Innovation system strengths and weaknesses in ...

Journal of Cleaner Production 131 (2016) 702e715

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of Cleaner Production journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jclepro

Innovation system strengths and weaknesses in progressing sustainable technology: the case of Swedish biorefinery development* € derholm c, Johan Frishammar d Hans Hellsmark a, *, Johanna Mossberg b, Patrik So a

Chalmers University of Technology, Environmental Systems Analysis, SE-412 96 Gothenburg, Sweden €teborg, Sweden CIT Industriell Energi AB, Chalmers Science Park, SE-412 88 Go Luleå University of Technology, Economics Unit, SE-971 87 Luleå, Sweden d Luleå University of Technology, Entrepreneurship and Innovation, SE-971 87 Luleå, Sweden b c

a r t i c l e i n f o

a b s t r a c t

Article history: Received 8 December 2015 Received in revised form 8 April 2016 Accepted 25 April 2016 Available online 6 May 2016

Based on the combination of economic challenges and uncertain policy conditions in the United States, European Union, and elsewhere, the development of advanced biorefineries has progressed slower than anticipated. This has delayed the transition to a more sustainable and less carbon-intensive economy. In this article, we adopt the technological innovation system (TIS) approach to analyze advanced biorefinery development in Sweden, a front-runner country in current development. The analysis highlights a number of system strengths (e.g., long-term research funding; significant research infrastructure; strong actor networks) that have contributed to developing the Swedish TIS, but also important system weaknesses (e.g., weak coordination among ministries; lack of industrial absorptive capacity; unclear roles) inhibiting it. The article highlights a combination of four policy measures that build on the system strengths to address the system weaknesses: (a) the implementation of a deployment policy for creating domestic niche markets; (b) improved policy timing and more structured coordination among different governmental agencies; (c) the provision of stronger incentives for mature industries to invest in R&D and improve their absorptive capacity; and (d) improved organization and financing of existing research infrastructure. In addition to the empirical contribution, the article contributes with novel insights into the TIS framework by highlighting the dynamics between system strengths and weaknesses, and suggests that system strengths should be better emphasized in future TIS studies. © 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Advanced biorefineries Technological innovation systems TIS System weaknesses System strengths Sweden

1. Introduction Today, a swift transition towards a bioeconomy is increasingly emphasised by international actors, such as IEA and the OECD, as well as by national governments (e.g., IEA, 2009b; Staffas et al.,

* An earlier version of this paper was presented at the International Sustainability Transitions Conference, 25e28 August 2015, University of Sussex, U.K. Financial support from the Swedish Research Council Formas, the Swedish Energy Agency, and f3 is gratefully acknowledged. The results presented in the present paper are primarily based on Chapter 7 in a report commissioned by the Swedish Energy Agency (Energimyndigheten, 2014b). We gratefully acknowledge the coauthors of that chapter: Anders Holmgren, Alice Kempe, Jonas Lindmark, and Johanna Ulmanen, as their work has provided a valuable input to the present paper. Any errors remain solely with the authors. * Corresponding author. E-mail address: [email protected] (H. Hellsmark).

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.04.109 0959-6526/© 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

2013; McCormick and Kautto, 2013). In general, the support for a transition towards a bioeconomy goes beyond pure carbon dioxide mitigation motives, and embrace also security-of-supply concerns and rural economic development. Related to this transition, many studies have highlighted the potential for an increased use of biomass in, for instance, the electric power (Muench, 2015) and transport sectors (Smyth et al., 2010). IEA (2011) estimated the possibility for an increase in the global share of biofuels from approximately three percent of total primary energy supply to nearly 30 percent by the year 2050. However, to achieve anything close to this, major investment in the development and deployment of efficient biomass conversion technologies is necessary. For the industry sector as well as the transport sector, managing the transition towards a bioeconomy largely hinges on the development of so-called advanced biorefineries (Iles and Martin, 2013; Kleinschmit et al., 2014). Based on

H. Hellsmark et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 131 (2016) 702e715

a flexible intake of forest residues and/or other lignocellulosic raw materials, advanced biorefineries permit production of large quantities of bulk products such as biofuels along with other highvalue products, such as specialty chemicals and/or new materials. These biorefineries can often be integrated in existing industrial infrastructures (e.g. pulp and paper mills or chemical process industries), where synergies can be achieved with respect to energy and material flows as well as with respect to know-how regarding processes, logistics and product and raw material markets € rjesson et al., 2013; IEA, 2009a; Nanda et al., 2015). (Bo If deployed at commercial scale, advanced biorefineries holds the potential for industrial renewal of the mature process industries whilst at the same time creating opportunities for new businesses through the creation of innovative value chains and products. Nevertheless, most advanced biorefinery technologies are not yet commercial and the development very much depends on the progression of two separate but complementing platform technologies: thermochemical and biochemical conversion of biomass (Pandey, 2011). Investing in advanced biorefineries (through these two platform technologies) is highly capital-intensive and implies significant risks, and this makes the investments contingent on policy support to progress along the learning curve. However, the combination of economic challenges and increasingly uncertain policies in the European Union and the United States, development of advanced biorefineries has progressed much slower than anticipated (Huenteler et al., 2014). Many large-scale plans have been abandoned, and only a few demonstration and semi-commercial scale plants have been built (Bacovsky, 2014). However, in the recent past, we have witnessed how proactive policy initiatives in single countries (e.g., Germany) have had profound impacts on the global development of renewable energy technologies such as solar photovoltaic and wind power (Mazzucato, 2013). To achieve a significant penetration of biofuels and biobased chemicals at the global level, certain regions and countries would be required to take the lead in similar ways, setting progressive, medium-term targets by actively promoting technological development in the advanced biorefinery area. In the present article, we investigate current prospects for developing advanced biorefineries in Sweden. Over the past decades, Sweden has been a frontrunner in the biorefinery field with several large pilot- and demonstration projects (Hellsmark, 2010; Ulmanen, 2013). For analyzing the current prospects for developing advanced biorefineries in Sweden, we take a point of departure in the technological innovation system (TIS) framework (Bergek et al., 2008a). In recent years, TIS has emerged as a prominent framework for the analysis of new technological fields, typically with a focus on the obstacles hindering the development and diffusion process and on the policy interventions needed to overcome these obstacles (e.g., Bergek et al., 2008a; Markard et al., 2012; Naubahar, 2006). The TIS framework was developed to provide a holistic and dynamic perspective on the evolution of technological fields and provide foremost policymakers at the national level with a tool and scheme of analysis for identifying so-called system weaknesses that hinder development. In this paper, we apply the TIS-framework from a primarily national perspective. However, Swedish biorefinery development is also positioned in the international context; international actors and other factors that could directly affect this development are therefore taken into consideration (cf. Coenen et al., 2012). A few prior TIS studies have also addressed the development of biomass conversion technologies, but these have often focused on a more limited set of technological options and/or on the specific challenges related to their development. In particular, previous

703

work has focused on first-generation conversion technologies such as biomass digestion (Markard et al., 2009; Negro et al., 2007), on combined heat and power production (Jacobsson, 2008), and/or on n, 2008). biofuel development in general (Hillman and Sande Moreover, Hellsmark (2010) and Ulmanen (2013) provided insights on upscaling technologies in thermochemical and biochemical conversion of biomass, whereas Hellsmark and Jacobsson (2012) analyzed different policy instruments for scaling up thermochemical conversion technologies. In contrast, the present study contributes with a more all-encompassing assessment of system weaknesses and system strengths in Sweden. Furthermore, TIS analyses in general, including those focusing on biomass conversion, place particular focus on those system weaknesses that the actors cannot deal with themselves, and that therefore can justify policy interventions (Wieczorek and Hekkert, 2012). The main focus of any given TIS-study has therefore been to identify these weaknesses, although when analyzing the system weaknesses, factors that reinforce the development of the TIS e socalled system strengths e are also present. These strengths, though, have not been focal points in previous TIS analyses. In this article, we suggest that policymakers would benefit significantly if they depart from what is strong in the innovation system (i.e., the system strengths) before considering specific policy options for addressing any system weaknesses. The purpose of the present study is, therefore, to employ the TIS framework to analyse the current prospects for developing advanced biorefineries in Sweden. For this purpose, we propose two research questions: 1. What are the system weaknesses and strengths of the advanced biorefinery development in Sweden? 2. How should public policy be designed to leverage on system strengths and address system weaknesses to stimulate the further development of advanced biorefineries? In addition to the empirical TIS analysis, we contribute to the TIS literature by highlighting the importance of the dynamics between strengths and weaknesses of the system. We argue that future TIS studies should be better balanced and devote more attention to the strengths of the system, because system strengths are essential for identifying what actors within the system (including policymakers) can achieve themselves, as well as what policymakers exogenous to the development can build on in terms of actor networks, technology, and institutional structures. Building on system strengths is also important since the system weaknesses may stem from different underlying beliefs, principles and political constraints that make them very difficult to address directly through efficient and targeted policy measures. In other words, often first-best policies may be difficult to implement due to political or public opinion reasons; in such situation further elaboration of existing strengths of the innovation system may constitute a decent second-best policy approach. For example, TIS scholars often endorse the use of feed-in tariffs as a superior instrument to strengthen the market formation phase of technological development (del Río and Bleda, 2012), and the empirical experiences from wind power and solar PV development tend to support this notion. However, such a policy instrument may have low political legitimacy in certain countries and contexts (Schenner, 2011). For this reason, it may be necessary to instead strengthen what is already strong in the innovation system. One example is to help key actors and innovators to gain access to markets if such materialize abroad. Furthermore, failures to address system weaknesses properly may lead to negative feedback loops on key functions of the TIS, which in turn may deteriorate existing system strengths and hamper its development. This further

704


underscores the need for a balanced analysis of weaknesses and strengths. The article proceeds as follows. In Section 2, we introduce the TIS framework, and in Section 3 we present the methods. Section 4 presents and assesses the advanced biorefinery development in Sweden. In Section 5, we analyze key system strengths and weaknesses, and discuss the potential role for policy interventions. Section 6 concludes the article.

