Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Can Fusion Be the Next General-Purpose Technology? Theory, Policy, Practice, and Politics Perspectives on Stewarding Fusion Energy Research

  • Published:
Journal of the Knowledge Economy Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The recent breakthrough of a net energy gain from a fusion reaction renders tangible several avenues for fusion energy. This article argues that fusion has the potential to be the next General-Purpose Technology (GPT) due to its several non-electricity applications. Following the evolutionary theory of technological change, this paper analyzes the evolution of fusion technologies at two different levels. At the micro level, this paper analyzes a possible evolution path for the fusion industry and for other industries that will be impacted by the developments of fusion, such as transportation and aerospace. At the macro level, this paper analyzes a possible evolution path for the diffusion of fusion within each national innovation system and across countries, a global commission. Both levels of analysis share the need for managed co-opetition via open science, where competitors cooperate under the supervision of national or international agencies. This article concludes with several perspectives that provide insightful contributions for policymakers, practitioners, and politicians interested in understanding how the evolution of fusion technologies will likely affect the funding of research and development and the direction and progress of technological change, and it illustrates the dynamic relation between a GPT and economic growth.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Source: Fusion Industry Association

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Available at the OSF digital repository at https://osf.io/hqzak.

  2. Unless specified otherwise, the source for all information regarding ITER is the official website www.iter.org.

References

  • Arthur, W. B. (1989). Competing technologies, increasing returns, and lock-in by historical events. The Economic Journal, 99(394), 116–131.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Autor, D., Dorn, D., Katz, L. F., Patterson, C., & Van Reenen, J. (2017). Concentrating on the fall of the labor share. American Economic Review: Papers and Proceedings, 107(5), 180–185.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bakker, R. M., Cambré, B., Korlaar, L., & Raab, J. (2011). Managing the project learning paradox: A set-theoretic approach toward project knowledge transfer. International Journal of Project Management, 29(5), 494–503.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bednyagin, D., & Gnansounou, E. (2012). Estimating spillover benefits of large R&D projects: Application of real options modelling approach to the case of thermonuclear fusion R&D programme. Energy Policy, 41, 269–279.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Breschi, S., Malerba, F., & Orsenigo, L. (2000). Technological regimes and Schumpeterian patterns of innovation. The Economic Journal, 110(463), 388–410.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bresnahan, T. F., & Trajtenberg, M. (1995). General purpose technologies ‘engines of growth’? Journal of Econometrics, 65(1), 83–108.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brookes, N., Sage, D., Dainty, A., Locatelli, G., & Whyte, J. (2017). An island of constancy in a sea of change: Rethinking project temporalities with long-term megaprojects. International Journal of Project Management, 35(7), 1213–1224.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brynjolfsson, E., & McAfee, A. (2014). The second machine age: Work, progress, and prosperity in a time of brilliant technologies. WW Norton & Company.

    Google Scholar 

  • Callon, M. (1994). Is science a public good? Science, Technology, & Human Values, 19(4), 395–424.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carayannis, E. G. (2014). Strategic knowledge arbitrage and serendipity (SKARSE™) in action. Journal of the Knowledge Economy, 5(2), 203–211.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carayannis, E. G., & Campbell, D. F. (2009). ‘Mode 3’and‘Quadruple Helix’: Toward a 21st century fractal innovation ecosystem. International Journal of Technology Management, 46(3–4), 201–234.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carayannis, E. G., & Campbell, D. F. (2010). Triple Helix, Quadruple Helix and Quintuple Helix and how do knowledge, innovation and the environment relate to each other?: A proposed framework for a trans-disciplinary analysis of sustainable development and social ecology. International Journal of Social Ecology and Sustainable Development, 1(1), 41–69.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carayannis, E. G., & Draper, J. (2021a). The growth of intellectual property ownership in the private-sector fusion industry. Fusion Engineering and Design, 173, 112815.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carayannis, E. G., & Draper, J. (2021b). The place of peace in the ITER machine assembly launch. Peace and Conflict: Journal of Peace Psychology, 27(4), 665–668.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carayannis, E. G., Draper, J., & Bhaneja, B. (2021). Towards fusion energy in the Industry 5.0 and Society 5.0 context: call for a global commission for urgent action on fusion energy. Journal of the Knowledge Economy, 12(4), 1891–1904.

  • Carayannis, E. G., Draper, J., & Bhaneja, B. (2022a). Fusion for peacebuilding: A trinity test-level critical juncture. Journal of Peace and Conflict Studies, 29(1), 4.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carayannis, E. G., Draper, J., & Crumpton, C. (2022b). Reviewing fusion energy to address climate change by 2050. Journal of Energy and Development, 47(1), 1–44.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carayannis, E. G., Draper, J., & Iftimie, I. A. (2020). Nuclear fusion diffusion. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 69(4), 1237–1251.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carayannis, E., Kostis, P., Dinçer, H., & Yüksel, S. (2022c). Balanced-scorecard-based evaluation of knowledge-oriented competencies of distributed energy investments. Energies, 15(21), 8245.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carayannis, E. G., & Meissner, D. (2017). Glocal targeted open innovation. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 42(2), 236–252.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chesbrough, H. (2020). Open innovation results. Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Claessens, M. (2020). ITER: The giant fusion reactor. Springer International Publishing.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Clery, D. (2013). A piece of the sun: the quest for fusion energy. Overlook Duckworth: New Yok and London.

