IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/enepol/v168y2022ics0301421522003135.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Designing publicly funded organisations for accelerated low carbon innovation: A case study of the ETI, UK and ARPA-E, US

Author

Listed:
  • Watson, Anna

Abstract

The role of publicly funded organisations in implementing accelerated low carbon innovation policy is receiving increasing attention. Due to different national contexts and priorities however, policy makers face high levels of complexity in understanding what organisational approaches might best suit their aims. This paper develops a set of ten principles for accelerated innovation organisation design, which seek to provide policy makers with a tool to better understand the interplay of different design features on innovation outputs. The principles are applied to a comparative case study of the Energy Technologies Institute (ETI), United Kingdom (UK), and the Advanced Research Projects Agency– Energy (ARPA-E), United States (US). Results demonstrate that the design of the ETI, which embedded incumbent industry actors and engaged a narrower set of staff competencies, caused it to prioritise un transformative innovation, contrary to its initial mission. Conversely, the operational approach of ARPA-E has created an entrepreneurial, flexible approach to pursuing transformative innovation. The organisation however lacks long term stability in a changing political environment. Conclusions explore the implications of these results for policy makers seeking to design organisations that are effective in accelerating low carbon innovation.

Suggested Citation

  • Watson, Anna, 2022. "Designing publicly funded organisations for accelerated low carbon innovation: A case study of the ETI, UK and ARPA-E, US," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 168(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:enepol:v:168:y:2022:i:c:s0301421522003135
    DOI: 10.1016/j.enpol.2022.113088
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301421522003135
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.enpol.2022.113088?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
    ---><---