2. The technological innovation systems approach Our analysis of Swedish biorefinery development roots theoretically in the TIS approach. Grounded in work by Carlsson and Stankiewicz (1991) and research in evolutionary and institutional economics (Nelson and Winter, 1982; North, 1990), the TIS literature views the generation and diffusion of technological fields as a result of the interplay of firms and other actors under a particular institutional infrastructure (Markard et al., 2012). The TIS concept is central to our analysis, because it focuses on novel technologies, as well as the institutional and organizational changes required for emerging technological fields to progress (Bergek et al., 2008a). A TIS comprises a set of structural elements: actors in the entire supply chain, networks, institutions, and (often) technology. A TIS analysis focuses on the dynamics of the innovation system. A central proposition is that weaknesses in any of the elements may obstruct further development of the system, and identifying drivers and barriers to innovation then becomes the focus. Specifically, TIS analysis aims to identify so-called “system weakness,” for example deficient networks, ill-functioning markets, or lack of infrastructure in relation to a set of “innovation processes” (also called functions) that describe what is occurring in the system (Bergek et al., 2008b; Hekkert et al., 2007). The specific functions in TIS studies vary somewhat in prior studies. In the present article, we use resource mobilization, market formation, influence on the direction of search, entrepreneurial experimentation, formation of social capital, legitimation, and knowledge development and diffusion. Table 1 summarizes these seven functions. Seminal articles by Bergek et al. (2008a, 2008b) provide a stepby-step practical scheme, which outlines six interlinked steps in TIS analysis. First, the TIS under assessment must be defined in terms of its technological or knowledge basis, including which applications and geographical contexts to include. The second step identifies the system's structural components, that is, the actors, networks,

institutions, and technologies of relevance. In the present article, we pay explicit attention to “system-building actors and networks,” as they are important change agents in forming a TIS (Hellsmark, 2010; Hellsmark and Jacobsson, 2009; Musiolik et al., 2012). In the third step, the various functions are mapped without any normative assessment. In the case of Swedish biorefinery development, the results from above three steps are primarily addressed in Sections 4.1 and 4.2. Fourth, the functionality of the TIS is analyzed in relation to a “system goal” (Section 4.3). This step implies establishing how far the system has progressed and matured (i.e., concept development, demonstration, niche market, commercial growth, and maturity phase) and what might be considered desirable in the next stage of development, for example, technology diffusion or industrial development. This target can be based on existing political visions and goals, and be expressed in quantitative or qualitative terms, and is used for analytical purposes. It is then assessed how well the functions are fulfilled in relation to that goal (Section 4.4). The outcome of step four is thus a normative analysis of the so-called “functional pattern” of the TIS. In step five, the mechanisms that block or drive development toward the desired functional state are determined. The analysis in step five is critical to step six, in which important policy challenges are formulated based on this current state of the mechanisms (Sections 5e6). Bergek et al. (2008a) emphasized that this analysis is iterative, and that iterations among steps and activities are necessary. System weaknesses, that is, the gap between current and desired functional patterns, is at the core of TIS analysis. Identifying and describing these gives input to actors within the system, as well as to those outside it that are willing and able to address them to enable or speed up further developing the TIS. In previous literature, the concepts of “system weaknesses”, “system problems”, “system failures” or “blocking mechanisms” are used interchangeably. We use the concept of “system weakness” to describe endogenous and exogenous factors that have a negative influence on the various functions (see Jacobsson and Bergek, 2011; Wieczorek and Hekkert, 2012). In contrast to most prior TIS literature, we devote specific attention to identifying and discussing the system strengths of the TIS. Analyzing system strengths is essential to determine what actors within the system can achieve themselves. From a policy perspective, these strengths are also important to motivate political action, and to address weaknesses indirectly by further building on

Table 1 Functions of a technological innovation system (TIS). Function

Definition

Resource mobilization

The extent to which actors within the TIS are able to mobilize human and financial capital, as well as complementary assets such as products, services, network infrastructure, etc. The factors that stimulate the emergence of markets for new products. These include articulation of demand from customers, institutional change, and changes in price and performance of the products. Market formation normally goes through different stages, i.e. demonstration projects, niche market, and mass markets. The incentives for organizations and actors to enter the technological field. These incentives may stem from visions, expectations of a growth potential, policy instruments, technical bottlenecks, etc. In an early phase, it also includes how prime movers manage to define technological opportunities and make it attractive for other actors to enter the field. The testing of new technologies, applications, and markets whereby new opportunities are created and a learning process unfolds. This includes the development and investments in artifacts such as products, production plants, and physical infrastructure. Social relationships among key actors. This includes trust, mutual dependence, shared norms, authority, and a sense of togetherness in the TIS. This type of social capital facilitates network building, knowledge diffusion, and collective action. The social acceptance of the technology and the actors and compliance with relevant institutions. Legitimacy is formed through conscious actions by organizations and individuals, and this process may often be complicated by competition (and lobbying) from adversaries defending existing technologies and regimes. The breadth and depth of the knowledge base and how that knowledge is developed, diffused and combined in the TIS. Various types of knowledge serve as inputs for innovation, including that generated from R&D and different learning processes (i.e., learning-by-doing, learning-by-using).

Market formation

Influence on the direction of search Entrepreneurial experimentation Formation of social capital Legitimation

Knowledge development and diffusion

Sources: Based on Bergek et al. (2008a, 2008b) with additions from Perez Vico (2013) on social capital.


the system strengths. Whereas system strengths may not render a direct need for policy intervention, failures to address the system weaknesses properly may lead to negative feedbacks on key TIS functions, thus deteriorating the strengths of the system, which in turn further hinders the progression of the TIS. For example, the development of the TIS may be stalled due to an absence of policy instruments to move the system beyond the demonstration phase, or due to international market developments (e.g., lower oil prices). If such system weaknesses are not resolved, the present system strengths such as accumulated human capital, research infrastructure, and so on may deteriorate or be lost. Furthermore, maintaining system strengths of the national TIS may be important even if a domestic market for relevant products fail to materialize; the corresponding market demand may emerge in other countries or regions instead, allowing appropriation for domestic actors. Previous research has tended to neglect how a national TIS may interact with foreign developments that also contribute to TIS performance (e.g. Gosens et al., 2015). This notion is also of relevance to policymaking, because it suggests that each national TIS need not always develop all the necessary structures and functions (Coenen et al., 2012, Coenen, 2015). 3. Methods Prior TIS studies have typically combined different methods and data sources, but existing research displays no clear consensus regarding which methods and data to use (Jacobsson and Bergek, 2011). For example, Hellsmark (2010), Hudson et al. (2011) and Karltorp (2011) relied mainly on interviews complemented by secondary data, whereas Negro et al. (2007) used historical event analysis. Still others combined qualitative interviews and historical event analysis (e.g., Suurs, 2009) or used social network analysis combined with structured interviews (van Alphen et al., 2010). Our approach combines interviews with expert assessments of the various TIS functions. Specifically, we used multiple data sources including interviews, secondary data, and information gathered from a workshop with key TIS stakeholders. First, we conducted 23 semi-structured interviews, which each lasted about 1.5 h. These targeted industrial companies, policymakers, and researchers at industrial plants (including pilot- and demonstration plants). The interviews discussed drivers and barriers for developing the biorefinery industry in Sweden, the roles of and the dynamics among different actors, also in relation to the research infrastructure. The interviews provided insights on primarily the evolution and the structure of the innovation system, and to some extent on the relative strengths of the various TIS functions. Key actors in each technology were interviewed first. Interviewees for additional dialogs were primarily identified with a senior officer at the Swedish Energy Agency, who for over a decade had been involved in funding research in the field of biochemical and thermochemical conversion. Further interviews were also identified together with the original interviewees, who provided the necessary contact information. For the interviews we sought after a good balance between interests and representatives from the various technological trajectories (see Fig. 1 for the technological trajectories and Appendix I for an overview of all interview respondents). Second, the secondary sources comprised public reports, as well as official market and research statistics. Of particular importance were data and reports from the IEA Task 39 as this information put the Swedish development into an international context. The international development was also discussed during the interviews with an emphasis on how it had influenced the development in Sweden and vice versa.

705

Third, a full-day workshop with 43 key stakeholders from academia, government and industry provided information on the TIS functions. The participants were divided into four groups: (1) biochemical conversion: (2) gasification of solid biomass: (3) entrained flow gasification, as well as (4) torrefaction, ligning and pyrolysis, according to their main field of expertise. Each group was then guided jointly by an official from the Swedish Energy Agency with expertise within the respective technological fields, and by one researcher with experience of TIS-studies. During the workshop, the realism of a goal for biorefinery development for the year 2030 (see further Section 4.3)1 was assessed. The participants also gave their feedback on an early version of the structure of the TIS. The main part of the workshop was devoted to creating input for functional assessment of the TIS, i.e., the strengths and weaknesses of the various functions, as well as for generating ideas on how the various functions could be strengthened. This assessment of the TIS functions was supported by asking the experts and stakeholders to rate the performance of the system's functions on a nine-point scale. Using an audience response system, each function was evaluated in relation to the goal. The outcome of the vote was displayed for all to see and to comment upon directly afterwards. This stimulated discussion and exchange of ideas and views. Notes were taken throughout the discussions to complement the results from the audience response system. All invited experts had the opportunity to provide additional feedback on a written summary of these notes, which were distributed via email after the workshop (see Appendix II for the template that was used for the workshop). Relying on broad stakeholder and expert deliberations and interactions addressed a critique voiced against TIS studies, namely that they often do not consider the logic of the policy process and thus risk resulting in advice that is difficult for policymakers to comprehend and act upon (Bening et al., 2015). Specifically, policy is not only associated with a politicaleadministrative hierarchy; it is also formulated and implemented within multi-actor networks beyond formal hierarchies (Flanagan et al., 2011). Moreover, because public policy often is part of the innovation system, the agency of actors should be acknowledged in the context of the different innovation system functions. The stakeholder workshop approach in this sense is more inclusive, because when key stakeholders participate in the analysis, they become owners of the emerging results.

