Catch-up dynamics in early industry lifecycle stages—a typology and comparative case studies in four clean-tech industries

Abstract

The literature on catch-up cycles has not yet systematically conceptualized how catch-up dynamics differ between the various industries that are emerging in the green techno-economic paradigm. We address this gap by connecting catch-up cycle theory with an industry typology from global innovation systems (GISs) literature, which distinguishes four generic industry types with footloose, spatially sticky, market-, and production-anchored innovation system characteristics. Catch-up patterns in early industry lifecycle stages are expected to systematically differ between these four industry types. This assumption is explored based on a comparative case study of the solar photovoltaics, wind power, solar water heaters, and membrane bioreactors industries, each of which exemplifies one of the four generic GIS configurations. We find that the speed and disruptiveness of early leadership changes differ significantly between the four industries, and that the effectiveness of capability upgrading strategies and catching-up policies are contingent on the innovation and valuation characteristics of each industry’s underlying GIS type.

Windows of opportunity for catching up in formative clean-tech sectors and the rise of China in concentrated solar power

“…While this literature has refined the evidence on how manufacturing industries for different technologies may be subject to spatial shifts, it largely reiterates the notion that for latecomer countries, opportunities exist primarily, or are limited to, later stages in an industry life-cycle (Anderson and Tushman, 1990). Simultaneously, a growing body of evidence shows that increasingly capable emerging and developing economies are more involved in earlystage technology development than has traditionally been recognized (Berkhout et al, 2010;Binz et al, 2020Binz et al, , 2012Gosens et al, 2020;Quitzow, 2015;Sengers and Raven, 2015;Tyfield et al, 2015). This literature currently still lacks a clear exposition of the ways in which formative or mature sectors may provide stronger or weaker entry barriers for latecomers.…”

“…Whilst this framework is rooted in Sectoral Innovation Systems literature, which has traditionally been applied predominantly to more mature sectors (e.g., Malerba and Nelson, 2011), the dimensions of technology, demand, and institutions are building blocks that are present, yet differently manifested, in sectors at differing maturity, and may therefore similarly be applied to study catch-up dynamics in early industry lifecycle stages (cf. Binz et al, 2020;Yap and Truffer, 2019).…”

A dynamic multi-sector analysis of technological catch-up: The impact of technology cycle times, knowledge base complexity and variety

“…The SSI literature addresses the sectoral conditions under which technological knowledge can be accessed and absorbed. Binz et al (2020) observe that global knowledge transfer is easier in mature renewable industries that rely on tradable knowledge. On the contrary, where large stocks of knowledge are tacit and cumulative, they are problematic to absorb through global networks (Park and Lee 2006;Mani and Malerba 2009).…”

“…Petralia et al (2017) show that catching-up countries diversify into technological domains that are proximate to the existing knowledge base, Meliciani (2002) hints at sectors that guarantee higher technological opportunities, and Park and Lee (2006) and Lee (2013) argue that catching-up economies benefit from expanding into domains characterised by shorter technological cycles, as they provide more frequent windows of opportunity and less challenging learning curves. In renewable energy industries, Lema et al (2020) and Binz et al (2020) claim that catching up is easier in technologically mature domains that have tradable knowledge and standardised products.…”

Escalation of global risks and threats in a pandemic condition: financial and macroeconomic aspects

“…But the judicious coordination of a wide range of industrial policy measures (such as tax incentives, domestic capability formation and standard setting, and the provision by development banks of finance at discounted rates in priority activities) has propelled China to a globally leading provider of manufactured low-carbon energy devices (Mathews, 2020). This has been the case particularly for solar photovoltaic products, which can be mass manufactured and provide an easier entry point for developing countries into emerging low-carbon technologies than, for example, wind power equipment where the high transport cost of some components, or the requirement for local maintenance and servicing of specific turbine models, require rapidly growing domestic demand to support the development of manufacturing activities (Binz et al, 2020 (Altenburg et al, 2017). Particularly the recycling and reuse of batteries will provide further manufacturing opportunities, as discussed in the following section.…”