IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/rff/report/rp-23-01.html

Demand-Pull Tools for Innovation in the Cement and Iron and Steel Sectors

Author

Listed:
  • Bergman, Aaron

    (Resources for the Future)

  • Krupnick, Alan

    (Resources for the Future)

  • Haerle, Daniel
  • Bioret, Lucie

    (Resources for the Future)

  • Zhu, Yuqi

    (Resources for the Future)

  • Shih, Jhih-Shyang

    (Resources for the Future)

Abstract

Demand-pull measures are a set of relatively underused policies for driving innovation by increasing the demand for innovative technologies. These measures contrast with supply-push policies, such as research and development funding, that subsidize the supply of innovative technologies. Demand-pull policies include:Prizes for innovationAdvance market commitments (AMCs), which commit to purchase innovative products when developedGovernment procurement, where the government provides additional demand for innovative technologiesMilestone payments, where funding is released in stages at the completion of various development stagesStandards, which can stimulate demand by providing information about technology performanceContracts for differences, which can reduce price volatility-related risk related that can hamper innovation

Suggested Citation

  • Bergman, Aaron & Krupnick, Alan & Haerle, Daniel & Bioret, Lucie & Zhu, Yuqi & Shih, Jhih-Shyang, 2023. "Demand-Pull Tools for Innovation in the Cement and Iron and Steel Sectors," RFF Reports 23-01, Resources for the Future.
    • Handle: RePEc:rff:report:rp-23-01
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.rff.org/documents/3760/Report_23-01_aEmAsu3.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Rishikesh Ram Bhandary & Kelly Sims Gallagher & Fang Zhang, 2021. "Climate finance policy in practice: a review of the evidence," Climate Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 21(4), pages 529-545, April.
    2. Kevin J. Boudreau & Eva C. Guinan & Karim R. Lakhani & Christoph Riedl, 2016. "Looking Across and Looking Beyond the Knowledge Frontier: Intellectual Distance, Novelty, and Resource Allocation in Science," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 62(10), pages 2765-2783, 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. Zhu, Yuqi & Bergman, Aaron, 2025. "Policies for Building the Technology Performance Insurance Market," RFF Reports 25-03, Resources for the Future.
    2. Bergman, Aaron & Krupnick, Alan & Nehrkorn, Katarina & Zhu, Yuqi, 2026. "Overcoming Demand Barriers to Hydrogen Use in Heavy-Duty Trucks and Ports," RFF Working Paper Series 26-03, Resources for the Future.

    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. Albert Banal-Estañol & Qianshuo Liu & Inés Macho-Stadler & David Pérez-Castrillo, 2021. "Similar-to-me Effects in the Grant Application Process: Applicants, Panelists, and the Likelihood of Obtaining Funds," Working Papers 1289, Barcelona School of Economics.
    2. Stephen A Gallo & Karen B Schmaling, 2022. "Peer review: Risk and risk tolerance," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 17(8), pages 1-20, August.
    3. repec:osf:socarx:cvngq_v1 is not listed on IDEAS
    4. Johan Lilliestam & Anthony Patt & Germán Bersalli, 2022. "On the quality of emission reductions: observed effects of carbon pricing on investments, innovation, and operational shifts. A response to van den Bergh and Savin (2021)," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 83(3), pages 733-758, November.
    5. Julian Kolev & Yuly Fuentes-Medel & Fiona Murray, 2019. "Is Blinded Review Enough? How Gendered Outcomes Arise Even Under Anonymous Evaluation," NBER Working Papers 25759, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    6. Jürgen Janger & Nicole Schmidt-Padickakudy & Anna Strauss-Kollin, 2019. "International Differences in Basic Research Grant Funding. A Systematic Comparison," WIFO Studies, WIFO, number 61664.
    7. Sarah Armitage & Noël Bakhtian & Adam Jaffe, 2024. "Innovation Market Failures and the Design of New Climate Policy Instruments," Environmental and Energy Policy and the Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 5(1), pages 4-48.
    8. Emilian Szczepański & Renata Żochowska & Mariusz Izdebski & Marianna Jacyna, 2025. "Decision-Making Problems in Urban Transport Decarbonization Strategies: Challenges, Tools, and Methods," Energies, MDPI, vol. 18(15), pages 1-17, July.
    9. Jeffrey L. Furman & Florenta Teodoridis, 2020. "Automation, Research Technology, and Researchers’ Trajectories: Evidence from Computer Science and Electrical Engineering," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 31(2), pages 330-354, March.
    10. Rodríguez Sánchez, Isabel & Makkonen, Teemu & Williams, Allan M., 2019. "Peer review assessment of originality in tourism journals: critical perspective of key gatekeepers," Annals of Tourism Research, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 1-11.
    11. Banal-Estañol, Albert & Macho-Stadler, Inés & Pérez-Castrillo, David, 2019. "Evaluation in research funding agencies: Are structurally diverse teams biased against?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(7), pages 1823-1840.
    12. Pierre Azoulay & Danielle Li, 2020. "Scientific Grant Funding," NBER Working Papers 26889, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    13. Balázs Kovács & Greta Hsu & Amanda Sharkey, 2024. "The Stickiness of Category Labels: Audience Perception and Evaluation of Producer Repositioning in Creative Markets," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 70(9), pages 6315-6335, September.
    14. Ke, Qing, 2020. "Technological impact of biomedical research: The role of basicness and novelty," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(7).
    15. Sam Arts & Nicola Melluso & Reinhilde Veugelers, 2023. "Beyond Citations: Measuring Novel Scientific Ideas and their Impact in Publication Text," Papers 2309.16437, arXiv.org, revised Dec 2024.
    16. Zou, Jin & Yan, Jingzhou & Deng, Guoying, 2023. "ESG rating confusion and bond spreads," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 129(C).
    17. Aurélie Hemonnet-Goujot & Delphine Manceau & Celine Abecassis-Moedas, 2019. "Drivers and Pathways of NPD Success in the Marketing-External Design Relationship," Post-Print hal-01883760, HAL.
    18. Chiara Franzoni & Paula Stephan & Reinhilde Veugelers, 2022. "Funding Risky Research," Entrepreneurship and Innovation Policy and the Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 1(1), pages 103-133.
    19. Dr. Kangyin Dong & Congyu Zhao & Xiucheng Dong, 2024. "From Hell To Heaven: How Climate Risks Hurt The Poor And Climate Finance Heals Them," Bulletin of Monetary Economics and Banking, Bank Indonesia, vol. 27(4), pages 603-630, December.
    20. Veugelers, Reinhilde & Wang, Jian, 2019. "Scientific novelty and technological impact," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(6), pages 1362-1372.
    21. Zhentao Liang & Jin Mao & Gang Li, 2023. "Bias against scientific novelty: A prepublication perspective," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 74(1), pages 99-114, January.

    More about this item

    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:rff:report:rp-23-01. 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: Resources for the Future (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/rffffus.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.