IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/enepol/v37y2009i7p2560-2573.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Public demonstration projects and field trials: Accelerating commercialisation of sustainable technology in solar photovoltaics

Author

Listed:
  • Brown, James
  • Hendry, Chris

Abstract

The paper considers the role of government funded demonstration projects and field trials (DTs) in accelerating the commercialisation of new energy technologies that meet a public good but do not have immediate market appeal [Sagar, A.D., van der Zwaan, B., 2006. Technological innovation in the energy sector: R&D, deployment, and learning-by-doing. Energy Policy 34, 2601-2608]. Drawing on an original database of DTs in the EU, Japan and USA from 1973 to 2004, we review the history of DTs in photovoltaic technology for electricity generation, and its subsequent take up as a commercial energy source. We find that DTs that are aimed purely at discovering suitable market opportunities are less successful in achieving diffusion than projects that target a particular application and concentrate resources on it. The former nevertheless have a vital role to play in the learning process, while a targeted focus is often dependent on national industrial and institutional factors.

Suggested Citation

  • Brown, James & Hendry, Chris, 2009. "Public demonstration projects and field trials: Accelerating commercialisation of sustainable technology in solar photovoltaics," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(7), pages 2560-2573, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:enepol:v:37:y:2009:i:7:p:2560-2573
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301-4215(09)00076-7
    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. Murmann, Johann Peter & Frenken, Koen, 2006. "Toward a systematic framework for research on dominant designs, technological innovations, and industrial change," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(7), pages 925-952, September.
    2. Timothy J. Foxon & Jonathan Köhler & Christine Oughton (ed.), 2008. "Innovation for a Low Carbon Economy," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 12790.
    3. Sagar, Ambuj D. & van der Zwaan, Bob, 2006. "Technological innovation in the energy sector: R&D, deployment, and learning-by-doing," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(17), pages 2601-2608, November.
    4. McDonald, Alan & Schrattenholzer, Leo, 2001. "Learning rates for energy technologies," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 29(4), pages 255-261, March.
    5. Dosi, Giovanni, 1993. "Technological paradigms and technological trajectories : A suggested interpretation of the determinants and directions of technical change," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 22(2), pages 102-103, April.
    6. Carlsson, B & Stankiewicz, R, 1991. "On the Nature, Function and Composition of Technological Systems," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 1(2), pages 93-118, April.
    7. Nemet, Gregory F., 2006. "Beyond the learning curve: factors influencing cost reductions in photovoltaics," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(17), pages 3218-3232, November.
    8. Arthur, W Brian, 1989. "Competing Technologies, Increasing Returns, and Lock-In by Historical Events," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 99(394), pages 116-131, March.
    9. Kenneth Arrow, 1962. "Economic Welfare and the Allocation of Resources for Invention," NBER Chapters, in: The Rate and Direction of Inventive Activity: Economic and Social Factors, pages 609-626, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    10. Windrum, Paul & Birchenhall, Chris, 1998. "Is product life cycle theory a special case? Dominant designs and the emergence of market niches through coevolutionary-learning," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 9(1), pages 109-134, March.
    11. Jacobsson, Staffan & Lauber, Volkmar, 2006. "The politics and policy of energy system transformation--explaining the German diffusion of renewable energy technology," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(3), pages 256-276, February.
    12. Andersson, Bjorn A. & Jacobsson, Staffan, 2000. "Monitoring and assessing technology choice: the case of solar cells," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 28(14), pages 1037-1049, November.
    13. Shum, Kwok L. & Watanabe, Chihiro, 2007. "Photovoltaic deployment strategy in Japan and the USA--an institutional appraisal," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(2), pages 1186-1195, February.
    14. Argote, L. & Epple, D., 1990. "Learning Curves In Manufacturing," GSIA Working Papers 89-90-02, Carnegie Mellon University, Tepper School of Business.
    15. Staffan Jacobsson & Anna Bergek, 2004. "Transforming the energy sector: the evolution of technological systems in renewable energy technology," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 13(5), pages 815-849, October.
    16. Rannels, James E, 2000. "Advancements in the United States Photovoltaic Program," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 19(1), pages 75-84.
    17. 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.
