IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/tefoso/v102y2016icp143-155.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A multi-criteria approach toward discovering killer IoT application in Korea

Author

Listed:
  • Kim, Suwon
  • Kim, Seongcheol

Abstract

The vision of IoT has become an important agenda in the ICT industry; however, a tangible IoT market has yet to evolve, and full-fledged IoT applications have yet to emerge. In order to encourage IoT market participation, reliable evidence guaranteeing market success needs to be presented to investors and enterprises. Particularly, the most promising domain in IoT needs to be discovered as a killer application to primarily invest in and develop, so that it can pioneer the IoT market. This study proposes an AHP model for assessing the viability of IoT applications, which consists of 11 technology, market, and regulation factors. The model was applied to assess and compare the prospect of three IoT applications — i.e. IoT healthcare, IoT logistics, and IoT energy management, inviting the perception of 31 ICT experts. The results showed that IoT logistics is the most promising IoT application, due to its strong market potential. IoT healthcare is perceived to have strength in wide consumer market demand, but reliability issues and regulation issues were posed. Meanwhile, IoT energy management showed strengths only in governmental support. The results also imply that it would be wiser for the government to focus on eliminating regulatory bottlenecks.

Suggested Citation

  • Kim, Suwon & Kim, Seongcheol, 2016. "A multi-criteria approach toward discovering killer IoT application in Korea," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 102(C), pages 143-155.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:tefoso:v:102:y:2016:i:c:p:143-155
    DOI: 10.1016/j.techfore.2015.05.007
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0040162515001237
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.techfore.2015.05.007?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. Jaffe, Adam B. & Newell, Richard G. & Stavins, Robert N., 2005. "A tale of two market failures: Technology and environmental policy," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 54(2-3), pages 164-174, August.
    2. Henry Chesbrough & Richard S. Rosenbloom, 2002. "The role of the business model in capturing value from innovation: evidence from Xerox Corporation's technology spin-off companies," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 11(3), pages 529-555, June.
    3. Baumgartner, Stefan & Winkler, Ralph, 2003. "Markets, technology and environmental regulation: price ambivalence of waste paper in Germany," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 47(2-3), pages 183-195, December.
    4. Zach Willey, 1982. "Economic Criteria in Environmental Regulation: Prospects for the 1980s," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 64(5), pages 935-941.
    5. Yoram Wind & Thomas L. Saaty, 1980. "Marketing Applications of the Analytic Hierarchy Process," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 26(7), pages 641-658, July.
    6. Willey, Zach, 1982. "ECONOMIC CRITERIA IN ENVIRONMENTAL REGULATION- PROSPECTS FOR THE 1980's," 1982 Annual Meeting, August 1-4, Logan, Utah 279166, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    7. Cristiano Antonelli & Agnieszka Gehringer, 2015. "The competent demand pull hypothesis: which sectors do play a role?," Economia Politica: Journal of Analytical and Institutional Economics, Springer;Fondazione Edison, vol. 32(1), pages 97-134, April.
    8. Zach Willey, 1982. "Economic Criteria in Environmental Regulation: Prospects for the 1980s," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 64(5), pages 935-941, December.
    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. Koo ,Hyunmo & Kim, Seongcheol & Nam, Changi, 2017. "Speaker Wars begins: Which applications will be the killer content for smart speaker?," 14th ITS Asia-Pacific Regional Conference, Kyoto 2017: Mapping ICT into Transformation for the Next Information Society 168505, International Telecommunications Society (ITS).
    2. Fabio Antoniou & Roland Strausz, 2014. "The Effectiveness of Taxation and Feed-in Tariffs," CESifo Working Paper Series 4788, CESifo.
    3. Bosetti, Valentina & Carraro, Carlo & Duval, Romain & Tavoni, Massimo, 2011. "What should we expect from innovation? A model-based assessment of the environmental and mitigation cost implications of climate-related R&D," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(6), pages 1313-1320.
