IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v10y2018i12p4497-d186423.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Assessing Technology Platforms for Sustainability with Web Data Mining Techniques

Author

Listed:
  • Desamparados Blazquez

    (Department of Economics and Social Sciences, Universitat Politècnica de València, 46022 València, Spain)

  • Josep Domenech

    (Department of Economics and Social Sciences, Universitat Politècnica de València, 46022 València, Spain)

  • Jose-Maria Garcia-Alvarez-Coque

    (Department of Economics and Social Sciences, Universitat Politècnica de València, 46022 València, Spain)

Abstract

Public policies have encouraged the proliferation of technology platforms that support the transition towards sustainable agriculture and the development of innovations in the food system. Provided the difficulty associated with assessing the outputs and outcomes of technology platforms, this work proposes a practical assessment method based on the retrieval and analysis of online documents related to the technology platforms. Concretely, the method consists of applying web scraping techniques to retrieve documents related to a technology platform from the Internet and then applying web data-mining techniques to automatically classify these documents into the functions that the platform should fulfill, which are described from the viewpoint of co-evolution of innovation. Data are automatically processed to obtain a variety of metrics, which are applied to measure the impact of European Technology Platforms (ETPs) on promoting an organic food paradigm. This method provides time-series data that helps to follow the evolution of the different functions of the platform and to describe its lifecycle. It has been applied to one platform taken as a case study, TP Organics, which represents a key platform for stakeholders that promote organic farming and agroecology as core components of an ambitious program for sustainable agriculture. The obtained online-based measures have been proven to assess the global evolution of the platform, its dissemination through the European Union (EU) Member States, and the evolution of the different functions expected to be fulfilled by it regarding the diffusion and promotion of innovations in organic agriculture.

Suggested Citation

  • Desamparados Blazquez & Josep Domenech & Jose-Maria Garcia-Alvarez-Coque, 2018. "Assessing Technology Platforms for Sustainability with Web Data Mining Techniques," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(12), pages 1-15, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:10:y:2018:i:12:p:4497-:d:186423
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/10/12/4497/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/10/12/4497/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Vicente, María Rosalía & López-Menéndez, Ana J. & Pérez, Rigoberto, 2015. "Forecasting unemployment with internet search data: Does it help to improve predictions when job destruction is skyrocketing?," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 92(C), pages 132-139.
    2. Bessant, John & Rush, Howard, 1995. "Building bridges for innovation: the role of consultants in technology transfer," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 24(1), pages 97-114, January.
    3. Howells, Jeremy, 2006. "Intermediation and the role of intermediaries in innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(5), pages 715-728, June.
    4. Francisco Mas-Verdú & Anthony Wensley & Martin Alba & José García Álvarez-Coque, 2011. "How much does KIBS contribute to the generation and diffusion of innovation?," Service Business, Springer;Pan-Pacific Business Association, vol. 5(3), pages 195-212, September.
    5. Verena Seufert & Navin Ramankutty & Jonathan A. Foley, 2012. "Comparing the yields of organic and conventional agriculture," Nature, Nature, vol. 485(7397), pages 229-232, May.
    6. Hyunyoung Choi & Hal Varian, 2012. "Predicting the Present with Google Trends," The Economic Record, The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 88(s1), pages 2-9, June.
    7. Adrian Muller & Christian Schader & Nadia El-Hage Scialabba & Judith Brüggemann & Anne Isensee & Karl-Heinz Erb & Pete Smith & Peter Klocke & Florian Leiber & Matthias Stolze & Urs Niggli, 2017. "Strategies for feeding the world more sustainably with organic agriculture," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 8(1), pages 1-13, December.
    8. Ruud E. Smits & Stefan Kuhlmann & Phillip Shapira (ed.), 2010. "The Theory and Practice of Innovation Policy," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 4181.
    9. Kilelu, Catherine W. & Klerkx, Laurens & Leeuwis, Cees, 2013. "Unravelling the role of innovation platforms in supporting co-evolution of innovation: Contributions and tensions in a smallholder dairy development programme," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 65-77.
    10. Eastwood, C.R. & Chapman, D.F. & Paine, M.S., 2012. "Networks of practice for co-construction of agricultural decision support systems: Case studies of precision dairy farms in Australia," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 108(C), pages 10-18.
    11. Sanjay K. Arora & Jan Youtie & Philip Shapira & Lidan Gao & TingTing Ma, 2013. "Entry strategies in an emerging technology: a pilot web-based study of graphene firms," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 95(3), pages 1189-1207, June.
    12. Biggs, Stephen D., 1990. "A multiple source of innovation model of agricultural research and technology promotion," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 18(11), pages 1481-1499, November.
    13. Kilelu, Catherine W. & Klerkx, Laurens & Leeuwis, Cees & Hall, Andy, 2011. "Beyond knowledge brokerage: An exploratory study of innovation intermediaries in an evolving smallholder agricultural system in Kenya," MERIT Working Papers 2011-022, United Nations University - Maastricht Economic and Social Research Institute on Innovation and Technology (MERIT).
    14. Klerkx, Laurens & Aarts, Noelle & Leeuwis, Cees, 2010. "Adaptive management in agricultural innovation systems: The interactions between innovation networks and their environment," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 103(6), pages 390-400, July.
    15. Marko P. Hekkert & Simona O. Negro, 2008. "Functions of innovation systems as a framework to understand sustainable technological change: empirical evidence for earlier claims," Innovation Studies Utrecht (ISU) working paper series 08-10, Utrecht University, Department of Innovation Studies, revised Apr 2008.
    16. Padel, Susanne & Röcklinsberg, Helena & Schmid, Otto, 2009. "The implementation of organic principles and values in the European Regulation for organic food," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(3), pages 245-251, June.
    17. Blazquez, Desamparados & Domenech, Josep, 2018. "Big Data sources and methods for social and economic analyses," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 130(C), pages 99-113.
    18. Boon, Wouter P.C. & Moors, Ellen H.M. & Kuhlmann, Stefan & Smits, Ruud E.H.M., 2011. "Demand articulation in emerging technologies: Intermediary user organisations as co-producers?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(2), pages 242-252, March.
    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. Aleksey I. Shinkevich & Irina G. Ershova & Farida F. Galimulina, 2022. "Forecasting the Efficiency of Innovative Industrial Systems Based on Neural Networks," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 11(1), pages 1-25, December.

