IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/mil/wpdepa/2017-18.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The Socio–Economic Impact of a Breakthrough in the Particle Accelerators’ Technology: A Research Agenda

Author

Listed:
  • Massimo FLORIO
  • Andrea BASTIANIN
  • Paolo CASTELNOVO

Abstract

Preliminary evidence on the long–run trajectory of the accelerator industry suggests that it may be close to have reached the maturity phase of its cycle. If this is the case, how can we measure the benefits an uncertain breakthrough in acceleration technology? Who are the main stakeholders interested by such a breakthrough? We identify these subjects and sketch some avenues for answering these questions. We thus present a model for the social Cost-Benefit Analysis (CBA) of research infrastructures and illustrate the results of its implementation for assessing the benefits of accelerators in basic science and hadrontherapy. Lastly, we move from the social CBA of single research infrastructures to the modeling a major change in the accelerator technology and hence in the industry. A research agenda on the potential impacts of a technological breakthrough is presented.

Suggested Citation

  • Massimo FLORIO & Andrea BASTIANIN & Paolo CASTELNOVO, 2017. "The Socio–Economic Impact of a Breakthrough in the Particle Accelerators’ Technology: A Research Agenda," Departmental Working Papers 2017-18, Department of Economics, Management and Quantitative Methods at Università degli Studi di Milano.
  • Handle: RePEc:mil:wpdepa:2017-18
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://wp.demm.unimi.it/files/wp/2017/DEMM-2017_18wp.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Huizingh, Eelko K.R.E., 2017. "Moving the innovation horizon in Asia," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 60, pages 43-44.
    2. Battistoni, Giuseppe & Genco, Mario & Marsilio, Marta & Pancotti, Chiara & Rossi, Sandro & Vignetti, Silvia, 2016. "Cost–benefit analysis of applied research infrastructure. Evidence from health care," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 112(C), pages 79-91.
    3. Rotolo, Daniele & Hicks, Diana & Martin, Ben R., 2015. "What is an emerging technology?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(10), pages 1827-1843.
    4. Florio, Massimo & Sirtori, Emanuela, 2016. "Social benefits and costs of large scale research infrastructures," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 112(C), pages 65-78.
    5. Lawrence, Michael & Goodwin, Paul & O'Connor, Marcus & Onkal, Dilek, 2006. "Judgmental forecasting: A review of progress over the last 25 years," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 22(3), pages 493-518.
    6. de Loë, Rob C. & Melnychuk, Natalya & Murray, Dan & Plummer, Ryan, 2016. "Advancing the State of Policy Delphi Practice: A Systematic Review Evaluating Methodological Evolution, Innovation, and Opportunities," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 104(C), pages 78-88.
    7. Önkal, Dilek & Sayım, Kadire Zeynep & Gönül, Mustafa Sinan, 2013. "Scenarios as channels of forecast advice," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 80(4), pages 772-788.
    8. Dahlin, Kristina B. & Behrens, Dean M., 2005. "When is an invention really radical?: Defining and measuring technological radicalness," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(5), pages 717-737, June.
    9. Massimo Florio & Sara Colautti, 2005. "A logistic growth theory of public expenditures: A study of five countries over 100 years," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 122(3), pages 355-393, March.
    10. Rowe, Gene & Wright, George, 1999. "The Delphi technique as a forecasting tool: issues and analysis," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 15(4), pages 353-375, October.
    11. Kristina Dahlin & Deans M. Behrens, 2005. "When is an invention really radical? Defining and measuring technological radicalness," Post-Print hal-00480416, HAL.
    12. Gene Rowe, 2007. "A Guide to Delphi," Foresight: The International Journal of Applied Forecasting, International Institute of Forecasters, issue 8, pages 11-16, Fall.
    13. Norman Dalkey & Olaf Helmer, 1963. "An Experimental Application of the DELPHI Method to the Use of Experts," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 9(3), pages 458-467, 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. Mark Knell & Simone Vannuccini, 2022. "Tools and concepts for understanding disruptive technological change after Schumpeter," Jena Economic Research Papers 2022-005, Friedrich-Schiller-University Jena.
    2. Andrea, Bastianin & Paolo, Castelnuovo & Massimo, Florio & Anna, Giunta, 2019. "Technological Learning and Innovation Gestation Lags at the Frontier of Science: from CERN Procurement to Patents," Working Papers 405, University of Milano-Bicocca, Department of Economics, revised Apr 2019.
    3. Barbieri, Nicolò & Marzucchi, Alberto & Rizzo, Ugo, 2020. "Knowledge sources and impacts on subsequent inventions: Do green technologies differ from non-green ones?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(2).