4. The structure and functions of the advanced biorefinery TIS in Sweden 4.1. Technology overview In the present study, advanced biorefineries refer to energy and material efficient process plants that use forest residues and/or other lignocellulosic feedstock to produce bulk products, such as biofuels and/or biochemical products, possibly along with other high-value products such as specialty chemicals and/or new materials. Moreover, by-product streams, such as (excess) heat, provide opportunities for integration with other industrial processes, district heating grids, etc.

1 This goal was created by the researchers since there is no such explicit goal for biorefineries in Sweden. However, formulating the goal was quite straightforward since there are existing goals related to a fossil independent vehicle fleet and chemistry industry. See Section 4.3 for how this was done. As a part of the expert assessment, the workshop participants also reflected on the relevance of the goal. Overall their assessment indicated that the goal is ambitious but clearly achievable and applicable.

706


General AB-TIS structure

Main PDP infrastructure

Main System builders

THERMOCHEMICAL CONVERSION Entrained flow gasifica on

Gasifica on of solid biomass • Göteborg Energi • Chalmers • Valmet • EON • KTH • Energy Agency

• LTU • Chemrec • SP ETC • IVAB • Volvo • Preem • Energy Agency

• Bioendev • UmU • Umeå Energii • Valmet (biochar) • Energy agency

• Valmet • SP ETC • KTH • Chalmers • Energy agency

• Chalmersboiler plant • Gobigas I

• SP ETC • LTU Green fuels

• UmU torrefac on pilot • Bioendev demo

• SP ETC • KTH

Chemical process industry Universi es and research ins tutes

Torrefac on

BIOCHEMICAL CONVERSION

Forest industry Enzyme and catalyst manufacturers

Pyrolysis

Hydrothermal pre-treatment, hydrolysis, fermenta on, frac ona on • Sekab • C5LT • Processum • Taurus • UmU • SLU • Chalmers • LTU • Lund • Reac • MoRe • Energy agency

• PDU-Lund • SP Biorefinery demo

Refineries and motor fuel distributors

Automo ve industry

Oil industry

Funding Agencies

• MoRe lab • SP Processum

Heat and power companies incl. the district hea ng sector

Fig. 1. Actors, networks, and technological trajectories of the Swedish advanced biorefinery technological innovation system (AB-TIS). See also Energimyndigheten (2014b).

The Advanced Biorefinery TIS (AB-TIS) is delineated around the development of two separate but complementing platform technologies: thermochemical and biochemical conversion of lignocellulosic biomass. These platform technologies are feedstock and product flexible, thus allowing the use of various lignocellulosicbased raw materials to produce chemicals, materials, fuels, and energy products. In Sweden, the development of thermochemical conversion of biomass centers around four technological trajectories: 1. Gasification of solid biomassdSolid biomass such as forest residues is heated up to high temperatures and reacted with oxygen (and/or steam). The process generates synthesis gas, which can be further processed into, for instance, biomassbased methane (also called Bio-SNG) and fed to the natural gas grid or used for the production of bio-chemicals. 2. Entrained flow gasificationdHere pulverized biomass, liquefied biomass or a fuel slurry is gasified. In Sweden, this technology has mainly been developed for gasification of black liquor, which is a by-product from the chemical pulping process, today burned in recovery boilers. Like for gasification of solid biomass, syngas is produced and this can be further upgraded for different purposes and applications. 3. Torrefaction as a pre-treatment of biomass for entrained flow gasificationda pre-treatment process in which biomass is “toasted” in oxygen-lean environments. The productdbiochardis energy intense and can replace (or be blended with) fossil coal in power and gasification plants without major modifications in infrastructure (Bergman et al., 2005). However, the bio-char can also be used for other purposes besides gasification. 4. PyrolysisdThe pyrolysis process is similar to gasification with the exception that it is oxygen free. Pyrolysis generates three coproducts; a liquid bio-oil, bio-char and volatile gases. The bio-oil can replace fossil- or bunker oil and be used in oil-based gasification plants or chemical process plants to produce biofuels.

In contrast, the development of biochemical conversion has centered around one main technological trajectorydthe so-called sugar platformdwhere biomass is converted into sugars through different pre-treatment steps followed by hydrolysis. The sugars could subsequently be fermented or by other means converted into biofuels and/or chemicals. Although these two platform technologies (thermochemical conversion and biochemical conversion) have been under development since the 1970s, the progress toward large-scale deployment has been modest (Pandey, 2011). In 2010, it was predicted that by 2012 the installed capacity in the OECD member nations would be about 680,000 tons of fuels and chemicals yearly. In reality, however, the installed capacity amounted to no more than 140,000 tons, consisting largely of small pilot and demonstration plants (IEA, 2013). An explanation is the prevailing market conditions (e.g., low crude oil prices), which terminated several large projects in recent years (Bacovsky, 2014). Despite low and somewhat disappointing production volumes, global research and development (R&D) activities in advanced biorefineries are still ambitious. According to the IEA (2013), significant development efforts in the thermochemical platform technologies are concentrated to the US, Canada, Brazil, Sweden, Finland, Norway, the Netherlands, Belgium, Germany, Italy, Austria, France, and Spain. In total, 48 pilot and demonstration plants at various scales have been erected. In addition, significant development in advanced biofuels and green chemicals is also taking place in China, where several plants have been built (Axelsson Linder, 2012). 4.2. The structure of the Swedish advanced biorefinery TIS For both the biochemical and thermochemical platforms, historical development has resulted in several system-building networks and alliances where multiple actors are engaged in technology and process development, basic R&D, as well as developing and selling end products (Energimyndigheten, 2014b;


Hellsmark, 2010). Actors include the policy level, such as the Swedish Energy Agency, which have been instrumental in providing opportunities beyond financing, by undertaking activities such as activating other actors and setting up new institutional and organizational structures (see Fig. 1). These development efforts have resulted in a relatively rich research infrastructure in the form of pilot and demonstration plants with research institutes and/or universities as main owners. A few private actors possess minority shares. Four system-building networks largely drive the development of the thermochemical conversion of biomass, with each focusing on one of the above-mentioned trajectories. First, the development of solid biomass gasification has a long history in Sweden. However, due to various mistakes and crises among individuals firms, much of the previous networks were dissolved (Hellsmark, 2010; Ulmanen, 2013; Hellsmark et al., 2016). Recent development jump-started in 2007 when the so-called research boiler at Chalmers University of Technology was supplemented with a largescale pilot plant for indirect fluidized bed gasification (Jacobsson et al., 2014). This investment was a collaboration between Valmet € teborg Energi and later enabled a large-scale demonstration and Go €teborg plant with a capacity of 20 MW (GoBiGas I) built by Go Energi. Completed in 2014, the plant produces biomethane fed to the natural gas grid. The next stage (GoBiGas II) has been granted funding under the NER 300 programme.2 An additional 80 MW can then be built if the commercial conditions are deemed favorable. Lately, the stakeholder group has broadened further and within the NER 300dthrough the energy company E.ONdhas been granted an additional project in the last call (Bio2G) for a reference plant allowing industrial production of 200 MW (1.5 TWh biogas). Second, developing entrained flow gasification of black liquor has been driven in large part by the company Chemrec, which constructed a large number of pilot- and demonstration plants for € derholm et al., various applications by working with customers (So 2014). Initially, the intention aimed at generating electricity, but a failed attempt to fund a commercial-scale plant in the early 2000s redirected development efforts to production of biofuels (methanol). In 2005, a pilot plant was completed in Piteå, later supplemented with a separate unit for dimethyl ether (DME) production. This enabled the entire process, from black liquor to biofuels, to be demonstrated, including small-scale test fleets of trucks from Volvo. Around the pilot plant, an R&D network consisting of national and international actors along the value chain emerged. A major research program, the BLG Program, enabled substantial research. In 2012, Chemrec failed to obtain funding for technology upscaling, and operational responsibility for infrastructure was then taken over by Luleå University of Technology, which expanded demonstration activities to include more raw materials and new types of fuels and chemicals under the label “LTU Green Fuels.” Third, development of torrefaction as a pre-treatment of biomass for entrained flow gasification has been driven by researchers at Umeå University, along with the local energy company Umeå Energi, in an attempt to commercialize the torrefaction technology through the company Bioendev. With partners, Bioendev built a first pilot plant over the period 2007e2009 (Ecotraffic, 2010). In 2012, the plant was scaled up, and in 2014, an industrial scale demonstration plant was constructed in Holmsund. The fourth trajectory of the thermochemical platformdpyrolysisdhas attracted relatively little attention in Sweden. €s (a commercial provider of packaging Still, in 2012, BillerudKorsna

2 NER 300 is a financing instrument for innovative, low-carbon energy demonstration projects managed jointly by the European Commission, the European Investment Bank, and the EU Member States.

