Better understanding of the role of learning in technical progress is important for the development of innovation theory and technology policy. This paper presents a comparative analysis of the effect of learning and technical change in electricity generation technologies. We use simultaneous two-factor learning and diffusion models to estimate the effect of learning by doing and learning by research on technical progress for a range of technologies in four stages of development. We find learning patters broadly in line with the perceived view of technical progress. The results generally show higher learning by research than learning by doing rates. Moreover, we do not find any development stage where learning by doing is stronger than learning by research. We show that simple learning by doing curves overstate the effect of learning in particular for newer technologies. Finally, we find little substitution potential between learning by doing and research for most technologies.
AlchianA. (1963). “Reliability of Progress Curves in Airframe Production.” Econometrica31(4) October: 679-693.
2.
ArgotL.EppleD. (1990). “Learning Curves in Manufacturing.” Science247(4945) February 23: 920-924, New Series.
3.
ArrowK. (1962). “The Economic Implications of Learning-by-Doing.” Review of Economic Studies29(3): 155-173.
4.
BarretoL.KypreosS. (2004). “Endogenizing R&D and Market Experience in the “Bottom-Up Energy-Systems ERIS model.” Technovation24(8) August: 615-629.
5.
BCG (1970). Perspectives on Experience, Boston Consulting Group, Boston, MA.
6.
Claeson ColpierU.CornlandD. (2002). “The Economics of the Combined Cycle Gas Turbine - An Experience Curve Analysis.” Energy Policy30(4) March: 309-316.
7.
CoryK. S.BernowS.DoughertyW.KarthaS.WilliamsE. (1999). Analysis of Wind Turbine Cost Reductions: The Role of Research and Development and Cumulative Production. paper presented at AWEA’s WINDPOWER ’99 Conference, Burlington, VT, June22.
8.
CriquiP.MartinJ.-M.SchrattenholzerL.KramT.Soete L.Van ZonA. (2000). “Energy Technology Dynamics.” International Journal of Global Energy Issues14(1-4): 65-103.
9.
DuttonJ.ThomasA. (1984). “Treating Progress Function as a Managerial Opportunity.” Academy of Management Review9(2): 235-247.
10.
FergusonP. R.FergusonG. J. (1994). Industrial Economics: Issues and Perspectives (2nd ed.), Macmillan: London.
11.
GrubbM.KohlerJ.AndersonD. (2002). “Induced Technical Change in Energy and Environmental Modeling: Analytic Approaches and Policy Implications.” Annual Review of Energy and Environment27: 271-308.
12.
GrublerA.Naki enoviN.VictorD. G. (1999). “Dynamics of Energy Technologies and Global Change.” Energy Policy27(5) May: 247-280.
13.
HallG.HowellS. (1985). “The Experience Curve: The Economist’s Perspective.” Strategic Management Journal6(3): 197-212.
14.
HirshW.Z. (1952). “Manufacturing Progress Functions.” Review of Economics and Statistics34(2): 143-155.
15.
IbenholtK. (2002). “Explaining Learning Curves for Wind Power.” Energy Policy30(13) October: 1181-1189.
16.
IEA (2000). Experience Curves for Energy Technology Policy, International Energy Agency: Paris.
17.
JamasbT.PollittM. (2005). “Deregulation and R&D in Network Industries: The Case of Electricity Sector.” Cambridge Working Papers in Economics CWPE 0533/Electricity Policy Research Group Working Paper EPRG 05/02, August, Faculty of Economics, University of Cambridge.
18.
JensenS. G. (2004). “Reducing Costs of Emerging Renewable Energy Technologies: An Analysis of the Dynamic Development with Wind Power as Case Study.” International Journal of Energy Technology and Policy2(1-2): 179-202.
19.
KlassenG.MiketaA.LarsenK.SundqvistT. (2005). ”The Impact of R&D on Innovation for Wind Energy in Denmark, Germany, and the United Kingdom.” Ecological Economics 54(2-3) August: 227-240.
20.
KouvariatakisN.SoriaA.IsoardS. (2000). “Modeling Energy Technology Dynamics: Methodology for Adaptive Expectations Models with Learning by Doing and Learning by Searching.” International Journal of Global Energy Issues14 (1-4): 104-115.
21.
LiebermanM. B. (1987). “The Learning Curve, Diffusion, and Competitive Strategy.” Strategic Management Journal8(5): 441-452.
22.
MargolisR. M.KammenD. M. (1999). “Underinvestment: The Energy Technology and R&D Policy Challenge.” Science285(5428) July 30: 690-692.
23.
McDonaldA.SchrattenholzerL. (2001). “Learning Rates for Energy Technologies.” Energy Policy29 (4): 255-261.
24.
MiketaA.SchrattenholzerL. (2004). “Experiments with a Methodology to Model the Role of R&D Expenditures in Energy Technology Learning Processes: First Results.” Energy Policy32:1679-1692.
25.
PapineauM. (2006). “An Economic Perspective on Experience Curves and Dynamic Economies in Renewable Energy Technologies.” Energy Policy34(4) March: 422-432.
26.
SchumpeterJ. A. (1942). Capitalism, Socialism, and Democracy, Harper and Row: New York.
27.
SchumpeterJ. A. (1934). The Theory of Economic Development: An Inquiry into Profits, Capital, Credit, Interest, and the Business Cycle, Harvard University Press: Cambridge, Mass.
28.
SkytteK.JensenS. G.MorthorstP. E.OlsenO. J. (2004). Støtte til Vedvarende Energi (in Danish), Jurist- og Økonomforbundets Forlag, Copenhagen.
29.
SpenceM. (1986). “Cost Reduction, Competition, and Industry Performance.” In StiglitzJ.(Ed.), New Developments in the Theory of Market Structure.
30.
StonemanP., ed. (1995). Handbook of the Economics of Innovation and Technological Change, Blackwell: Oxford.
31.
SoderholmP.KlassenG. (2007). “Wind Power in Europe: A Simultaneous Innovation-Diffusion Model.” Environmental and Resource Economics36(2): 163-190.
32.
SoderholmP.SundqvistT. (2003). Learning Curve Analysis for Energy Technologies: Theoretical and Econometric Issues, paper presented at the International Energy Workshop (IEW), Laxen-burg, Austria, June 24-26.
33.
ThirtleC. G.RuttanV. W. (1987). The Role of Demand and Supply in the Generation and Diffusion of Technical Change, Harwood Academic Publishers: London.
34.
WrightT. P. (1936). “Factors Affecting the Cost of Airplanes.” Journal of Aeronautical Sciences3(4).
