IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hal/journl/hal-03772981.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Co-Design for Novelty Anchoring Into Multiple Socio-Technical Systems in Transitions: The Case of Earth Observation Data

Author

Listed:
  • Raphaelle Barbier

    (CGS i3 - Centre de Gestion Scientifique i3 - Mines Paris - PSL (École nationale supérieure des mines de Paris) - PSL - Université Paris sciences et lettres - I3 - Institut interdisciplinaire de l’innovation - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique)

  • Skander Ben Yahia

    (CGS i3 - Centre de Gestion Scientifique i3 - Mines Paris - PSL (École nationale supérieure des mines de Paris) - PSL - Université Paris sciences et lettres - I3 - Institut interdisciplinaire de l’innovation - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique)

  • Pascal Le Masson

    (CGS i3 - Centre de Gestion Scientifique i3 - Mines Paris - PSL (École nationale supérieure des mines de Paris) - PSL - Université Paris sciences et lettres - I3 - Institut interdisciplinaire de l’innovation - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique)

  • Benoit Weil

    (CGS i3 - Centre de Gestion Scientifique i3 - Mines Paris - PSL (École nationale supérieure des mines de Paris) - PSL - Université Paris sciences et lettres - I3 - Institut interdisciplinaire de l’innovation - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique)

Abstract

Tackling grand challenges requires new forms of collaborative innovation to support intricate design processes involving heterogeneous actors. This paper specifically investigates how co- design supports the anchoring of promising novelties into multiple socio-technical systems to accelerate their respective sustainability transitions. A co-design framework adapted to this multi-system context is derived from transition research and design and innovation management research. The framework is validated empirically based on twenty-seven case studies where the novelty to be anchored corresponds to Earth observation data. Contributing to transition research, the paper shows how this multi-system co-design framework provides novelty developers with a diagnostic tool to clarify their anchoring strategy, by framing the relevant actions to conduct at different time horizons. Several enrichments of the anchoring concept are also proposed, highlighting some complementarities between different forms of anchoring and the endless property of the process. Contributing to design and innovation management research, the paper sheds light on co-design in an original perspective by considering a context crossing the usual boundaries of socio-technical systems and focusing on a diagnostic dimension preceding the organisation of collective design sessions. The co- design framework also highlights a so-called "resource-based" form of collaborative innovation aiming to build novelty-based resources for heterogeneous actors facing grand challenges. This approach complements more common "challenge-based" approaches aiming to directly address a targeted challenge.

