IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/tefoso/v103y2016icp249-263.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The thorny road to technology legitimation — Institutional work for potable water reuse in California

Author

Listed:
  • Binz, Christian
  • Harris-Lovett, Sasha
  • Kiparsky, Michael
  • Sedlak, David L.
  • Truffer, Bernhard

Abstract

Technological innovation that is incongruous with established social rules and practices is often confronted with strong skepticism and a lack of societal legitimacy. Yet, how the early actors in a new technological field create legitimacy for new products is not well researched. This paper addresses this gap by proposing an analytical framework for the early technology legitimation phase that combines recent insights from innovation studies and institutional sociology. Both literatures agree that technology legitimation depends on a complex alignment process in which the technology and its institutional context mutually shape each other. Innovation system studies recently proposed to explore these processes in more detail. So far, this literature has mainly treated legitimacy as an outcome of overall system maturation and has not ventured into assessing legitimation as an active process. The framework we put forward in this paper conceptualizes technology legitimation as being enacted by different actors in a technological innovation system through specific forms of institutional work. This framework is illustrated with a case study on potable water reuse, in this case the injection of treated wastewater into drinking water reservoirs — a technology most consumers confront with revulsion. California is among very few regions worldwide where this technology is becoming common practice. Interviews with 20 key stakeholders and content analysis of 124 newspaper articles reveal how technology proponents worked on legitimizing this controversial technology by engaging in system building and institutional work at various levels. We outline how the legitimation process interrelates with other core development processes of a technological innovation system and discuss how our framework informs recent work in innovation and transition studies.

