IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/aoe/wpaper/2103.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Overcoming the harmony fallacy: How values shape the course of innovation systems

Author

Listed:
  • Jonas Heiberg

    (Eawag, Swiss Federal Institute of Aquatic Science and Technology, Switzerland)

  • Bernhard Truffer

    (Eawag, Swiss Federal Institute of Aquatic Science and Technology, Switzerland)

Abstract

The technological innovation systems (TIS) framework is one of the dominant perspectives in transitions studies to analyze success conditions of newly emerging technologies and industries. Key conditions for innovation success reside in overcoming so-called system failures. So far, TIS studies mostly adopted a rather harmonious view on the values, goals and interests that motivate the different actors and by this were unable to address competition, conflicts and, in particular, battles over diverging directionalities within the system. To tackle this “harmony fallacy”, we propose an institutional logics based measure for “value-based proximities” among actors, which serve to identify the “degree of harmony” in the field. To operationalize these concepts, we apply socio-technical configuration analysis (STCA) based on transcripts from 26 interviews, covering the case of modular water technologies in Switzerland. Results indicate that value orientations crucially affect system failures, diverging technological preferences and collaboration patterns. Conflictual field logics may prevent the stabilization of system structures in a specific country and drive actors to engage in sub- or transnational networks. This analysis enables to inspire key conceptual tasks of innovation system analysis, like the identification of system failures, the setting of appropriate system boundaries and the formulation of better policy implications.

Suggested Citation

  • Jonas Heiberg & Bernhard Truffer, 2021. "Overcoming the harmony fallacy: How values shape the course of innovation systems," GEIST - Geography of Innovation and Sustainability Transitions 2021(03), GEIST Working Paper Series.
  • Handle: RePEc:aoe:wpaper:2103
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.geist-wp.com/papers/geist_wp_2103.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. 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.
    2. K. Matthias Weber & Bernhard Truffer, 2017. "Moving innovation systems research to the next level: towards an integrative agenda," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press and Oxford Review of Economic Policy Limited, vol. 33(1), pages 101-121.
    3. Markard, Jochen & Raven, Rob & Truffer, Bernhard, 2012. "Sustainability transitions: An emerging field of research and its prospects," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(6), pages 955-967.
    4. Markard, Jochen & Truffer, Bernhard, 2008. "Technological innovation systems and the multi-level perspective: Towards an integrated framework," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(4), pages 596-615, May.
    5. Ruud E. Smits & Stefan Kuhlmann & Phillip Shapira (ed.), 2010. "The Theory and Practice of Innovation Policy," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 4181.
    6. Smith, Adrian & Stirling, Andy & Berkhout, Frans, 2005. "The governance of sustainable socio-technical transitions," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(10), pages 1491-1510, December.
    7. Weber, K. Matthias & Rohracher, Harald, 2012. "Legitimizing research, technology and innovation policies for transformative change," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(6), pages 1037-1047.
    8. Rohe, Sebastian & Chlebna, Camilla, 2021. "A spatial perspective on the legitimacy of a technological innovation system: Regional differences in onshore wind energy," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 151(C).
    9. Jonas Heiberg & Christian Binz & Bernhard Truffer, 2020. "The Geography of Technology Legitimation: How Multiscalar Institutional Dynamics Matter for Path Creation in Emerging Industries," Economic Geography, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 96(5), pages 470-498, October.
    10. Ron Boschma, 2005. "Proximity and Innovation: A Critical Assessment," Regional Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 39(1), pages 61-74.
    11. Kejia Yang & Johan Schot & Bernhard Truffer, 2020. "Shaping the Directionality of Sustainability Transitions: The Diverging Development Patterns of Solar PV in Two Chinese Provinces," SPRU Working Paper Series 2020-14, SPRU - Science Policy Research Unit, University of Sussex Business School.
    12. Cristina Chaminade & Charles Esquist, 2010. "Rationales for Public Policy Intervention in the Innovation Process: Systems of Innovation Approach," Chapters, in: Ruud E. Smits & Stefan Kuhlmann & Phillip Shapira (ed.), The Theory and Practice of Innovation Policy, chapter 5, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    13. 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.
    14. Carlsson, Bo & Jacobsson, Staffan & Holmen, Magnus & Rickne, Annika, 2002. "Innovation systems: analytical and methodological issues," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 31(2), pages 233-245, February.
    15. Binz, Christian & Harris-Lovett, Sasha & Kiparsky, Michael & Sedlak, David L. & Truffer, Bernhard, 2016. "The thorny road to technology legitimation — Institutional work for potable water reuse in California," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 103(C), pages 249-263.
    16. Carlsson, B & Stankiewicz, R, 1991. "On the Nature, Function and Composition of Technological Systems," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 1(2), pages 93-118, April.
    17. Hugues Jeannerat & Le�la Kebir, 2016. "Knowledge, Resources and Markets: What Economic System of Valuation?," Regional Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 50(2), pages 274-288, February.
    18. Bergek, Anna & Jacobsson, Staffan & Carlsson, Bo & Lindmark, Sven & Rickne, Annika, 2008. "Analyzing the functional dynamics of technological innovation systems: A scheme of analysis," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(3), pages 407-429, April.
    19. Yap, Xiao-Shan & Truffer, Bernhard, 2019. "Shaping selection environments for industrial catch-up and sustainability transitions: A systemic perspective on endogenizing windows of opportunity," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(4), pages 1030-1047.
    20. Binz, Christian & Truffer, Bernhard, 2017. "Global Innovation Systems—A conceptual framework for innovation dynamics in transnational contexts," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(7), pages 1284-1298.
    21. 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.
    22. Binz, Christian & Truffer, Bernhard & Coenen, Lars, 2014. "Why space matters in technological innovation systems—Mapping global knowledge dynamics of membrane bioreactor technology," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(1), pages 138-155.
    23. Schot, Johan & Steinmueller, W. Edward, 2018. "Three frames for innovation policy: R&D, systems of innovation and transformative change," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(9), pages 1554-1567.
    24. Eric Dahlgren & Caner Göçmen & Klaus Lackner & Garrett van Ryzin, 2013. "Small Modular Infrastructure," The Engineering Economist, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 58(4), pages 231-264.
    25. Fuenfschilling, Lea & Truffer, Bernhard, 2014. "The structuration of socio-technical regimes—Conceptual foundations from institutional theory," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(4), pages 772-791.
    26. Kooijman, Marlous & Hekkert, Marko P. & van Meer, Peter J.K. & Moors, Ellen H.M. & Schellekens, Huub, 2017. "How institutional logics hamper innovation: The case of animal testing," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 70-79.
    27. Fionn Murtagh & Pierre Legendre, 2014. "Ward’s Hierarchical Agglomerative Clustering Method: Which Algorithms Implement Ward’s Criterion?," Journal of Classification, Springer;The Classification Society, vol. 31(3), pages 274-295, October.
    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. 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.
    2. Heiberg, Jonas & Truffer, Bernhard & Binz, Christian, 2022. "Assessing transitions through socio-technical configuration analysis – a methodological framework and a case study in the water sector," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(1).
    3. Johan Miörner & Jonas Heiberg & Christian Binz, 2021. "Global regime diffusion in space: a missed transition in San Diego’s water sector," GEIST - Geography of Innovation and Sustainability Transitions 2021(08), GEIST Working Paper Series.