    18. David, Paul A, 1985. "Clio and the Economics of QWERTY," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 75(2), pages 332-337, May.
    19. Johan Schot & Frank Geels, 2007. "Niches in evolutionary theories of technical change," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 17(5), pages 605-622, October.
    20. Brown, James E. & Hendry, Chris N. & Harborne, Paul, 2007. "An emerging market in fuel cells? Residential combined heat and power in four countries," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(4), pages 2173-2186, April.
    21. Harborne, Paul & Hendry, Chris, 2009. "Pathways to commercial wind power in the US, Europe and Japan: The role of demonstration projects and field trials in the innovation process," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(9), pages 3580-3595, September.
    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. Sandén, Björn A. & Hillman, Karl M., 2011. "A framework for analysis of multi-mode interaction among technologies with examples from the history of alternative transport fuels in Sweden," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(3), pages 403-414, April.
    2. Wilson, Charlie, 2012. "Up-scaling, formative phases, and learning in the historical diffusion of energy technologies," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 81-94.
    3. Bossink, Bart, 2020. "Learning strategies in sustainable energy demonstration projects: What organizations learn from sustainable energy demonstrations," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 131(C).
    4. Strupeit, Lars, 2017. "An innovation system perspective on the drivers of soft cost reduction for photovoltaic deployment: The case of Germany," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 273-286.
    5. 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.
    6. Dosi, Giovanni & Nelson, Richard R., 2010. "Technical Change and Industrial Dynamics as Evolutionary Processes," Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, in: Bronwyn H. Hall & Nathan Rosenberg (ed.), Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 0, pages 51-127, Elsevier.
    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. Hendry, Chris & Harborne, Paul, 2011. "Changing the view of wind power development: More than "bricolage"," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(5), pages 778-789, June.
    9. Safarzyńska, Karolina & Frenken, Koen & van den Bergh, Jeroen C.J.M., 2012. "Evolutionary theorizing and modeling of sustainability transitions," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(6), pages 1011-1024.
    10. Giovanni Dosi & Richard Nelson, 2013. "The Evolution of Technologies: An Assessment of the State-of-the-Art," Eurasian Business Review, Springer;Eurasia Business and Economics Society, vol. 3(1), pages 3-46, June.
    11. Hellsmark, Hans & Frishammar, Johan & Söderholm, Patrik & Ylinenpää, Håkan, 2016. "The role of pilot and demonstration plants in technology development and innovation policy," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(9), pages 1743-1761.
    12. Miklós Antal & Ardjan Gazheli & Jeroen C.J.M. van den Bergh, 2012. "Behavioural Foundations of Sustainability Transitions. WWWforEurope Working Paper No. 3," WIFO Studies, WIFO, number 46424, April.
    13. Hötte, Kerstin, 2020. "How to accelerate green technology diffusion? Directed technological change in the presence of coevolving absorptive capacity," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 85(C).
    14. Negro, Simona O. & Alkemade, Floortje & Hekkert, Marko P., 2012. "Why does renewable energy diffuse so slowly? A review of innovation system problems," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 16(6), pages 3836-3846.
    15. Schmidt, Tobias S. & Battke, Benedikt & Grosspietsch, David & Hoffmann, Volker H., 2016. "Do deployment policies pick technologies by (not) picking applications?—A simulation of investment decisions in technologies with multiple applications," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(10), pages 1965-1983.
    16. Albert Faber & Koen Frenken, 2008. "Models in evolutionary economics and environmental policy: Towards an evolutionary environmental economics," Innovation Studies Utrecht (ISU) working paper series 08-15, Utrecht University, Department of Innovation Studies, revised Apr 2008.
    17. Foxon, Timothy J., 2011. "A coevolutionary framework for analysing a transition to a sustainable low carbon economy," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(12), pages 2258-2267.
    18. 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.
    19. Papachristos, George, 2017. "Diversity in technology competition: The link between platforms and sociotechnical transitions," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 291-306.
    20. Grazia Cecere & Nicoletta Corrocher & Cédric Gossart & Muge Ozman, 2014. "Lock-in and path dependence: an evolutionary approach to eco-innovations," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 24(5), pages 1037-1065, November.

    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:37:y:2009:i:7:p:2560-2573. 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.