Photo by karsten_wuerth from unsplash
Clayton Christensen’s term, ‘disruptive innovation’ has become widespread. Unfortunately, Christensen’s theory relies on far too narrow a conception of both disruption and innovation to be a central framework for thinking… Click to show full abstract
Clayton Christensen’s term, ‘disruptive innovation’ has become widespread. Unfortunately, Christensen’s theory relies on far too narrow a conception of both disruption and innovation to be a central framework for thinking about low-carbon transitions. It is better understood as describing one specific mechanism of technological and industrial change that contributes to a broader framework of understanding transitions. It should also be understood as a warning and reminder: businesses, policy analysts and energy modellers alike are prone to overlook potential shifts in user demands, and the technological changes that chase and enable them.
Journal Title: Energy research and social science
Year Published: 2017
Link to full text (if available)
Share on Social Media: Sign Up to like & get
recommendations!