IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ces/ceswps/_7252.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Do Pilot and Demonstration Projects Work?

Author

Listed:
  • Christopher J. Blackburn
  • Mallory E. Flowers
  • Daniel C. Matisoff
  • Juan Moreno-Cruz

Abstract

Pilot and demonstration (P&D) projects are commonly deployed to catalyze early adoption of technology, but are poorly understood in terms of mechanism and impact. We conceptually distinguish unique functions of pilots and demonstrations, then examine whether they accelerate green building adoption. To identify effects of P&Ds on adoption, we develop a difference-in-difference-in-differences strategy, exploiting variation in location, technologies, and timing of P&D projects. Results indicate a 12% increase in adoption rates within markets affected by P&D projects. Further analyses examine mechanisms driving this effect. Subsequent results suggest green building demonstration projects create learning externalities, proliferating technology diffusion under certain conditions.

Suggested Citation

  • Christopher J. Blackburn & Mallory E. Flowers & Daniel C. Matisoff & Juan Moreno-Cruz, 2018. "Do Pilot and Demonstration Projects Work?," CESifo Working Paper Series 7252, CESifo.
    • Handle: RePEc:ces:ceswps:_7252
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cesifo.org/DocDL/cesifo1_wp7252.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Hendry, Chris & Harborne, Paul & Brown, James, 2010. "So what do innovating companies really get from publicly funded demonstration projects and trials? innovation lessons from solar photovoltaics and wind," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(8), pages 4507-4519, August.
    2. Hendry, Chris & Harborne, Paul, 2011. "Changing the view of wind power development: More than "bricolage"," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(5), pages 778-789, June.
    3. David J. Zimmerman, 2003. "Peer Effects in Academic Outcomes: Evidence from a Natural Experiment," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 85(1), pages 9-23, February.
    4. Andries De Grip & Jan Sauermann, 2012. "The Effects of Training on Own and Co‐worker Productivity: Evidence from a Field Experiment," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 122(560), pages 376-399, May.
    5. Kevin J. Boudreau & Tom Brady & Ina Ganguli & Patrick Gaule & Eva Guinan & Anthony Hollenberg & Karim R. Lakhani, 2017. "A Field Experiment on Search Costs and the Formation of Scientific Collaborations," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 99(4), pages 565-576, July.
    6. Nemet, Gregory F. & Zipperer, Vera & Kraus, Martina, 2018. "The valley of death, the technology pork barrel, and public support for large demonstration projects," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 119(C), pages 154-167.
    7. Stephen J. Decanio & William E. Watkins, 1998. "Investment In Energy Efficiency: Do The Characteristics Of Firms Matter?," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 80(1), pages 95-107, February.
    8. Kamp, Linda M. & Smits, Ruud E. H. M. & Andriesse, Cornelis D., 2004. "Notions on learning applied to wind turbine development in the Netherlands and Denmark," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(14), pages 1625-1637, September.
    9. Lorenzo Cassi & Anne Plunket, 2014. "Proximity, network formation and inventive performance: in search of the proximity paradox," The Annals of Regional Science, Springer;Western Regional Science Association, vol. 53(2), pages 395-422, September.
    10. Kotchen, Matthew J. & Costello, Christopher, 2018. "Maximizing the impact of climate finance: Funding projects or pilot projects?," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 92(C), pages 270-281.
    11. Marcel Fafchamps & Sanjeev Goyal & Marco J. van der Leij, 2010. "Matching and Network Effects," Journal of the European Economic Association, MIT Press, vol. 8(1), pages 203-231, March.
    12. Bryan Bollinger, 2015. "Green technology adoption: An empirical study of the Southern California garment cleaning industry," Quantitative Marketing and Economics (QME), Springer, vol. 13(4), pages 319-358, December.
    13. Simcoe, Timothy & Toffel, Michael W., 2014. "Government green procurement spillovers: Evidence from municipal building policies in California," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 68(3), pages 411-434.
    14. Frank M. Bass, 1969. "A New Product Growth for Model Consumer Durables," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 15(5), pages 215-227, January.
    15. Bui, Linda T.M. & Kapon, Samuel, 2012. "The impact of voluntary programs on polluting behavior: Evidence from pollution prevention programs and toxic releases," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 64(1), pages 31-44.
    16. Pence Karen M., 2006. "The Role of Wealth Transformations: An Application to Estimating the Effect of Tax Incentives on Saving," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 5(1), pages 1-26, July.
    17. Jensen, Richard, 1982. "Adoption and diffusion of an innovation of uncertain profitability," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 27(1), pages 182-193, June.
    18. Ashenfelter, Orley & Card, David, 1985. "Using the Longitudinal Structure of Earnings to Estimate the Effect of Training Programs," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 67(4), pages 648-660, November.
    19. Lange Ian, 2009. "Evaluating Voluntary Measures with Treatment Spillovers: The Case of Coal Combustion Products Partnership," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 9(1), pages 1-22, September.
    20. Bikhchandani, Sushil & Hirshleifer, David & Welch, Ivo, 1992. "A Theory of Fads, Fashion, Custom, and Cultural Change in Informational Cascades," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 100(5), pages 992-1026, October.
    21. Läpple, Doris & Rensburg, Tom Van, 2011. "Adoption of organic farming: Are there differences between early and late adoption?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(7), pages 1406-1414, May.
    22. Mah, Daphne Ngar-yin & Wu, Yun-Ying & Ip, Jasper Chi-man & Hills, Peter Ronald, 2013. "The role of the state in sustainable energy transitions: A case study of large smart grid demonstration projects in Japan," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 63(C), pages 726-737.
