Innovation Systems and Technical Change

6.1 Multi-level perspective on technological

transitions

Maria Kaninia [10-936-342]

Tuesday, May 31, 2011

Technological Transitions (TT) are major On the other hand, at a micro-level, rad-
changes (involving not only the technologies per ical innovations usually occur within “niches”
se but also their organisational context) in the which provide a relatively risk-free incubation
ways technological systems satisfy the demands space. The hierarchical structure of socio-
of society. In order to explain TT, it is often technical change implies that a radical innova-
assumed that technology can only fulfill soci- tion will only be incorporated into the respective
etal needs within a socio-technical configuration. dominant regime (thus causing a regime shift)
Transitions between such configurations are not if it is accepted by processes in the context of
easy to occur, exactly because they involve a wide the overlying levels (ST-regime and landscape).
range of socio-institutional parameters. Through the step-by-step increase of the niche ar-
eas where an innovative technology is acceptable
Evolutionary economics provides paradigms to
(niche-cumulation), it gradually becomes incor-
explain the process of TT, especially in combina-
porated into the ST-regime.
tion with a multi-level perspective which shows
the linkages at hierarchically arranged levels. However, niche space for the incubation of
These linkages form the structure of a technolog- novel technologies is not created spontaneously,
ical system and guide it to converge and stabilise but is rather guided by landscape developments
into a “technological regime”. To stress the im- (as indicated by the empirical case-study). Simi-
portance of the multi-actor network which defines larly, the innovations that arise at the micro-level
this regime, the term “socio-technical regime” is are also governed by the upper levels (meaning
used instead (which corresponds to the meso- that, when a gap or “window of opportunity” be-
level of the multi-level perspective). In evolu- comes visible in a ST-regime, actors at the niche-
tionary terms, the ST-regime has the role of se- level might be driven to produce innovative tech-
lecting and retaining suitable technological inno- nological solutions corresponding to this gap).
vations. Through incremental progression from
Furthermore, innovations are not adopted by
one regime to its successor, a “socio-technical tra-
the ST-regime in a disruptive way (because ST-
jectory” is formed.
regimes by definition have inertia, their reconfig-
At a macro-level, trajectories occur within uration is a gradual process). Usually there is a
a “socio-technical landscape”, which consists of transition trajectory, along which hybrid cross-
a set of external parameters, such as economic overs between existing and new technologies are
growth or political developments. The changes created. This means it is possible that no direct
induced upon the socio-technical regime because competition is visible at the time of the change
of the evolutions at the landscape level are (in (and only becomes visible from an ex-post per-
general) relatively slow and incremental. spective). An alternative pathway for new tech-

1
 Innovation Systems and Technical Change
Maria Kaninia [10-936-342] 6.1 Multi-level perspective on technological transitions

nologies to become accepted in ST-regimes is be considered positive for an analytical frame-

when there is large growth and demand in the work (because it provides flexibility).
relevant sector.
Based on the above, the actual incremental Sources:
process of reconfiguration at the regime level
(which constitutes the TT) is dynamic and de- • Geels, F.W., 2002. Technological transitions
fined through interactions with both adjacent as evolutionary reconfiguration processes: a
levels. multilevel perspective and a case-study. Re-
search Policy, 31, 1257-1274.
Table 1: Multi-level perspective

level concept function

macro landscape environment / exogenous
parameters
meso ST-regimes established technological
status-quo / incremental
innovation
micro niches radical innovation

Discussion
One point of controversy is the assumption of
the author that shifts at the macro-level occur
at a slow pace. In reality, there have been major
landscape changes that occurred in a very short
time period and triggered big changes in the ST-
regimes. A good example is the oil crisis of the
seventies, which led to a relatively fast technolog-
ical re-orientation to achieving energy efficiency
and also to a reversal of the trend for energy in-
tensity (primary energy per GDP unit), which
started decreasing after the oil crisis.
It would also be interesting to discuss the case
when a technological innovation has an imme-
diate repercussion not only upon its relevant
regime, but also upon the macro landscape (a
prominent example would be nuclear technol-
ogy and the changes that the first use of nu-
clear weapons brought about to the international
“landscape”).
Finally, regarding the specific example pro-
vided by Geels to illustrate the multi-level per-
spective, the border between what constitutes
part of the ST-regime and what is part of the
broader landscape always clear. For example,
ports can be considered part of the ST-regime
for ships or components of the landscape. On the
other hand, this difficulty in the multi-level per-
spective in determining exact borders could also