IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v9y2017i5p847-d99059.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Adoption and Use of Low-Carbon Technologies: Lessons from 100 Finnish Pilot Studies, Field Experiments and Demonstrations

Author

Listed:
  • Eva Heiskanen

    (Consumer Society Research Centre, Department of Political and Economic Studies, University of Helsinki, 00014 Helsinki, Finland)

  • Kaarina Hyvönen

    (Consumer Society Research Centre, Department of Political and Economic Studies, University of Helsinki, 00014 Helsinki, Finland)

  • Senja Laakso

    (Consumer Society Research Centre, Department of Political and Economic Studies, University of Helsinki, 00014 Helsinki, Finland)

  • Päivi Laitila

    (Motiva Ltd., 00100 Helsinki, Finland)

  • Kaisa Matschoss

    (Consumer Society Research Centre, Department of Political and Economic Studies, University of Helsinki, 00014 Helsinki, Finland)

  • Irmeli Mikkonen

    (Motiva Ltd., 00100 Helsinki, Finland)

Abstract

Experimentation is critical for the deployment of low-carbon technologies. New solutions need to be selected and adapted to their contexts of use, and users need to learn new skills. Society as a whole needs to create new modes of production, consumption and governance. We investigated how local pilot projects, demonstrations and trials of low-carbon technologies promote learning in Finnish society, where the government has made a commitment to a culture of experimentation. We drew on a database of 100 pilot projects and experiments and 15 detailed case studies. We identified several types of learning, beyond the formal evaluation of “what works where and when”: pilot projects served to inspire, to create commitment and to develop networks. We also investigated how lessons learned are transferred to other sites and into societal knowledge. We contribute by conceptualizing different forms of learning and transfer—particularly situated and embodied forms—alongside more techno-scientific ones. While highlighting this form of learning, we also note that it is not particularly strong in acknowledging challenges faced in experimentation. We argue that there is scope for more systematic evaluation, alongside more situated forms of learning and sharing. We also pinpoint tensions between these two forms of learning that need to be addressed.

Suggested Citation

  • Eva Heiskanen & Kaarina Hyvönen & Senja Laakso & Päivi Laitila & Kaisa Matschoss & Irmeli Mikkonen, 2017. "Adoption and Use of Low-Carbon Technologies: Lessons from 100 Finnish Pilot Studies, Field Experiments and Demonstrations," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(5), pages 1-20, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:9:y:2017:i:5:p:847-:d:99059
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/9/5/847/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/9/5/847/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Jacobsson, Staffan & Lauber, Volkmar, 2006. "The politics and policy of energy system transformation--explaining the German diffusion of renewable energy technology," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(3), pages 256-276, February.
    2. Imke Lammers & Lea Diestelmeier, 2017. "Experimenting with Law and Governance for Decentralized Electricity Systems: Adjusting Regulation to Reality?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(2), pages 1-14, February.
    3. Arne Martin Fevolden & Lars Coenen & Teis Hansen & Antje Klitkou, 2017. "The Role of Trials and Demonstration Projects in the Development of a Sustainable Bioeconomy," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(3), pages 1-15, March.
    4. Jensen, Morten Berg & Johnson, Bjorn & Lorenz, Edward & Lundvall, Bengt Ake, 2007. "Forms of knowledge and modes of innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(5), pages 680-693, June.
    5. Maria Kopsakangas-Savolainen & Artti Juutinen, 2013. "Energy consumption and savings: A survey-based study of Finnish households," Journal of Environmental Economics and Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 2(1), pages 71-92, March.
    6. Neij, Lena & Heiskanen, Eva & Strupeit, Lars, 2017. "The deployment of new energy technologies and the need for local learning," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 101(C), pages 274-283.
    7. Karen Handley & Andrew Sturdy & Robin Fincham & Timothy Clark, 2006. "Within and Beyond Communities of Practice: Making Sense of Learning Through Participation, Identity and Practice," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 43(3), pages 641-653, May.
    8. Susie Moloney & Ralph Horne, 2015. "Low Carbon Urban Transitioning: From Local Experimentation to Urban Transformation?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(3), pages 1-17, February.
    9. Frank Geels & J Jasper Deuten, 2006. "Local and global dynamics in technological development: a socio-cognitive perspective on knowledge flows and lessons from reinforced concrete," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 33(4), pages 265-275, May.
    10. Adrian Smith & Tom Hargreaves & Sabine Hielscher & Mari Martiskainen & Gill Seyfang, 2016. "Making the most of community energies: Three perspectives on grassroots innovation," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 48(2), pages 407-432, February.
    11. Christopher M. Chini & James F. Canning & Kelsey L. Schreiber & Joshua M. Peschel & Ashlynn S. Stillwell, 2017. "The Green Experiment: Cities, Green Stormwater Infrastructure, and Sustainability," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(1), pages 1-21, January.
    12. Heather Lovell, 2009. "The Role of Individuals in Policy Change: The Case of UK Low-Energy Housing," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 27(3), pages 491-511, June.
    13. Giovanni Dosi, 2000. "Sources, Procedures, and Microeconomic Effects of Innovation," Chapters, in: Innovation, Organization and Economic Dynamics, chapter 2, pages 63-114, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    14. Marc Wolfram & Niki Frantzeskaki, 2016. "Cities and Systemic Change for Sustainability: Prevailing Epistemologies and an Emerging Research Agenda," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(2), pages 1-18, February.
    15. John Seely Brown & Paul Duguid, 1991. "Organizational Learning and Communities-of-Practice: Toward a Unified View of Working, Learning, and Innovation," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 2(1), pages 40-57, 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. Fabian Scheller & Isabel Doser & Emily Schulte & Simon Johanning & Russell McKenna & Thomas Bruckner, 2021. "Stakeholder dynamics in residential solar energy adoption: findings from focus group discussions in Germany," Papers 2104.14240, arXiv.org.
    2. Nicola Stocco & Francesco Gardona & Fulvio Biddau & Paolo Francesco Cottone, 2021. "Learning Processes and Agency in the Decarbonization Context: A Systematic Review through a Cultural Psychology Point of View," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(18), pages 1-31, September.
    3. Geels, Frank W., 2022. "Causality and explanation in socio-technical transitions research: Mobilising epistemological insights from the wider social sciences," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(6).
    4. Kate Mattocks, 2021. "Policy experimentation and policy learning in Canadian cultural policy," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 54(4), pages 891-909, December.
    5. Raphael Wasserbaur & Tomohiko Sakao, 2020. "Conceptualising Design Fixation and Design Limitation and Quantifying Their Impacts on Resource Use and Carbon Emissions," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(19), pages 1-21, October.
    6. 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).
    7. Antonio Gabaldón & Carlos Álvarez & María Del Carmen Ruiz-Abellón & Antonio Guillamón & Sergio Valero-Verdú & Roque Molina & Ana García-Garre, 2018. "Integration of Methodologies for the Evaluation of Offer Curves in Energy and Capacity Markets through Energy Efficiency and Demand Response," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(2), pages 1-27, February.
    8. Matschoss, Kaisa & Repo, Petteri, 2020. "Forward-looking network analysis of ongoing sustainability transitions," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 161(C).
    9. Senja Laakso, 2019. "Experiments in Everyday Mobility: Social Dynamics of Achieving a Sustainable Lifestyle," Sociological Research Online, , vol. 24(2), pages 235-250, June.

