IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/indinn/v27y2020i6p680-704.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The diffusion of a policy innovation in the energy sector: evidence from the collective switching case in Europe

Author

Listed:
  • Silvia Blasi
  • Silvia Rita Sedita

Abstract

This paper investigates the heterogeneity of ways through which a policy innovation affects the structure and the complex interactions taking place within a business ecosystem and how different business ecosystems react differently to a policy innovation, given their structural and behavioural characteristics. The paper focuses on a specific policy innovation, namely the collective switching. We performed a cross-country analysis using the 6C framework as a tool for identifying differences in the structure and behaviours of energy business ecosystems after the introduction of collective switching. We examined in rich detail 11 European countries’ collective switching campaigns, and provide an accurate description of the transformations of their energy business ecosystems. Semi-structured interviews, conducted with consumer associations that organised collective switching campaigns, provide insights for the definition of some policy interventions.

Suggested Citation

  • Silvia Blasi & Silvia Rita Sedita, 2020. "The diffusion of a policy innovation in the energy sector: evidence from the collective switching case in Europe," Industry and Innovation, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 27(6), pages 680-704, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:taf:indinn:v:27:y:2020:i:6:p:680-704
    DOI: 10.1080/13662716.2019.1616535
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/13662716.2019.1616535
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/13662716.2019.1616535?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 look for a different version below or search for a different version of it.