    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. 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.
    2. Dahesh, Mehran Badin & Tabarsa, Gholamali & Zandieh, Mostafa & Hamidizadeh, Mohammadreza, 2020. "Reviewing the intellectual structure and evolution of the innovation systems approach: A social network analysis," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 63(C).
    3. Heiberg, Jonas & Truffer, Bernhard & Binz, Christian, 2022. "Assessing transitions through socio-technical configuration analysis – a methodological framework and a case study in the water sector," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(1).
    4. Kieft, Alco & Harmsen, Robert & Hekkert, Marko P., 2020. "Toward ranking interventions for Technological Innovation Systems via the concept of Leverage Points," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 153(C).
    5. 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.
    6. Rakas, Marija & Hain, Daniel S., 2019. "The state of innovation system research: What happens beneath the surface?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(9), pages 1-1.
    7. Markard, Jochen, 2020. "The life cycle of technological innovation systems," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 153(C).
    8. Yap, Xiao-Shan & Truffer, Bernhard, 2019. "Shaping selection environments for industrial catch-up and sustainability transitions: A systemic perspective on endogenizing windows of opportunity," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(4), pages 1030-1047.
    9. Jonas Heiberg & Christian Binz & Bernhard Truffer, 2020. "Assessing transitions through socio-technical network analysis – a methodological framework and a case study from the water sector," Papers in Evolutionary Economic Geography (PEEG) 2035, Utrecht University, Department of Human Geography and Spatial Planning, Group Economic Geography, revised Aug 2020.
    10. Sebastian Rohe & Jannika Mattes, 2021. "What about the regional level? Regional configurations of Technological Innovation Systems," PEGIS geo-disc-2021_01, Institute for Economic Geography and GIScience, Department of Socioeconomics, Vienna University of Economics and Business.
    11. Binz, Christian & Truffer, Bernhard, 2017. "Global Innovation Systems—A conceptual framework for innovation dynamics in transnational contexts," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(7), pages 1284-1298.
    12. Haley, Brendan, 2018. "Integrating structural tensions into technological innovation systems analysis: Application to the case of transmission interconnections and renewable electricity in Nova Scotia, Canada," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(6), pages 1147-1160.
    13. Andersson, Johnn & Hellsmark, Hans & Sandén, Björn A., 2018. "Shaping factors in the emergence of technological innovations: The case of tidal kite technology," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 132(C), pages 191-208.
    14. Diercks, Gijs & Larsen, Henrik & Steward, Fred, 2019. "Transformative innovation policy: Addressing variety in an emerging policy paradigm," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(4), pages 880-894.
    15. Janssen, Matthijs J., 2019. "What bangs for your buck? Assessing the design and impact of Dutch transformative policy," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 138(C), pages 78-94.
    16. Hellsmark, Hans & Frishammar, Johan & Söderholm, Patrik & Ylinenpää, Håkan, 2016. "The role of pilot and demonstration plants in technology development and innovation policy," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(9), pages 1743-1761.
    17. Joanna Stryjek, 2021. "Counteracting the COVID-19 Crisis with Innovation Policy Tools: A Case Study of the EU’s Supranational Innovation Policy," European Research Studies Journal, European Research Studies Journal, vol. 0(3), pages 450-468.
    18. Konstantinos Karanasios & Paul Parker, 2018. "Explaining the Diffusion of Renewable Electricity Technologies in Canadian Remote Indigenous Communities through the Technological Innovation System Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-28, October.
    19. Attila Havas & Doris Schartinger & K. Matthias Weber, 2022. "Innovation Studies, Social Innovation, and Sustainability Transitions Research: From mutual ignorance towards an integrative perspective?," CERS-IE WORKING PAPERS 2227, Institute of Economics, Centre for Economic and Regional Studies.
    20. Kejia Yang & Johan Schot & Bernhard Truffer, 2020. "Shaping the Directionality of Sustainability Transitions: The Diverging Development Patterns of Solar PV in Two Chinese Provinces," SPRU Working Paper Series 2020-14, SPRU - Science Policy Research Unit, University of Sussex Business School.

    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:aoe:wpaper:2103. 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: Johan Miörner (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.geist-wp.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.