    23. Kahn Matthew E & Vaughn Ryan K., 2009. "Green Market Geography: The Spatial Clustering of Hybrid Vehicles and LEED Registered Buildings," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 9(2), pages 1-24, March.
    24. Bryan Bollinger, 2015. "Green technology adoption: An empirical study of the Southern California garment cleaning industry," Quantitative Marketing and Economics (QME), Springer, vol. 13(4), pages 319-358, December.
    25. Abhijit V. Banerjee, 1992. "A Simple Model of Herd Behavior," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 107(3), pages 797-817.
    26. Stoneman, Paul & Diederen, Paul, 1994. "Technology Diffusion and Public Policy," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 104(425), pages 918-930, July.
    27. Doraszelski, Ulrich, 2001. "The net present value method versus the option value of waiting: A note on Farzin, Huisman and Kort (1998)," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 25(8), pages 1109-1115, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Christopher J. Blackburn & Mallory E. Flowers & Daniel C. Matisoff & Juan Moreno‐Cruz, 2020. "Do Pilot and Demonstration Projects Work? Evidence from a Green Building Program," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 39(4), pages 1100-1132, September.
    2. Bossink, Bart, 2020. "Learning strategies in sustainable energy demonstration projects: What organizations learn from sustainable energy demonstrations," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 131(C).
    3. Edouard Civel & Marc Baudry, 2018. "The Fate of Inventions. What can we learn from Bayesian learning in strategic options model of adoption ?," EconomiX Working Papers 2018-47, University of Paris Nanterre, EconomiX.
    4. Dunia López-Pintado & Duncan J. Watts, 2008. "Social Influence, Binary Decisions and Collective Dynamics," Rationality and Society, , vol. 20(4), pages 399-443, November.
    5. Mira Frick & Yuhta Ishii, 2015. "Innovation Adoption by Forward-Looking Social Learners," Cowles Foundation Discussion Papers 1877, Cowles Foundation for Research in Economics, Yale University.
    6. Fu, Wentao & Le Riche, Antoine, 2021. "Endogenous growth model with Bayesian learning and technology selection," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 114(C), pages 58-71.
    7. H. Peyton Young, 2009. "Innovation Diffusion in Heterogeneous Populations: Contagion, Social Influence, and Social Learning," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 99(5), pages 1899-1924, December.
    8. Tetsuya Kasahara, 2015. "Strategic Technology Adoption Under Dispersed Information and Information Learning," International Journal of Innovation and Technology Management (IJITM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 12(06), pages 1-18, December.
    9. Zejin Liu & Steven Van de Walle, 2022. "The role of demonstration projects as policy instruments in the development of nonprofit organizations: Beyond instrumentality," Public Administration & Development, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 42(4), pages 233-244, October.
    10. Francesco Bogliacino & Giorgio Rampa, 2010. "Monopolistic competition and new products: a conjectural equilibrium approach," Journal of Economic Interaction and Coordination, Springer;Society for Economic Science with Heterogeneous Interacting Agents, vol. 5(1), pages 55-76, June.
    11. Eslami, Hossein & Krishnan, Trichy, 2023. "New sustainable product adoption: The role of economic and social factors," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 183(C).
    12. Mario A. Maggioni, 2004. "The rise and fall of industrial clusters: Technology and the life cycle of region," Working Papers 2004/6, Institut d'Economia de Barcelona (IEB).
    13. H Peyton Young & Lucas Merrill Brown, 2016. "The Diffusion of a Social Innovation: Executive Stock Options from 1936," Economics Series Working Papers 777, University of Oxford, Department of Economics.
    14. Benson Tsz Kin Leung, 2022. "Innovation Diffusion among Case-based Decision-makers," Papers 2203.05785, arXiv.org, revised Jan 2023.
    15. John C. Persons & Vincent A. Warther, "undated". "Boom and Bust Patterns in the Adoption of Financial Innovations," Research in Financial Economics 9601, Ohio State University.
    16. Delli Gatti,Domenico & Fagiolo,Giorgio & Gallegati,Mauro & Richiardi,Matteo & Russo,Alberto (ed.), 2018. "Agent-Based Models in Economics," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9781108400046, November.
    17. Michel Grabisch & Agnieszka Rusinowska & Xavier Venel, 2019. "Diffusion in countably infinite networks," Documents de travail du Centre d'Economie de la Sorbonne 19017, Université Panthéon-Sorbonne (Paris 1), Centre d'Economie de la Sorbonne.
    18. Li, Feng & Du, Timon C. & Wei, Ying, 2023. "This is what’s in store for you: How online social learning affects product positioning," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 179(C).
    19. Adriaan R. Soetevent, 2006. "Empirics of the Identification of Social Interactions; An Evaluation of the Approaches and Their Results," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 20(2), pages 193-228, April.
    20. Keuschnigg, Marc, 2015. "Product Success in Cultural Markets: The Mediating Role of Familiarity, Peers, and Experts," MPRA Paper 63444, University Library of Munich, Germany.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    information spillovers; peer effects; social learning; pilot and demonstration projects; technology adoption; diffusion; policy evaluation; green building;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • O33 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Technological Change: Choices and Consequences; Diffusion Processes
    • Q55 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Environmental Economics: Technological Innovation
    • D83 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Search; Learning; Information and Knowledge; Communication; Belief; Unawareness

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:ces:ceswps:_7252. 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: Klaus Wohlrabe (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cesifde.html .

    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.