707

material) was granted funding from the NER 300 to develop a largescale production plant. However, the project was eventually canceled. Research and development on pyrolysis is conducted by the research institute SP ETC, KTH and Umeå University, where university activities focus on processing torrefaction- and pyrolysis gas into liquid biofuels and chemicals. The development of biochemical conversion of biomass consists of a large network of actors developing biofuels and chemicals from cellulose, originating from the interest in developing ethanol as a vehicle fuel during the 1980s. One aim was to increase the use of grain-based ethanol to pave the way for lignocellulosic-ethanol; as such, in parallel, market development for grain-based bioethanol was essential. Eventually, this resulted in large-scale uptake of ethanol as a vehicle fuel (Ulmanen, 2013). To progress the lignocellulosic-ethanol technology, a lab-scale pilot plant was constructed at Lund University in the early 1990s, and in 2004 a larger € €ldsvik. This plant is pilot plant was inaugurated in the town of Ornsk o owned by Umeå University, Luleå University of Technology, and the company SEKAB, through a holding company (Etanolpiloten AB). From the beginning, SEKAB was responsible for both operations and commercializing the technology. A first commercial-scale plant was planned for in 2008e2009, but was abandoned in the aftermath to the financial crisis, and because the market for ethanol was not evolving favorably (IEA, 2013). In 2012, the operations at the € € ldsvik were taken over by pilot- and demonstration plant in Ornsk o SP Technical Research Institute. Development activities then expanded from experiments with ethanol alone to several other biotechnological conversion processes. As a consequence, new actors joined the network, which today consist of several organizations, including SEKAB, SP Processum, SP Technical Research Institute, Umeå University, Chalmers University of Technology, and Lund University. The system-building networks that constitute the core of the AB-TIS depend on the engagement and support of additional actors to enable further development and diffusion of each respective technology. In the case of advanced biorefineries, the existing industrial actors are of particular importance; these can take part in the technology development processes providing key competences and resources, and enable upscaling to commercial scale. 4.3. Formulating an analytical goal of the AB-TIS In order to assess the strengths and weaknesses of a TIS, an analytical goal must be formulated. For advanced biorefineries, there exist no explicit policy or industrial goal that can be used; however, the development of the AB-TIS roots strongly in the Swedish government's ambition to have a fossil-independent vehicle fleet by the year 2030. This initiative is part of the wider vision of a sustainable and resource-efficient energy supply without any net emissions of greenhouse gases by the year 2050 (Government Bill 2008/09:162). Similar related strategies exist on a regional level in Sweden, such as for the chemical industry in the Stenungsund region, which has the ambition to be based on €nsson et al., 2012). Realizing the renewable feedstock by 2030 (Jo above goals requires drastically reducing the amount of transports needed, increasing energy efficiency, and allowing biofuels and biochemicals to play an important role (SOU, 2013:84). The level of biofuel use identified as necessary to reach the ambition of a fossil independent vehicle fleet by 2030 is about 10e20 TW h depending on other developments of the transport sector (SOU, 2013:84).3 Similarly, the chemical industry in

3 See http://www.regeringen.se/rattsdokument/statens-offentliga-utredningar/ 2013/12/sou-201384/for the reports underlying the goal formulation.

708


Stenungsund alone uses about 15 TWh of fossil feedstock, which would need to be replaced with biogenioc feedstock in order to €nsson et al., 2012). Regarding available become fossil-free (Jo biomass, a review of different assessments estimates the shortterm potential for increased biomass production to roughly 50e60 TWh and the long-term potential to up to 160e200 TWh € rjesson et al., 2013). If 40 TWh of this biomass were to be used in (Bo advanced biorefineries it would give e at least e about 20 TWh of biofuels and/or biochemicals depending on conversion process and products produced. Given these strategies and the visions for a fossil independent vehicle fleet, a chemical industry based on renewable feedstock, and the potentials for available biomass as presented above, the following analytical goal for the AB-TIS was constructed by the authors4 By year 2030, investments of SEK 30 to 60 billion (about 3.3e6.5 billion Euro) have been granted to build 8 to 12 commercial scale plants, which together produce at least 20 TWh fuels and/or chemicals. If this goal is reached, a major step toward a fossil-independent vehicle fleet and a fossil-free chemical industry would be made, and the Swedish AB-TIS would progress from the current demonstration phase to a niche market phase by 2030. Based on calculations from previous scale-up trials, the cost of the 8 to 12 plants is about SEK 4 to 5 billion (Euro 0.4 to 0.5 billion) each (Hellsmark and Jacobsson, 2012). 4.4. Functional assessment of the AB-TIS The performance of the seven TIS functions is assessed in relation to how they strengthen or inhibit the further development of the TIS in relation to the analytical goal. In addition to assessing whether functions are strong or weak (or somewhere in between), we provide a more in-depth explanation of the rationale. For a summary, see Fig. 2. Fig. 2 pictures that knowledge development and diffusion is the only function that is significantly strengthening the development of the Swedish AB-TIS in relation to the goal. This functional strength is the result of strategic and long-term R&D efforts, a persistent and strong academic commitment, and relatively strong networks between academia and industrial companies. The weak aspects of this function root in the fact that key technologies have not yet been upscaled to commercial size. Consequently, important learning processes are absent. For example, knowledge and experience of construction, commissioning, systems integration, and knowledge of institutional constraints are lacking. Furthermore, some key players in the value chain are still missing or are only weakly engaged (e.g., enzyme producers, parts of the forestry and pulp and paper industry). For this function to remain strong, the AB-TIS needs to develop into a niche market phase. There are two system functions that are weak and that may significantly prohibit the further development of the AB-TIS: resource mobilization and market formation. The weaknesses of these two functions are strongly related to the dynamic development of the TIS, and the present need to shift into a niche market phase in which historical efforts and strengths are no longer sufficient to propel development. For example, different types of financial (and human) capital are required for the further scale-up

4 As mentioned in Section 3, as a part of the expert assessment the workshop participants also reflected on the relevance of this goal. Overall it was judged as ambitious but clearly achievable and applicable.

of the technology (where past efforts focused mainly on verification and optimization). The absence of sufficient financial support to deploying technology makes risks with commercial-scale production largely unmanageable for potential investors (including venture capitalists). Still, these two weak functions also have some strong features, grounded in the fact that previous development efforts left an open research infrastructure of international significance. In addition, a related successful deployment of biorefinery technologies based on starch-based raw materials has occurred, and these markets could contribute to forming markets for more advanced products and fuels as well. Finally, there are four functions of intermediate strength: (1) influence on the direction of search, (2) entrepreneurial experimentation, (3) formation of social capital and (4) legitimation. In these cases, each functional strength can be related largely to historical efforts, including developing a research infrastructure to facilitate experimentation and establishing strong networks and collaborations within each technological trajectory. Furthermore, for a long time, clear political emphases on societal challenges (e.g., climate change, security-of-supply concerns) were apparent, which in part could be managed through the AB-TIS. In contrast, the weaknesses of the above functions are rooted in the complexities of the two technology platforms and the AB-TIS. For example, there is a current lack of compatible goals for different designs/products in the European Union. At the national level, this tends to generate a situation with far too many options, which may foment conflicts among actors with competing interests. Moreover, there is a lack of clear organization of existing research infrastructure, and limited interaction among different technological trajectories along the entire value chains. 5. System strengths and weaknesses of the Swedish advanced biorefinery TIS and the role of public policy In this section we identify the system strengths and the system weaknesses of the Swedish AB-TIS, and discuss their relevance for policy-making. Section 5.1 briefly summarizes the most important system strengths. Since already existing strengths typically do not render any specific direct need for policy intervention, the discussion on policy action is primarily placed in Section 5.2 where the weaknesses of the system are discussed. Here we discuss how the different system weaknesses can be addressed in policy, in part by building on the existing system strengths, and how failures to deal with these weaknesses may lead to negative feedback effects on the system and functional strengths. 5.1. System strengths Fig. 3 summarizes the most significant system strengths of the Swedish AB-TIS (i.e., S1, S2, S3 etc.), and disentangles how each strength supports the seven functions. To begin with, the actors deciding to contribute to the biorefinery development have been influenced to do so by a series of overlapping events at the international level (S9). These included the oil crises in the 1970s, nuclear energy opposition, the climate change crisis, and competitiveness issues in the pulp and paper industries of developed countries. Together, these events strengthened the function influence on the direction of search, in turn motivating investments in developing biomass resources for new applications. As a result of these external events, system-building actors have also taken advantage of related key competencies and industrial structures (S8) to strengthen primarily the functions knowledge development, entrepreneurial experimentation, resource mobilization, and legitimation. For example, the company Chemrec, founded in the mid-1980s, took advantage of knowledge generated in the


Weak funcƟons

Resource mobiliza on

FuncƟons of intermediate strength

Market forma on

Influence on the direc on of search

Entrepreneurial experimenta on

Strong funcƟons

Forma on of social capital

Legi ma on • Significant commitment and consensus on climate and environmental issues • Alterna ve use of forest biomass is considered legi mate, substan al and established industrial structures could gain a compe ve advantage • The technologies have been demonstrated

• Access to research funding and investment in scaling up technology through pilot demonstra on facili es • Open research infrastructure has enabled EU funding • Experiences from the process industry may facilitate large demonstra on projects

• Policy instruments that have favored and s ll favor developing (mostly so-called first genera on) biofuels and the related vehicle market • Crea ng markets for bulk products (e.g., fuel) could pave the way for specialty products

• Dis nct and overlapping (energy related) crises • Increased focus on security of supply • Clear vision and poli cal consensus regarding a fossil-free vehicle fleet in 2030 • Clear industrial objec ves of a biobased economy to improve interna onal compe veness

