IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/respol/v40y2011i5p778-789.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Changing the view of wind power development: More than "bricolage"

Author

Listed:
  • Hendry, Chris
  • Harborne, Paul

Abstract

Understanding innovation depends at root on good qualitative descriptions. This paper re-assesses the role of "bricolage", and the extent of science-based R&D and experience-based learning, in the development of the Danish wind turbine system. It argues that the competition between these two opposed frames of reference was never conclusively settled, but involved a reassertion of science-based R&D, which was ultimately decisive for long-term success. This adds a dimension to the received account by showing the persistence of contested collective frames of reference as a driving force across the technology life cycle. At the same time, a more nuanced account of these two learning processes enhances theorisation of the innovation process by showing a learning sequence and interplay of modes that is diametrically at odds with the conventional stylised model of the experience curve.

Suggested Citation

  • 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.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:respol:v:40:y:2011:i:5:p:778-789
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0048733311000369
    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. Hendry, Chris & Harborne, Paul & Brown, James, 2010. "So what do innovating companies really get from publicly funded demonstration projects and trials? innovation lessons from solar photovoltaics and wind," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(8), pages 4507-4519, August.
    2. 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.
    3. Kaplan, Sarah & Tripsas, Mary, 2008. "Thinking about technology: Applying a cognitive lens to technical change," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(5), pages 790-805, June.
    4. Garud, Raghu & Karnoe, Peter, 2003. "Bricolage versus breakthrough: distributed and embedded agency in technology entrepreneurship," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(2), pages 277-300, February.
    5. Jensen, Morten Berg & Johnson, Bjorn & Lorenz, Edward & Lundvall, Bengt Ake, 2007. "Forms of knowledge and modes of innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(5), pages 680-693, June.
    6. Erkko Autio, 1997. "New Technology-Based Firms in Innovation Networks," Palgrave Macmillan Books, in: Dylan Jones-Evans & Magnus Klofsten (ed.), Technology, Innovation and Enterprise, chapter 7, pages 209-235, Palgrave Macmillan.
    7. Kirner, Eva & Kinkel, Steffen & Jaeger, Angela, 2009. "Innovation paths and the innovation performance of low-technology firms--An empirical analysis of German industry," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(3), pages 447-458, April.
    8. Autio, E., 1997. "New, technology-based firms in innovation networks symplectic and generative impacts," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 26(3), pages 263-281, October.
    9. Santamara, Llus & Nieto, Mara Jess & Barge-Gil, Andrs, 2009. "Beyond formal R&D: Taking advantage of other sources of innovation in low- and medium-technology industries," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(3), pages 507-517, April.
    10. 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.
    11. George Westerman & F. Warren McFarlan & Marco Iansiti, 2006. "Organization Design and Effectiveness over the Innovation Life Cycle," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 17(2), pages 230-238, April.
    12. McDonald, Alan & Schrattenholzer, Leo, 2001. "Learning rates for energy technologies," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 29(4), pages 255-261, March.
    13. 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.
    14. Hargadon, Andrew, 2010. "Technology policy and global warming: Why new innovation models are needed," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(8), pages 1024-1026, October.
    15. Per Dannemand Andersen, 2004. "Sources of experience – theoretical considerations and empirical observations from Danish wind energy technology," International Journal of Energy Technology and Policy, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 2(1/2), pages 33-51.
    16. Robertson, Paul L. & Patel, Parimal R., 2007. "New wine in old bottles: Technological diffusion in developed economies," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(5), pages 708-721, June.
    17. Bergek, Anna & Jacobsson, Staffan & Carlsson, Bo & Lindmark, Sven & Rickne, Annika, 2008. "Analyzing the functional dynamics of technological innovation systems: A scheme of analysis," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(3), pages 407-429, April.
    18. Timothy J. Foxon & Jonathan Köhler & Christine Oughton (ed.), 2008. "Innovation for a Low Carbon Economy," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 12790.
    19. Kamp, Linda M. & Smits, Ruud E. H. M. & Andriesse, Cornelis D., 2004. "Notions on learning applied to wind turbine development in the Netherlands and Denmark," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(14), pages 1625-1637, September.
