Más allá de la tecnología: el papel de los RTO en las grandes transiciones sociales

Eva Arrilucea Solachi

doi:10.18543/bee.2956

Eva Arrilucea Solachi TECNALIA Research & Innovation https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2131-9195

Keywords: RTOs, Transitions, Absorptive capacity

Abstract

The sustainable development goals associated with the digital and green transitions require complex responses that often have an important technological component. However, technology alone is not sufficient to address these transitions. Accompanying the technological solutions must be an understanding of geopolitical trends and institutional, social, political, and other changes. In this context, Research and Technology Organisations (RTOs) have the potential to develop a range of roles beyond technology generation. These roles can contribute to improving the absorptive capacity of companies, society, and the ecosystem as a whole. This document proposes some of these roles and how they can reduce the barriers inherent in transitions.

Author Biography

Eva Arrilucea Solachi, TECNALIA Research & Innovation

Ph.D. in Economic Analysis and Public Economy from the University of Basque Country (2005), Spain, and Expert in Business and Technology Management from the University of Deusto (2013). She has more than 20 years of experience in the private sector in public policy consulting for public administrations with experience in Europe, LATAM and the Middle East. She has been working in Tecnalia for 12 years and currently she is part of the strategic support team to the General Management.

References

Amara, L., Becheick, N., & Ouimet, M. (2008). Learning and novelty of innovation in established manufacturing SMEs. Technovation 28 (7), 450-463. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.technovation.2008.02.001

Andersen, M. (2004). An Innovation system approach to eco-innovation: Aligning policy rationales. In The Greening of Policies – Interlinkages and Policy Integration Conference (pp. 1-28). Berlin.

Bennat, T., & Sternberg, R. (2020). Knowledge bases in German regions: what hinders combinatorial knowledge dynamics and how regional innovation policies may help. European Planning Studies 28 (2), 319-339. https://doi.org/10.1080/09654313.2019.1656168

Borrás, S., Haakonsson, S., & Poulsen, R. (2023). The transformative capacity of public sector organisations in sustainability transitions: a conceptualization. Papers in Innovation Studies no. 02. CIRCLE Centre for Innovation research LUND University.

Cohen, W.M., & Levinthal, D.A. (1990). Absorptive capacity: A new perspective on learning and innovation. Administrative Science Quarterly, 35(1), 128-152. https://doi.org/10.2307/2393553

Collingridge, D. (1980). The social control of technology. New York: St. Martin’s Press.

Comin, D., Licht, G., Pellens, M., & Schubert, T. (2019). Do companies benefit from public research organisations? The impact of the Fraunhofer Society in Germany. ZEW-Centre for European Economic Research Discussion Paper, no19-006. http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3354365

De Jong, J., & Freel, M.S. (2010). Absorptive capacity and the reach of collaboration in high technology small firms. Research Policy 39(1), 47-54. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10961-020-09800-x

Dominkovic, D., Bacekovic, I., Pedersen, A., & Krajacic, G. (2018). The future of transportation in sustainable energy systems: opportunities and barriers in a clean energy transition. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 82, 1823-1838. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2017.06.117

EARTO. (2015). Knowing your innovation ecosystem actors: data on European RTOs. European Association of Research and Technology Organisations.

EARTO. (2024). Unlocking Innovation: the role of RTOs as intermediaries in knowledge valorisation. EARTO-European Association of Research and Technology Organisations.

Fitjar, R., & Rodriguez-Pose, A. (2013). Firm collaboration and modes of innovation in Norway. Research Policy 42, 128-138. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2012.05.009

Geels, F.W. (2002). Technological transitions as evolutionary reconfiguration processes: a multilevel perspective and a case-study. Research Policy, 31, 1257-1274. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0048-7333(02)00062-8

Geels, F.W. (2004). From sectoral systems of innovation to socio-technical systems: Insights about dynamics and change from sociology and institutional theory. Research Policy, 33 (6-7), 897-920. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2004.01.015

Geels, F. (2019). Socio-technical transitions to sustainability: a review of criticism and elaboration of the multi level perspective. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability 39, 187-201. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cosust.2019.06.009

Geels, F. (2020). Micro-foundations of the multi-level perspective on socio-technical transitions: developing a multi-dimensional model of agency through crossovers between social constructivism, evolutionary economics and neo-institutional theory. Technological Forecasting & Social Change, 152.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2019.119894