• A rac ve research infrastructure • Rela vely many experiments with technological processes on different scales and across the value chain • Strong par cipa on of actors along large parts of the value chain • Good opportuni es for process integra on with exis ng energy infrastructure and industry

• Strong networks between actors within the same technological trajectory • Increased collabora on between key players thanks to the large research ini a ves in the field with the focus on collabora on and trans-diciplinarity (both at na onal and EU level)

• Public funding does not handle market risk • Difficult to get industrial co-funding • "Sprawling" public funding is difficult to use to build large-scale research infrastructure • Lack of basic funding for research infrastructure, making adap on and development difficult • Difficulty in retaining key competences in the field • Lack of chemical engineers (long-term)

• No naturally occurring niche markets for the products • Developing shale gas and other rapid changes in the global market discourage investment • Current policy instruments do not handle market risk and are not long-term

• One-sided argumenta on for advanced biorefineries • Ambi ous visions have not been followed up with concrete ac ons • Na onal and interna onal (EU) goals and visions are not always compa ble • Prerequisites some mes change quickly • Incen ves and goals lacking for bio-based chemical products • “Too many” op ons leads to paralysis

• "Expensive" research infrastructure in rela on to industrial interest • A "gap" between the demonstra on phase and the commercial growth phase • Few (none) demonstra ons at commercial scale • Absence of key players who take a coordina ng role • Lack of clear organiza on of research infrastructure

• Limited interac on between technology tracks and along the en re value chains • Different views and objec ves for different actors (e.g., the forest and chemical industry) • Compe on regarding funding between alterna ve technological trajectories • Lack of confidence in the government to keep its promises of incen ves for biorefineries and biorefinery products

709

• New business models struggle to gain acceptance • Lack of dominant design • Key players ques oning the use of biomass for energy purposes • High costs can turn into a poli cal risk for municipal corpora ons • The technologies are large-scale whilst mainly small-scale technologies gain legi macy right now

Knowledge development and diffusion • Long-term research efforts • Strong knowledge in core processing technology • Strong academic commitment (including ins tutes) • Strong networks between academia, some parts of industry, and research infrastructure • Lack of knowledge regarding system integra on and combina on of different knowledge areas • Inadequate knowledge of deployment, scaling, new products and their markets • Lack of par cipa on from key parts of industry • Lack of na onal actors in key areas • Weak absorp on capacity of key parts of the industry

FuncƟonal strengths

FuncƟonal weaknesses

Fig. 2. Functional assessment of the Swedish advanced biorefinery technological innovation system (AB-TIS).

System strengths

Func ons

S1: Significant research infrastructure Market forma on

Forma on of social capital



S2: Several complemen ng value chains tested (ethanol, DME, bio-diesel, biogas) S3: Prominent research actors and entrepreneurial companies S4: Strong networks with interna onal linkages S5: Long-term research funding TIS-INTERNAL S6: Clear visions concerning a fossil free vehicle fleet

Legi ma on

Knowledge development and diffusion

Influence on the direc on of search = strong func on = average func on = weak func on

TIS-INTERNAL / NATIONAL S7: Processing biomass into high value products are considered legi mate and desirable S8: Access to related key skills and industry structure NATIONAL

S9: Overlapping crises (oil crisis, nuclear power, climate, P&P) INTERNATIONAL

Fig. 3. System strengths of the Swedish advanced biorefinery technological innovation system (AB-TIS). See also Energimyndigheten (2014b).

forest and petrochemical industries for developing technology and making it operational at a demonstration scale. A related example is the large-scale demonstration plant Gobigas, where the petrochemical industry has been important in terms of key personnel to make the plant operational. Yet another example is SEKAB, with key

actors pursuing ethanol production based on the biochemical conversion process, which roots in ethanol production in the Swedish pulp and paper industry in the 1940s. For all trajectories, related and complementary competences have been attracted also from the automotive industry.

710


Over time, experimental activities evolved to include a broader network of industrial actors, and this increased the legitimacy of the AB-TIS (S7 in Fig. 3). Legitimacy has been further reinforced by significant support among lay people for using biomass for energy purposes (Hedberg and Holmberg, 2014), and by the fact that biomass resources constitute approximately 40 percent of total energy demand in Sweden (Energimyndigheten, 2014a). The legitimacy of the AB-TIS has also been strengthened as a result of the crises of the Nordic pulp and paper industries, which experience increased international competition and declining demand for their traditional products (S9). Consequently, firms in these industries proactively look for new products and applications to increase profits. The wide range of experiments has also resulted in the emergence of a significant research infrastructure consisting of pilot and demonstration plants at various scales (S1). In the cities of € €ldsvik, Go €teborg and Piteå, large-scale pilot and demonOrnsk o stration plants were constructed along the various technological trajectories, and multiple value chains (S2) (e.g., ethanol, DME, diesel, biogas) appeared around these plants. This development strengthened the functions of knowledge development, entrepreneurial experimentation, and resource mobilization. To some extent, experimental activities also supported the emergence of an early market formation. For example, close to the DME pilot plant in Piteå, yet another small infrastructure was built in the early 2000s, with fueling stations and a small test fleet of DME vehicles supplied by Volvo (Hellsmark et al., 2016). This small yet important niche market allowed for a value chain to be formed, and key actors along that chain learned about and experimented with the technology. Yet another example is the relatively large-scale infrastructure with users, fuel stations, and vehicle suppliers, which appeared around € € ldsvik. the ethanol pilot plant in Ornsk o With the establishment of a large-scale research infrastructure (S1) and increased access to long-term research funding (S5), all major universities in Sweden have been attracted to the AB-TIS, in addition to several internationally strong research groups. Therefore, the emergence of prominent research actors and entrepreneurial companies (S3) has clearly strengthened the TIS function knowledge development and diffusion. Entrepreneurial companies have been primarily small and research-oriented, such as Chemrec, SEKAB, and Bioendev. Together with university-based actors, these companies built strong networks (S3) with significant international links (S4). From a public policy perspective, the above system strengths constitute an opportunity. An increased policy emphasis on developing a biobased economy goes well in hand with a significant public support for using biomass, a strong university and research base, as well as domestic industry sectors that face declining markets that could benefit from forming new markets for biorefinery products. To some extent, this opportunity has already been exploited. The Swedish government's (S6) political vision concerning a fossil-independent vehicle fleet by the year 2030 further strengthens the influence on the direction of search of the ABTIS. In the next section, we advance the analysis regarding how public policy can leverage these system's strengths, and thereby address remaining system weaknesses directly or indirectly. We also devote specific attention to how failures to address the system weaknesses may lead to negative feedback effects on system functions and strengths, in turn inhibiting the future development of the AB-TIS. 5.2. System weaknesses and the role of policy Although five of the seven TIS functions are strong or have intermediate strength, several important system weaknesses can be

identified. Fig. 4 reveals that these weaknesses (W1, W2, W3, etc.) relate to most functions of the AB-TIS, but in particular to the market formation and resource mobilization functions. The most important system weakness in the Swedish AB-TIS is the lack of appropriate policy instruments in the niche market and commercial growth phase (W1). This interacts with system weakness W6, i.e. strong competition from low-priced fossil fuels and alternative uses of raw materials. The combined effect of these system weaknesses is that the market formation function remains underdeveloped. There are few naturally occurring niche markets for products emanating from advanced biorefineries; in other words, there are few geographical regions or specific sectors in which new technology is found more feasible than the alternatives. Consequently, if policy desires to build on the strengths of the system (S1eS9), such niche markets need to be created politically through policy incentives such as public procurement or price guarantees in addition to general schemes such as a permanent CO2-tax. However, longterm and general polices for stimulating technologies that produce renewable fuels are lacking for the growth phase as well. In particular, W1 creates a vacuum for current AB-TIS actors and prohibits further investments to move the AB-TIS into the next phase. The above system weaknesses negatively affect market formation and several of the other functions; failure to address them may have serious consequences for further developing the AB-TIS. In particular, the following risks are worth highlighting: One important system strength, existing research infrastructure (S1), could be perceived too expensive for the industrial actors to incur. Consequently, a gap between the demonstration and commercial phase of the technology could emerge, which may weaken the function of entrepreneurial experimentation. Existing knowledge on making large-scale plants operational (up-scaling), and new products from biorefineries and their markets, may eventually be lost as firms invest in alternatives when there is no market, thus implying that knowledge development and diffusion is weakened. It will remain difficult to obtain industrial co-financing for commercial-scale projects, which weakens the function of resource mobilization. The ambitious vision of a fossil-independent vehicle fleet by 2030 will be increasingly difficult to reach. This vision will thus not be translated into concrete action; therefore, the influence of direction of search would become weaker. Policy intervention is needed to support market formation for two reasons. First, as long as the market is constrained, important learning processes will not advance. Technological development is rooted in various forms of learning, such as learning-by-doing (i.e., tacit knowledge acquired during manufacturing) (Arrow, 1962) and learning-by-using (i.e., improving the technology as a result of user feedback) (Kline and Rosenberg, 1986; MacKenzie and Wajcman, 1999). Because of the public good characteristics of knowledge generated through learning, firms seldom reap full benefits from learning investments. For this reason, they are likely to underinvest in learning if not supported. Second, developing the AB-TIS is likely to be lengthy and highly uncertain, and few actors may be willing to assume initial investment risks. Moreover, venture capitalists seldom fill this funding void for new business ventures in early stages (e.g., Mazzucato, 2013). This is particularly the case in knowledge-based sectors, in which capital intensity and technological complexity are high. Policy support for technology deployment, therefore, provides for experiences gained from production, field tests, and prolonged