Suggested Citation

  • Binz, Christian & Harris-Lovett, Sasha & Kiparsky, Michael & Sedlak, David L. & Truffer, Bernhard, 2016. "The thorny road to technology legitimation — Institutional work for potable water reuse in California," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 103(C), pages 249-263.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:tefoso:v:103:y:2016:i:c:p:249-263
    DOI: 10.1016/j.techfore.2015.10.005
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0040162515002930
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.techfore.2015.10.005?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. Smith, Adrian & Raven, Rob, 2012. "What is protective space? Reconsidering niches in transitions to sustainability," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(6), pages 1025-1036.
    2. Thomas Lawrence & Roy Suddaby & Bernard Leca, 2009. "Introduction: theorizing and studying institutional work," Post-Print hal-00576557, HAL.
    3. T. Lawrence & R. Suddaby & B. Leca, 2009. "Introduction : Theorizing and studying institutional work," Post-Print hal-00808954, HAL.
    4. Van De Ven, H., 1993. "The development of an infrastructure for entrepreneurship," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 8(3), pages 211-230, May.
    5. Markard, Jochen & Stadelmann, Martin & Truffer, Bernhard, 2009. "Prospective analysis of technological innovation systems: Identifying technological and organizational development options for biogas in Switzerland," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(4), pages 655-667, May.
    6. Rao, Hayagreeva, 2004. "Institutional activism in the early American automobile industry," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 19(3), pages 359-384, May.
    7. 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.
    8. Frank Geels & J Jasper Deuten, 2006. "Local and global dynamics in technological development: a socio-cognitive perspective on knowledge flows and lessons from reinforced concrete," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 33(4), pages 265-275, May.
    9. Wustenhagen, Rolf & Wolsink, Maarten & Burer, Mary Jean, 2007. "Social acceptance of renewable energy innovation: An introduction to the concept," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(5), pages 2683-2691, May.
    10. 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.
    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. Fuenfschilling, Lea & Truffer, Bernhard, 2016. "The interplay of institutions, actors and technologies in socio-technical systems — An analysis of transformations in the Australian urban water sector," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 103(C), pages 298-312.
    13. ., 1998. "Technological Change," Chapters, in: Heinz D. Kurz & Neri Salvadori (ed.), The Elgar Companion to Classical Economics, volume 0, chapter 127, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    14. 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.
    15. Thomas Lawrence & Roy Suddaby & Bernard Leca, 2009. "Institutional work," Post-Print hal-00576548, HAL.
    16. 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.
    17. Simona O. Negro & Marko P. Hekkert, 2008. "Explaining the success of emerging technologies by innovation system functioning: the case of biomass digestion in Germany," Innovation Studies Utrecht (ISU) working paper series 08-08, Utrecht University, Department of Innovation Studies, revised Feb 2008.
    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. Reischauer, Georg, 2018. "Industry 4.0 as policy-driven discourse to institutionalize innovation systems in manufacturing," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 132(C), pages 26-33.
    2. Michaël Distelmans & Ilse Scheerlinck, 2021. "Institutional Strategies in the Ridesharing Economy: A Content Analysis Based on Uber’s Example," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(14), pages 1-25, July.
    3. Bennich, Amelie, 2024. "The digital imperative: Institutional pressures to digitalise," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 76(C).
    4. Binz, Christian & Truffer, Bernhard, 2017. "Global Innovation Systems—A conceptual framework for innovation dynamics in transnational contexts," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(7), pages 1284-1298.
    5. Denise Reike & Marko P. Hekkert & Simona O. Negro, 2023. "Understanding circular economy transitions: The case of circular textiles," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 32(3), pages 1032-1058, March.
    6. Geissinger, Andrea & Laurell, Christofer & Sandström, Christian & Eriksson, Klas & Nykvist, Rasmus, 2019. "Digital entrepreneurship and field conditions for institutional change– Investigating the enabling role of cities," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 146(C), pages 877-886.
    7. Dehler-Holland, Joris & Okoh, Marvin & Keles, Dogan, 2022. "Assessing technology legitimacy with topic models and sentiment analysis – The case of wind power in Germany," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 175(C).
    8. Yap, Xiao-Shan & Truffer, Bernhard, 2019. "Shaping selection environments for industrial catch-up and sustainability transitions: A systemic perspective on endogenizing windows of opportunity," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(4), pages 1030-1047.
    9. Schneider, Nina & Rinscheid, Adrian, 2024. "The (de-)construction of technology legitimacy: Contending storylines surrounding wind energy in Austria and Switzerland," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 198(C).
    10. Strambach, Simone & Pflitsch, Gesa, 2020. "Transition topology: Capturing institutional dynamics in regional development paths to sustainability," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(7).
    11. Weiss, Daniel & Nemeczek, Fabian, 2021. "A text-based monitoring tool for the legitimacy and guidance of technological innovation systems," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 66(C).
    12. Kwak, Kiho & Yoon, Hyungseok (David), 2020. "Unpacking transnational industry legitimacy dynamics, windows of opportunity, and latecomers’ catch-up in complex product systems," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(4).
    13. Johan Miörner & Jonas Heiberg & Christian Binz, 2021. "Global regime diffusion in space: a missed transition in San Diego’s water sector," GEIST - Geography of Innovation and Sustainability Transitions 2021(08), GEIST Working Paper Series.
    14. Markard, Jochen, 2020. "The life cycle of technological innovation systems," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 153(C).
    15. Nof Afghani & Johannes Hamhaber & Jos Frijns, 2022. "An Integrated Assessment Framework for Transition to Water Circularity," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(14), pages 1-19, July.
    16. Ben-Slimane, Karim & Diridollou, Cédric & Hamadache, Karim, 2020. "The legitimation strategies of early stage disruptive innovation," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 158(C).
    17. Hanna Hayden & Tsvetan Tsvetanov, 2019. "The Effectiveness of Urban Irrigation Day Restrictions in California," Water Economics and Policy (WEP), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 5(03), pages 1-29, July.
    18. Jian Shen & Zhenquan Sha & Yenchun Jim Wu, 2020. "Enterprise Adaptive Marketing Capabilities and Sustainable Innovation Performance: An Opportunity–Resource Integration Perspective," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(2), pages 1-15, January.
    19. Gherhes, Cristian & Yu, Zhen & Vorley, Tim & Xue, Lan, 2023. "Technological trajectories as an outcome of the structure-agency interplay at the national level: Insights from emerging varieties of AI," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 168(C).
    20. Rohe, Sebastian & Chlebna, Camilla, 2021. "A spatial perspective on the legitimacy of a technological innovation system: Regional differences in onshore wind energy," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 151(C).
    21. Kejia Yang & Johan Schot & Bernhard Truffer, 2020. "Shaping the Directionality of Sustainability Transitions: The Diverging Development Patterns of Solar PV in Two Chinese Provinces," SPRU Working Paper Series 2020-14, SPRU - Science Policy Research Unit, University of Sussex Business School.
    22. Ron Boschma, Lars Coenen, Koen Frenken, Bernhard Truffer & Lars Coenen & Koen Frenken & Bernhard Truffer, 2016. "Towards a theory of regional diversification," Papers in Evolutionary Economic Geography (PEEG) 1617, Utrecht University, Department of Human Geography and Spatial Planning, Group Economic Geography, revised Jul 2016.
    23. Jonas Heiberg & Bernhard Truffer, 2021. "Overcoming the harmony fallacy: How values shape the course of innovation systems," GEIST - Geography of Innovation and Sustainability Transitions 2021(03), GEIST Working Paper Series.
    24. Romasanta, Angelo K.S. & van der Sijde, Peter & de Esch, Iwan J.P., 2022. "Absorbing knowledge from an emerging field: The role of interfacing by proponents in big pharma," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 110(C).
    25. Fuenfschilling, Lea & Binz, Christian, 2018. "Global socio-technical regimes," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(4), pages 735-749.

