IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/appene/v86y2009i2p243-250.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

New environmental policy for system innovation: Casus alternatives for fossil motor fuels

Author

Listed:
  • Ros, Jan
  • Nagelhout, Dick
  • Montfoort, Johanna

Abstract

The Fourth Dutch Environmental Policy Plan, released in 2001, was explicitly focused on long term system innovations to solve the very tenacious problems of climate change and global biodiversity [VROM (Environmental Department). Where there's a will there's a world, 4th National Environmental Policy Plan for the Netherlands 2001 [summary in English]]. This plan ushered in a new environmental policy. Five years later, in 2006, the Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency (MNP) brought out the first analysis of the progress of these system innovation processes, showing that although new initiatives had been taken, long term policy was not yet a leading element. MNP has developed a new evaluation method for this analysis, which is not based on monitoring results of environmental quality or emission reduction, but on societal activities concerning perception of the problems, vision, R&D, experiments in practice and the analysis of driving forces behind new investments. Still, a policy evaluation is difficult without clear policy goals. System innovation is a goal-seeking process, and not only in terms of greenhouse gas emissions or levels of biodiversity in the long term. Since there are many technological and/or institutional possibilities established beforehand, choices are not clear. Neither is it wise to make a choice too soon. This is why an important element of the method is the focus on system options as potential goals. The evaluation method is explained and illustrated with system options related to mobility. Examples are fuel cells and hydrogen produced with Concentrating Solar Power (CSP) in northern Africa, energy transport included. Another system option is based on CSP, as well as on the direct use of electricity in plug-in hybrid cars. A third system option is based on liquid biofuels. Although far from giving a complete picture, these options provide good indications of transition processes in practice for developing alternatives for fossil motor fuels. Here the main on-going activities for these system options are described and the role of Dutch policy in the goal-seeking process is analyzed. Potential environmental effects of these system options have been calculated as a part of a broader sustainability assessment.

Suggested Citation

  • Ros, Jan & Nagelhout, Dick & Montfoort, Johanna, 2009. "New environmental policy for system innovation: Casus alternatives for fossil motor fuels," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 86(2), pages 243-250, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:appene:v:86:y:2009:i:2:p:243-250
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0306-2619(08)00059-7
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Negro, Simona O. & Hekkert, Marko P. & Smits, Ruud E., 2007. "Explaining the failure of the Dutch innovation system for biomass digestion--A functional analysis," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(2), pages 925-938, February.
    2. 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.
    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. Igor Tomièiæ & Markus Schatten, 2015. "Towards an Agent Based Framework for Modelling Smart Self-Sustainable Systems," Interdisciplinary Description of Complex Systems - scientific journal, Croatian Interdisciplinary Society Provider Homepage: http://indecs.eu, vol. 13(1), pages 57-70.
    2. Raslavičius, Laurencas & Azzopardi, Brian & Keršys, Artūras & Starevičius, Martynas & Bazaras, Žilvinas & Makaras, Rolandas, 2015. "Electric vehicles challenges and opportunities: Lithuanian review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 786-800.
    3. Tran, Martino, 2012. "Technology-behavioural modelling of energy innovation diffusion in the UK," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 95(C), pages 1-11.
    4. Caroline Rodrigues Vaz & Tania Regina Shoeninger Rauen & Álvaro Guillermo Rojas Lezana, 2017. "Sustainability and Innovation in the Automotive Sector: A Structured Content Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(6), pages 1-23, May.
    5. Lin, Boqiang & Kuang, Yunming, 2020. "Household heterogeneity impact of removing energy subsidies in China: Direct and indirect effect," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 147(C).
    6. Cho, Hyun Jun & Kim, Jin-Kuk & Ahmed, Faisal & Yeo, Yeong-Koo, 2013. "Life-cycle greenhouse gas emissions and energy balances of a biodiesel production from palm fatty acid distillate (PFAD)," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 111(C), pages 479-488.
    7. Abejon Aparicio, Noe & Lai, Cynthia & Chan-Halbrendt, Catherine, 2012. "“DOSSA”, highway to energy self-sustainability," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 97(C), pages 217-224.
    8. Wonglimpiyarat, Jarunee, 2010. "Technological change of the energy innovation system: From oil-based to bio-based energy," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 87(3), pages 749-755, March.

    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. 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.
    2. Alkemade & Simona Negro & Neil Thompson & Marko Hekkert, 2011. "Towards a micro-level explanation of sustainability transitions: entrepreneurial strategies," Innovation Studies Utrecht (ISU) working paper series 11-01, Utrecht University, Department of Innovation Studies, revised Apr 2011.
    3. 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.
    4. Yu-Sheng Kao & Kazumitsu Nawata & Chi-Yo Huang, 2019. "Systemic Functions Evaluation based Technological Innovation System for the Sustainability of IoT in the Manufacturing Industry," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(8), pages 1-34, April.
    5. van Alphen, Klaas & van Ruijven, Jochem & Kasa, Sjur & Hekkert, Marko & Turkenburg, Wim, 2009. "The performance of the Norwegian carbon dioxide, capture and storage innovation system," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(1), pages 43-55, January.
    6. Edsand, Hans, 2016. "Technological Innovation Systems and the wider context: A framework for developing countries," MERIT Working Papers 2016-017, United Nations University - Maastricht Economic and Social Research Institute on Innovation and Technology (MERIT).
    7. Markard, Jochen & Stadelmann, Martin & Truffer, Bernhard, 2009. "Prospective analysis of technological innovation systems: Identifying technological and organizational development options for biogas in Switzerland," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(4), pages 655-667, May.
    8. Bleda, Mercedes & del Río, Pablo, 2013. "The market failure and the systemic failure rationales in technological innovation systems," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(5), pages 1039-1052.
    9. Bennett, Simon J, 2012. "Using past transitions to inform scenarios for the future of renewable raw materials in the UK," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 95-108.
    10. 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.
    11. Haddad, Carolina R. & Bergek, Anna, 2023. "Towards an integrated framework for evaluating transformative innovation policy," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(2).
    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. 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).
    14. 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.
    15. Markard, Jochen, 2020. "The life cycle of technological innovation systems," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 153(C).
    16. Edsand, Hans-Erik, 2019. "Technological innovation system and the wider context: A framework for developing countries," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 58(C).
    17. Tigabu, Aschalew D. & Berkhout, Frans & van Beukering, Pieter, 2015. "Technology innovation systems and technology diffusion: Adoption of bio-digestion in an emerging innovation system in Rwanda," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 90(PA), pages 318-330.
    18. Thomas Hoppe & Gerdien De Vries, 2018. "Social Innovation and the Energy Transition," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(1), pages 1-13, December.
    19. 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.
    20. Marko P. Hekkert & Simona O. Negro, 2008. "Functions of innovation systems as a framework to understand sustainable technological change: empirical evidence for earlier claims," Innovation Studies Utrecht (ISU) working paper series 08-10, Utrecht University, Department of Innovation Studies, revised Apr 2008.

    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:eee:appene:v:86:y:2009:i:2:p:243-250. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/405891/description#description .

    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.