IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/enepol/v91y2016icp220-232.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Policy and innovation: Nanoenergy technology in the USA and China

Author

Listed:
  • Liu, Na
  • Guan, JianCheng

Abstract

The USA is a leading country while China is an up-and-coming one in nanotechnology. We carried out a cross-country comparative study on policy and innovation of the two countries in subset nanoenergy field. They both created favorable policy environments for nanotechnology involving applications of nanotechnology in the energy sector. However, Chinese policy deployments for nanotechnology lack coordinated arrangements and effective assessment mechanisms. China performs better than the USA in technological quantity, but weaker in technological influence. The USA expresses an industry-oriented model in nanoenergy technological research and development, but China exhibits a university-and-institute-oriented model. Interorganizational collaboration relationships in the two countries are both still very rare and have huge development space. They both have a long way to go in converting their technological achievements into commercial products, especially China. Finally, we provide the policy implications of this study. In particular, the Chinese government should strengthen its efforts in policies by changing the national S&T evaluation system to set up the basic idea that quality is better than quantity in order to raise the original innovation motivations of innovators.

Suggested Citation

  • Liu, Na & Guan, JianCheng, 2016. "Policy and innovation: Nanoenergy technology in the USA and China," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 91(C), pages 220-232.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:enepol:v:91:y:2016:i:c:p:220-232
    DOI: 10.1016/j.enpol.2016.01.020
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301421516300209
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.enpol.2016.01.020?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. Vincent Mangematin & Steve Walsh, 2012. "The Future Of Nanotechnologies," Grenoble Ecole de Management (Post-Print) hal-00658034, HAL.
    2. Guan, Jiancheng & Liu, Na, 2016. "Exploitative and exploratory innovations in knowledge network and collaboration network: A patent analysis in the technological field of nano-energy," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(1), pages 97-112.
    3. Connelly, Michael C. & Sekhar, J.A., 2012. "U. S. energy production activity and innovation," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 79(1), pages 30-46.
    4. Guan, Jiancheng & Liu, Na, 2015. "Invention profiles and uneven growth in the field of emerging nano-energy," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 76(C), pages 146-157.
    5. Angela Hullmann, 2007. "Measuring and assessing the development of nanotechnology," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 70(3), pages 739-758, March.
    6. Kostoff, Ronald N., 2012. "China/USA nanotechnology research output comparison—2011 update," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 79(5), pages 986-990.
    7. T. Gorjiara & C. Baldock, 2014. "Nanoscience and nanotechnology research publications: a comparison between Australia and the rest of the world," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 100(1), pages 121-148, July.
    8. Guan, Jiancheng & Ma, Nan, 2007. "China's emerging presence in nanoscience and nanotechnology: A comparative bibliometric study of several nanoscience `giants'," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(6), pages 880-886, July.
    9. Kostoff, Ronald N., 2008. "Comparison of China/USA science and technology performance," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 2(4), pages 354-363.
    10. Vincent Mangematin & Steve Walsh, 2012. "The Future Of Nanotechnologies," Post-Print hal-00658034, HAL.
    11. Hussein, Ahmed Kadhim, 2015. "Applications of nanotechnology in renewable energies—A comprehensive overview and understanding," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 460-476.
    12. Lee, Woo Jin & Sohn, So Young, 2014. "Patent analysis to identify shale gas development in China and the United States," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 111-115.
    13. Jung, Hyun Ju & Lee, Jeongsik “Jay”, 2014. "The impacts of science and technology policy interventions on university research: Evidence from the U.S. National Nanotechnology Initiative," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(1), pages 74-91.
    14. Ying Guo & Xiao Zhou & Alan L. Porter & Douglas K. R. Robinson, 2015. "Tech mining to generate indicators of future national technological competitiveness: Nano-Enhanced Drug Delivery (NEDD) in the US and China," Post-Print hal-01276911, HAL.
    15. Richard P Appelbaum & Rachel A Parker, 2008. "China's bid to become a global nanotech leader: Advancing nanotechnology through state-led programs and international collaborations," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 35(5), pages 319-334, June.
    16. Sanjay K. Arora & Alan L. Porter & Jan Youtie & Philip Shapira, 2013. "Capturing new developments in an emerging technology: an updated search strategy for identifying nanotechnology research outputs," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 95(1), pages 351-370, April.
    17. Erik Fisher & Roop L Mahajan, 2006. "Contradictory intent? US federal legislation on integrating societal concerns into nanotechnology research and development," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 33(1), pages 5-16, February.
    18. Lee, Kyungpyo & Lee, Sungjoo, 2013. "Patterns of technological innovation and evolution in the energy sector: A patent-based approach," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 415-432.
    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. Kroll, Henning & Berghäuser, Hendrik & Blind, Knut & Neuhäusler, Peter & Scheifele, Fabian & Thielmann, Axel & Wydra, Sven, 2022. "Schlüsseltechnologien," Studien zum deutschen Innovationssystem 7-2022, Expertenkommission Forschung und Innovation (EFI) - Commission of Experts for Research and Innovation, Berlin.
    2. Na Liu & Philip Shapira & Xiaoxu Yue, 2021. "Tracking developments in artificial intelligence research: constructing and applying a new search strategy," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(4), pages 3153-3192, April.
    3. Asif Khan & Li-Ru Chen & Chao-Yang Hung, 2021. "The Role of Corporate Social Responsibility in Supporting Second-Order Social Capital and Sustainable Innovation Ambidexterity," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(13), pages 1-15, June.
    4. Muhammad Yousaf Raza & Yingchao Chen & Songlin Tang, 2022. "Assessing the Green R&D Investment and Patent Generation in Pakistan towards CO 2 Emissions Reduction with a Novel Decomposition Framework," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(11), pages 1-19, May.
    5. Mahdi Yami & Gao Changchun & Gao Han, 2018. "The Science and Technology Parks (STPs) Evaluation Model Approach to Eco-Innovation Key Indicator," International Business Research, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 11(11), pages 187-200, November.
    6. Yang, Yong-cong & Nie, Pu-yan, 2022. "Subsidy for clean innovation considered technological spillover," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 184(C).

