IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ieu/journl/v8y2012i8p09-40.html

The new mobility paradigm: Transformation of value chain and business models

Author

Listed:
  • Guy Fournier

    (Institute for Industrial Ecology, Pforzheim University)

  • Henning Hinderer

    (Business Administration & Engineering, Pforzheim University)

  • Daniel Schmid

    (Business Administration & Engineering, Pforzheim University)

  • René Seign

    (Department for Traffic Engineering, Universität der Bundeswehr München)

  • Manuel Baumann

    (Institute for Technology Assessment and Systems Analysis, Karlsruhe Institute of Technology and IET/CESNova, FCT-Universidade Nova de Lisboa)

Abstract

Four categories of innovations have been identified by Freeman and Perez: incremental innovations, radical innovations, new technological systems (systemic innovations), and technological revolutions or new techno-economic paradigms. New techno-economic paradigms represent changes in technological systems that are so far-reaching in their effects that they have a major influence on the behaviour of the entire economy. Scarcity of oil and external costs like global warming are the key arguments and the main drivers of the change of the current paradigm. They will affect especially the mobility of individuals and the interlinked business models. Novel business models within newly created markets will raise e.g. extended mobility services, activities aiming at the infrastructure, new opportunities in the field of energy transmission and supply and even new strategies of recycling, reusing or reducing the use of resources in order to address global scarcity issues. Especially for the established players of the automotive industry like original equipment manufacturers (OEMs) or 1st and 2nd tier suppliers this implicates opportunities and risks at the same time. But also new players will get the chance to create and enter new markets with new or extended products or services and lead the new value chain. This paper compiles and evaluates current approaches and business models of selected OEMs together with upcoming players. Additionally their positions within the existing value chain are being analyzed and classified. Bringing together the identified drivers of changes with current trends within the automotive industry the authors also show new concepts of extended business models, e.g. the idea of an ecosystem, that have the potential to cause an additional shift of power within the global mobility value chain.

Suggested Citation

  • Guy Fournier & Henning Hinderer & Daniel Schmid & René Seign & Manuel Baumann, 2012. "The new mobility paradigm: Transformation of value chain and business models," Enterprise and Work Innovation Studies, Universidade Nova de Lisboa, IET/CICS.NOVA-Interdisciplinary Centre on Social Sciences, Faculty of Science and Technology, vol. 8(8), pages 9-40, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:ieu:journl:v:8:y:2012:i:8:p:09-40
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://run.unl.pt/handle/10362/10154
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Paul Klemperer, 1987. "The Competitiveness of Markets with Switching Costs," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 18(1), pages 138-150, Spring.
    2. Shy,Oz, 2001. "The Economics of Network Industries," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521805001, January.
    3. Hess, Thomas & Grau, Christoph & Dörr, Jonathan, 2008. "Download-Angebote für Musik: Hintergründe, Bedeutung und Perspektiven," Working Papers 2/2008, University of Munich, Munich School of Management, Institute for Information Systems and New Media.
    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. Marco Opazo-Basáez & Ferran Vendrell-Herrero & Oscar F. Bustinza, 2018. "Uncovering Productivity Gains of Digital and Green Servitization: Implications from the Automotive Industry," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(5), pages 1-17, May.
    2. Yurong Chen & Yannick Perez, 2015. "Business Model Design: Lessons Learned from Tesla Motors," Post-Print hal-01424723, HAL.
    3. Nuno Boavida & Manuel Baumann & António B. Moniz & Jens Schippl & Max Reichenbach & Marcel Weil, 2013. "Technology transition towards electric mobility - technology assessment as a tool for policy design," IET Working Papers Series 04/2013, Universidade Nova de Lisboa, IET/CICS.NOVA-Interdisciplinary Centre on Social Sciences, Faculty of Science and Technology.