    20. 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.
    21. Nemet, Gregory F., 2006. "Beyond the learning curve: factors influencing cost reductions in photovoltaics," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(17), pages 3218-3232, November.
    22. Klaassen, Ger & Miketa, Asami & Larsen, Katarina & Sundqvist, Thomas, 2005. "The impact of R&D on innovation for wind energy in Denmark, Germany and the United Kingdom," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 54(2-3), pages 227-240, August.
    23. 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.
    24. Nemet, Gregory F., 2009. "Demand-pull, technology-push, and government-led incentives for non-incremental technical change," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(5), pages 700-709, June.
    25. Baker, Ted & Miner, Anne S. & Eesley, Dale T., 2003. "Improvising firms: bricolage, account giving and improvisational competencies in the founding process," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(2), pages 255-276, February.
    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. Antoine Dechezleprêtre & Matthieu Glachant, 2014. "Does Foreign Environmental Policy Influence Domestic Innovation? Evidence from the Wind Industry," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 58(3), pages 391-413, July.
    2. Nemet, Gregory F. & Zipperer, Vera & Kraus, Martina, 2018. "The valley of death, the technology pork barrel, and public support for large demonstration projects," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 119(C), pages 154-167.
    3. 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).
    4. Webb, Janette, 2015. "Improvising innovation in UK urban district heating: The convergence of social and environmental agendas in Aberdeen," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 265-272.
    5. Wiser, Ryan & Millstein, Dev, 2020. "Evaluating the economic return to public wind energy research and development in the United States," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 261(C).
    6. Pansera, Mario & Owen, Richard, 2015. "Framing resource-constrained innovation at the ‘bottom of the pyramid’: Insights from an ethnographic case study in rural Bangladesh," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 92(C), pages 300-311.
    7. Huenteler, Joern & Ossenbrink, Jan & Schmidt, Tobias S. & Hoffmann, Volker H., 2016. "How a product’s design hierarchy shapes the evolution of technological knowledge—Evidence from patent-citation networks in wind power," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(6), pages 1195-1217.
    8. Arne Martin Fevolden & Lars Coenen & Teis Hansen & Antje Klitkou, 2017. "The Role of Trials and Demonstration Projects in the Development of a Sustainable Bioeconomy," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(3), pages 1-15, March.
    9. Sinsel, Simon R. & Markard, Jochen & Hoffmann, Volker H., 2020. "How deployment policies affect innovation in complementary technologies—evidence from the German energy transition," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 161(C).
    10. Marco Bettiol & Vladi Finotto & Eleonora Di Maria & Stefano Micelli, 2014. "The hidden side of innovation: why tinkerers matter," Working Papers 08, Department of Management, Università Ca' Foscari Venezia.
    11. Garud, Raghu & Gehman, Joel & Giuliani, Antonio Paco, 2014. "Contextualizing entrepreneurial innovation: A narrative perspective," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(7), pages 1177-1188.
    12. Bento, Nuno & Fontes, Margarida, 2015. "The construction of a new technological innovation system in a follower country: Wind energy in Portugal," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 99(C), pages 197-210.
    13. Hoppmann, Joern & Peters, Michael & Schneider, Malte & Hoffmann, Volker H., 2013. "The two faces of market support—How deployment policies affect technological exploration and exploitation in the solar photovoltaic industry," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(4), pages 989-1003.
    14. Elia, A. & Kamidelivand, M. & Rogan, F. & Ó Gallachóir, B., 2021. "Impacts of innovation on renewable energy technology cost reductions," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 138(C).
    15. Christopher J. Blackburn & Mallory E. Flowers & Daniel C. Matisoff & Juan Moreno‐Cruz, 2020. "Do Pilot and Demonstration Projects Work? Evidence from a Green Building Program," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 39(4), pages 1100-1132, September.
    16. 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).
    17. Christopher J. Blackburn & Mallory E. Flowers & Daniel C. Matisoff & Juan Moreno-Cruz, 2018. "Do Pilot and Demonstration Projects Work?," CESifo Working Paper Series 7252, CESifo.
    18. Sansi Yang & C. Richard Shumway, 2020. "Knowledge accumulation in US agriculture: research and learning by doing," Journal of Productivity Analysis, Springer, vol. 54(2), pages 87-105, December.
    19. Yu, Xiaoyu & Wang, Xinchun, 2021. "The effects of entrepreneurial bricolage and alternative resources on new venture capabilities: Evidence from China," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 137(C), pages 527-537.
    20. 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.