    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. Coenen, Lars & Benneworth, Paul & Truffer, Bernhard, 2012. "Toward a spatial perspective on sustainability transitions," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(6), pages 968-979.
    2. 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.
    3. 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.
    4. Attila Havas & Doris Schartinger & K. Matthias Weber, 2022. "Innovation Studies, Social Innovation, and Sustainability Transitions Research: From mutual ignorance towards an integrative perspective?," CERS-IE WORKING PAPERS 2227, Institute of Economics, Centre for Economic and Regional Studies.
    5. Haley, Brendan, 2018. "Integrating structural tensions into technological innovation systems analysis: Application to the case of transmission interconnections and renewable electricity in Nova Scotia, Canada," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(6), pages 1147-1160.
    6. Markard, Jochen, 2020. "The life cycle of technological innovation systems," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 153(C).
    7. Edsand, Hans-Erik, 2019. "Technological innovation system and the wider context: A framework for developing countries," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 58(C).
    8. Ron Boschma, Lars Coenen, Koen Frenken, Bernhard Truffer & Lars Coenen & Koen Frenken & Bernhard Truffer, 2016. "Towards a theory of regional diversification," Papers in Evolutionary Economic Geography (PEEG) 1617, Utrecht University, Department of Human Geography and Spatial Planning, Group Economic Geography, revised Jul 2016.
    9. Rohe, Sebastian & Chlebna, Camilla, 2021. "A spatial perspective on the legitimacy of a technological innovation system: Regional differences in onshore wind energy," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 151(C).
    10. Binz, Christian & Truffer, Bernhard & Li, Li & Shi, Yajuan & Lu, Yonglong, 2012. "Conceptualizing leapfrogging with spatially coupled innovation systems: The case of onsite wastewater treatment in China," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 79(1), pages 155-171.
    11. Edsand, Hans, 2016. "Technological Innovation Systems and the wider context: A framework for developing countries," MERIT Working Papers 2016-017, United Nations University - Maastricht Economic and Social Research Institute on Innovation and Technology (MERIT).
    12. Warneryd, Martin & Håkansson, Maria & Karltorp, Kersti, 2020. "Unpacking the complexity of community microgrids: A review of institutions’ roles for development of microgrids," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 121(C).
    13. Monk, Alexander & Perkins, Richard, 2020. "What explains the emergence and diffusion of green bonds?," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 145(C).
    14. Maximilian Benner, 2021. "System-level agency and its many shades: How to shape the system for path development?," PEGIS geo-disc-2021_10, Institute for Economic Geography and GIScience, Department of Socioeconomics, Vienna University of Economics and Business.
    15. 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.
    16. Turnheim, Bruno & Geels, Frank W., 2019. "Incumbent actors, guided search paths, and landmark projects in infra-system transitions: Re-thinking Strategic Niche Management with a case study of French tramway diffusion (1971–2016)," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(6), pages 1412-1428.
    17. 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.
    18. Filippo Celata & Venere Stefania sanna, "undated". "Community activism and sustainability: a multi-dimensional assessment," Working Papers 137/14, Sapienza University of Rome, Metodi e Modelli per l'Economia, il Territorio e la Finanza MEMOTEF.
    19. Cheng Wang & Tao Lv & Rongjiang Cai & Jianfeng Xu & Liya Wang, 2022. "Bibliometric Analysis of Multi-Level Perspective on Sustainability Transition Research," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(7), pages 1-31, March.
    20. Binz, Christian & Diaz Anadon, Laura, 2016. "Transplanting clean-tech paths from elsewhere: The emergence of the Chinese solar PV industry," Papers in Innovation Studies 2016/29, Lund University, CIRCLE - Centre for Innovation Research.

    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:103:y:2016:i:c:p:249-263. 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.