Functions

System weaknesses


W1: Lack of policy instruments in niche market and commercial growth phase


Influence on the direc on of search Knowledge development and diffusion

Market forma on

711

W2: Weak coordina on between ministries, agencies, and regional actors W3: Weak industrial par cipa on and industrial absorp ve capability

W4: Weak collabora ons over knowledge and organiza onal boundaries W5:Unclear roles, collabora ons, ownership, and financing of research infrastructure

TIS-INTERNAL Forma on of social capital

Legi ma on

W6: Compe on from fossil fuels and alterna ve use of raw materials

INTERNATIONAL = strong func on = average func on = weak func on

Fig. 4. System weaknesses of the Swedish advanced biorefinery technological innovation system (AB-TIS). See also Energimyndigheten (2014b).

use, pulling technology down the learning curve and enhancing its performance. In Sweden, in the context of advanced biorefineries, different options for such deployment policies that are applicable to niche markets have been discussed. These include, for example, a price premium model or public procurement in the case of biofuels and green chemicals and other bio-based products (Nissinen et al., 2009; Onstad, 2005; SOU, 2013:84). Regardless of which instrument implemented, it should build on the strengths and address weaknesses of the AB-TIS, but should also consider the overall characteristics of the TIS. This particular case implies that major investments in new technologies with long payback periods must be made by mature industries that have alternative investment opportunities at hand. Consequently, policy conditions must provide attractive profit opportunities and remain stable during times of highly fluctuating fossil fuel prices. Whereas the first system weakness (W1) underscores the need for deployment policies, the second weakness addresses the prospects for realizing required policy changes in practice. A key system weakness of the Swedish AB-TIS is the lack of coordination among government ministries, agencies, and regional actors (W2). The absence of sufficient coordination has negatively affected the shift from the demonstration to the niche market phase. During the demonstration phase, public R&D support played an important role in reducing technical and product-related risks, but actor networks have to date only had limited (and mostly an indirect) influence over the institutional and market-related risks. As the AB-TIS approaches the niche market phase, however, demand increases for coordination and technology-specific knowledge among relevant agencies and ministries, especially because the needed policy instruments are not within the realm of a single authority. This system weakness risk preventing the development of several TIS functions. For example: There is a lack of timing in policy actions taken, and/or policies are designed inefficiently. A gap then emerges between the demonstration phase and the niche market phase;

consequently, the functions market formation and resource mobilization are further weakened. Entrepreneurs trying to scale up technology experience problems not for technical reasons, but because financial incentives and support functions are lacking. Therefore, the function of legitimization is weakened. Actors' confidence in government acting to fulfill its ambitious visions and goals is damaged; resulting in the function development of social capital being weakened. Actors receive insufficient guidance for choosing to invest in the AB-TIS when the rules of the game change quickly and/or due to conflicts between different types of policy goals. When clear incentives are not present, the function influencing the direction of search is weakened. Multiple participants at the stakeholder workshop expressed concerns regarding current knowledge about policy timing, especially among public agencies and ministries. There is, it was argued, an increased need to understand when different types of policy instruments are appropriate and how risks throughout the different phases of developing the technology should be managed. Especially for small firms, which often pioneer in developing new technologies, the timing between different policy incentives is of outmost importance. Extended periods of policy vacuum may even imply bankruptcy. To achieve policy timing, knowledge about the often longsighted innovation processes needs be strengthened, along with the ability to coordinate policy efforts among various agencies and ministries. For example, when calls for new pilot- and demonstration programs are formulated, policymakers need specific knowledge about the development of the AB-TIS, as well as about related legislative matters such as processes for environmental permits, which are lengthy in many European countries. Addressing this system weakness includes drawing on existing system strengths regarding knowledge already accumulated by actor networks to assess which development phase the AB-TIS occupies.

712


A third system weakness that warrants specific policy commitments is weak industrial participation and the lack of industrial absorptive capacity (W3). Although the existing industrial structure was described as an important system strength (at minimum for gaining access to related competencies; S8), there are also holes in the value chain with no Swedish actors taking an active role. For example, there are no longer any large-scale equipment manufacturers or actors that develop catalysis process technologies in Sweden.5 Hence, for nationally based actors' investing, it is of crucial importance to attract international partners to develop domestic technology. Moreover, current development projects often lack participation from the forestry and chemical industries, in part because of a limited ability to absorb and translate new knowledge into new business opportunities. This is a significant problem because established actors are the ones who often integrate emerging technological trajectories into existing operations. This system weakness thus prevents developing a wide range of functions of the AB-TIS, including situations where:

Sweden, however, this currently does not take place to the extent needed; as such, the fourth system weakness (W4) in the AB-TIS is weak collaboration over knowledge and organizational boundaries. Much of the knowledge and skills necessary for achieving the goals of the AB-TIS are available in various types of companies belonging to different industries. Historically, this human capital has been developed separately, but it needs to be further integrated in both research and in commercial projects as technology is scaled up. Otherwise, a weak cooperation over knowledge and organizational boundaries could lead to:

Significant key players who could have assumed a coordinating role do not act to acquire the knowledge required to advance the technology. In this way, the AB-TIS functions entrepreneurial experimentation as well as knowledge development and diffusion are weakened. It becomes increasingly difficult to obtain industrial counterfinancing for new development projects, thus weakening the function resource mobilization. New technologies and business models related to changes in, for example, the pulp and paper industry's key activities may have difficulties gaining acceptance, which implies that legitimization is weakened.

Some policy measures have already been put into place in Sweden to address this system weakness, primarily long-term R&D funding (i.e., S5). A few new research programs, such as Bioinnovation and f3, focus on collaboration among various actors with complementary knowledge. Nevertheless, new types of industrial partnerships between industries and between equipment manufacturers and their customers will probably need be formed and strengthened further. It is unlikely, however, that such partnerships will be formed prior to deploying commercial-scale plants (i.e., before weakness W1 has been addressed). The final system weakness is that of unclear roles, collaborations, ownership, and financing of research infrastructure (W5). The development of a strong research infrastructure constitutes an important system strength in the Swedish AB-TIS. At the same time, the actor-networks surrounding these facilities are unclear in terms of agency, ownership, and a lack of long-term financing. If unattained to, this system weakness implies:

The limited industrial participation can be understood from the perspective that the industry in general is organized efficiently and competitive in existing markets, but has limited resources to develop new technologies and business areas. In mature industries, there is fierce competition for existing development resources, and companies may have multiple investment options among which they can choose. The fact that the biochemical and thermochemical biomass conversion processes are still under development and not yet deployed in industrial scale imply that the behavior of a process at the commercial scale, and how rapidly it becomes sufficiently efficient, are difficult to anticipate in advance (see also Huenteler et al., 2014). This system weakness (W3) can be addressed in part through the policy instruments proposed to address system weaknesses W1 and W6, that is, a deployment policy. Such a policy would create stronger incentives for the industry to participate in the development activities but also help reduce uncertainties concerning plausible options. In addition, there could be further incentives for mature domestic industries to open their physical infrastructure for research purposes, thus contributing to more active collaboration between established industry and research-based actors. Yet another policy approach could be to build on system strengths S1, S3, and S4 and develop specific incentives for firms with key complementary competences to invest and participate. In general, however, it is insufficient to focus solely on increasing industrial participation. Indeed, ensuring actors from different sectors work together may be equally important. In

5 Nevertheless, there are such equipment manufacturers with strong ties to Sweden through a history of mergers and acquisitions, such as Valmet, a leading global developer and supplier of services and technologies for the pulp, paper, and energy industries.

A continued lack of knowledge on systems integration, implying that the function of knowledge development and diffusion is weakened. Limited interaction remaining between different technology trajectories and among key actors along the entire value chain, due to key differences in core values, implying that the function formation of social capital is weakened.

Research environments of critical sizes are not strengthened. These environments are necessary, at minimum for establishing agreements with the few international major corporations active in certain critical areas (e.g., equipment manufacturing and specialists in catalysis) and to compensate for existing gaps in the actor structure (see also system weakness W3). If this cannot be accomplished, the functions knowledge development and diffusion, entrepreneurial experimentation, and resource mobilization will inevitably be weakened. The existing cooperative atmosphere surrounding pilot- and demonstration plants is not further strengthened, thus giving rise to an imbalance between commercial interests and research interests. This may imply that developing alternative tracks and competing networks around the research infrastructure becomes difficult, suggesting that knowledge development and diffusion, as well as entrepreneurial experimentation are weakened. The research infrastructure becomes outdated, and is not adapted to the industry's changing needs. The infrastructure then loses its international competitiveness, resulting in a weakening of the function of resource mobilization. Building on system strength S1 and developing a more efficient organization around the research infrastructure can be effective for increasing its international attractiveness, while at the same time allowing the skills of employees, operators, and experiments at the plants to be further stimulated. Organizational development around the research infrastructure could also be prioritized


through a neutral and active actor that owns, organizes, and markets the infrastructure. In this way, the research infrastructure will remain internationally competitive and attractive, and become an important stepping stone for entrepreneurial companies to access markets as they materialize in other countries, even if the main system weakness (i.e., W1) is not addressed in Sweden. 6. Conclusions and implications The present study analyzed the dynamics between systemic barriers and drivers in progressing sustainable technology, using the development of advanced biorefineries in Sweden as an illustrative case. For this purpose, the study addressed two research questions: (1) what are the system weaknesses and strengths of the TIS, and (2) how should public policy be designed to leverage on these strengths and address these weaknesses in order to stimulate the further TIS development? Regarding the first research question, the analysis identified and described nine system strengths reinforcing the development of the advanced biorefinery TIS in Sweden, and six system weaknesses hampering it. While the system weaknesses to a large extent are TIS-internal (such as the lack of policy instruments in the niche market and commercial growth phases), the system strengths relate both to the TIS itself and to national and international developments in related areas (such as a number of overlapping crises driving the development towards a bioeconomy). To address these system weaknesses, additional policy intervention is needed, in particular because two of the identified weaknesses (i.e., W1 and W6) cannot be handled by existing AB-TIS actors. Specifically, in addressing the second research question we point toward a combination of policy measures that build on both the identified strengths of the system, and address the weaknesses. The nature of each system weakness and their respective policy implications are summarized in Table 2. Four different policy measures play a particularly important role in the proposed policy mix. First, a technology deployment policy that creates a domestic market in Sweden for biobased chemicals and renewable fuels needs to be implemented, thus supporting technology development during a niche market phase and allowing for the first commercial scale plants to be built. The purpose of such a deployment policy is to stimulate learning, form value chains, and experiment with various design options on a larger scale. It would also facilitate incremental innovations that allow key technologies to progress down the learning curve to eventually become competitive (Kemp et al., 1998; Smith and Raven, 2012). Candidates for such deployment polices would include, for example, public procurement and

