A comparative analysis of Photovoltaic Technological Innovation Systems including international dimensions: the cases of Japan and The Netherlands

Technological innovation systems in contexts: Conceptualizing contextual structures and interaction dynamics

“…Then this country may be treated as a shorthand denomination for all different contexts. As a matter of fact, most empirical applications of the TIS concept have focused on the national scale or, at most, endeavoured comparative analyses of two or several nationally delimited TISs (Bergek and Jacobsson, 2003;Lovio and Kivimaa, 2012;McDowall et al, 2013;Negro et al, 2007;Vasseur et al, 2013).…”

Barriers to the adoption of photovoltaic systems: The state of the art

“…This leaves remote areas underserved and the PV market concentrates around big cities [38]. A study comparing Japan and the Netherlands by Vasseur et al [53] showed that Japan has a better technological innovation system to support the PV industry. In the Dutch case, there is a lack of collaboration and knowledge exchange between researchers and policy makers with adopters.…”

“…Insufficient and ineffective policy support is often mentioned as a barrier in several studies in different contexts, e.g., in the Netherlands [53] and the US [58,63]. For example, Vasseur et al [53] indicate the influence of inconsistent national subsidy schemes in the Netherlands, which can discourage entrepreneurs from investing in PV systems.…”

“…For example, Vasseur et al [53] indicate the influence of inconsistent national subsidy schemes in the Netherlands, which can discourage entrepreneurs from investing in PV systems. In the South Korean case of microgeneration as studied by Jeong [55], policy support also exists but some potential adopters still do not want to install PV systems.…”

The impact of environmental policy instruments on innovation: A review of energy and automotive industry studies

“…Although such an approach might have allowed us to study how country-specific characteristics influence the effect of environmental policy on innovation, a main problem is the lack of available empirical studies with such a focus. Although there are cross-country comparative studies of innovation processes in specific technologies (cf., e.g., Bergek and Jacobsson, 2003;Hillman et al, 2008;Lovio and Kivimaa, 2012;Praetorius et al, 2010;van Alphen et al, 2009;Vasseur et al, 2013), most of these do not discuss the innovation outcomes of specific policy instruments (those that do are included in our review). It would have been even more difficult to find empirical evidence of the innovation outcome of all four types of policy instruments.…”