Hostname: page-component-6bf8c574d5-mggfc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-02-25T18:03:33.766Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Eco-Innovation in Biomass Research Projects

Part of: Responsible Design

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 July 2019

Gwenola Yannou-Le Bris ,
Viviane Treves ,
Jean-Marc Meynard  and
Marianne Cerf
Gwenola Yannou-Le Bris*
Affiliation:
AgroParisTech;
Viviane Treves
Affiliation:
INRA
Jean-Marc Meynard
Affiliation:
INRA
Marianne Cerf
Affiliation:
INRA
*
Contact: Yannou-Le Bris, Gwenola AgroParisTech, Laboratoire Génie Industriel France, [email protected]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

This paper tackles two questions. Our first question addresses the multi-actor activity that is visibly required for building radical innovations like eco-innovation. Our second question addresses the tricky issue of how to assess contribution to ecological transition when innovation projects are still in the fuzzy early-upstream phase. In this aim four research projects are selected and analyzed in this paper because they share a common scope—the development of new processes or materials tied to the conversion of biomass. Through the analysis of the actors interactions conducted in these projects, of their perimeters, of their sustainability objectives and of their results we show a limit of the eco-innovation capacity of these projects linked to the limits of their crossdisciplinarity.

Keywords

Eco-innovationCollaborative designSustainabilityResearch methodologies and methods
Type
Article
Information
Proceedings of the Design Society: International Conference on Engineering Design , Volume 1 , Issue 1 , July 2019 , pp. 3281 - 3290
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BYCreative Common License - NCCreative Common License - ND
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is unaltered and is properly cited. The written permission of Cambridge University Press must be obtained for commercial re-use or in order to create a derivative work.
Copyright
© The Author(s) 2019

References

Bergek, A., Jacobsson, S., Carlsson, B., Lindmark, S. and Rickne, A., (2008), “Analyzing the functional dynamics of technological innovation systems: A scheme of analysis”, Research PolicyGoogle Scholar
Bonnetto, E., Yannou, B, Bertoluci, G., Boly, V and Alvarez, J. (2016), “A categorization of customer concerns for an OT front-end of innovation process in IT/OT convergence.” 12th ICORD Conference; Dubrovnik.Google Scholar
Callon, M., Lhommer, R. and Fleury, J. (1999), “Pour une sociologie de la traduction en innovation,” Recherche & Formation, Vol. 31, pp. 113–126.Google Scholar
Carillo-Hermosilla, J., Del Rio, P. and Konnolat, T., (2010), “Diversity of eco-innovations: Reflections from selected case studies”, Journal of Cleaner Production Management, vol. 18, pp. 1073–1083.Google Scholar
Colinet, L., Joly, P.B, Gaunand, A. and Lemarié, S., (2014), “ASIRPA - Analysis of the Impacts of Public Agronomic Research,” INRA Report, p. 64.Google Scholar
Dubois, M., (2005), “Scientific action: interpretative and explanatory models in the sociology of science,” L'année sociologique, Vol. 55, pp. 103–125.Google Scholar
Enengel, B., Muhar, A., Penker, M., Freyer, B., Drlik, S. and Ritter, F. (2012), “Co-production of Knowledge in Transdisciplinary Doctoral Theses on Landscape Development – An Analysis of Actor Roles and Knowledge Types in Different Research Phases,” Landscape and Urban Planning, 105, 1-2: 106-117. sociologique Landscape and Urban Planning, Vol. 105, pp. 106–117.Google Scholar
FAO (2015), “Feeding the world in 2050,” Rome.Google Scholar
Gaglio, G. (2011), “Sociologie de l'innovation”, coll. « Que sais-je», PUF, Paris, 2011, p. 128.Google Scholar
Klein, K.J. and Knight, A.P., (2005), “Innovation Implementation: Overcoming the Challenge”, Current Directions in Psychological, Vol. 14 No. 5, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0963-7214.2005.00373.xGoogle Scholar
Meynard, JM, Jeuffroy, MH, Le Bail, M, Lefèvre, A, Magrini, MB and Michon, C. (2017), “Designing coupled innovations for the sustainability transition of agrifood systems”. Agric Syst Vol. 157, p. 330–339. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agsy.2016.08.002Google Scholar
Nonaka, I. and Toyoma, R. (2003), “The knowledge-creating theory revisited: knowledge creation as a synthesizing process,” Knowledge Management Research & Practice, Vol. 1 No. 1, pp. 2–10.Google Scholar
Reed, M.S., Graves, A., Dandy, N., Posthumus, H., Hubacek, K., Morris, J., Prell, C., Quinn, C.H. and Stringer, LC. (2009), “Who's in and why? A typology of stakeholder analysis methods for natural resource management”, Journal of Environmental Management, Vol. 90, pp. 1933–1949 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2009.01.001Google Scholar
, Thiard, et al. (2013), “Mission on support mechanisms for partnership research,” French Ministry of Economy and Finance, Higher Education and Research.Google Scholar
Roelofsen, A., et al. “Stakeholder interaction within research consortia on emerging technologies: Learning how and what?” Research Policy, Vol. 40 No. 3, pp. 341–354.Google Scholar
G, Yannou-Le Bris and Serhan, H. (2018), “The knowledge value chain for eco-design and eco-innovation in food - Case study of ECOTROPHELIA projects.” Innovation Network, (Ed.), 8th Forum Innovation, Nîmes, France.Google Scholar