713

various types of price guarantees, perhaps combined with investment subsidies. Beside the problem of creating specific policies that stimulate investments in the first plants, the long-term conditions for renewable fuels in Sweden need to be improved (e.g., introducing more stable policies regarding the exemption from the carbon tax). When deciding on policy instruments, policymakers need consider that achieving the stated ambitions of a fossil independent vehicle fleet and a chemical process industry based on renewable feedstock, through e.g. large scale deployment of advanced biorefineries, major investments in radically new technologies must be made, probably to a large extent by mature industrial sectors that currently suffer from profitability problems and that also have alternative investment options available. Identifying the specific policy instruments that are most suitable is beyond the scope of the present article, although it is emphasized that a mix of different policy instruments (i.e., for different product groups) may be needed. This remains an important area for future research (see also del Río and Bleda, 2012). Second, more knowledge is needed about policy timing as well as about governmental agencies' abilities to coordinate their efforts and policy instruments when a technology moves between different development phases (see also Flanagan et al., 2011). In the case of advanced biorefineries, the lack of coordination and poor timing have resulted in a persistent gap between the demonstration and the niche market phase. If this is not properly addressed, the gap risks resulting in technology development being stalled, key firms going out of business, and strategic assets being lost. Third, an opportunity exists to further build on the strength of good access to related key skills and industry structure (S8), by creating stronger incentives for the mature industries to invest in R&D, as well as strengthening their absorptive capacity. Such actions would thus address the weakness of industrial participation and industrial absorptive capability (W3). The mature industries have trimmed their organizational structures; for example, in Sweden the forestry and chemical industries rely heavily on external consultants and technology suppliers for developing and implementing new knowledge. At the same time, a shift toward advanced biorefineries depends heavily on these firms' internal ability to absorb and integrate new technology into existing operations (cf. Cohen and Levinthal, 1990). Hence, policy initiatives that aim at strengthening the industry's absorptive capacity and their participation in R&D projects are critical. Fourth and finally, the organization and the financing of existing research infrastructure are keys to developing advanced biorefineries. By achieving this, policy can build on what is already

Table 2 System weaknesses and policy measures. System weaknesses

Potential policy measures and links to system strengths

A lack of appropriate policies in the niche market and commercial growth phase (W1), in combination with strong competition from low-priced fossil fuels (W6) A lack of coordination among government ministries, agencies, as well as regional actors (W2)

Niche markets need be created through deployment policy incentives such as public procurement or price guarantees. If this cannot be achieved, the existing research infrastructure (i.e., S1) risks being perceived as too expensive for industrial actors to incur. Knowledge about the current status of the biorefinery development and knowledge about innovation processes needs to be increased among policy makers, along with an increased ability to coordinate policy efforts between ministries and agencies. This includes drawing on existing system strengths regarding knowledge already accumulated by actor networks. A deployment policy would encourage the industry to participate in development activities. This could be complemented by building on system strengths S1, S3, S4 and S8 and develop specific incentives for firms with key complementary competences to invest and participate. Further building on system strength S3 and securing long-term R&D funding, increasingly also with a focus on collaboration among various actors with complementary knowledge. However, entirely new partnerships are unlikely to be formed before system weakness S1 has been addressed. Building on system strength S1 and develop a more efficient and neutral organization around the research infrastructure. This would allow key actors to appropriate also on markets being developed outside Sweden.

Weak industrial participation and a lack of industrial absorptive capacity (W3) Weak collaboration over knowledge and organizational boundaries (W4) Unclear roles, collaborations, ownership, and financing of research infrastructure (W5)

714


strong in the innovation system and increase the prospects for the infrastructure to become internationally competitive. This will allow key actors to appropriate also on markets being developed outside Sweden. Improved organization and financing of this infrastructure are important for building up research environments of critical sizes and to make these attractive for international capital and partnerships. Other European countries and the United States are experiencing similar challenges as Sweden with respect to the development of advanced biorefineries, such as a lack of niche markets (Huenteler et al., 2014). Overall, few commercial-scale plants have been implemented internationally during the last decade.6 Therefore, our case study, and the key implications outlined, are of interest well beyond the Swedish domestic market and may help policymakers and other actors in international markets capitalize on strengths, eliminate weaknesses, and formulate better policy for developing sustainable technologies. In addition to empirical TIS analysis and its conclusions above, the research also illustrated how policy implications generated from TIS-studies can be more relevant and meaningful by departing from relevant system strengths before identifying system weaknesses. Specifically, we have highlighted how the identification of system strengths may be important for addressing weaknesses indirectly, by building on what is already strong, rather than directly, which in some cases may be difficult for institutional reasons (e.g., due to underlying beliefs and principles). This approach is consistent with research calling for a deeper understanding of the dynamics and interaction effects in emerging TIS (cf. Markard and Truffer, 2008). In addition, it is argued that it is important to recognize that failures to address system weaknesses properly may lead to negative feedback on key functions of the TIS, which may deteriorate existing system strengths, in turn making it difficult to develop the technology further. Finally, an important aspect of the present study is also that we invited policymakers and other stakeholders to take an active role in the analysis, thereby attempting to take into account the logic of the policy process and strengthen the actionable nature of the conclusions and implications (cf. Flanagan et al., 2011; Bening et al., 2015). By doing so, the TIS framework will be equipped to more effectively create a deeper understanding of which system weaknesses the actors can address themselves (including existing policy actors within the TIS), and which weaknesses require deliberate policy measures. Appendix A. Supplementary data Supplementary data related to this article can be found at http:// dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.04.109. References Arrow, K.J., 1962. The economic implications of learning by doing. Rev. Econ. Stud. 29, 155e173. Axelsson Linder, J., 2012. Main System Weaknesses and Strengths for Speeding up the Development, Use and Diffusion of Biomass Based Conversion Technologies €pings University, in China. Department of Management and Engineering. Linko Sweden. Bacovsky, D., 2014. In: Overview of Advanced Biofuels Technologies, European Biofuels Technology Platform 6th Stakeholder Plenary Meeting SPM6: Biofuels for Low Carbon Transport & Energy Security, 14e15 October 2014. Diamant Conference Centre, Brussels. Bening, C.R., Blum, N.U., Schmidt, T.S., 2015. The need to increase the policy relevance of the functional approach to Technological Innovation Systems (TIS). Environ. Innov. Soc. Transit. 16, 73e75.

6

See also http://demoplants.bioenergy2020.eu/(accessed 2015-11-24).