    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. 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).
    2. Marcel Bednarz & Tom Broekel, 2020. "Pulled or pushed? The spatial diffusion of wind energy between local demand and supply," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 29(4), pages 893-916.
    3. Neij, Lena & Heiskanen, Eva & Strupeit, Lars, 2017. "The deployment of new energy technologies and the need for local learning," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 101(C), pages 274-283.
    4. Grillitsch, Markus & Schubert, Torben & Srholec, Martin, 2019. "Knowledge base combinations and firm growth," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(1), pages 234-247.
    5. Michael Kaethler, 2019. "Curating creative communities of practice: the role of ambiguity," Journal of Organization Design, Springer;Organizational Design Community, vol. 8(1), pages 1-17, December.
    6. Alvesson, Mats & Sveningsson, Stefan, 2011. "Management is the solution: Now what was the problem? On the fragile basis for managerialism," Scandinavian Journal of Management, Elsevier, vol. 27(4), pages 349-361.
    7. Nanditha Mathew & George Paily, 2022. "STI-DUI innovation modes and firm performance in the Indian capital goods industry: Do small firms differ from large ones?," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 47(2), pages 435-458, April.
    8. Schmid, Stefan & Schurig, Andreas, 2003. "The development of critical capabilities in foreign subsidiaries: disentangling the role of the subsidiary's business network," International Business Review, Elsevier, vol. 12(6), pages 755-782, December.
    9. Halvor Holtskog, 2017. "Defining the Characteristics of an Expert in a Social Context Through Subjective Evaluation," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 8(3), pages 1014-1031, September.
    10. Engel, Nora, 2009. "Innovation Dynamics in Tuberculosis Control in India: The Shift to New Partnerships," MERIT Working Papers 2009-040, United Nations University - Maastricht Economic and Social Research Institute on Innovation and Technology (MERIT).
    11. Wiebe, Kirsten S. & Lutz, Christian, 2016. "Endogenous technological change and the policy mix in renewable power generation," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 739-751.
    12. Mathew, Nanditha & Paily, George, 2020. "STI-DUI innovation modes and firm performance in the Indian capital goods industry: Do small firms differ from large ones?," MERIT Working Papers 2020-008, United Nations University - Maastricht Economic and Social Research Institute on Innovation and Technology (MERIT).
    13. Attila Havas, 2016. "Social and Business Innovations: Are Common Measurement Approaches Possible?," Foresight-Russia Форсайт, CyberLeninka;Федеральное государственное автономное образовательное учреждение высшего образования «Национальный исследовательский университет «Высшая школа экономики», vol. 10(2 (eng)), pages 58-80.
    14. Lars Mewes & Tom Broekel, 2020. "Subsidized to change? The impact of R&D policy on regional technological diversification," The Annals of Regional Science, Springer;Western Regional Science Association, vol. 65(1), pages 221-252, August.
    15. Christina Fang & Jeho Lee & Melissa A. Schilling, 2010. "Balancing Exploration and Exploitation Through Structural Design: The Isolation of Subgroups and Organizational Learning," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 21(3), pages 625-642, June.
    16. 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.
    17. Steen Høyrup, 2010. "Employee-driven innovation and workplace learning: basic concepts, approaches and themes," Transfer: European Review of Labour and Research, , vol. 16(2), pages 143-154, May.
    18. Chiara Franco & Alberto Marzucchi & Sandro Montresor, 2012. "Absorptive capacity, innovation cooperation and human-capital. Evidence from 3 European countries," JRC Research Reports JRC77090, Joint Research Centre.
    19. Strupeit, Lars, 2017. "An innovation system perspective on the drivers of soft cost reduction for photovoltaic deployment: The case of Germany," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 273-286.
    20. Torsten Ringberg & Markus Reihlen, 2008. "Towards a Socio‐Cognitive Approach to Knowledge Transfer," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 45(5), pages 912-935, July.

    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:9:y:2017:i:5:p:847-:d:99059. 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.