Suggested Citation

  • Raphaelle Barbier & Skander Ben Yahia & Pascal Le Masson & Benoit Weil, 2022. "Co-Design for Novelty Anchoring Into Multiple Socio-Technical Systems in Transitions: The Case of Earth Observation Data," Post-Print hal-03772981, HAL.
    • Handle: RePEc:hal:journl:hal-03772981
    DOI: 10.1109/TEM.2022.3184248
    Note: View the original document on HAL open archive server: https://hal.science/hal-03772981
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://hal.science/hal-03772981/document
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1109/TEM.2022.3184248?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Smith, Adrian & Raven, Rob, 2012. "What is protective space? Reconsidering niches in transitions to sustainability," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(6), pages 1025-1036.
    2. Howells, Jeremy, 2006. "Intermediation and the role of intermediaries in innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(5), pages 715-728, June.
    3. Elsa T.A. Berthet & C�cile Barnaud & Nathalie Girard & Julie Labatut & Guillaume Martin, 2016. "How to foster agroecological innovations? A comparison of participatory design methods," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 59(2), pages 280-301, February.
    4. Armand Hatchuel, 2001. "Towards Design Theory and Expandable Rationality: The Unfinished Program of Herbert Simon," Journal of Management & Governance, Springer;Accademia Italiana di Economia Aziendale (AIDEA), vol. 5(3), pages 260-273, September.
    5. Geels, Frank W. & Schot, Johan, 2007. "Typology of sociotechnical transition pathways," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(3), pages 399-417, April.
    6. Zolfagharian, Mohammadreza & Walrave, Bob & Raven, Rob & Romme, A. Georges L., 2019. "Studying transitions: Past, present, and future," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(9), pages 1-1.
    7. Marcel Bogers & Ann-Kristin Zobel & Allan Afuah & Esteve Almirall & Sabine Brunswicker & Linus Dahlander & Lars Frederiksen & Annabelle Gawer & Marc Gruber & Stefan Haefliger & John Hagedoorn & Dennis, 2017. "The open innovation research landscape: established perspectives and emerging themes across different levels of analysis," Industry and Innovation, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 24(1), pages 8-40, January.
    8. Stefan Kuhlmann & Arie Rip, 2018. "Next-Generation Innovation Policy and Grand Challenges," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 45(4), pages 448-454.
    9. Geels, Frank W., 2002. "Technological transitions as evolutionary reconfiguration processes: a multi-level perspective and a case-study," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 31(8-9), pages 1257-1274, December.
    10. Sutherland, Lee-Ann & Peter, Sarah & Zagata, Lukas, 2015. "Conceptualising multi-regime interactions: The role of the agriculture sector in renewable energy transitions," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(8), pages 1543-1554.
    11. Sylvain Lenfle & Jonas Söderlund, 2022. "Project-oriented agency and regeneration in socio-technical transition: Insights from the case of numerical weather prediction (1978–2015)," Post-Print hal-03640761, HAL.
    12. James Stewart & Sampsa Hyysalo, 2008. "Intermediaries, Users And Social Learning In Technological Innovation," International Journal of Innovation Management (ijim), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 12(03), pages 295-325.
    13. Stock-Homburg, Ruth M. & Heald, Shannon L.M. & Holthaus, Christian & Gillert, Nils Lennart & Hippel, Eric von, 2021. "Need-solution pair recognition by household sector individuals: Evidence, and a cognitive mechanism explanation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(8).
    14. Lenfle, Sylvain & Söderlund, Jonas, 2022. "Project-oriented agency and regeneration in socio-technical transition: Insights from the case of numerical weather prediction (1978–2015)," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(3).
    15. Farla, Jacco & Markard, Jochen & Raven, Rob & Coenen, Lars, 2012. "Sustainability transitions in the making: A closer look at actors, strategies and resources," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 79(6), pages 991-998.
    16. Armand Hatchuel & Pascal Le Masson & Yoram Reich & Eswaran Subrahmanian, 2018. "Design theory: a foundation of a new paradigm for design science and engineering," Post-Print hal-01633021, HAL.
    17. Geels, Frank W., 2004. "From sectoral systems of innovation to socio-technical systems: Insights about dynamics and change from sociology and institutional theory," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(6-7), pages 897-920, September.
    18. Ivan Montiel & Alvaro Cuervo-Cazurra & Junghoon Park & Raquel Antolín-López & Bryan W. Husted, 2021. "Implementing the United Nations’ Sustainable Development Goals in international business," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 52(5), pages 999-1030, July.
    19. Ilse Hellemans & Amanda J. Porter & Damla Diriker, 2022. "Harnessing digitalization for sustainable development: Understanding how interactions on sustainability‐oriented digital platforms manage tensions and paradoxes," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 31(2), pages 668-683, February.
    20. Foray, D. & Mowery, D.C. & Nelson, R.R., 2012. "Public R&D and social challenges: What lessons from mission R&D programs?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(10), pages 1697-1702.
    21. Amanda J. Porter & Philipp Tuertscher & Marleen Huysman, 2020. "Saving Our Oceans: Scaling the Impact of Robust Action Through Crowdsourcing," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 57(2), pages 246-286, March.
    22. Smith, Adrian & Voß, Jan-Peter & Grin, John, 2010. "Innovation studies and sustainability transitions: The allure of the multi-level perspective and its challenges," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(4), pages 435-448, May.
    23. 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.
    24. Elzen, Boelie & Bos, Bram, 2019. "The RIO approach: Design and anchoring of sustainable animal husbandry systems," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 145(C), pages 141-152.
    25. Raven, Rob, 2007. "Co-evolution of waste and electricity regimes: Multi-regime dynamics in the Netherlands (1969-2003)," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(4), pages 2197-2208, April.
    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. Jain, Sanjay, 2020. "Fumbling to the future? Socio-technical regime change in the recorded music industry," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 158(C).
    2. Andersen, Allan Dahl & Markard, Jochen, 2020. "Multi-technology interaction in socio-technical transitions: How recent dynamics in HVDC technology can inform transition theories," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 151(C).
    3. 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.
    4. Hamid El Bilali, 2019. "The Multi-Level Perspective in Research on Sustainability Transitions in Agriculture and Food Systems: A Systematic Review," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 9(4), pages 1-24, April.
    5. 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.
    6. 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.
    7. Catia Milena Lopes & Annibal José Scavarda & Guilherme Luís Roehe Vaccaro & Christopher Rosa Pohlmann & André Luis Korzenowski, 2018. "Perspective of Business Models and Innovation for Sustainability Transition in Hospitals," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(1), pages 1-19, December.
    8. Geels, Frank W., 2020. "Micro-foundations of the multi-level perspective on socio-technical transitions: Developing a multi-dimensional model of agency through crossovers between social constructivism, evolutionary economics," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 152(C).
    9. 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).
    10. Manning, Stephan & Reinecke, Juliane, 2016. "A modular governance architecture in-the-making: How transnational standard-setters govern sustainability transitions," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(3), pages 618-633.
    11. Berggren, Christian & Magnusson, Thomas & Sushandoyo, Dedy, 2015. "Transition pathways revisited: Established firms as multi-level actors in the heavy vehicle industry," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(5), pages 1017-1028.
    12. Sorrell, Steve, 2018. "Explaining sociotechnical transitions: A critical realist perspective," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(7), pages 1267-1282.
    13. Ignė Stalmokaitė & Johanna Yliskylä-Peuralahti, 2019. "Sustainability Transitions in Baltic Sea Shipping: Exploring the Responses of Firms to Regulatory Changes," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(7), pages 1-23, March.
    14. Haddad, Carolina R. & Bergek, Anna, 2023. "Towards an integrated framework for evaluating transformative innovation policy," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(2).
    15. Christina Gugerell & Marianne Penker, 2020. "Change Agents’ Perspectives on Spatial–Relational Proximities and Urban Food Niches," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(6), pages 1-18, March.
    16. Huguenin, Ariane & Jeannerat, Hugues, 2017. "Creating change through pilot and demonstration projects: Towards a valuation policy approach," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(3), pages 624-635.
    17. 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.
    18. 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.
    19. Fuenfschilling, Lea & Truffer, Bernhard, 2016. "The interplay of institutions, actors and technologies in socio-technical systems — An analysis of transformations in the Australian urban water sector," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 103(C), pages 298-312.
    20. Thomas Magnusson & Viktor Werner, 2023. "Conceptualisations of incumbent firms in sustainability transitions: Insights from organisation theory and a systematic literature review," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 32(2), pages 903-919, February.

    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:hal:journl:hal-03772981. 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: CCSD (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/ .

    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.