IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/respol/v48y2019i10s0048733318302105.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Lost in translation: How legacy limits the OECD in promoting new policy mixes for sustainability transitions

Author

Listed:
  • Diercks, Gijs

Abstract

The OECD has a strong legacy in shaping innovation policy mixes. The purpose of this paper is therefore to provide a better understanding of how the OECD is currently shaping new policy mixes for sustainability transitions. It provides a detailed account of the uptake of system innovation thinking, a key concept in transition studies, at the OECD. It takes an ethnographic approach combining desk research with participant observation, allowing to study ‘discourse in the making’. The paper traces the different translation and inscription strategies pursued. It finds that despite purposeful efforts, system innovation has not been institutionalised in the core activities of the organisation, thus can be considered ‘lost in translation’. It concludes that legacy effects created a number of sticking points that can be categorised under three main categories: (1) institutional, arising from previous ways of working; (2) cognitive, arising from ways of framing and knowing and (3) political, arising from pre-existing power relations. Suggestions are made for both innovation policy academics and practitioners interested in promoting a transformative innovation agenda.

Suggested Citation

  • Diercks, Gijs, 2019. "Lost in translation: How legacy limits the OECD in promoting new policy mixes for sustainability transitions," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(10).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:respol:v:48:y:2019:i:10:s0048733318302105
    DOI: 10.1016/j.respol.2018.09.002
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0048733318302105
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.respol.2018.09.002?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. Weber, K. Matthias & Rohracher, Harald, 2012. "Legitimizing research, technology and innovation policies for transformative change," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(6), pages 1037-1047.
    2. Lehtonen, Markku, 2009. "OECD organisational discourse, peer reviews and sustainable development: An ecological-institutionalist perspective," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(2), pages 389-397, December.
    3. Ruud Smits & Stefan Kuhlmann & Morris Teubal, 2010. "A System-Evolutionary Approach for Innovation Policy," Chapters, in: Ruud E. Smits & Stefan Kuhlmann & Phillip Shapira (ed.), The Theory and Practice of Innovation Policy, chapter 17, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    4. Geels, Frank W., 2010. "Ontologies, socio-technical transitions (to sustainability), and the multi-level perspective," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(4), pages 495-510, May.
    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. Rogge, Karoline S. & Schleich, Joachim, 2018. "Do policy mix characteristics matter for low-carbon innovation? A survey-based exploration of renewable power generation technologies in Germany," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(9), pages 1639-1654.
    7. Nay, Olivier, 2012. "How do policy ideas spread among international administrations? Policy entrepreneurs and bureaucratic influence in the UN response to AIDS," Journal of Public Policy, Cambridge University Press, vol. 32(1), pages 53-76, March.
    8. Henriques, Luisa & Larédo, Philippe, 2013. "Policy-making in science policy: The ‘OECD model’ unveiled," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(3), pages 801-816.
    9. Peter Stegmaier & Stefan Kuhlmann & Vincent R. Visser, 2014. "The discontinuation of socio-technical systems as a governance problem," Chapters, in: Susana Borrás & Jakob Edler (ed.), The Governance of Socio-Technical Systems, chapter 6, pages 111-131, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    10. Rogge, Karoline S. & Reichardt, Kristin, 2016. "Policy mixes for sustainability transitions: An extended concept and framework for analysis," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(8), pages 1620-1635.
    11. 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.
    12. Ruud E. Smits & Stefan Kuhlmann & Phillip Shapira (ed.), 2010. "The Theory and Practice of Innovation Policy," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 4181.
    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. Geoff Mulgan, 2012. "The Theoretical Foundations of Social Innovation," Palgrave Macmillan Books, in: Alex Nicholls & Alex Murdock (ed.), Social Innovation, chapter 1, pages 33-65, Palgrave Macmillan.
    15. Richard Owen & Phil Macnaghten & Jack Stilgoe, 2012. "Responsible research and innovation: From science in society to science for society, with society," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 39(6), pages 751-760, December.
    16. Mytelka, Lynn K. & Smith, Keith, 2002. "Policy learning and innovation theory: an interactive and co-evolving process," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 31(8-9), pages 1467-1479, December.
    17. Carlota Perez, 2012. "Innovation systems and policy: not only for the rich?," The Other Canon Foundation and Tallinn University of Technology Working Papers in Technology Governance and Economic Dynamics 42, TUT Ragnar Nurkse Department of Innovation and Governance.
    18. Foray, D. & Mowery, D.C. & Nelson, R.R., 2012. "Public R&D and social challenges: What lessons from mission R&D programs?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(10), pages 1697-1702.
    19. Garud, Raghu & Gehman, Joel, 2012. "Metatheoretical perspectives on sustainability journeys: Evolutionary, relational and durational," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(6), pages 980-995.
    20. Kees Swaans & Birgit Boogaard & Ramkumar Bendapudi & Hailemichael Taye & Saskia Hendrickx & Laurens Klerkx, 2014. "Operationalizing inclusive innovation: lessons from innovation platforms in livestock value chains in India and Mozambique," Innovation and Development, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 4(2), pages 239-257, October.
