IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/teinso/v35y2013i4p233-247.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Patterns of nanotechnology innovation and governance within a metropolitan area

Author

Listed:
  • Foley, Rider W.
  • Wiek, Arnim

Abstract

The present study employs a real-time, practice-oriented, and place-based approach to dissect the process of nanotechnology innovation in support of novel governance schemes. The research question is: What are actors specifically doing in the process of nanotechnology innovation in a metropolitan area, and what are enabling and constraining drivers that could be leveraged for novel governance approaches? The study presents results from 45 interviews and a synthesis workshop with actors from academia, industry, government, and the civil society in Phoenix. Results show that actors follow preconceived mental models of innovation with the primary objective to deploy profitable commercial or military products. The dominant network actors are academics, industry, and government funding agencies. The network is divided along product-based sectors with few cross-sector linkages. Considerable governmental support for entrepreneurs and for academic research via the National Nanotechnology Initiative enables nanotechnology innovation in the early stages. Market failures and corporate barriers, however, constrain the value proposition in later phases. There is novelty in the nanotechnology products; yet, little attention is paid to consumer input, adverse effects, or broader public value generation.

Suggested Citation

  • Foley, Rider W. & Wiek, Arnim, 2013. "Patterns of nanotechnology innovation and governance within a metropolitan area," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 35(4), pages 233-247.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:teinso:v:35:y:2013:i:4:p:233-247
    DOI: 10.1016/j.techsoc.2013.10.004
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160791X13000729
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.techsoc.2013.10.004?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. Arnim Wiek & Kelli Larson, 2012. "Water, People, and Sustainability—A Systems Framework for Analyzing and Assessing Water Governance Regimes," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 26(11), pages 3153-3171, September.
    2. Lisa M. PytlikZillig & Alan J. Tomkins, 2011. "Public Engagement for Informing Science and Technology Policy: What Do We Know, What Do We Need to Know, and How Will We Get There?," Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 28(2), pages 197-217, March.
    3. Wiek, Arnim & Zemp, Stefan & Siegrist, Michael & Walter, Alexander I., 2007. "Sustainable governance of emerging technologies—Critical constellations in the agent network of nanotechnology," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 29(4), pages 388-406.
    4. Jaffe, Adam B., 2000. "The U.S. patent system in transition: policy innovation and the innovation process," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 29(4-5), pages 531-557, April.
    5. Rene Kemp & Saeed Parto & Robert B. Gibson, 2005. "Governance for sustainable development: moving from theory to practice," International Journal of Sustainable Development, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 8(1/2), pages 12-30.
    6. Arnim Wiek & David Guston & Sander van der Leeuw & Cynthia Selin & Philip Shapira, 2013. "Nanotechnology in the City: Sustainability Challenges and Anticipatory Governance," Journal of Urban Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 20(2), pages 45-62, April.
    7. Henry Etzkowitz, 1998. "Triple Helix of innovation: introduction," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 25(6), pages 358-364, December.
    8. Sara Boettiger & Brian D. Wright, 2006. "Open Source in Biotechnology: Open Questions Innovations Case Discussion: CAMBIA-BiOS," Innovations: Technology, Governance, Globalization, MIT Press, vol. 1(4), pages 45-57, October.
    9. Markard, Jochen & Truffer, Bernhard, 2008. "Technological innovation systems and the multi-level perspective: Towards an integrated framework," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(4), pages 596-615, May.
    10. Claire L. Felbinger & James E. Rohey, 2001. "GLOBALIZATION'S IMPACT ONSTATE AND LOCAL POLICY: The Rise of Regional Cluster‐Based Economic Development Strategies1," Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 18(3), pages 63-79, September.
    11. Rosenberg, Nathan & Nelson, Richard R., 1994. "American universities and technical advance in industry," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 23(3), pages 323-348, May.
    12. Gil Avnimelech & Maryann Feldman, 2010. "Regional Corporate Spawning and the Role of Homegrown Companies," Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 27(4), pages 475-489, July.
    13. Donald S. Siegel & Mike Wright & Andy Lockett, 2007. "The rise of entrepreneurial activity at universities: organizational and societal implications," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 16(4), pages 489-504, August.
    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. Daniel Culotta & Arnim Wiek & Nigel Forrest, 2016. "Selecting and coordinating local and regional climate change interventions," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 34(7), pages 1241-1266, November.
    2. Sadowski, Jathan, 2015. "Office of Technology Assessment: History, implementation, and participatory critique," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 9-20.
    3. Arora, Sanjay K. & Foley, Rider W. & Youtie, Jan & Shapira, Philip & Wiek, Arnim, 2014. "Drivers of technology adoption — the case of nanomaterials in building construction," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 87(C), pages 232-244.

