Lars Coenen, forsker, Circle/Universitetet i Lund. Presentasjon fra konferansen "På vei mot Transport 2.0?"

1. Pilotprosjekter som
innovasjonsstrategi
På vei mot transport 2.0?
2. februar 2015 - Union Scene Drammen
Lars Coenen
CIRCLE, Lunds Universitet
NIFU & Utrecht Universitet

2. Time horizon (years)
Improvement in
environmental 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

3. 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)

4. 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.

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

6. Example regime

7. 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

8. 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?

9. Projects in the database
433 demonstration and trail projects in the
database in total
Denmark: 224, incl. 7 EU projects
Norway: 107 projects
Sweden: 102 projects
Transport technologies
97 projects (22%) were concerned with
transportation
– electrical mobility
– biofuel/biogas
Energy technologies – IEA codes
0
50
100
150
200
250
Denmark Norway Sweden
Million€
Other Power and
Storage technologies
Hydrogen and Fuel
cells
Renewable energy
sources
Energy efficiency

10. Projects in the database
- increase of demonstration and trail projects during the period
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
Denmark
Norway
Sweden
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
Million€
Denmark
Norway
Sweden
Number of projects Funding of projects

11. Project aims
- number of projects - multiple aims possible
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
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…
Facilitate learning
Expose system weaknesses
Other objectives
Denmark Norway Sweden

12. 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

13. 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

14. 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

15. 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

16. 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.