Pilotprosjekter som innovasjonsstrategi

På vei mot transport 2.0?2. februar 2015 - Union Scene Drammen

Lars CoenenCIRCLE, Lunds Universitet

NIFU & Utrecht Universitet

Time horizon (years)

Improvement inenvironmental efficiency

Factor 10

Factor 5

Factor 2

5 10 20

Function innovation= new system

Partial system redesign

System optimimisation

Low-carbon transport requires transitions to new systems

What can innovation policy deliver?

• Innovation > market failure > public support for R&D

• Innovation system policy:– Innovation capabilities (beyond R&D)– Institutions– Networks

• Yet, poor fit with the innovation constraints implied by low-carbon transitions (Alkemade, Hekkert and Negro.,

2012)

A definition of ’transition’

Co-evolution towards system innovations through new technology, changes in markets, user pratices, policy and cultural discourses, and governing institutions (Geels, Hekkert and Jacobsson, 2008)

(1) co-evolution and multiple changes in socio-technical systems or configurations

(2) multi-actor interactions between social groups such as firms, user groups, scientific communities, policy makers, social movements and special interest groups

(3) ‘radical’ change in terms of scope of change (not speed)(4) long-term processes covering 40-50 years.

Socio-technical transitions: multi level perspective (Geels, 2004)

Example regime

Insights from transition studies for innovation policy

Additional system failures (Weber and Rohracher, 2012)

• Demand / market creation (Dewald and Truffer, 2011)

• Public legitimacy for emergent technologies• Directionality • Resistance to change• Entrepreneurial experimentation

Innodemo• Hva har skandinaviske

demonstrasjons- og forsøksprosjekt og programmer bidratt med for å støtte opp under overgangen til mer bærekraftige energi- og transportsystemer?

• Hvordan bør styring av slike prosjekter og programmer utvikles for at de skal gi størst mulig bidrag?

Projects in the database433 demonstration and trail projects in the database in total

Denmark: 224, incl. 7 EU projectsNorway: 107 projectsSweden: 102 projects

Transport technologies97 projects (22%) were concerned with transportation– electrical mobility– biofuel/biogas

Energy technologies – IEA codes

0

50

100

150

200

250

Denmark Norway Sweden

Mill

ion

€

Other Power andStorage technologies

Hydrogen and Fuelcells

Renewable energysources

Energy efficiency

Projects in the database- increase of demonstration and trail projects during the period

2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 20120

10

20

30

40

50

60

Denmark

Norway

Sweden

2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 20120

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

Denmark

Norway

Sweden

Mill

ion

€

Number of projects Funding of projects

Project aims- number of projects - multiple aims possible

Prove technical feasibility

Reduce building, operating and maintenance costs

Prove feasibility in commercial applications

Prove environmental feasibility

Improve public acceptance

Introducing institutional embedding

Contribute to the formation of knowledge networks

Facilitate learning

Expose system weaknesses

Other objectives

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

Denmark Norway Sweden

Resultater av prosjektene, i prosent

Demo of functioning technology

New design/concept

New standards

New manufacturing process

Extension/continuation of project

Licenses

Patents

Written manuals/reports

Commercial success

27.33

22.98

4.35

2.48

13.66

1.24

10.56

14.29

3.11

Governance conclusions: widening considerations of uncertainty

• Trial and demonstration projects are key to bridging the valleys of death between R&D and market/societal introduction of new technologies

• High risks and uncertainties are unavoidable: allow for experimentation & failure

• Most focus is on reducing technological uncertainty

• Reducing social and economic uncertainty are equally important but usually recieve less attention

• Greater involvement required from users, policy-makers, non-technological stakeholders

Governance conclusions: deal with uncertainty, not ignore or avoid it

• Build a smart portfolio of trial and demonstration projects

• Many projects will fail: this is unavoidable for experimentation

• True failure > ‘the failure to learn from failure’

• Barriers: Silo structures, ineffective mechanisms to support learning, high staff turnover and the lack of time for learning

• More attention for learning and communication between and across projects

• Transitions to sustainable energy and transport systems: system of systems that require system integration

Governance conclusion: diversity of projects, stakeholders and knowledge as a resource

• Trial and demonstration projects are inherently experimental

• Uneasy fit with ‘orthodox’ project management

• Heterogenous stakeholders: diversity in interests, goals, knowledge > opportunity for innovation, challenge for project management

• Trust is crucial to facilitate learning and a culture of collaboration and fruitful experimentation > requires patience and a willingness to accept failure

Trial and demonstration projects: Strategic Niche Management (Raven, 2005)

technical development: design specifications and required complementary technology user context: user characteristics, requirements, meanings and barriers to use societal and environmental impact industrial development: production and maintenance government policy and regulatory framework.