    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. Karacuka, Mehmet & Çatık, A. Nazif & Haucap, Justus, 2013. "Consumer choice and local network effects in mobile telecommunications in Turkey," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(4), pages 334-344.
    2. Stefan Hellmer, 2010. "Switching Costs, Switching Benefits and Lock-In Effects — The Reregulated Swedish Heat Market," Energy & Environment, , vol. 21(6), pages 563-575, October.
    3. Beomjin Choi & T. S. Raghu & Ajay Vinzé & Kevin J. Dooley, 2019. "Effectiveness of standards consortia: Social network perspectives," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 21(2), pages 405-416, April.
    4. Davide Consoli & Pier Paolo Patrucco, 2011. "Complexity and the Coordination of Technological Knowledge: The Case of Innovation Platforms," Chapters, in: Handbook on the Economic Complexity of Technological Change, chapter 8 Edward Elgar Publishing.
    5. Christian Dahl Winther, 2007. "Optimal research effort and product differentiation in network industries," Economics Working Papers 2007-19, Department of Economics and Business Economics, Aarhus University.
    6. Vu, Khuong & Rohman, Ibrahim Kholilul & Bohlin, Erik, 2024. "Promoting the adoption of digital technology: Strategic policy insights from a network effects model," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(10).
    7. Jean Gabszewicz & Victor Ginsburgh & Shlomo Weber, 2011. "Bilingualism and Communicative Benefits," Annals of Economics and Statistics, GENES, issue 101-102, pages 271-286.
    8. Victor Ginsburgh & Jacques Melitz & Farid Toubal, 2014. "Foreign Language Learning : An Econometric Analysis," Working Papers 2014-21, Center for Research in Economics and Statistics.
    9. Mark J. Tremblay, 2019. "Platform Competition and Endogenous Switching Costs," Journal of Industry, Competition and Trade, Springer, vol. 19(4), pages 537-559, December.
    10. Heggedal, Tom-Reiel & Helland, Leif & Neset Joslin, Knut-Eric, 2018. "Should I Stay or should I Go? Bandwagons in the lab," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 150(C), pages 86-97.
    11. Glenn Ellison, 2005. "A Model of Add-On Pricing," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 120(2), pages 585-637.
    12. T.W. Ross, 2004. "Sunk Costs and the Entry Decision," Journal of Industry, Competition and Trade, Springer, vol. 4(2), pages 79-93, June.
    13. Ajay Kalra & Surendra Rajiv & Kannan Srinivasan, 1998. "Response to Competitive Entry: A Rationale for Delayed Defensive Reaction," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 17(4), pages 380-405.
    14. Allen N. Berger & Astrid A. Dick, 2007. "Entry into Banking Markets and the Early‐Mover Advantage," Journal of Money, Credit and Banking, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 39(4), pages 775-807, June.
    15. Shy Oz, 2012. "Account-to-Account Electronic Money Transfers: Recent Developments in the United States," Review of Network Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 11(1), pages 1-25, March.
    16. Michiel Bijlsma & Paul de Bijl & Viktoria Kocsis, 2009. "Concurrentie, innovatie en intellectuele eigendomsrechten in software markten," CPB Document 181, CPB Netherlands Bureau for Economic Policy Analysis.
    17. Marie Allard & Pierre Thomas Léger & Lise Rochaix, 2009. "Provider Competition in a Dynamic Setting," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 18(2), pages 457-486, June.
    18. Jorge Fernández‐Ruiz, 2019. "A Mixed Duopoly With Switching Costs," The Japanese Economic Review, Japanese Economic Association, vol. 70(2), pages 235-257, June.
    19. Giuliano Masiero & Hugh Gravelle, 2000. "Quality incentives under a capitation regime: the role of patient expectations," Departmental Working Papers 2000-07, Department of Economics, Management and Quantitative Methods at Università degli Studi di Milano.
    20. Marian Beise, 2004. "Lead Markets, Innovation Differentials and Growth," Discussion Paper Series 157, Research Institute for Economics & Business Administration, Kobe University.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    JEL classification:

    • L62 - Industrial Organization - - Industry Studies: Manufacturing - - - Automobiles; Other Transportation Equipment; Related Parts and Equipment
    • O33 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Technological Change: Choices and Consequences; Diffusion Processes
    • Q5 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics

    Lists

    This item is featured on the following reading lists, Wikipedia, or ReplicationWiki pages:
    1. Studies on the automobile industry

    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:ieu:journl:v:8:y:2012:i:8:p:09-40. 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: António Brandão Moniz (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ieunlpt.html .

    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.