    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. Guan, Jiancheng & Liu, Na, 2015. "Invention profiles and uneven growth in the field of emerging nano-energy," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 76(C), pages 146-157.
    2. Guan, Jiancheng & Liu, Na, 2016. "Exploitative and exploratory innovations in knowledge network and collaboration network: A patent analysis in the technological field of nano-energy," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(1), pages 97-112.
    3. Na Liu & Jiancheng Guan, 2015. "Dynamic evolution of collaborative networks: evidence from nano-energy research in China," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 102(3), pages 1895-1919, March.
    4. Alexander I. Terekhov, 2017. "Bibliometric spectroscopy of Russia’s nanotechnology: 2000–2014," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 110(3), pages 1217-1242, March.
    5. Elena M. Tur & Evangelos Bourelos & Maureen McKelvey, 2022. "The case of sleeping beauties in nanotechnology: a study of potential breakthrough inventions in emerging technologies," The Annals of Regional Science, Springer;Western Regional Science Association, vol. 69(3), pages 683-708, December.
    6. Na Liu & Jianqi Mao & Jiancheng Guan, 2020. "Knowledge convergence and organization innovation: the moderating role of relational embeddedness," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 125(3), pages 1899-1921, December.
    7. Coccia, Mario & Wang, Lili, 2015. "Path-breaking directions of nanotechnology-based chemotherapy and molecular cancer therapy," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 94(C), pages 155-169.
    8. Wong, Chan-Yuan & Wang, Lili, 2015. "Trajectories of science and technology and their co-evolution in BRICS: Insights from publication and patent analysis," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 9(1), pages 90-101.
    9. Li Tang & Philip Shapira, 2011. "Regional development and interregional collaboration in the growth of nanotechnology research in China," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 86(2), pages 299-315, February.
    10. Doran, Justin & Ryan, Geraldine, 2019. "Does nanotechnology research generate an innovation premium over other types of research? Evidence from Ireland," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 59(C).
    11. Chan-Yuan Wong, 2019. "A century of scientific publication: towards a theorization of growth behavior and research-orientation," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 119(1), pages 357-377, April.
    12. Brennecke, Julia & Rank, Olaf, 2017. "The firm’s knowledge network and the transfer of advice among corporate inventors—A multilevel network study," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(4), pages 768-783.
    13. Donna Kidwell, 2014. "Navigating the role of the principal investigator: a comparison of four cases," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 39(1), pages 33-51, February.
    14. Ratinho, Tiago & Harms, Rainer & Walsh, Steven, 2015. "Structuring the Technology Entrepreneurship publication landscape: Making sense out of chaos," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 100(C), pages 168-175.
    15. Guan, JianCheng & Zhang, JingJing, 2018. "The dynamics of partner and knowledge portfolios in alternative energy field," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 82(P3), pages 2869-2879.
    16. Inchae Park & Keeeun Lee & Byungun Yoon, 2015. "Exploring Promising Research Frontiers Based on Knowledge Maps in the Solar Cell Technology Field," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(10), pages 1-30, October.
    17. Raul Gouvea & Jonathan Linton & Manuel Montoya & Steven Walsh, 2012. "Emerging Technologies and Ethics: A Race-to-the-Bottom or the Top?," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 109(4), pages 553-567, September.
    18. Maria Karaulova & Abdullah Gök & Oliver Shackleton & Philip Shapira, 2016. "Science system path-dependencies and their influences: nanotechnology research in Russia," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 107(2), pages 645-670, May.
    19. Ozcan, Sercan & Islam, Nazrul, 2014. "Collaborative networks and technology clusters — The case of nanowire," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 82(C), pages 115-131.
    20. Stucki, Tobias & Woerter, Martin, 2019. "The private returns to knowledge: A comparison of ICT, biotechnologies, nanotechnologies, and green technologies," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 145(C), pages 62-81.

    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:91:y:2016:i:c:p:220-232. 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.