    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. 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).
    2. 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.
    3. Arne Martin Fevolden & Lars Coenen & Teis Hansen & Antje Klitkou, 2017. "The Role of Trials and Demonstration Projects in the Development of a Sustainable Bioeconomy," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(3), pages 1-15, March.
    4. 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.
    5. Bento, Nuno & Fontes, Margarida, 2015. "The construction of a new technological innovation system in a follower country: Wind energy in Portugal," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 99(C), pages 197-210.
    6. 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.
    7. 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.
    8. Hendry, Chris & Harborne, Paul & Brown, James, 2010. "So what do innovating companies really get from publicly funded demonstration projects and trials? innovation lessons from solar photovoltaics and wind," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(8), pages 4507-4519, August.
    9. Rizzi, Francesco & van Eck, Nees Jan & Frey, Marco, 2014. "The production of scientific knowledge on renewable energies: Worldwide trends, dynamics and challenges and implications for management," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 657-671.
    10. Trott, Paul & Simms, Chris, 2017. "An examination of product innovation in low- and medium-technology industries: Cases from the UK packaged food sector," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(3), pages 605-623.
    11. Musiolik, Jörg & Markard, Jochen, 2011. "Creating and shaping innovation systems: Formal networks in the innovation system for stationary fuel cells in Germany," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(4), pages 1909-1922, April.
    12. Huenteler, Joern & Schmidt, Tobias S. & Ossenbrink, Jan & Hoffmann, Volker H., 2016. "Technology life-cycles in the energy sector — Technological characteristics and the role of deployment for innovation," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 104(C), pages 102-121.
    13. Elia, A. & Kamidelivand, M. & Rogan, F. & Ó Gallachóir, B., 2021. "Impacts of innovation on renewable energy technology cost reductions," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 138(C).
    14. Söderholm, Patrik & Hellsmark, Hans & Frishammar, Johan & Hansson, Julia & Mossberg, Johanna & Sandström, Annica, 2019. "Technological development for sustainability: The role of network management in the innovation policy mix," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 138(C), pages 309-323.
    15. Gosens, Jorrit & Lu, Yonglong & Coenen , Lars, 2013. "Clean-tech Innovation in Emerging Economies: Transnational Dimensions in Technological Innovation System Formation," Papers in Innovation Studies 2013/10, Lund University, CIRCLE - Centre for Innovation Research.
    16. Polzin, Friedemann & von Flotow, Paschen & Klerkx, Laurens, 2016. "Addressing barriers to eco-innovation: Exploring the finance mobilisation functions of institutional innovation intermediaries," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 103(C), pages 34-46.
    17. Malhotra, Abhishek & Schmidt, Tobias S. & Huenteler, Joern, 2019. "The role of inter-sectoral learning in knowledge development and diffusion: Case studies on three clean energy technologies," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 146(C), pages 464-487.
    18. Samadi, Sascha, 2018. "The experience curve theory and its application in the field of electricity generation technologies – A literature review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 82(P3), pages 2346-2364.
    19. Nemet, Gregory F. & Zipperer, Vera & Kraus, Martina, 2018. "The valley of death, the technology pork barrel, and public support for large demonstration projects," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 119(C), pages 154-167.
    20. Muhammad Nouman & Mohammad Sohail Yunis & Muhammad Atiq & Owais Mufti & Abdul Qadus, 2022. "‘The Forgotten Sector’: An Integrative Framework for Future Research on Low- and Medium-Technology Innovation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(6), pages 1-19, March.

    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:respol:v:40:y:2011:i:5:p:778-789. 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/respol .

    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.