CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 73Sustainability and Climate Change GovernanceInnovation Diffusion and ForecastingInnovation, Technology, and Society

On order and complexity in innovations systems: conceptual frameworks for policy mixes in sustainability transitions

Open access
Grubb, Michael, McDowall, Will, Drummond, Paul·2017·Energy Research & Social Science
DOI 10.1016/j.erss.2017.09.016
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.erss.2017.09.016

Cites

3 of 3 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The complexity of the nexus of sociotechnical barriers requires a more comprehensive approach of combining policy processes, elements and characteristics to develop a consistent and coherent EV policy mix.

    “The complexity of the nexus of sociotechnical barriers discussed above arguably requires a more comprehensive approach of combining policy processes, elements and characteristics to develop a consistent and coherent EV policy mix (Grubb et al., 2017;Rogge and Reichardt, 2016).”

    From Understanding the socio-technical nexus of Nordic electric vehicle (EV) barriers: A qualitative discussion of range, price, charging and knowledge (2020) · cites this paper as Grubb et al., 2017

    In “2. Context and links to existing literature” (page unavailable), Grubb et al. describe policy elements, processes and characteristics, including consistency and coherence. “A map for the evolution of policy packages” explains why complex barriers call for policy mixes that address multiple obstacles. The paper supports the general approach, but does not specifically establish what an EV policy mix requires. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 45

