IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/scippl/v45y2018i4p455-467..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Influencing the direction of innovation processes: the shadow of authorities in demand articulation

Author

Listed:
  • Haico te Kulve
  • Wouter Boon
  • Kornelia Konrad
  • Tjerk Jan Schuitmaker

Abstract

This article aims to contribute to the development of demand-based innovation policies by examining the role of regulatory authorities in the process of formulating demands and requirements for novel technologies in three specific cases of emerging sensor technologies. We make two contributions. First, we conceptualize the different ways in which authorities may be involved in demand articulation processes during the innovation journey. We suggest four potential roles for regulatory actors: ‘following authority’, ‘forceful authority’, ‘co-creating authority’ and ‘shadow authority’. Second, we show how regulatory authorities in their role of ‘shadow authority’ influence demand articulation processes even if they are not immediately engaged. In early phases of the innovation journey, regulatory agencies may not be directly involved, but suppliers and potential users of technologies anticipate authorities’ positions and actions. In conclusion, we discuss the situations in which the involvement of regulatory authorities can support the process and guide the direction of demand articulation.

Suggested Citation

  • Haico te Kulve & Wouter Boon & Kornelia Konrad & Tjerk Jan Schuitmaker, 2018. "Influencing the direction of innovation processes: the shadow of authorities in demand articulation," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 45(4), pages 455-467.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:scippl:v:45:y:2018:i:4:p:455-467.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/scipol/scy015
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    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. Jakob Edler & Paul Cunningham & Abdullah Gök & Philip Shapira (ed.), 2016. "Handbook of Innovation Policy Impact," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 16121.
    2. Stefan Ambec & Mark A. Cohen & Stewart Elgie & Paul Lanoie, 2013. "The Porter Hypothesis at 20: Can Environmental Regulation Enhance Innovation and Competitiveness?," Review of Environmental Economics and Policy, Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 7(1), pages 2-22, January.
    3. Raghu Garud & Michael A. Rappa, 1994. "A Socio-Cognitive Model of Technology Evolution: The Case of Cochlear Implants," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 5(3), pages 344-362, August.
    4. Weber, K. Matthias & Rohracher, Harald, 2012. "Legitimizing research, technology and innovation policies for transformative change," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(6), pages 1037-1047.
    5. Wouter Boon & Jakob Edler, 2018. "Demand, challenges, and innovation. Making sense of new trends in innovation policy," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 45(4), pages 435-447.
    6. Edler, Jakob & Georghiou, Luke, 2007. "Public procurement and innovation--Resurrecting the demand side," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(7), pages 949-963, September.
    7. Kemp, René & Pontoglio, Serena, 2011. "The innovation effects of environmental policy instruments — A typical case of the blind men and the elephant?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 72(C), pages 28-36.
    8. Trienekens, Jacques & Zuurbier, Peter, 2008. "Quality and safety standards in the food industry, developments and challenges," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 113(1), pages 107-122, May.
    9. Mary Tripsas, 2008. "Customer preference discontinuities: a trigger for radical technological change," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 29(2-3), pages 79-97.
    10. Nichola Lowe & Maryann Feldman, 2008. "Constructing entrepreneurial advantage: consensus building, technological uncertainty and emerging industries," Cambridge Journal of Regions, Economy and Society, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 1(2), pages 265-284.
    11. Leonard-Barton, Dorothy, 1988. "Implementation as mutual adaptation of technology and organization," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 17(5), pages 251-267, October.
    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. Allen, Darcy W.E. & Berg, Chris & Markey-Towler, Brendan & Novak, Mikayla & Potts, Jason, 2020. "Blockchain and the evolution of institutional technologies: Implications for innovation policy," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(1).

