IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/teinso/v63y2020ics0160791x20303328.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Emergence, consolidation and dominance of meta-regimes: Exploring the historical evolution of mass production (1765–1972) from the Deep Transitions perspective

Author

Listed:
  • Kanger, Laur
  • Sillak, Silver

Abstract

Grand environmental and societal challenges have drawn increasing attention to system innovation and socio-technical transitions. A recent Deep Transitions framework has provided a comprehensive theory of the co-evolutionary patterns of multiple socio-technical systems over the last 250 years. However, so far the framework has not been subjected to systematic empirical exploration. In this paper we address this gap by exploring the co-evolutionary model linking niche-level dynamics, transitions in single systems and ‘great surges of development’, as conceptualized by Schot and Kanger (2018) [1]. For this purpose, we conduct a case study on the historical evolution of mass production in the Transatlantic region from 1765 to 1972. Instead of focusing on dominant technologies or common practices the development of mass production is understood as the emergence of a meta-regime, i.e. a set of mutually aligned rules guiding production activities in multiple socio-technical systems. The results broadly confirm the overall model but also enable to extend the Deep Transitions framework by uncovering new mechanisms and patterns in the variation, diffusion and contestation of meta-regimes.

Suggested Citation

  • Kanger, Laur & Sillak, Silver, 2020. "Emergence, consolidation and dominance of meta-regimes: Exploring the historical evolution of mass production (1765–1972) from the Deep Transitions perspective," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 63(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:teinso:v:63:y:2020:i:c:s0160791x20303328
    DOI: 10.1016/j.techsoc.2020.101393
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160791X20303328
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.techsoc.2020.101393?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. Schot, Johan & Kanger, Laur, 2018. "Deep transitions: Emergence, acceleration, stabilization and directionality," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(6), pages 1045-1059.
    2. Olmstead, Alan L. & Rhode, Paul W., 2001. "Reshaping The Landscape: The Impact And Diffusion Of The Tractor In American Agriculture, 1910–1960," The Journal of Economic History, Cambridge University Press, vol. 61(3), pages 663-698, September.
    3. Mila Davids & Koen Frenken, 2018. "Proximity, knowledge base and the innovation process: towards an integrated framework," Regional Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 52(1), pages 23-34, January.
    4. Smil, Vaclav, 2013. "Made in the USA," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262019388, April.
    5. Jonas Scherner & Jochen Streb & Stephanie Tilly, 2014. "Supplier networks in the German aircraft industry during World War II and their long-term effects on West Germany's automobile industry during the 'Wirtschaftswunder'," Business History, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 56(6), pages 996-1020, September.
    6. Geels, Frank W., 2006. "Major system change through stepwise reconfiguration: A multi-level analysis of the transformation of American factory production (1850–1930)," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 28(4), pages 445-476.
    7. Kornai, Janos, 1992. "The Socialist System: The Political Economy of Communism," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780198287766.
    8. Sorrell, Steve, 2018. "Explaining sociotechnical transitions: A critical realist perspective," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(7), pages 1267-1282.
    9. Raven, R.P.J.M. & Verbong, G.P.J., 2009. "Boundary crossing innovations: Case studies from the energy domain," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 31(1), pages 85-93.
    10. David F. Noble, 1978. "Social Choice in Machine Design: The Case of Automatically Controlled Machine Tools, and a Challenge for Labor," Politics & Society, , vol. 8(3-4), pages 313-347, September.
    11. Carlota Perez, 2010. "Technological revolutions and techno-economic paradigms," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 34(1), pages 185-202, January.
    12. Sutherland, Lee-Ann & Peter, Sarah & Zagata, Lukas, 2015. "Conceptualising multi-regime interactions: The role of the agriculture sector in renewable energy transitions," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(8), pages 1543-1554.
    13. Taiichi Ohno, 1982. "How the Toyota Production System was Created," Japanese Economy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 10(4), pages 83-101.
    14. Robert J. Gordon, 2016. "Perspectives on The Rise and Fall of American Growth," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 106(5), pages 72-76, May.
    15. Genus, Audley & Coles, Anne-Marie, 2008. "Rethinking the multi-level perspective of technological transitions," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(9), pages 1436-1445, October.
    16. Freeman, Chris & Louca, Francisco, 2002. "As Time Goes By: From the Industrial Revolutions to the Information Revolution," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780199251056.
    17. Krausmann, Fridolin & Gaugl, Birgit & West, James & Schandl, Heinz, 2016. "The metabolic transition of a planned economy: Material flows in the USSR and the Russian Federation 1900 to 2010," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 124(C), pages 76-85.
    18. Nye, David E., 2013. "America's Assembly Line," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262018715, April.
    19. Shearer, J. Ronald, 1997. "The Reichskuratorium für Wirtschaftlichkeit: Fordism and Organized Capitalism in Germany, 1918–1945," Business History Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 71(4), pages 569-602, January.
    20. Fisher, Robert J & Price, Linda L, 1992. "An Investigation into the Social Context of Early Adoption Behavior," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 19(3), pages 477-486, December.
    21. Glen Norcliffe, 1997. "Popeism and Fordism: Examining the Roots of Mass Production," Regional Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 31(3), pages 267-280.
