "Unfolding research themes for industrial symbiosis and underlying theories," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 30(6), pages 1682-1702, December.
    3. Mohammadtaghi Falsafi & Rosanna Fornasiero, 2022. "Explorative Multiple-Case Research on the Scrap-Based Steel Slag Value Chain: Opportunities for Circular Economy," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(4), pages 1-18, February.
    4. Lovisa Harfeldt-Berg & Sarah Broberg & Karin Ericsson, 2022. "The Importance of Individual Actor Characteristics and Contextual Aspects for Promoting Industrial Symbiosis Networks," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(9), pages 1-21, April.
    5. Daniel Jato-Espino & Carmen Ruiz-Puente, 2020. "Fostering Circular Economy Through the Analysis of Existing Open Access Industrial Symbiosis Databases," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(3), pages 1-24, January.
    6. Qiuchen, Wang & Jannicke, Hauge Baalsrud & Sebastiaan, Meijer, 2022. "The complexity of stakeholder influence on MaaS: A study on multi-stakeholder perspectives in Shenzhen self-driving mini-bus case," Research in Transportation Economics, Elsevier, vol. 94(C).
    7. Luigi Fusco Girard & Francesca Nocca, 2019. "Moving Towards the Circular Economy/City Model: Which Tools for Operationalizing This Model?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(22), pages 1-48, November.
    8. Nathaniel John Maynard & Vaishnav Raj Kanagaraj Subramanian & Chien-Yu Hua & Shih-Fang Lo, 2020. "Industrial Symbiosis in Taiwan: Case Study on Linhai Industrial Park," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(11), pages 1-11, June.
    9. Marić, Josip & Opazo-Basáez, Marco & Vlačić, Božidar & Dabić, Marina, 2023. "Innovation management of three-dimensional printing (3DP) technology: Disclosing insights from existing literature and determining future research streams," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 193(C).
    10. Wang, Qiuchen & Liu, Hongyi & Ore, Fredrik & Wang, Lihui & Hauge, Jannicke Baalsrud & Meijer, Sebastiaan, 2023. "Multi-actor perspectives on human robotic collaboration implementation in the heavy automotive manufacturing industry - A Swedish case study," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 72(C).
    11. Silvia Vignetti & Francesco Giffoni & Chiara Pancotti & Francesca Pagliara, 2020. "Analytical framework for ex‐post evaluation of transport projects: Lessons learnt on retrospective CBA," Papers in Regional Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 99(3), pages 683-703, June.
    12. Ali Zackery & Joseph Amankwah-Amoah & Zahra Heidari Darani & Shiva Ghasemi, 2022. "COVID-19 Research in Business and Management: A Review and Future Research Agenda," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(16), pages 1-32, August.
    13. Eusebius Pantja Pramudya & Lukas Rumboko Wibowo & Fitri Nurfatriani & Iman Kasiman Nawireja & Dewi Ratna Kurniasari & Sakti Hutabarat & Yohanes Berenika Kadarusman & Ananda Oemi Iswardhani & Rukaiyah , 2022. "Incentives for Palm Oil Smallholders in Mandatory Certification in Indonesia," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(4), pages 1-28, April.
    14. Peter Schnell & Phillip Haag & Hans Christian Jünger, 2022. "Implementation of Digital Technologies in Construction Companies: Establishing a Holistic Process which Addresses Current Barriers," Businesses, MDPI, vol. 3(1), pages 1-18, December.
    15. Lütkenhorst, Wilfried, 2018. "Creating wealth without labour? Emerging contours of a new techno-economic landscape," IDOS Discussion Papers 11/2018, German Institute of Development and Sustainability (IDOS).
    16. Chen, Yanyan & Mandler, Timo & Meyer-Waarden, Lars, 2021. "Three decades of research on loyalty programs: A literature review and future research agenda," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 124(C), pages 179-197.
    17. Jānis Krūmiņš & Māris Kļaviņš, 2023. "Investigating the Potential of Nuclear Energy in Achieving a Carbon-Free Energy Future," Energies, MDPI, vol. 16(9), pages 1-31, April.
    18. Hongxia Jin & Lu Lu & Haojun Fan, 2022. "Global Trends and Research Hotspots in Long COVID: A Bibliometric Analysis," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(6), pages 1-14, March.
    19. Prince Donkor Ameyaw & Walter Timo de Vries, 2020. "Transparency of Land Administration and the Role of Blockchain Technology, a Four-Dimensional Framework Analysis from the Ghanaian Land Perspective," Land, MDPI, vol. 9(12), pages 1-25, December.
    20. Alexandra Amy Boeing & Karina Jorristma & Mark A Griffin & Sharon K Parker, 2020. "Surfacing the social factors early: A sociotechnical approach to the design of a future submarine," Australian Journal of Management, Australian School of Business, vol. 45(3), pages 527-545, August.

    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:gam:jsusta:v:12:y:2019:i:1:p:313-:d:303581. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.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.