Technological transitions as evolutionary reconfiguration processes: a multi-level perspective and a case-study
Introduction
Technological Transitions (TT) are defined as major technological transformations in the way societal functions such as transportation, communication, housing, feeding, are fulfilled. TT do not only involve technological changes, but also changes in elements such as user practices, regulation, industrial networks, infrastructure, and symbolic meaning. An example is the transition in offices from punched card technology and small office technology to digital computers, 1930–1960 (Van den Ende and Kemp, 1999).
This paper addresses the following questions: How do TT come about? Are there particular patterns and mechanisms in transition processes? My analysis of TT is based on a particular perspective on technology, stemming from sociology of technology. In this perspective technology, of itself, has no power, does nothing. Only in association with human agency, social structures and organisations does technology fulfil functions. In this respect, Hughes (1987) coined the useful metaphor of a ‘seamless web’ in which physical artefacts, organisations, natural resources, scientific elements, legislative artefacts are combined in order to achieve functionalities. Rip and Kemp (1998) analyse technology as ‘configurations that work’. While the term ‘configurations’ refers to the alignment between a heterogeneous set of elements, the addition ‘that work’ indicates that the configuration fulfils a function. Configurations that work cannot easily be bounded from the rest of society in a simple and obvious way. Things and skills are part of routines, of patterns of behaviour, of organisations. They work only because they are embedded. Societal functions are fulfilled by sociotechnical configurations. Fig. 1 portrays the modern sociotechnical configuration for land-based personal transportation. The transportation function is fulfilled, because a heterogeneous set of elements is linked together.
In this conceptualisation, TT consist of a change from one sociotechnical configuration to another, involving substitution of technology, as well as changes in other elements. Such reconfiguration processes do not occur easily, because the elements in a sociotechnical configuration are linked and aligned to each other. Radically new technologies have a hard time to break through, because regulations, infrastructure, user practices, maintenance networks are aligned to the existing technology. New technologies often face a mis-match with the established socio-institutional framework (Freeman and Perez, 1988). But socio-technical configurations rarely remain ‘closed’ for good. Previously achieved closure can be undone. The question then becomes how we can understand inertia, and how it is overcome. Before addressing this question I will position my paper in the literature, particularly evolutionary economics and technology studies.
Within evolutionary economics, there are two views on the process of technological evolution.1 In the first view, evolution is a process of variation, selection and retention. In Section 2, I build upon this view by using Nelson and Winter’s concept of ‘technological regimes’ to understand inertia of established technologies. In the second view, evolution is a process of unfolding, creating ‘new combinations’ (Schumpeter, 1934, p. 66), resulting in paths and trajectories. While there are sophisticated debates in evolutionary economics about ‘variation’ (e.g. learning within firms, organisational routines, knowledge management), ‘selection’ is taken somewhat for granted. Markets are simply assumed to be ‘out there’. For radically new technologies, however, there are no established markets and no fixed preferences. Radically new technologies, markets, and user preferences co-evolve. Furthermore, selection is more than adoption. User also have to integrate new technologies in their practices, organisations and routines, something which involves learning, adjustments and ‘domestication’ (Lie and Sørensen, 1996). Another critique is that the selection environment is wider than users and markets. Policies and institutions also play a role, as well as infrastructures, cultural discourse or maintenance networks. Although Nelson, 1994, Nelson, 1995 has done some work on such wider co-evolution processes, the topic is under-exposed in evolutionary economics. With regard to evolutionary economics, this paper explores two new things. First, a multi-level perspective is described to combine both views of evolution. Second, I complement the focus on ‘variations’ with attention for the wider selection environment, using the concept of socio-technical configurations.
In technology studies, the idea that linkages between technical and social elements provide stability is particularly emphasised in actor-network theory (e.g. Latour, 1991, Latour, 1993, Law and Callon, 1992). Sociotechnical change is described as a process of shifting assemblies of associations and substitutions, a reweaving of elements. Changes in one element in the network can trigger changes in other elements. The empirical illustrations of this process usually have a micro-focus. There has been relatively little attention in technology studies for long-term and large-scale technological developments.2 This paper addresses this gap.
