Renewable energy technology-is it a manufactured technology or an information technology?

Sustainability

Volumn 2, Issue 8, 2010, Pages 2382-2402

  Shum, Kwok L ^a  

^a HONG KONG UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY   (Hong Kong)

Author keywords

Evolutionary policy; Information technology; Manufactured technology; Network externality; Renewable energy

Indexed keywords

EID: 79953328354     PISSN: 20711050     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3390/su2082382     Document Type: Article

References (39)

1. World Energy Outlook 2006; International Energy Agency (IEA): Paris, France, 2006.
2. Wene, C. Experience Curve for Energy Technology Policy; International Energy Agency (IEA): Paris, France, 2000.
3. Grubb, M.; Newbery, D. Pricing carbon for electricity generation: national and international dimensions. In Delivering a Low-Carbon Electricity System-Technologies, Economics and Policy; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK, 2008.
4. Reicher, D. Testimony of Dan W. Reicher before the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works-Legislative Hearing on S.1733 Clean Energy Jobs and American Power Act; U.S. Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works: Washington, DC, USA, 28 October 2009.
5. Stryi-Hipp, G. Why FIT Policies are Important; SEMI PV Group: Berlin, Germany, January 2010.
6. Lauber, V. REFIT and RPS: Options for a harmonized community framework. Energ. Policy 2004, 32, 1405-1414.
7. Hvelplund, F. Political prices or political quantities? A comparison of renewable energy support systems. New Energ. 2001, 5, 18-23.
8. Hvelplund, F. Renewable energy: political prices or political quantities. In Switching to Renewable Power-A Framework for the 21st Century; Lauber, V., Ed.; Earthscan: Sterling, VA, USA, 2006.
9. Tidd, J.; Bessant, J.; Pavitt, K. Managing Innovation-Integrating Technological, Market and Organizational Change, 3rd ed.; John Wiley: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2005.
10. Hobday, M. The project-based organizations: an idea form for managing complex products and systems? Res. Policy 2000, 29, 871-893.
11. Amit, R. Cost leadership strategies and experience curves. Strateg. Manage. J. 1986, 7, 281-292
12. Arrow, K. The economic implications of learning by doing. Rev. Econ. Stud. 1962, 29, 155-173.
13. Friedman, T. Hot, Flat & Crowded, Why the World Needs a Green Revolution-and How We Can Renew our Global Future; Macmillan: New York, NY, USA, 2009.
14. Junginger, M.; Faaij, A.; Turkenburg W.C. Global experience curves for wind farms. Energ. Policy 2003, 33, 133-150.
15. Kodama, F. Innovation management in the emerging IT environment. In POM Facing the New Millennium, Proceedings of the First World Conference on Production and Operations Management, Sevilla, Spain, 27 Augutst-1 September 2000.
16. Watanabe, C.; Kondo, R. Formation of IT features through interaction with institutional systems-Empirical evidence of unique epidemic behavior. Technovation 2003, 23, 205-219.
17. Nagamatsu, A.; Watanabe, C.; Shum, K. Diffusion trajectory of self-propagating innovations interacting with institutions-Incorporation of multi-factors learning function to model PV diffusion in Japan. Energ. Policy 2006, 34, 411-421.
18. Shum, K.; Watanabe, C. Network externality perspective of Feed-in-Tariff instruments-Some observations and suggestions. Energ. Policy 2010, 38, 3266-3269.
19. Utilities to pay premium to solar power providers. Japan Times, 25 February 2009.
20. Japan's renewable energy drive runs out of steam, UK Journalist Symposium. Japan Times, 5 June 2008.
21. Rogers, E.M. Diffusion of Innovations, 5th ed.; Free Press: Florence, MA, USA, 2003.
22. Geroski, P.A. Models of technology diffusion. Res. Policy 2000, 29, 603-625.
23. Sterzinger, G. The economic promise of renewable energy. New Labor Forum 2007, 16, 80-91.
24. Idenburg, A.M.; Faber, A. An evolutionary-economic evaluation of barriers and opportunities in Dutch energy innovation policies. In Evolutionary Economics and Environmental Policy: Survival of the Greenest; van den Bergh, J.C.J.M., Faber A., Idenburg, A.M., Oosterhuis, F.H., Eds.; Edward Elgar Publication: Cheltenham, UK, 2007.
25. Nill, J.; Kemp, R. Evolutionary approaches for sustainable innovation policies: From niche to paradigm? Res. Policy 2009, 38, 668-680.
26. Shum, K.; Watanabe, C. Photovoltaic deployment strategy in Japan and the USA-An institutional appraisal. Energ. Policy 2007, 35, 1186-1195.
27. Johnson, A.; Jacobsson, S. Inducement and blocking mechanism in the development of a new industry: The case of renewable energy in Sweden. In Technology and the Market-Demand, Users and Innovation; Edward Elgar Publication, Cheltenham, UK, 2001.
28. Pistorius, C.; Utterback, J. Multi-Mode interaction among technologies. Res. Policy 1997, 26, 67-84.
29. Arthur, B. Increasing Returns and Path Dependency in the Economy; University of Michigan Press: Ann Arbor, MI, USA, 1994.
30. Duan, W.; Chen, Z. Key factor to drive success of new product with network effects: Product quality or installed base? Syst. Eng. Theor. Pract. 2007, 27, 144-148.
31. Shum, K.; Watanabe C. Towards a local learning (innovation) model of solar photovoltaic deployment. Energ. Policy 2008, 36, 508-521.
32. Lauber, V.; Mez, L. Three decades of renewable electricity policies in Germany. Energ. Environ. 2004, 15, 599-623.
33. European PV Associations' Position Paper on a Feed-In Tariff for Photovoltaic Solar Electricity; European Photovoltaic Industry Association: Brussels, Belgium, 2005.
34. Neuhoff, K. Large Scale Deployment of Renewable for Electricity Generation; Cambridge Working Papers in Economics CWPE 0460 CMI Working Paper 59; University of Cambridge: Cambridge, UK, 2004.
35. Bergek, A.; Jacobsson, S. Are tradable green certificates a cost efficient policy driving technical change or a rent-generating machine? Lessons from Sweden 2003-2008. Energ. Policy 2009, 38, 1255-1271.
36. National Survey Report of PV Power Applications in Japan 2007; IEA: Paris, France, 2008.
37. National Survey Report of PV Power Applications in Germany 2008, Version 2; IEA: Paris, France, 2009.
38. Jager-Waldau, A. PV Status Report 2008; Joint Research Centre, European Commission: Brussels, Belgium, 2008.
39. Shum, K.; Watanabe, C. Towards an institutions-theoretic framework comparing solar photovoltaic diffusion patterns in Japan and the United States. Int. J. Innovat. Manage. 2007, 11, 565-592.