How do changing institutional logics affect innovation? The cases of Online Electric Vehicle and Fuel Cell Electric Vehicle in Korea

ABSTRACT

The coevolution of technological capabilities and institutional arrangements is critical for the success of innovations. Yet, it remains unclear how actors’ shifting relations during institutional change affect innovation. The paper examines the dynamics in how actors shape the institution by integrating the institutional logics perspective with policy mix literature. Insights are drawn from the Online Electric Vehicle and Fuel Cell Electric Vehicle cases in Korea, where involved stakeholders revealed contrasting identities and practices throughout the innovation stages. While both cases witnessed shifts in institutional logics, the repercussions on innovation differed depending on the characteristics of actors’ identity mix. Findings contribute to institutional theory by expanding the traditional dyadic perspective on incumbent and emerging institutional logics. We also add to the policy mix literature by introducing a neo-institutional perspective. The paper concludes by underlining how the overarching characteristics of the institutional mix trigger different coordination failures.

KEYWORDS:

• Institutional logics
• Policy mix
• Innovation
• Identity
• Practice

JEL CLASSIFICATION:

• O30
• O32
• O33
• O38

View correction statement:

Correction

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Data availability statement

Data are available from the authors upon request.

Correction Statement

This article was originally published with errors, which have now been corrected in the online version. Please see Correction (http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13662716.2023.2298120)

Notes

¹ Literature defines institutions as the formal (e.g. laws, policies) and informal (e.g. traditions, codes of conduct) ‘rules of the game’ that structure the relationship between actors in various parts of the polity and economy (North 1990).

² Institutional entrepreneurship is a manifestation of power among social actors (Levy and Scully 2007), which is used to create new systems of meaning that determine actors’ practice (Suddaby and Greenwood 2005).

³ A comprehensive policy mix framework incorporates much broader actor networks (e.g. engineers, infrastructure managers, commercial users, funders) to capture institutional transition on a high level of aggregation (Mossberg et al. 2018). However, as this research aims to delve deeper into individual organisational actors, we limit the scope of analysis to the three primary actor types that lead innovation (Avelino and Wittmayer 2016).

⁴ We utilised Korea’s National Digital Science Library and National Assembly Library to review archival data on technology-driven projects.

⁵ The President of Korea organised a Presidential Committee on New Growth Engine in 2008 that sought to distinguish core technologies with the potential to promote future economic growth (MKE 2008).

⁶ Business feasibility review is a set of analyses (e.g. marketability, competition, standardisation) that determine the practicality of the technology’s commercialisation, thereby deciding whether it is a viable candidate to receive government funding (KISTEP 2010).

⁷ A functional hydrogen economy requires co-development of 1) hydrogen production (e.g. fossil-based, renewable-based), 2) storage and distribution (e.g. pipeline, tube-trailer), and 3) application technologies (e.g. automobile, drone, power plant, gas turbine).

⁸ One of the most critical challenges for hydrogen energy producers is overcoming local citizens’ protests against the construction of hydrogen facilities (Interviewee B12).

Additional information

Funding

This work was supported by the National Research Foundation of Korea Grant funded by the Korean Government [NRF-2020R1A2B5B01002243] and the Ministry of Science and ICT, Korea, under the ITRC (Information Technology Research Center) support program, [IITP-2022-2018-0-01402] supervised by the IITP (Institute for Information & Communications Technology Planning & Evaluation).