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Grigorii V. Teplykh, 2018. "Innovations and productivity: the shift during the 2008 crisis," Industry and Innovation, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 25(1), pages 53-83, January.
    2. Clarysse, Bart & Wright, Mike & Bruneel, Johan & Mahajan, Aarti, 2014. "Creating value in ecosystems: Crossing the chasm between knowledge and business ecosystems," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(7), pages 1164-1176.
    3. Christian Wolf & Michael G. Pollitt, 2008. "Privatising national oil companies: Assessing the impact on firm performance," Working Papers EPRG 0805, Energy Policy Research Group, Cambridge Judge Business School, University of Cambridge.
    4. 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.
    5. Xin Xu & Viswanath Venkatesh & Kar Yan Tam & Se-Joon Hong, 2010. "Model of Migration and Use of Platforms: Role of Hierarchy, Current Generation, and Complementarities in Consumer Settings," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 56(8), pages 1304-1323, August.
    6. Timothy Moss, 2009. "Intermediaries and the Governance of Sociotechnical Networks in Transition," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 41(6), pages 1480-1495, June.
    7. Carlo Cambini & Federico Caviggioli & Giuseppe Scellato, 2016. "Innovation and market regulation: evidence from the European electricity industry," Industry and Innovation, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 23(8), pages 734-752, November.
    8. Raven, Rob P.J.M., 2006. "Towards alternative trajectories? Reconfigurations in the Dutch electricity regime," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(4), pages 581-595, May.
    9. Nolden, Colin & Sorrell, Steve & Polzin, Friedemann, 2016. "Catalysing the energy service market: The role of intermediaries," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 98(C), pages 420-430.
    10. Ron Adner & Rahul Kapoor, 2010. "Value creation in innovation ecosystems: how the structure of technological interdependence affects firm performance in new technology generations," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 31(3), pages 306-333, March.
    11. Yang, Yingkui, 2014. "Understanding household switching behavior in the retail electricity market," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 406-414.
    12. Chris M. Wilson & Catherine Waddams Price, 2007. "Do Consumers Switch to the Best Supplier?," Working Paper series, University of East Anglia, Centre for Competition Policy (CCP) 2007-06, Centre for Competition Policy, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK..
    13. Jesper Lindgaard Christensen & Ina Drejer & Poul Houman Andersen & Jacob Rubæk Holm, 2016. "Innovation policy: how can it best make a difference?," Industry and Innovation, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 23(2), pages 135-139, February.
    14. Rahul Kapoor & Nathan R. Furr, 2015. "Complementarities and competition: Unpacking the drivers of entrants' technology choices in the solar photovoltaic industry," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 36(3), pages 416-436, March.
    15. Pollitt, Michael G., 2012. "The role of policy in energy transitions: Lessons from the energy liberalisation era," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 128-137.
    16. Stephen Littlechild, 2008. "Municipal aggregation and retail competition in the Ohio energy sector," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 34(2), pages 164-194, October.
    17. Xiaoping He & David Reiner, 2017. "Why Consumers Switch Energy Suppliers: The Role of Individual Attitudes," The Energy Journal, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(Number 6).
    18. Kang, Jin-Su & Downing, Stephen, 2015. "Keystone effect on entry into two-sided markets: An analysis of the market entry of WiMAX," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 94(C), pages 170-186.
    19. Junic Kim, 2016. "The platform business model and business ecosystem: quality management and revenue structures," European Planning Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 24(12), pages 2113-2132, December.
    20. Ruth Little & Damian Maye & Brian Ilbery, 2010. "Collective Purchase: Moving Local and Organic Foods beyond the Niche Market," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 42(8), pages 1797-1813, August.
    21. Rong, Ke & Hu, Guangyu & Lin, Yong & Shi, Yongjiang & Guo, Liang, 2015. "Understanding business ecosystem using a 6C framework in Internet-of-Things-based sectors," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 159(C), pages 41-55.
    22. Lamar Pierce, 2009. "Big losses in ecosystem niches: how core firm decisions drive complementary product shakeouts," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 30(3), pages 323-347, March.
    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. Gomes, Leonardo Augusto de Vasconcelos & Facin, Ana Lucia Figueiredo & Salerno, Mario Sergio & Ikenami, Rodrigo Kazuo, 2018. "Unpacking the innovation ecosystem construct: Evolution, gaps and trends," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 136(C), pages 30-48.
    2. Chao Zhang & Jiancheng Guan, 2017. "How to identify metaknowledge trends and features in a certain research field? Evidences from innovation and entrepreneurial ecosystem," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 113(2), pages 1177-1197, November.
    3. Shi, Xianwei & Liang, Xingkun & Luo, Yining, 2023. "Unpacking the intellectual structure of ecosystem research in innovation studies," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(6).
    4. Fabian Schueler & Dimitri Petrik, 2022. "Objectives of platform research: A co-citation and systematic literature review analysis," Papers 2202.08822, arXiv.org.
    5. Tsujimoto, Masaharu & Kajikawa, Yuya & Tomita, Junichi & Matsumoto, Yoichi, 2018. "A review of the ecosystem concept — Towards coherent ecosystem design," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 136(C), pages 49-58.
    6. Ke Rong & Yong Lin & Boyi Li & Thommie Burström & Lynne Butel & Jiang Yu, 2018. "Business ecosystem research agenda: more dynamic, more embedded, and more internationalized," Asian Business & Management, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 17(3), pages 167-182, July.
    7. Phillips, Mark A. & Ritala, Paavo, 2019. "A complex adaptive systems agenda for ecosystem research methodology," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 148(C).
    8. Christina Theodoraki & Karim Messeghem & Mark P. Rice, 2018. "A social capital approach to the development of sustainable entrepreneurial ecosystems: an explorative study," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 51(1), pages 153-170, June.
    9. Gomes, Leonardo Augusto de Vasconcelos & Flechas, Ximena Alejandra & Facin, Ana Lucia Figueiredo & Borini, Felipe Mendes, 2021. "Ecosystem management: Past achievements and future promises," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 171(C).
    10. Jarryd Daymond & Eric Knight & Maria Rumyantseva & Steven Maguire, 2023. "Managing ecosystem emergence and evolution: Strategies for ecosystem architects," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 44(4), pages 1-27, April.
    11. Walrave, Bob & Talmar, Madis & Podoynitsyna, Ksenia S. & Romme, A. Georges L. & Verbong, Geert P.J., 2018. "A multi-level perspective on innovation ecosystems for path-breaking innovation," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 136(C), pages 103-113.
    12. Mark A. Phillips & Jagjit Singh Srai, 2018. "Exploring Emerging Ecosystem Boundaries: Defining ‘The Game’," International Journal of Innovation Management (ijim), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 22(08), pages 1-21, December.
    13. Nishino, Nariaki & Okazaki, Miki & Akai, Kenju, 2018. "Effects of ability difference and strategy imitation on cooperation network formation: A study with game theoretic modeling and multi-agent simulation," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 136(C), pages 145-156.
    14. Han, Jin & Zhou, Haibo & Löwik, Sandor & de Weerd-Nederhof, Petra, 2022. "Building and sustaining emerging ecosystems through new focal ventures: Evidence from China's bike-sharing industry," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 174(C).
    15. Xu, Guannan & Wu, Yuchen & Minshall, Tim & Zhou, Yuan, 2018. "Exploring innovation ecosystems across science, technology, and business: A case of 3D printing in China," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 136(C), pages 208-221.
    16. Jung Kwan Kim & Ram Mudambi, 2020. "An ecosystem-based analysis of design innovation infringements: South Korea and China in the global tire industry," Journal of International Business Policy, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 3(1), pages 38-57, March.
    17. Guannan Xu & Weijie Hu & Yuanyuan Qiao & Yuan Zhou, 2020. "Mapping an innovation ecosystem using network clustering and community identification: a multi-layered framework," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 124(3), pages 2057-2081, September.
    18. Elisa Villani & Christian Lechner, 2019. "The emergence of an innovation ecosystem in a low innovation region: Disrupting inertia by a young university," BEMPS - Bozen Economics & Management Paper Series BEMPS63, Faculty of Economics and Management at the Free University of Bozen.
    19. Ying-Che Hsieh & Kuo-Yi Lin & Chao Lu & Ke Rong, 2017. "Governing a Sustainable Business Ecosystem in Taiwan’s Circular Economy: The Story of Spring Pool Glass," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(6), pages 1-15, June.
    20. Dong, Caiting & Liu, Xielin & Tang, Fangcheng & Qiu, Shumin, 2023. "How upstream innovativeness of ecosystems affects firms' innovation: The contingent role of absorptive capacity and upstream dependence," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 124(C).

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • Q40 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Energy - - - General
    • O35 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Social Innovation
    • O52 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Economywide Country Studies - - - Europe
    • O57 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Economywide Country Studies - - - Comparative Studies of Countries

    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:taf:indinn:v:27:y:2020:i:6:p:680-704. 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: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/CIAI20 .

    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.