    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. Avery Sen, 2017. "Island + Bridge: how transformative innovation is organized in the federal government," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 44(5), pages 707-721.
    2. Gross, Robert & Hanna, Richard & Gambhir, Ajay & Heptonstall, Philip & Speirs, Jamie, 2018. "How long does innovation and commercialisation in the energy sectors take? Historical case studies of the timescale from invention to widespread commercialisation in energy supply and end use technolo," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 123(C), pages 682-699.
    3. Brendan Haley, 2016. "Getting the Institutions Right: Designing the Public Sector to Promote Clean Innovation," Canadian Public Policy, University of Toronto Press, vol. 42(s1), pages 54-66, November.
    4. Roberts, Cameron & Geels, Frank W., 2019. "Conditions for politically accelerated transitions: Historical institutionalism, the multi-level perspective, and two historical case studies in transport and agriculture," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 140(C), pages 221-240.
    5. Chan, Melissa & Jones, Charles A. & Kempener, Ruud & Diaz Anadon, Laura & Logar, Nathaniel James & Narayanamurti, Venkatesh & Bunn, Matthew G. & Chan, Gabriel Angelo & Lee, Audrey, 2011. "Transforming U.S. Energy Innovation," Scholarly Articles 10594301, Harvard Kennedy School of Government.
    6. Dani Rodrik, 2014. "Green industrial policy," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press and Oxford Review of Economic Policy Limited, vol. 30(3), pages 469-491.
    7. Carley, Sanya, 2011. "Historical analysis of U.S. electricity markets: Reassessing carbon lock-in," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(2), pages 720-732, February.
    8. Unruh, Gregory C., 2000. "Understanding carbon lock-in," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 28(12), pages 817-830, October.
    9. Anadón, Laura Díaz, 2012. "Missions-oriented RD&D institutions in energy between 2000 and 2010: A comparative analysis of China, the United Kingdom, and the United States," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(10), pages 1742-1756.
    10. Nemet, Gregory F. & Kammen, Daniel M., 2007. "U.S. energy research and development: Declining investment, increasing need, and the feasibility of expansion," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(1), pages 746-755, January.
    11. William B Bonvillian, 2018. "DARPA and its ARPA-E and IARPA clones: a unique innovation organization model," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 27(5), pages 897-914.
    12. 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.
    13. Kivimaa, Paula & Kern, Florian, 2016. "Creative destruction or mere niche support? Innovation policy mixes for sustainability transitions," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(1), pages 205-217.
    14. William Bonvillian & Richard Atta, 2011. "ARPA-E and DARPA: Applying the DARPA model to energy innovation," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 36(5), pages 469-513, October.
    15. Vasudeva, Gurneeta, 2009. "How national institutions influence technology policies and firms' knowledge-building strategies: A study of fuel cell innovation across industrialized countries," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(8), pages 1248-1259, October.
    16. Edmondson, Duncan L. & Kern, Florian & Rogge, Karoline S., 2019. "The co-evolution of policy mixes and socio-technical systems: Towards a conceptual framework of policy mix feedback in sustainability transitions," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(10).
    17. Erkki Karo & Rainer Kattel, 2016. "How to Organize for Innovation: Entrepreneurial State and Organizational Variety," The Other Canon Foundation and Tallinn University of Technology Working Papers in Technology Governance and Economic Dynamics 66, TUT Ragnar Nurkse Department of Innovation and Governance.
    18. Francesco Crespi & Dario Guarascio, 2019. "The demand-pull effect of public procurement on innovation and industrial renewal," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 28(4), pages 793-815.
    19. Nahm, Jonas, 2017. "Renewable futures and industrial legacies: Wind and solar sectors in China, Germany, and the United States†," Business and Politics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 19(1), pages 68-106, March.
    20. Goldstein, Anna P. & Narayanamurti, Venkatesh, 2018. "Simultaneous pursuit of discovery and invention in the US Department of Energy," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(8), pages 1505-1512.
    21. Sanden, Bjorn A. & Azar, Christian, 2005. "Near-term technology policies for long-term climate targets--economy wide versus technology specific approaches," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(12), pages 1557-1576, August.
    22. Doblinger, Claudia & Surana, Kavita & Anadon, Laura Diaz, 2019. "Governments as partners: The role of alliances in U.S. cleantech startup innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(6), pages 1458-1475.
    23. William B. Bonvillian, 2014. "The new model innovation agencies: An overview," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 41(4), pages 425-437.
    24. Rainer Kattel & Mariana Mazzucato, 2018. "Mission-oriented innovation policy and dynamic capabilities in the public sector," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 27(5), pages 787-801.
    25. Gabriel Chan & Anna P. Goldstein & Amitai Bin-Nun & Laura Diaz Anadon & Venkatesh Narayanamurti, 2017. "Six principles for energy innovation," Nature, Nature, vol. 552(7683), pages 25-27, December.
    26. Pierre Azoulay & Erica Fuchs & Anna P. Goldstein & Michael Kearney, 2019. "Funding Breakthrough Research: Promises and Challenges of the “ARPA Model”," Innovation Policy and the Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 19(1), pages 69-96.
    27. Stokes, Leah C. & Breetz, Hanna L., 2018. "Politics in the U.S. energy transition: Case studies of solar, wind, biofuels and electric vehicles policy," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 113(C), pages 76-86.
    28. Dan Breznitz & Darius Ornston & Steven Samford, 2018. "Mission critical: the ends, means, and design of innovation agencies," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 27(5), pages 883-896.
    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. Hoppmann, Joern, 2021. "Hand in hand to Nowhereland? How the resource dependence of research institutes influences their co-evolution with industry," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(2).
    2. Doblinger, Claudia & Surana, Kavita & Anadon, Laura Diaz, 2019. "Governments as partners: The role of alliances in U.S. cleantech startup innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(6), pages 1458-1475.
    3. Weigelt, Carmen & Lu, Shaohua & Verhaal, J. Cameron, 2021. "Blinded by the sun: The role of prosumers as niche actors in incumbent firms’ adoption of solar power during sustainability transitions," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(9).
    4. Leitch, Aletta & Haley, Brendan & Hastings-Simon, Sara, 2019. "Can the oil and gas sector enable geothermal technologies? Socio-technical opportunities and complementarity failures in Alberta, Canada," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 125(C), pages 384-395.
    5. Haddad, Carolina R. & Bergek, Anna, 2023. "Towards an integrated framework for evaluating transformative innovation policy," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(2).
    6. Kirsi Kotilainen & Pami Aalto & Jussi Valta & Antti Rautiainen & Matti Kojo & Benjamin K. Sovacool, 2019. "From path dependence to policy mixes for Nordic electric mobility: Lessons for accelerating future transport transitions," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 52(4), pages 573-600, December.
    7. Steffen S. Bettin, 2020. "Electricity infrastructure and innovation in the next phase of energy transition—amendments to the technology innovation system framework," Review of Evolutionary Political Economy, Springer, vol. 1(3), pages 371-395, November.
    8. Goldstein, Anna P. & Kearney, Michael, 2020. "Know when to fold ‘em: An empirical description of risk management in public research funding," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(1).
    9. Brozynski, Max T. & Leibowicz, Benjamin D., 2022. "A multi-level optimization model of infrastructure-dependent technology adoption: Overcoming the chicken-and-egg problem," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 300(2), pages 755-770.
    10. Jonas Meckling & Clara Galeazzi & Esther Shears & Tong Xu & Laura Diaz Anadon, 2022. "Energy innovation funding and institutions in major economies," Nature Energy, Nature, vol. 7(9), pages 876-885, September.
    11. Erik Gawel & Sebastian Strunz & Paul Lehmann, 2016. "Support policies for renewables: Instrument choice and instrument change from a Public Choice perspective," WIDER Working Paper Series wp-2016-6, World Institute for Development Economic Research (UNU-WIDER).
    12. Cunial, Santiago, 2024. "Policy legacies and energy transitions: Greening policies under sectoral reforms in Argentina and Chile," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 188(C).
    13. Schmidt, Tobias S. & Sewerin, Sebastian, 2019. "Measuring the temporal dynamics of policy mixes – An empirical analysis of renewable energy policy mixes’ balance and design features in nine countries," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(10).
    14. Samson Afewerki & Asbjørn Karlsen, 2021. "Policy mixes for just sustainable regional development in industrially overspecialized regions: the case of two Norwegian petro-maritime regions," PEGIS geo-disc-2021_02, Institute for Economic Geography and GIScience, Department of Socioeconomics, Vienna University of Economics and Business.
    15. Steen, Markus & Weaver, Tyson, 2017. "Incumbents’ diversification and cross-sectorial energy industry dynamics," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(6), pages 1071-1086.
    16. Erik Gawel & Sebastian Strunz & Paul Lehmann, 2016. "Support policies for renewables Instrument choice and instrument change from a Public Choice perspective," WIDER Working Paper Series 006, World Institute for Development Economic Research (UNU-WIDER).
    17. Kanger, Laur & Sovacool, Benjamin K. & Noorkõiv, Martin, 2020. "Six policy intervention points for sustainability transitions: A conceptual framework and a systematic literature review," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(7).
    18. Chicombo, Adélia Filosa Francisco & Musango, Josephine Kaviti, 2024. "Urban households energy transition pathways: A gendered perspective regarding Mozambique," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 190(PA).
    19. Turnheim, Bruno & Nykvist, Björn, 2019. "Opening up the feasibility of sustainability transitions pathways (STPs): Representations, potentials, and conditions," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(3), pages 775-788.
    20. Barbanente, Angela & Grassini, Laura, 2022. "Fostering transitions in landscape policies: A multi-level perspective," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 112(C).

    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:enepol:v:168:y:2022:i:c:s0301421522003135. 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/locate/enpol .

    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.