Section snippets
An integrative evolutionary multi-level perspective on technological transitions
In this section, I briefly outline the multi-level framework, which has been described more elaborately elsewhere (Kemp, 1994, Schot et al., 1994, Rip and Kemp, 1998, Kemp et al., 1998, Van den Ende and Kemp, 1999, Rip, 2000, Geels and Kemp, 2000, Kemp et al., 2001). The multi-level perspective aims to integrate findings from different literatures as an ‘appreciative theory’ (Nelson and Winter, 1982). The different levels are not ontological descriptions of reality, but analytical and heuristic
Empirical case-study: from sailing ships to steamships, 1780–1900
Traditional analyses of this transition describe it in terms of a life-cycle of steamships, a hero fighting against sailing ships (David versus Goliath). To prevent a heroic storyline, I will start the analysis with the established sailing ship regime, and show how steamships emerged within this context. I aim to tell the story in terms of complexity and reconfiguration processes. To this end, I will use a mosaic style of writing, shifting between different elements of the sociotechnical regime
Analysis and some mechanisms in technological transitions
I now return to the questions formulated at the end of Section 2. How does the arrow representing a breakthrough from niche- to regime-level, come about? And how do reconfiguration processes occur? I will address these questions on the basis of the case-study, but make the answers more general by referring to other examples. The general pattern by which radical innovations break out is that they follow trajectories of niche-cumulation. The step from niche to regime-level does not occur at once,
Discussion and conclusions
To answer the question how TT come about, I described a new perspective, based on insights from evolutionary economics and technology studies. These insights have been synthesised in a multi-level perspective consisting of three levels: technological niches, sociotechnical regimes, sociotechnical landscape. This perspective combines two views on evolution. Evolution as ‘variation and selection’ is encompassed by conceptualising niches as the locus where radical variety is generated, and regimes
Acknowledgements
I would like to thank Adri de la Bruhèze, Bo Carlsson, Edward Constant, Jasper Deuten, Boelie Elzen, Ken Green, Luigi Orsenigo, Keith Pavitt, Arie Rip and two anonymous referees for their useful comments on previous versions of this paper. The study was supported by a grant from the Dutch research council NWO.
References (56)
Getting round the lock-in in electricity generating systems: the example of the gas turbine
Research Policy
(1997)Technology and the transition to environmental sustainability: the problem of technological regime shifts
Futures
(1994)- et al.
Multi-mode interaction among technologies
Research Policy
(1997) - et al.
Strategies for shifting technological systems: the case of the automobile system
Futures
(1994) - Beniger, J.R., 1986. The Control Revolution: Technological and Economic Origins of the Information Society. Harvard...
The international diffusion of ocean steam navigation: the myth of the retardation of Netherlands steam navigation to the East Indies
Economisch-en Sociaal-Historisch Jaarboek
(1982)- Calhoun, O., 1973. The Intelligence of a People. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ,...
- Callon, M. (Ed.), 1998. The Laws of the Market. Blackwell,...
The interaction of design hierarchies and market moncepts in technological evolution
Research Policy
(1985)- Craig, R., 1980. The Ship: Steam Tramps and Cargo Liners, 1850–1950. Her Majesty’s Stationary Office,...
From shafts to wires: historical perspective on electrification
Journal of Economic History
The ascendency of the sailing ship 1850–1885
Economic History Review
Cited by (4089)
Towards niche readiness: Achieving socio-economic maturity in the bottom-up transition to DC power systems
2024, Environmental Innovation and Societal TransitionsHow do technology-inherent characteristics affect valuation processes in innovation systems?
2024, Environmental Innovation and Societal TransitionsExplaining energy transition: A systemic social mechanisms approach illustrated with the examples of Germany and Poland
2024, Energy Research and Social ScienceCan isolated microgrids be viable? A longitudinal study of long-term sustainability in rural Senegal
2024, Energy Research and Social ScienceQuestioning nuclear scale-up propositions: Availability and economic prospects of light water, small modular and advanced reactor technologies
2024, Energy Research and Social Science