    4. Valeria Croce & Karl Wöber & John Kester, 2016. "Expert identification and calibration for collective forecasting tasks," Tourism Economics, , vol. 22(5), pages 979-994, October.
    5. Rezaei, Mojtaba & Jafari-Sadeghi, Vahid & Cao, Dongmei & Mahdiraji, Hannan Amoozad, 2021. "Key indicators of ethical challenges in digital healthcare: A combined Delphi exploration and confirmative factor analysis approach with evidence from Khorasan province in Iran," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 167(C).
    6. Sun, Bixuan & Kolesnikov, Sergey & Goldstein, Anna & Chan, Gabriel, 2021. "A dynamic approach for identifying technological breakthroughs with an application in solar photovoltaics," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 165(C).
    7. Seokbeom Kwon & Alan Porter & Jan Youtie, 2016. "Navigating the innovation trajectories of technology by combining specialization score analyses for publications and patents: graphene and nano-enabled drug delivery," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 106(3), pages 1057-1071, March.
    8. Inchae Park & Byungun Yoon, 2018. "Identifying Promising Research Frontiers of Pattern Recognition through Bibliometric Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-32, November.
    9. Xu, Haiyun & Winnink, Jos & Yue, Zenghui & Zhang, Huiling & Pang, Hongshen, 2021. "Multidimensional Scientometric indicators for the detection of emerging research topics," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 163(C).
    10. Andrea Bastianin & Paolo Castelnovo & Massimo Florio & Anna Giunta, 2022. "Big science and innovation: gestation lag from procurement to patents for CERN suppliers," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 47(2), pages 531-555, April.
    11. Prommer, Lisa & Tiberius, Victor & Kraus, Sascha, 2020. "Exploring the future of startup leadership development," Journal of Business Venturing Insights, Elsevier, vol. 14(C).
    12. Avimanyu Datta, 2016. "Antecedents To Radical Innovations: A Longitudinal Look At Firms In The Information Technology Industry By Aggregation Of Patents," International Journal of Innovation Management (ijim), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 20(07), pages 1-31, October.
    13. Kathryn Rudie Harrigan & Maria Chiara Guardo & Bo Cowgill, 2017. "Multiplicative-innovation synergies: tests in technological acquisitions," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 42(5), pages 1212-1233, October.
    14. Verhoeven, Dennis & Bakker, Jurriën & Veugelers, Reinhilde, 2016. "Measuring technological novelty with patent-based indicators," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(3), pages 707-723.
    15. Mary J. Benner, 2010. "Securities Analysts and Incumbent Response to Radical Technological Change: Evidence from Digital Photography and Internet Telephony," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 21(1), pages 42-62, February.
    16. Fildes, Robert & Goodwin, Paul & Onkal, Dilek, 2015. "Information use in supply chain forecasting," MPRA Paper 66034, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    17. Maxim Kotsemir & Alexander Abroskin & Dirk Meissner, 2013. "Innovation concepts and typology – an evolutionary discussion," HSE Working papers WP BRP 05/STI/2013, National Research University Higher School of Economics.
    18. Di Zio, Simone & Bolzan, Mario & Marozzi, Marco, 2021. "Classification of Delphi outputs through robust ranking and fuzzy clustering for Delphi-based scenarios," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 173(C).
    19. Alyami, Saleh. H. & Rezgui, Yacine & Kwan, Alan, 2013. "Developing sustainable building assessment scheme for Saudi Arabia: Delphi consultation approach," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 27(C), pages 43-54.
    20. KANG Byeongwoo & MOTOHASHI Kazuyuki, 2020. "Local Industry Influence on Commercialization of University Research by University Startups," Discussion papers 20086, Research Institute of Economy, Trade and Industry (RIETI).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Logistic function; Technological breakthrough; Cost–benefit analysis; Delphi method; Innovation;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • D61 - Microeconomics - - Welfare Economics - - - Allocative Efficiency; Cost-Benefit Analysis
    • O30 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - General
    • O33 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Technological Change: Choices and Consequences; Diffusion Processes

    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:mil:wpdepa:2017-18. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: . General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/damilit.html .

    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: DEMM Working Papers The email address of this maintainer does not seem to be valid anymore. Please ask DEMM Working Papers to update the entry or send us the correct address (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/damilit.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.