    21. Veugelers, Reinhilde, 2012. "Which policy instruments to induce clean innovating?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(10), pages 1770-1778.
    22. Schot, Johan & Steinmueller, W. Edward, 2018. "Three frames for innovation policy: R&D, systems of innovation and transformative change," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(9), pages 1554-1567.
    23. 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.
    24. Kieron Flanagan & Elvira Uyarra, 2016. "Four dangers in innovation policy studies -- and how to avoid them," Industry and Innovation, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 23(2), pages 177-188, February.
    25. Florian Kern & Michael Howlett, 2009. "Implementing transition management as policy reforms: a case study of the Dutch energy sector," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 42(4), pages 391-408, November.
    26. Flanagan, Kieron & Uyarra, Elvira & Laranja, Manuel, 2011. "Reconceptualising the 'policy mix' for innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(5), pages 702-713, June.
    27. Niinikoski, Marja-Liisa & Moisander, Johanna, 2014. "Serial and comparative analysis of innovation policy change," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 85(C), pages 69-80.
    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. Bok Gyo Jeong & Seongho An & Geiguen Shin, 2024. "Mapping policy agenda in international development: Reflections on OECD Development Centre Working Papers from 1990 to 2017," Journal of International Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 36(1), pages 502-523, January.
    2. Veldhuizen, Caroline, 2020. "Smart Specialisation as a transition management framework: Driving sustainability-focused regional innovation policy?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(6).
    3. Zikopoulos, Christos, 2022. "On the effect of upgradable products design on circular economy," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 254(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. Diercks, Gijs & Larsen, Henrik & Steward, Fred, 2019. "Transformative innovation policy: Addressing variety in an emerging policy paradigm," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(4), pages 880-894.
    2. Kern, Florian & Rogge, Karoline S. & Howlett, Michael, 2019. "Policy mixes for sustainability transitions: New approaches and insights through bridging innovation and policy studies," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(10).
    3. 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).
    4. Imbert, Enrica & Ladu, Luana & Morone, Piergiuseppe & Quitzow, Rainer, 2017. "Policy strategies for a transition to a bioeconomy in Europe: the case of Italy and Germany," MPRA Paper 78143, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    5. Laatsit, Mart & Grillitsch, Markus & Fünfschilling, Lea, 2022. "Great expectations: the promises and limits of innovation policy in addressing societal challenges," Papers in Innovation Studies 2022/9, Lund University, CIRCLE - Centre for Innovation Research.
    6. 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).
    7. 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.
    8. Rogge, Karoline S. & Reichardt, Kristin, 2013. "Towards a more comprehensive policy mix conceptualization for environmental technological change: A literature synthesis," Working Papers "Sustainability and Innovation" S3/2013, Fraunhofer Institute for Systems and Innovation Research (ISI).
    9. Kuokkanen, A. & Nurmi, A. & Mikkilä, M. & Kuisma, M. & Kahiluoto, H. & Linnanen, L., 2018. "Agency in regime destabilization through the selection environment: The Finnish food system’s sustainability transition," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(8), pages 1513-1522.
    10. Hilde Nykamp, 2020. "Policy Mix for a Transition to Sustainability: Green Buildings in Norway," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(2), pages 1-17, January.
    11. Nuñez-Jimenez, Alejandro & Knoeri, Christof & Hoppmann, Joern & Hoffmann, Volker H., 2022. "Beyond innovation and deployment: Modeling the impact of technology-push and demand-pull policies in Germany's solar policy mix," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(10).
    12. 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).
    13. Trotter, Philipp A. & Brophy, Aoife, 2022. "Policy mixes for business model innovation: The case of off-grid energy for sustainable development in sub-Saharan Africa," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(6).
    14. Franz Tödtling & Michaela Trippl & Veronika Desch, 2022. "New directions for RIS studies and policies in the face of grand societal challenges," European Planning Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 30(11), pages 2139-2156, November.
    15. Kivimaa, Paula & Rogge, Karoline S., 2022. "Interplay of policy experimentation and institutional change in sustainability transitions: The case of mobility as a service in Finland," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(1).
    16. 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.
    17. Rogge, Karoline S. & Pfluger, Benjamin & Geels, Frank W., 2020. "Transformative policy mixes in socio-technical scenarios: The case of the low-carbon transition of the German electricity system (2010–2050)," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 151(C).
    18. Falcone, Pasquale Marcello & Lopolito, Antonio & Sica, Edgardo, 2019. "Instrument mix for energy transition: A method for policy formulation," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 148(C).
    19. Ossenbrink, Jan & Finnsson, Sveinbjoern & Bening, Catharina R. & Hoffmann, Volker H., 2019. "Delineating policy mixes: Contrasting top-down and bottom-up approaches to the case of energy-storage policy in California," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(10).
    20. Markus M Bugge & Lars Coenen & Are Branstad, 2018. "Governing socio-technical change: Orchestrating demand for assisted living in ageing societies," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 45(4), pages 468-479.

    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:48:y:2019:i:10:s0048733318302105. 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.