    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. Shane, Scott, 2004. "Encouraging university entrepreneurship? The effect of the Bayh-Dole Act on university patenting in the United States," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 19(1), pages 127-151, January.
    2. Dosi, Giovanni & Nelson, Richard R., 2010. "Technical Change and Industrial Dynamics as Evolutionary Processes," Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, in: Bronwyn H. Hall & Nathan Rosenberg (ed.), Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 0, pages 51-127, Elsevier.
    3. Freeman, Chris, 2001. "A hard landing for the 'New Economy'? Information technology and the United States national system of innovation," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 12(2), pages 115-139, July.
    4. Junfu Zhang, 2009. "The performance of university spin-offs: an exploratory analysis using venture capital data," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 34(3), pages 255-285, June.
    5. Van Looy, Bart & Landoni, Paolo & Callaert, Julie & van Pottelsberghe, Bruno & Sapsalis, Eleftherios & Debackere, Koenraad, 2011. "Entrepreneurial effectiveness of European universities: An empirical assessment of antecedents and trade-offs," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(4), pages 553-564, May.
    6. Antonio Della Malva & Francesco Lissoni & Patrick Llerena, 2013. "Institutional change and academic patenting: French universities and the Innovation Act of 1999," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 23(1), pages 211-239, January.
    7. Breandán Ó hUallacháin & Timothy F. Leslie, 2007. "Rethinking the regional knowledge production function," Journal of Economic Geography, Oxford University Press, vol. 7(6), pages 737-752, November.
    8. Perkmann, Markus & King, Zella & Pavelin, Stephen, 2011. "Engaging excellence? Effects of faculty quality on university engagement with industry," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(4), pages 539-552, May.
    9. Stefan Schaltegger & Markus Beckmann & Erik G. Hansen, 2013. "Transdisciplinarity in Corporate Sustainability: Mapping the Field," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 22(4), pages 219-229, May.
    10. Munari, Federico & Toschi, Laura, 2014. "Running ahead in the nanotechnology gold rush. Strategic patenting in emerging technologies," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 83(C), pages 194-207.
    11. Kuzdas, Christopher & Wiek, Arnim & Warner, Benjamin & Vignola, Raffaele & Morataya, Ricardo, 2015. "Integrated and Participatory Analysis of Water Governance Regimes: The Case of the Costa Rican Dry Tropics," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 66(C), pages 254-268.
    12. Ozgur Aydogmus & Erkan Gürpinar, 2022. "Science, Technology and Institutional Change in Knowledge Production: An Evolutionary Game Theoretic Framework," Dynamic Games and Applications, Springer, vol. 12(4), pages 1163-1188, December.
    13. Junfu Zhang, 2006. "A Study of Academic Entrepreneurs Using Venture Capital Data," PPIC Working Papers 2006.01, Public Policy Institute of California.
    14. Roberto Iorio & Sandrine Labory & Francesco Rentocchini, 2014. "Academics’ Motivations and Depth and Breadth of Knowledge Transfer Activities," Working Papers 1401, c.MET-05 - Centro Interuniversitario di Economia Applicata alle Politiche per L'industria, lo Sviluppo locale e l'Internazionalizzazione.
    15. Sidia Moreno Rojas & Agueda García Carrillo, 2014. "Sistema para la evaluación de capacidades de innovación en pymes de países en desarrollo: caso Panamá," Revista Facultad de Ciencias Económicas, Universidad Militar Nueva Granada, vol. 0(2), pages 109-122, December.
    16. Wipo, 2011. "World Intellectual Property Report 2011- The Changing Face of Innovation," WIPO Economics & Statistics Series, World Intellectual Property Organization - Economics and Statistics Division, number 2011:944, April.
    17. Yaron Zelekha & Léo-Paul Dana, 2019. "Social Capital Versus Cultural Capital Determinants of Entrepreneurship: An Empirical Study of the African Continent," Journal of Entrepreneurship and Innovation in Emerging Economies, Entrepreneurship Development Institute of India, vol. 28(2), pages 250-269, September.
    18. Michael J. Andrews, 2020. "Local Effects of Land Grant Colleges on Agricultural Innovation and Output," NBER Chapters, in: Economics of Research and Innovation in Agriculture, pages 139-175, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    19. Shiyuan Pan & Heng-fu Zou & Tailong Li, 2010. "Patent Protection, Technological Change and Wage Inequality," CEMA Working Papers 437, China Economics and Management Academy, Central University of Finance and Economics.
    20. Singh, Anuraag & Triulzi, Giorgio & Magee, Christopher L., 2021. "Technological improvement rate predictions for all technologies: Use of patent data and an extended domain description," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(9).

    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:teinso:v:35:y:2013:i:4:p:233-247. 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: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/technology-in-society .

    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.