    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. Yang, Huan & Klerkx, Laurens & Leeuwis, Cees, 2014. "Functions and limitations of farmer cooperatives as innovation intermediaries: Findings from China," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 127(C), pages 115-125.
    2. Kilelu, Catherine W. & Klerkx, Laurens & Leeuwis, Cees, 2013. "Unravelling the role of innovation platforms in supporting co-evolution of innovation: Contributions and tensions in a smallholder dairy development programme," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 65-77.
    3. Aurélie Cardona & Cristiana Carusi & Michael Mayerfeld Bell, 2021. "Engaged Intermediaries to Bridge the Gap between Scientists, Educational Practitioners and Farmers to Develop Sustainable Agri-Food Innovation Systems: A US Case Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(21), pages 1-13, October.
    4. Colleen M. Eidt & Laxmi P. Pant & Gordon M. Hickey, 2020. "Platform, Participation, and Power: How Dominant and Minority Stakeholders Shape Agricultural Innovation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(2), pages 1-21, January.
    5. Kilelu, Catherine W. & Klerkx, Laurens & Leeuwis, Cees, 2016. "Unraveling the role of innovation platforms in supporting coevolution of innovation: Contributions and tensions in a smallholder dairy-development program," IFPRI book chapters, in: Devaux, André & Torero, Maximo & Donovan, Jason & Horton, Douglas E. (ed.), Innovation for inclusive value-chain development: Successes and challenges, chapter 9, pages 269-302, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    6. Caloffi, Annalisa & Colovic, Ana & Rizzoli, Valentina & Rossi, Federica, 2023. "Innovation intermediaries' types and functions: A computational analysis of the literature," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 189(C).
    7. Kivimaa, Paula & Boon, Wouter & Hyysalo, Sampsa & Klerkx, Laurens, 2019. "Towards a typology of intermediaries in sustainability transitions: A systematic review and a research agenda," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(4), pages 1062-1075.
    8. Paula Kivimaa & Wouter Boon & Sampsa Hyysalo & Laurens Klerkx, 2017. "Towards a Typology of Intermediaries in Transitions: a Systematic Review," SPRU Working Paper Series 2017-17, SPRU - Science Policy Research Unit, University of Sussex Business School.
    9. Laurens Klerkx & Andy Hall & Cees Leeuwis, 2009. "Strengthening agricultural innovation capacity: are innovation brokers the answer?," International Journal of Agricultural Resources, Governance and Ecology, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 8(5/6), pages 409-438.
    10. Alex Koutsouris, 2012. "Exploring the emerging facilitation and brokerage roles for agricultural extension education," Working Papers 2012-4, Agricultural University of Athens, Department Of Agricultural Economics.
    11. van Winden, Willem & Carvalho, Luís, 2019. "Intermediation in public procurement of innovation: How Amsterdam’s startup-in-residence programme connects startups to urban challenges," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(9), pages 1-1.
    12. Federica Rossi & Ana Colovic & Annalisa Caloffi & Margherita Russo, 2021. "Public innovation intermediaries and digital co-creation," Working Papers 49, Birkbeck Centre for Innovation Management Research, revised Feb 2021.
    13. Skaalsveen, Kamilla & Ingram, Julie & Urquhart, Julie, 2020. "The role of farmers' social networks in the implementation of no-till farming practices," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 181(C).
    14. Kivimaa, Paula, 2014. "Government-affiliated intermediary organisations as actors in system-level transitions," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(8), pages 1370-1380.
    15. Selviaridis, Kostas & Hughes, Alan & Spring, Martin, 2023. "Facilitating public procurement of innovation in the UK defence and health sectors: Innovation intermediaries as institutional entrepreneurs," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(2).
    16. Malek, Žiga & Tieskens, Koen F. & Verburg, Peter H., 2019. "Explaining the global spatial distribution of organic crop producers," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 176(C).
    17. Boon, Wouter P.C. & Moors, Ellen H.M. & Kuhlmann, Stefan & Smits, Ruud E.H.M., 2011. "Demand articulation in emerging technologies: Intermediary user organisations as co-producers?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(2), pages 242-252, March.
    18. Jenson, Ian & Doyle, Richard & Miles, Morgan P., 2020. "An entrepreneurial marketing process perspective of the role of intermediaries in producing innovation outcomes," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 112(C), pages 291-299.
    19. Lema, Zelalem & Lobry de Bruyn, Lisa A. & Marshall, Graham R. & Roschinsky, Romana & Duncan, Alan J., 2021. "Multilevel innovation platforms for development of smallholder livestock systems: How effective are they?," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 189(C).
    20. Marine Agogué & Elsa Berthet & Tobias Fredberg & Pascal Le Masson & Blanche Segrestin & Martin Stoetzel & Martin Wiener & Anna Yström, 2017. "Explicating the role of innovation intermediaries in the 'unknown': a contingency approach," Post-Print hal-01481878, HAL.

    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:gam:jsusta:v:10:y:2018:i:12:p:4497-:d:186423. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.