    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. Julien Chicot & Mireille Matt, 2018. "Public procurement of innovation: a review of rationales, designs, and contributions to grand challenges," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 45(4), pages 480-492.
    2. Fagerberg, Jan, 2018. "Mobilizing innovation for sustainability transitions: A comment on transformative innovation policy," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(9), pages 1568-1576.
    3. Grashof, Nils, 2020. "Putting the watering can away Towards a targeted (problem-oriented) cluster policy framework," Papers in Innovation Studies 2020/4, Lund University, CIRCLE - Centre for Innovation Research.
    4. Uyarra, Elvira & Zabala-Iturriagagoitia, Jon Mikel & Flanagan, Kieron & Magro, Edurne, 2020. "Public procurement, innovation and industrial policy: Rationales, roles, capabilities and implementation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(1).
    5. Edler, Jakob, 2023. "Demand, public procurement and transformation," Discussion Papers "Innovation Systems and Policy Analysis" 79, Fraunhofer Institute for Systems and Innovation Research (ISI).
    6. Lewandowska Małgorzata Stefania, 2016. "Do Government Policies Foster Environmental Performance of Enterprises from CEE Region?," Comparative Economic Research, Sciendo, vol. 19(3), pages 45-67, September.
    7. Nuñez-Jimenez, Alejandro & Knoeri, Christof & Hoppmann, Joern & Hoffmann, Volker H., 2022. "Beyond innovation and deployment: Modeling the impact of technology-push and demand-pull policies in Germany's solar policy mix," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(10).
    8. Wouter Boon & Jakob Edler, 2018. "Demand, challenges, and innovation. Making sense of new trends in innovation policy," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 45(4), pages 435-447.
    9. Samant, Shantala & Thakur-Wernz, Pooja & Hatfield, Donald E., 2020. "Does the focus of renewable energy policy impact the nature of innovation? Evidence from emerging economies," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 137(C).
    10. Rogge, Karoline S. & Reichardt, Kristin, 2016. "Policy mixes for sustainability transitions: An extended concept and framework for analysis," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(8), pages 1620-1635.
    11. Grashof, Nils, 2021. "Putting the watering can away –Towards a targeted (problem-oriented) cluster policy framework," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(9).
    12. Jakob Edler, 2023. "Demand, public procurement and transformation," MIOIR Working Paper Series 2023-03, The Manchester Institute of Innovation Research (MIoIR), The University of Manchester.
    13. Rogge, Karoline S. & Reichardt, Kristin, 2013. "Towards a more comprehensive policy mix conceptualization for environmental technological change: A literature synthesis," Working Papers "Sustainability and Innovation" S3/2013, Fraunhofer Institute for Systems and Innovation Research (ISI).
    14. Borrás, Susana & Edler, Jakob, 2020. "The roles of the state in the governance of socio-technical systems’ transformation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(5).
    15. Jonas Heiberg & Bernhard Truffer, 2021. "The emergence of a global innovation system – a case study from the water sector," GEIST - Geography of Innovation and Sustainability Transitions 2021(09), GEIST Working Paper Series.
    16. Durán-Romero, Gemma & López, Ana M. & Beliaeva, Tatiana & Ferasso, Marcos & Garonne, Christophe & Jones, Paul, 2020. "Bridging the gap between circular economy and climate change mitigation policies through eco-innovations and Quintuple Helix Model," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 160(C).
    17. Staffan Waldo & Anton Paulrud, 2017. "Reducing Greenhouse Gas Emissions in Fisheries: The Case of Multiple Regulatory Instruments in Sweden," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 68(2), pages 275-295, October.
    18. Švarc, Jadranka & Dabić, Marina, 2021. "Transformative innovation policy or how to escape peripheral policy paradox in European research peripheral countries," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 67(C).
    19. repec:ers:journl:v:xxiv:y:2021:i:3:p:450-468 is not listed on IDEAS
    20. Wiegmann, Paul Moritz & de Vries, Henk J. & Blind, Knut, 2017. "Multi-mode standardisation: A critical review and a research agenda," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(8), pages 1370-1386.
    21. Fubiao Zhu & Delin Zhuang & Shengwu Jin & Lingling Gao & Rui Chen, 2022. "Effects of air pollution on regional innovation and the mediator role of health: Evidence from China," Growth and Change, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 53(2), pages 628-650, June.

    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:oup:scippl:v:45:y:2018:i:4:p:455-467.. 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: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/spp .

    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.