    4. Mingfeng Tang & Grace Sheila Walsh & Cuiwen Li & Angathevar Baskaran, 2021. "Exploring technology business incubators and their business incubation models: case studies from China," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 46(1), pages 90-116, February.
    5. Feser, Daniel & Runst, Petrik, 2015. "Energy efficiency consultants as change agents? Examining the reasons for EECs’ limited success," ifh Working Papers 1 (2015), Volkswirtschaftliches Institut für Mittelstand und Handwerk an der Universität Göttingen (ifh).
    6. Patrice Bougette & Christophe Charlier, 2019. "Subsidies and Countervailing Measures in the EU Biofuel Industry: A Welfare Analysis," Post-Print halshs-02306022, HAL.
    7. Banai, Reza, 2010. "Evaluation of land use-transportation systems with the Analytic Network Process," The Journal of Transport and Land Use, Center for Transportation Studies, University of Minnesota, vol. 3(1), pages 85-112.
    8. Hille, Erik & Althammer, Wilhelm & Diederich, Henning, 2020. "Environmental regulation and innovation in renewable energy technologies: Does the policy instrument matter?," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 153(C).
    9. Fatih Yiğit & Şakir Esnaf, 2021. "A new Fuzzy C-Means and AHP-based three-phased approach for multiple criteria ABC inventory classification," Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing, Springer, vol. 32(6), pages 1517-1528, August.
    10. Vitaliy Roud & Thomas Wolfgang Thurner, 2018. "The Influence of State‐Ownership on Eco‐Innovations in Russian Manufacturing Firms," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 22(5), pages 1213-1227, October.
    11. Yuliya Snihur & Llewellyn D. W. Thomas & Robert A. Burgelman, 2018. "An Ecosystem‐Level Process Model of Business Model Disruption: The Disruptor's Gambit," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 55(7), pages 1278-1316, November.
    12. Emanuele Massetti & Lea Nicita, 2010. "The Optimal Climate Policy Portfolio when Knowledge Spills across Sectors," CESifo Working Paper Series 2988, CESifo.
    13. Rachele Corticelli & Margherita Pazzini & Cecilia Mazzoli & Claudio Lantieri & Annarita Ferrante & Valeria Vignali, 2022. "Urban Regeneration and Soft Mobility: The Case Study of the Rimini Canal Port in Italy," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(21), pages 1-27, November.
    14. Giancarlo Giudici & Massimiliano Guerini & Cristina Rossi-Lamastra, 2019. "The creation of cleantech startups at the local level: the role of knowledge availability and environmental awareness," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 52(4), pages 815-830, April.
    15. Lin, Sheng-Hau & Zhao, Xiaofeng & Wu, Jiuxing & Liang, Fachao & Li, Jia-Hsuan & Lai, Ren-Ji & Hsieh, Jing-Chzi & Tzeng, Gwo-Hshiung, 2021. "An evaluation framework for developing green infrastructure by using a new hybrid multiple attribute decision-making model for promoting environmental sustainability," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 75(C).
    16. Richard Hunt & Lauren Ortiz-Hunt, 2018. "Deinstitutionalization through Business Model Evolution: Women Entrepreneurs in the Middle East and North Africa," Chapters, in: Ladislav Mura (ed.), Entrepreneurship - Development Tendencies and Empirical Approach, IntechOpen.
    17. Pishchulov, Grigory & Trautrims, Alexander & Chesney, Thomas & Gold, Stefan & Schwab, Leila, 2019. "The Voting Analytic Hierarchy Process revisited: A revised method with application to sustainable supplier selection," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 211(C), pages 166-179.
    18. Christoph P. Kiefer & Pablo Del Río González & Javier Carrillo‐Hermosilla, 2019. "Drivers and barriers of eco‐innovation types for sustainable transitions: A quantitative perspective," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 28(1), pages 155-172, January.
    19. Söderholm, Patrik & Pettersson, Maria, 2011. "Offshore wind power policy and planning in Sweden," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(2), pages 518-525, February.
    20. Seung-Jin Han & Won-Jae Lee & So-Hee Kim & Sang-Hoon Yoon & Hyunwoong Pyun, 2022. "Assessing Expected Long-term Benefits for the Olympic Games: Delphi-AHP Approach from Korean Olympic Experts," SAGE Open, , vol. 12(4), pages 21582440221, December.

    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:tefoso:v:102:y:2016:i:c:p:143-155. 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.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/00401625 .

    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.