    22. Gianni Toniolo, 1998. "Europe’s Golden Age, 1950-1973: Speculations from a Long-run Perspective," Economic History Review, Economic History Society, vol. 51(2), pages 252-267, May.
    23. Ron Boschma, 2005. "Proximity and Innovation: A Critical Assessment," Regional Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 39(1), pages 61-74.
    24. Best, Michael H., 2019. "Industrial innovation and productive structures: The creation of America’s ‘Arsenal of democracy’," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 48(C), pages 32-41.
    25. Phil Johnstone & Caitriona McLeish, 2020. "The Role of War in Deep Transitions: Exploring Mechanisms, Imprints and Rules in Sociotechnical Systems," SPRU Working Paper Series 2020-04, SPRU - Science Policy Research Unit, University of Sussex Business School.
    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. Zhao, Yuntong & Du, Yushen, 2021. "Technical standard competition: An ecosystem-view analysis based on stochastic evolutionary game theory," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 67(C).
    2. Johnstone, Phil & McLeish, Caitriona, 2022. "World wars and sociotechnical change in energy, food, and transport: A deep transitions perspective," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 174(C).
    3. Kanger, Laur & Bone, Frédérique & Rotolo, Daniele & Steinmueller, W. Edward & Schot, Johan, 2022. "Deep transitions: A mixed methods study of the historical evolution of mass production," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 177(C).
    4. Focacci, Chiara Natalie & Perez, Carlota, 2022. "The importance of education and training policies in supporting technological revolutions: A comparative and historical analysis of UK, US, Germany, and Sweden (1830–1970)," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 70(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. Kanger, Laur & Bone, Frédérique & Rotolo, Daniele & Steinmueller, W. Edward & Schot, Johan, 2022. "Deep transitions: A mixed methods study of the historical evolution of mass production," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 177(C).
    2. Johan Schot & Laur Kanger, 2016. "Deep Transitions: Emergence, Acceleration, Stabilization and Directionality," SPRU Working Paper Series 2016-15, SPRU - Science Policy Research Unit, University of Sussex Business School.
    3. Schot, Johan & Kanger, Laur, 2018. "Deep transitions: Emergence, acceleration, stabilization and directionality," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(6), pages 1045-1059.
    4. Mark Knell, 2021. "The digital revolution and digitalized network society," Review of Evolutionary Political Economy, Springer, vol. 2(1), pages 9-25, April.
    5. Mark Knell & Simone Vannuccini, 2022. "Tools and concepts for understanding disruptive technological change after Schumpeter," Jena Economics Research Papers 2022-005, Friedrich-Schiller-University Jena.
    6. Thanos Fragkandreas, 2023. "Case study research on innovation systems: paradox, dialectical analysis and resolution," Working Papers 65, Birkbeck Centre for Innovation Management Research, revised 15 May 2023.
    7. Marianna Epicoco & Magali Jaoul-Grammare & Anne Plunket, 2020. "Technological novelty and productivity growth: a cliometric approach," Working Papers of BETA 2020-37, Bureau d'Economie Théorique et Appliquée, UDS, Strasbourg.
    8. 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).
    9. Marco Gallegati, 2019. "A system for dating long wave phases in economic development," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 29(3), pages 803-822, July.
    10. Armanda Cetrulo & Alessandro Nuvolari, 2019. "Industry 4.0: revolution or hype? Reassessing recent technological trends and their impact on labour," Economia e Politica Industriale: Journal of Industrial and Business Economics, Springer;Associazione Amici di Economia e Politica Industriale, vol. 46(3), pages 391-402, September.
    11. Mário Franco & Lurdes Esteves & Margarida Rodrigues, 2024. "Clusters as a Mechanism of Sharing Knowledge and Innovation: Case Study from a Network Approach," Global Business Review, International Management Institute, vol. 25(2), pages 377-400, April.
    12. Rita Strohmaier & Marlies Schuetz & Simone Vannuccini, 2019. "A systemic perspective on socioeconomic transformation in the digital age," Economia e Politica Industriale: Journal of Industrial and Business Economics, Springer;Associazione Amici di Economia e Politica Industriale, vol. 46(3), pages 361-378, September.
    13. Nelson, John P., 2023. "Differential “progressibility” in human know-how: A conceptual overview," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(2).
    14. Andersen, Allan Dahl & Markard, Jochen, 2020. "Multi-technology interaction in socio-technical transitions: How recent dynamics in HVDC technology can inform transition theories," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 151(C).
    15. Nieto-Carrillo, Ernesto & Carreira, Carlos & Teixeira, Paulino, 2024. "Industrial dynamics in the ICT technological paradigm: The case of Portugal, 1986–2018," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 155-170.
    16. 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.
    17. Zhao, Shuliang & Wang, Junchen & Ji, Jiaojiao & Vincent Ekow, Arkorful, 2024. "Proximity or alienation? Can knowledge type influence the relationship between proximity and enterprise innovation performance?," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 202(C).
    18. Rinaldo Evangelista, 2018. "Technology and Economic Development: The Schumpeterian Legacy," Review of Radical Political Economics, Union for Radical Political Economics, vol. 50(1), pages 136-153, March.
    19. Slavo Radosevic & Esin Yoruk, 2016. "A New Metrics Of Technology Upgrading: The Central And East European Countries In A Comparative Perspective," UCL SSEES Economics and Business working paper series 2016-2, UCL School of Slavonic and East European Studies (SSEES).
    20. Palm, Alvar, 2022. "Innovation systems for technology diffusion: An analytical framework and two case studies," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 182(C).

    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:63:y:2020:i:c:s0160791x20303328. 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.