Bergek, A., Hekkert, M., Jacobsson, S., 2008a. Functions in innovation systems: a framework for analysing energy system dynamics and identifying goals for system-building activities by entrepreneurs and policymakers. In: Foxon, T., €hler, J., Oughton, C. (Eds.), Innovations for a Low Carbon Economy: Economic. Ko Institutional and Management Approaches. Edward Elgar, Cheltenham. Bergek, A., Jacobsson, S., Carlsson, B., Lindmark, S., Rickne, A., 2008b. Analyzing the functional dynamics of technological innovation systems: a scheme of analysis. Res. Policy 37, 407e429. Bergman, P.C.A., Prins, M.J., Boersma, A.R., Kiel, J.H.A., Ptasinski, K.J., Janssen, F.J.J.G., 2005. Torrefaction for Entrained-flow Gasification of Biomass. Energy Research Centre of the Netherlands, Petten. €rjesson, P., Lundgren, J., Ahlgren, S., Nystro €m, I., 2013. Dagens och framtidens Bo hållabara Biodrivmedel: Underlagsrapport från f3 till utredningen om FossilFri Fordonstrafik. f3, 2013:13. Carlsson, B., Stankiewicz, R., 1991. On the nature, function and composition of technological systems. J. Evol. Econ. 1, 93e118. Coenen, L., 2015. Engaging with changing spatial realities in TIS research. Environ. Innov. Soc. Transit. 16, 70e72. Coenen, L., Benneworth, P., Truffer, B., 2012. Toward a spatial perspective on sustainability transitions. Res. Policy 41, 968e979. Cohen, W.M., Levinthal, D.A., 1990. Absorptive capacity: a new perspective on learning and innovation. Adm. Sci. Q. 35, 128e152. del Río, P., Bleda, M., 2012. Comparing the innovation effects of support schemes for renewable electricity technologies: a function of innovation approach. Energy Policy 50, 272e282. €ra €dling av skogens biprodukter till pellets, torrefierat bra €nsle och Ecotraffic, 2010. Fo € nsamt? Rapport 100701. EcotrafficSundsvall. pyrolysolja: Vad € ar mest lo Energimyndigheten, 2014a. Energil€ aget i siffror 2014. Energimyndigheten, Eskilstuna. Energimyndigheten, 2014b. Teknologiska innovationssystem inom energiområdet: En praktisk v€ agledning till identifiering av systemsvagheter som motiverar s€ arskilda politiska åtaganden. ER 2014:23. Energimyndigheten, Eskilstuna. Flanagan, K., Uyarra, E., Laranja, M., 2011. Reconceptualising the ‘policy mix’ for innovation. Res. Policy 40, 702e713. Gosens, J., Lu, Y., Coenen, L., 2015. The role of transnational dimensions in emerging economy ‘Technological Innovation Systems’ for clean-tech. J. Clean. Prod. 86, 378e388. Government Bill, 2008/09. En sammanhållen klimat- och energipolitik. Swedish Government, Stockholm, 162. Hedberg, P., Holmberg, S., 2014. Svenska folkets åsikter om olika energik€ allor 1999€teborgs 2013, Forskningsprojektet Energiopinionen i Sverige. SOM-Institutet, Go €teborg, Sverige. Universitet, Go Hekkert, M.P., Suurs, R.A.A., Negro, S.O., Kuhlmann, S., Smits, R.E.H.M., 2007. Functions of innovation systems: a new approach for analysing technological change. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change 74, 413e432. Hellsmark, H., 2010. Unfolding of the Formative Phase of Gasified Biomass in the European Union: the Role of System Builders in Relaising the Potential of Second-generation Transportation Fuels from Biomass, Department of Energy € teborg. and Environment. Chalmers University of Technology, Go Hellsmark, H., Jacobsson, S., 2009. Opportunities for and limits to Academics as System buildersethe case of realizing the potential of gasified biomass in Austria. Energy Policy 37, 5597e5611. Hellsmark, H., Jacobsson, S., 2012. Realising the potential of gasified biomass in the European Uniondpolicy challenges in moving from demonstration plants to a larger scale diffusion. Energy Policy 41, 507e518. €derholm, P., Frishammar, J., Ylinenp€ €, H., 2016. The role of pilot Hellsmark, H., So aa and demonstration plants in technology development and innovation policy: an analytical framework based on lessons from Swedish biorefinery development. Res. Policy (accepted for publication). n, B.A., 2008. Exploring technology paths: the development of Hillman, K.M., Sande alternative transport fuels in Sweden 2007e2020. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change 75, 1279e1302. Hudson, L., Winskel, M., Allen, S., 2011. The hesitant emergence of low carbon technologies in the UK: the micro-CHP innovation system. Technol. Anal. Strateg. Manag. 23, 297e312. Huenteler, J., Anadon, L.D., Lee, H., Santen, N., 2014. Commercializing Secondgeneration Biofuels. Scaling up Sustainable Suply Chains and the Role of Public Polic, Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs. Harvard University, Cambridge, USA. IEA, 2009a. Biorefineries: Adding Value to the Sustainable Utilisation of Biomass. International Energy Agency Bioenergy, Paris. Task 42, 2009:01. IEA, 2009b. World Energy Outlook. International Energy Agency, Paris. IEA, 2011. Technology Roadmap Biofuels for Transport. International Energy Agency, Paris. IEA, 2013. Status of Advanced Biofuels Demonstration Facilities in 2012. International Energy Agency, Paris. Task 39. Iles, A., Martin, A.N., 2013. Expanding bioplastics production: sustainable business innovation in the chemical industry. J. Clean. Prod. 45, 38e49. Jacobsson, S., 2008. The emergence and troubled growth of a ‘biopower’ innovation system in Sweden. Energy Policy 36, 1491e1508. Jacobsson, S., Bergek, A., 2011. Innovation system analyses and sustainability transitions: contributions and suggestions for research. Environ. Innov. Soc. Transit. 1, 41e57. Jacobsson, S., Perez Vico, E., Hellsmark, H., 2014. The many ways of academic researchers: how science is made useful? Sci. Public Policy 41, 641e657.

H. Hellsmark et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 131 (2016) 702e715 €nsson, J., Hackl, R., Harvey, S., Jensen, C., Sandoff, A., 2012. From fossil to biogenic Jo feedstock e exploring different technology pathways for a Swedish chemical cluster. In: Proceedings of ECEEE Industrial Summer Study, 11-14 September, 2012, Arnhem, the Netherlands. Karltorp, K., 2011. Resource Mobilisation for Energy System Transformation/Envi€ teborg. ronmental Systems Analysis. Chalmers University of Technology, Go Kemp, R., Schot, J., Hoogma, R., 1998. Regime shifts to sustainability through processes of niche formation: the approach of strategic niche management. Technol. Anal. Strateg. Manag. 10, 175e196. Kleinschmit, D., Hauger Lindstad, B., Jellesmark Thorsen, B., Toppinen, A., Roos, A., Bardsen, S., 2014. Shades of green: a social scientific view on bioeconomy in the forest sector. Scand. J. For. Res. 29 (4), 402e410. Kline, S.J., Rosenberg, N., 1986. An overview of innovation. In: Landau, R., Rosenberg, N. (Eds.), The Positive Sum Strategy Harnessing Technology for Economic Growth. National Academy, Washington, D.C., pp. 275e306 MacKenzie, D.A., Wajcman, J. (Eds.), 1999. The Social Shaping of Technology, second ed. Open University Press, Buckingham. Markard, J., Raven, R., Truffer, B., 2012. Sustainability transitions: an emerging field of research and its prospects. Res. Policy 41, 955e967. Markard, J., Stadelmann, M., Truffer, B., 2009. Prospective analysis of technological innovation systems: identifying technological and organizational development options for biogas in Switzerland. Res. Policy 38, 655e667. Markard, J., Truffer, B., 2008. Actor-oriented analysis of innovation systems: exploring microemeso level linkages in the case of stationary fuel cells. Technol. Anal. Strateg. Manag. 20, 443e464. Mazzucato, M., 2013. The Entrepreneurial State e Debunking Public vs. Private Sector Myths. Anthem Press, New York, USA. McCormick, K., Kautto, N., 2013. The bioeconomy in Europe: an overview. Sustainability 5 (6), 2589e2608. Muench, S., 2015. Greenhouse gas mitigation potential of electricity from biomass. J. Clean. Prod. 103, 483e490. Musiolik, J., Markard, J., Hekkert, M., 2012. Networks and network resources in technological innovation systems: towards a conceptual framework for system building. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change 79, 1032e1048. Nanda, S., Azargohar, R., Dalai, A.K., Kozinski, J.A., 2015. An assessment on the sustainability of lignocellulosic biomass for biorefining. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 50, 925e941. Naubahar, S., 2006. Emergence and development of the national innovation systems concept. Res. Policy 35, 745e766. Negro, S.O., Hekkert, M.P., Smits, R.E., 2007. Explaining the failure of the Dutch innovation system for biomass digestionea functional analysis. Energy Policy 35, 925e938.

715

Nelson, R.R., Winter, S.G., 1982. An Evolutionary Theory of Economic Change. The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts and London. Nissinen, A., Parikka-Alhola, K., Rita, H., 2009. Environmental criteria in the public purchases above the EU threshold values by three Nordic countries: 2003 and 2005. Ecol. Econ. 68, 1838e1849. North, D.C., 1990. Institutions, Institutional Change and Economics. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. Onstad, C.A., 2005. USDA sets example with biobased products. Ind. Bioprocess. 27, 6. Pandey, A., 2011. Biofuels : Alternative Feedstocks and Conversion Processes. Academic Press, Kidlington, Oxford. Perez Vico, E., 2013. The Impact of Academia on the Dynamics of Innovation Systems: Capturing and Explaining Utilities from Academic R&D (doctoral thesis). Department of Energy and Environment. [Gothenburg]: Chalmers University of Technology. Schenner, E., 2011. Policy Instrument Selection in Environmental Politics: the Political Career of Tradable Green Certificates in the EU and Sweden. Department of Political Science and Sociology. University of Salzburg, Salzburg. Smith, A., Raven, R., 2012. What is protective space? Reconsidering niches in transitions to sustainability. Res. Policy 41, 1025e1036. Gallacho ir, B.P., Korres, N.E., Murphy, J.D., 2010. Can we meet targets Smyth, B.M., O for biofuels and renewable energy in transport given the constraints imposed by policy in agriculture and energy? J. Clean. Prod. 18, 1671e1685. €g. In: Statens offentliga utredningar, 84; Stockholm. SOU, 2013. Fossilfrihet på va Suurs, R., 2009. Motors of Sustainable Innovation e Towards a Theory on the Dynamics of Technological Innovation Systems. Copernicus Institute of Sustainable Development and Innovation. Utrecht University, Utrecht. Staffas, L., Gustavsson, M., McCormick, K., 2013. Strategies and policies for the bioeconomy and bio-based economy: an analysis of official national approaches. Sustainability 5 (6), 2751e2769. € derholm, P., Frishammar, J., Hellsmark, H., Ylinenpa €€ So a, H., 2014. Pilot- och dem€ggningars betydelse inom bioraffinaderiområdet: Resultat från onstrationsanla €rstudie. SP Rapport 2014:10. SP Sveriges Tekniska Forskningsinstitut, en fo Borås. Ulmanen, J., 2013. Exploring Policy Protection in Biofuel niche Development, School of Innovation Sciences. Eindhoven University of Technology, Eindhoven. van Alphen, K., Noothout, P.M., Hekkert, M.P., Turkenburg, W.C., 2010. Evaluating the development of carbon capture and storage technologies in the United States. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 14, 971e986. Wieczorek, A., Hekkert, M., 2012. Systemic instruments for systemic innovation problems: a framework for policy makers and innovation scholars. Sci. Public Policy 39, 74e87.