  1. Acemoglu D, Aghion P, Bursztyn L, Hemous D (2010). The Environment and Directed Technical Change. American Economic Review 2012, 102(1): 131-166 http://dx.doi=10.1257/aer.102.1.131 · DOI
  2. Almeida, A.D., Santos, B., Paolo, B., Quicheron, M. (2014) Solid state lighting review - Potential and challenges in Europe, Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 34, 30-48
  3. Ambec S, Mark A. Coheny, Stewart Elgiez, and Paul Lanoie (2013), The Porter Hypothesis at 20: Can Environmental Regulation Enhance Innovation and Competitiveness? Review of Environmental Economics and Policy, 7:1, winter 2013, pp. 2-22
  4. Bergek, A., S. Jacobsson, B. Carlsson, S. Lindmark and A. Rickne (2008b). "Analyzing the functional dynamics of technological innovation systems: A scheme of analysis." Research Policy 37(3): 407-429.
  5. Bettencourt, L.M.A., Trancik, J.E., Kaur, J. (2013) Determinants of the Pace of Global Innovation in Energy Technologies, PLoS ONE, 8(10), e67864. doi:10.1371/ journal.pone.0067864 · DOI
  6. Bladh, M. and Krantz, H. (2008) Towards a bright future? Household use of electric light: A microlevel study, Energy Policy, 36(9), 3521-3530
  7. Böhringer, C. and Rosendahl, K.E. (2011) Greening Electricity More Than Necessary: On the Cost Implications of Overlapping Regulation in EU Climate Policy, 131(3), 469-492
  8. Breschi, S., F. Malerba, L. Orsenigo (2000) Technological regimes and Schumpeterian patterns of innovation. The Economic Journal 110: 388-410.
  9. Castellacci, F and Lie, C.M. (2015) Do the effects of R&D tax credits vary across industries? A meta-regression analysis, Research Policy, 44(4), 819-832
  10. Cooke, P., Uranga, M.G., Etxebarria, G. (1998) Regional Systems of Innovation: An Evolutionary Perspective, Environment and Planning A, 30(9), 1563-1584
  11. Dechezleprêtre A; Glachant, Matthieu; Haščič, Ivan; Johnstone, Nick; Ménière, Yann (2011), Invention and transfer of climate change-mitigation technologies: a global analysis, Review of Environmental Economics and Policy 5:1 pp.109-130
  12. Edenhofer, O., Lessmann, K., Kemfert, C., Grubb, M., & Kohler, J. Induced Technological Change: Exploring its Implications for the Economics of Atmospheric Stabilization: Synthesis Report from the Innovation Modeling Comparison Project. The Energy Journal, SI2006 (01), 57-108. doi:10.5547/ISSN0195-6574-EJ-VolSI2006-NoSI1-3 · DOI
  13. Foxon, T. J. (2011). "A coevolutionary framework for analysing a transition to a sustainable low carbon economy." Ecological Economics 70(12): 2258-2267.
  14. Fouquet, R., & Pearson, P. J. (2006). Seven centuries of energy services: The price and use of light in the United Kingdom (1300-2000). The Energy Journal, 139-177.
  15. Flanagan, K. and Uyarra, E. (2016) Four dangers in innovation policy studies -and how to avoid them, Industry and Innovation, 23(3), 177-188
  16. Flanagan, K., Uyarra, E., Laranja, M (2011) Reconceptualising the 'policy mix' for innovation, Research Policy, 40(5), 702-713.
  17. Freeman, C. and F. Louca (2001). As time goes by: from the industrial revolutions to the information revolution, Oxford University Press.
  18. Grubb, M (2004) Technology Innovation and Climate Change Policy: An Overview of Issues and Options, Keio economic studies, 41(2), 103-132
  19. Grubb, M., Hourcade, J-C., Neuhoff, K. [GHK] (2014) Planetary Economics: Energy, Climate Change and the Three Domains of Sustainable Development, Routledge, Abingdon UK
  20. Grubler A. et al, Policies for the Energy Technology Innovation System (ETIS), Chapter 24 in Nakicenovic et al (2012).
  21. Hall, S, Timothy J Foxon, and Ronan Bolton (2015), Investing in low-carbon transitions: energy finance as an adaptive market, Climate Policy 17:3, doi: 10.1080/14693062.2015.1094731 · DOI
  22. Hekkert, M. P., R. A. A. Suurs, S. O. Negro, S. Kuhlmann and R. E. H. M. Smits (2007). "Functions of innovation systems: A new approach for analysing technological change." Technological forecasting and social change 74(4): 413-432.
  23. Helm, D. (2009) EU climate-change policy -a critique, Smith School Working Paper Series, University of Oxford, Oxford
  24. by P. Eliadis, M. Hill, and Howlett, M, 31-50. Montreal: McGill-Queen"s University Press, 2005
  25. Iammarino, S. (2005) An evolutionary integrated view of Regional Systems of Innovation: Concepts, measures and historical perspectives, European Planning Studies, 13(4), 497-519
  26. Jaffe A.B., R.G. Newell R.G. and R.N. Stavins (2005) A tale of two market failures: Technology and environmental policy. Ecological Economics, Vol.54: 2-3.
  27. John, P. (2003) Is There Life After Policy Streams, Advocacy Coalitions, and Punctuations: Using Evolutionary Theory to Explain Policy Change?, Policy Studies Journal, 31(4), 481-498
  28. Kivimaa, P. and Kern, F. (2016) Creative destruction or mere niche support? Innovation policy mixes for sustainability transitions, Research Policy, 45(1), 205-217
  29. Klein Woolthuis, R., M. Lankhuizen and V. Gilsing (2005). "A system failure framework for innovation policy design." Technovation 25(6): 609-619.
  30. Lantz, E., Hand, M., Wiser, R. (2012) The past and Future Cost of Wind Energy, Conference Paper presented at the 2012 World Renewable Energy Forum, Colorado Lazard (2017) Lazard's Levelized Cost of Energy Analysis -Version 10.0, [Online] Available at: https://www.lazard.com/media/438038/levelized-cost-of-energy-v100.pdf [Accessed 28th July 2017]
  31. Lehman, P. (2012) Justifying a Policy Mix for Pollution Control: A Review of Economic Literature, Journal of Economic Surveys, 26(1), 71-97
  32. Lindblom, C.E. (1958) Tinbergen on Policy Making, Journal of Political Economy, 66(6), 531- 538
  33. Malerba, F. (2002). "Sectoral systems of innovation and production." Research Policy 31(2): 247-264.
  34. Markard, J. and Truffer, B. (2006) Innovation processes in large technical systems: Market liberalization as a driver for radical change?, Research Policy, 35(5), 609-625
  35. Menanteaua, P. and Lefebvreb, H. (2000) Competing technologies and the diffusion of innovations: the emergence of energy-efficient lamps in the residential sector, Research Policy, 29(3), 375-389
  36. Metcalfe, J.S. (1993) Technology systems and technology policy in an evolutionary framework, Cambridge Journal of Economics, 19(1), 25-46
  37. Nelson R. and S. G. Winter. 1982. An Evolutionary Theory of Economic Change. Cambridge, Massachusetts: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.
  38. Nill, J. and Kemp, R. (2009) Evolutionary approaches for sustainable innovation policies: From niche to paradigm?, Research Policy, 38(4), 668-680
  39. Pavitt, K. (1984). "Sectoral patterns of technical change: towards a taxonomy and a theory." Research Policy 13(6): 343-373.
  40. Porter M. and C van der Linde, Toward a New Conception of the Environment- Competitiveness Relationship The Journal of Economic Perspectives Vol. 9, No. 4 (Autumn, 1995), pp. 97-118
  41. Rogge K. and Reichardt K (2016), Policy mixes for sustainability transitions: An extended concept and framework for analysis, Research Policy 45: 1620-1635. Doi: 10.1016/j.respol.2016.04.004 · DOI · Paper page
  42. Rubin, E.S., Chen, C., Rao, A.B. (2007) Cost and performance of fossil fuel power plants with CO2 capture and storage, Energy Policy, 35(9), 4444-4454
  43. Safarzyńska, Karolina (2017): Integrating behavioural economics into climate-economy models: some policy lessons, Climate Policy, DOI: 10.1080/14693062.2017.1313718 · DOI
  44. Schot J. and Frank Geels, 'Niches in Evolutionary Theories of Technical Change', Journal of Evolutionary Economics (2007), 17 (5), 605-622.
  45. Williamson, O.E. (2000) The New Institutional Economics: Taking Stock, Looking Ahead, Journal of Economic Literature, vol 38, no 3: 595-613

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Grubb, M., McDowall, W., & Drummond, P.
Affiliations
University College London (GB)
Corresponding author
Grubb, Michael
ORCID
Venue
Energy Research & Social Science
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2017-11
Volume
33
Pages
21-34
ISSN
2214-6296 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/j.erss.2017.09.016
OpenAlex
W2761196329
Cited by
73
References
3
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 11 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 11 · 2019: 9 · 2018: 6
FWCI
4.93
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
www.elsevier.com/tdm/userlicense/1.0/ (tdm)
Locations
  • Energy Research & Social Science (publishedVersion)
  • UCL Discovery (University College London) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Global and Planetary Change › Sustainability and Climate Change Governance
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Innovation Diffusion and Forecasting
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Innovation, Technology, and Society
Keywords
sustainability transitions, innovation systems, policy mix, innovation chain, vertical innovation, system innovation, evolutionary economics, low-carbon power systems, energy conversion, innovation adoption, conceptual framework

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review