The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Evolutionary approaches for sustainable innovation policies: From niche to paradigm?
Abstract
Fostering technological innovation is considered as an important element of policies towards sustainable development. In the past 10 years, evolutionary policy approaches have been increasingly advocated. For several reasons, they seem well equipped to underpin sustainable innovation policies. They focus on dynamics of change and their drivers, they allow for a substantive perspective on technologies beyond mere input–output relations, taking into account trajectories and different characteristics of innovation, and they are able to describe circumstances under which established technologies might persist even when they are to some extent inferior to their new competitors (lock-in). However, the policy effectiveness of evolutionary approaches in cases in which radical or systemic changes are involved is not yet proven. In this paper we assess the theoretical rationale, instrumental aspects and the coping with policy constraints of three evolutionary policy approaches which have also been used in empirical studies: strategic niche management, transition management and time strategies. Each approach has its strengths and specific problems and all three have to be further developed and tested out but they hold promise for contributing to non-incremental change with economic and environmental benefits, by shaping processes of variation, selection and retention, with the outcomes feeding back into policy. They may also be used in other areas in which innovation direction is important, for instance health care or food.
Overview
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
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.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Geels, F. W. (2002) · Research Policy · doi:10.1016/s0048-7333(02)00062-8 · Cited by 7,275
Technological paradigms and technological trajectories
Dosi, G. (1982) · Research Policy · doi:10.1016/0048-7333(82)90016-6 · Cited by 6,685
Unruh, G. C. (2000) · Energy Policy · doi:10.1016/s0301-4215(00)00070-7 · Cited by 3,304
Redefining innovation — eco-innovation research and the contribution from ecological economics
Rennings, K. (2000) · Ecological Economics · doi:10.1016/s0921-8009(99)00112-3 · Cited by 3,226
Cited by
What is protective space? Reconsidering niches in transitions to sustainability
Smith, A., & Raven, R. (2012) · Research Policy · doi:10.1016/j.respol.2011.12.012 · Cited by 1,712
Legitimizing research, technology and innovation policies for transformative change
Weber, K. M., & Rohracher, H. (2012) · Research Policy · doi:10.1016/j.respol.2011.10.015 · Cited by 1,077
Diversity of eco-innovations: Reflections from selected case studies
Carrillo-Hermosilla, J., del Río, P., & Könnölä, T. (2010) · Journal of Cleaner Production · doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2010.02.014 · Cited by 1,070
Seyfang, G., & Haxeltine, A. (2012) · Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy · doi:10.1068/c10222 · Cited by 1,014
Sustainability transitions in the making: A closer look at actors, strategies and resources
Farla, J., Markard, J., Raven, R., & Coenen, L. (2012) · Technological Forecasting and Social Change · doi:10.1016/j.techfore.2012.02.001 · Cited by 708
Metadata
- Authors
- Nill, J., & Kemp, R.
- Venue
- Research Policy
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2009-05
- Volume
- 38
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 668-680
- ISSN
- 0048-7333 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2115593523
- Cited by
- 480
- References
- 4
- FWCI
- 25.38
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Evolutionary approaches for sustainable innovation policies: From niche to paradigm? https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.respol.2009.01.011
- The paper
- Nill, J., & Kemp, R. (2009). Evolutionary approaches for sustainable innovation policies: From niche to paradigm? Research Policy. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2009.01.011
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.