Herstad, S., Sandven, T., & Ebersberger, B. (2015). Recruitment, knowledge integration and modes of innovation. Research Policy, 44 (1), 138-153. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2014.06.007

Hervas-Oliver, J., Albors-Garrigós, J., De Miguel, B., & Hidalgo, A. (2012). The role of a firm’s absorptive capacity and the technology transfer process in clusters: How effective are technology centres in low-tech clusters?. Entrepreneurship and Regional Development, 24 (7-8), 523-559. https://doi.org/10.1080/08985626.2012.710256

Hoogma, R., Kemp, R., Schot, J., & Tuffer, B. (2002). Experimenting for Sustainable Transport: The Approach of Strategic Niche Management. London, New York: Spon Press. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203994061

Jensen, M., Jhonson, E., Lorenz, E., & Lundvall, B. (2007). Forms of knowledge and modes of innovation. Research Policy, 36, 680-693. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2007.01.006

Kemp, R., & Rip, A. S. (2001). Constructing transition paths through the management of niches. In R. Garud & P. Karnoe (Eds.), Path dependence and creation (pp. 269-299). London: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Mazzucato, M. (2019). Governing Missions in the European Union. European Commission.

Mikhailov, A., & Reichert, F. (2019). Influence of absorptive capacity on innovation: a systematic literature review. Revista de Administração Mackenzie, 20 (6). https://doi.org/10.1590/1678-6971/eRAMD190033

Molas-Gallart, J., Boni, A., Giachi, S., & Schot, J. (2021). A formative approach to the evaluation of Transformative Innovation Policies. Research Evaluation, 30(4), 431-442. https://doi.org/10.1093/reseval/rvab016

Moodysson, J., & Jonsson, O. (2007). Knowledge collaboration and proximity: the spatial organisation of biotech innovation projects. European Urban and Regional Studies, 14, 115-131. https://doi.org/10.1177/0969776407075556

Norouzi, F., Hoppe, T., Ramirez, L., & Bauer, P. (2022). A review of socio-technical barriers to smart microgrid development. Renewable and sustainable energy reviews, 167, 112-123. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2022.112674

OECD. (2021). The design and implementation of mission-oriented innovation policies. A new systemic policy approach to address societal challenges. OECD Science, Technology and Industry Policy Papers, no. 100. https://doi.org/10.1787/3f6c76a4-en

OECD. (2022). The contribution of RTOs to socio-economic recovery, resilience and transitions. OECD Science, Technology and Industry Policy Papers nº 129.

Oliver, T., Benini, L., A, B., Dupong, C., Doherty, B., Grodzinska-Jurczak, M., & Tarrason, L. (2021). Knowledge architecture for the wise governance of sustainability transitions. Environmental Science and Policy, 126, 152-163. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2021.09.025

Parrilli, M., & Radicic, D. (2020). STI and DUI innovation modes in micro, small, medium and large-sized firms: Distinctive patterns across Europe and the US. European Planning Studies. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09654313.2020.1754343

Reda, F., Ruggiero, S., Auvinen, K., & Temmes, A. (2021). Towards low-carbon district heating: Investigating the socio-technical challenges of the urban energy transition. Smart Energy, 4, 100-110. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.segy.2021.100054

Rip, A., & Kemp, R. (1998). Technological change. In S. Rayner & E. L. Malone (Eds.), Social Science & Medicine (327-399).

Rotmans, J., Kemp, R., & Van Asselt, M. (2001). More evolution than revolution: transition management in public policy. Foresight: The journal of future studies, strategic thinking and policy, 3(1), 15-31. https://doi.org/10.1108/14636680110803003

Thomä, J., & Zimmermann, V. (2019). Non-R&D, interactive, learning and economic performance. Revisiting innovation in SMEs. IFH Working Paper, no. 17.

Vanrie, P. (2023). Mutual Learning Exercise on Knowledge Valorisation: Intermediaries. DG for Research and Innovation-European Commission.

Viscido, S., Taucer, F., Grande, S., & Jenet, A. (2022). Towards the implementation of an EU Strategy for Technology Infrastructures. JRC-EARTO Paper.

Zahra, S., & George, G. (2002). Absorptive capacity: A review and reconceptualization and extension. Academy of Management Review, 27 (2), 185-203. https://doi.org/10.2307/4134351

Beyond technology: the role of RTOs in major societal transitions

Abstract

Author Biography

References