  • Dasgupta, P., & David, P. A. (1994). The new economics of science. Research Policy, 23(5), 487–521.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • David, P. A. (1985). Clio and the economics of QWERTY. The American Economic Review, 75(2), 332–337.

    Google Scholar 

  • David, P. A. (2003). The economic logic of “open science” and the balance between private property rights and the public domain in scientific data and information. In J. M. Esanu & P. F. Uhlir (Eds.), The role of the public domain in scientific and technical data and information (pp. 19–34). National Academies Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Diamond, D. W. (1989). Reputation acquisition in debt markets. Journal of Political Economy, 97(4), 828–862.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dosi, G. (1982). Technological paradigms and technological trajectories: A suggested interpretation of the determinants and directions of technical change. Research Policy, 11(3), 147–162.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dosi, G., Llerena, P., & Labini, M. S. (2006). The relationships between science, technologies and their industrial exploitation: An illustration through the myths and realities of the so-called ‘European Paradox.’ Research Policy, 35(10), 1450–1464.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Etzkowitz, H., & Leydesdorff, L. (2000). The dynamics of innovation: From National Systems and “Mode 2” to a Triple Helix of university–industry–government relations. Research Policy, 29(2), 109–123.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gordon, R. J. (2016). Innovation: can the future match the great inventions of the past? In The rise and fall of American growth: the U.S. standard of living since the Civil War. Princeton University Press, Princeton, pp.566–604.

  • Griffiths, T., Pearson, R., Bluck, M., & Takeda, S. (2022). The commercialisation of fusion for the energy market: A review of socio-economic studies. Progress in Energy, 4, 042008.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gutiérrez, G., & Philippon, T. (2017). Declining competition and investment in the U.S. Working Paper No. 23583, National Bureau of Economic Research, Cambridge, MA.

  • Hall, B. H. (2002). The financing of research and development. Oxford Review of Economic Policy, 18(1), 35–51.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hoedl, S. (2022). Achieving a social license for fusion energy. Physics of Plasmas, 29, 092506.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jasanoff, F. (2022). Spaceship or stewardship: Imaginaries of sustainability in the information age. Historical Social Research, 47(4), 29–47.

    Google Scholar 

  • Klepper, S. (1997). Industry life cycles. Industrial and Corporate Change, 6(1), 145–182.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Malerba, F. (2000). Economia dell’Innovazione. Carocci Editore.

    Google Scholar 

  • Malerba, F. (2002). Sectoral systems of innovation and production. Research Policy, 31(2), 247–264.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mazzucato, M. (2018). Mission-oriented innovation policies: Challenges and opportunities. Industrial and Corporate Change, 27(5), 803–815.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Merton, R. K. (1973). The sociology of science. University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nandakumar, B., & J., Thomas, C. P., Wallack, S. S., Kress, D. (2009). Pathways of health technology diffusion: The United States and low-income countries. Health Affairs, 28(4), 986–995.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. (2019). Final report of the committee on a strategic plan for US burning plasma research. National Academies Press, Washington.

  • National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. (2021). Bringing fusion to the U.S. grid. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.

  • Nelson, R. (1993). National innovation systems. Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nelson, R., & Winter, G. (1982). An evolutionary theory of economic change. Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nicholas, T. E. G., Davis, T. P., Federici, F., Leland, J., Patel, B. S., Vincent, C., & Ward, S. H. (2021). Re-examining the role of nuclear fusion in a renewables-based energy mix. Energy Policy, 149, 112043.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nonaka, I. (1991). The knowledge-creating company. Harvard Business Review, 69, 96–104.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nordhaus, W. D. (1996). Do real-output and real-wage measures capture reality? The history of lighting suggests not. In The economics of new goods (pp. 27–70). University of Chicago Press.

  • Pavitt, K. (1984). Sectoral patterns of technical change: Towards a taxonomy and a theory. Research Policy, 13(6), 343–373.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rosenberg, N. (1990). Why do firms do basic research (with their own money)? Research Policy, 19(2), 165–174.

  • Rosenberg, N. (1994). Exploring the black box: Technology, economics, and history. Cambridge University Press.

  • Sanchez, D. L., & Sivaram, V. (2017). Saving innovative climate and energy research: Four recommendations for mission innovation. Energy Research & Social Science, 29, 123–126.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schumpeter, J. A. (1942). Capitalism, socialism and democracy. Harper and Row.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scotchmer, S. (2004). Innovation and incentives. MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Songwe V, Stern N, Bhattacharya A (2022) Finance for climate action: scaling up investment for climate and development. Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change and the Environment, London School of Economics and Political Science, London.

  • Stern, N., & Stiglitz, J. (2022). The economics of immense risk, urgent action and radical change: towards new approaches to the economics of climate change. Journal of Economic Methodology, 1–36.

  • Stiglitz, J. E. (2014). Unemployment and innovation. Working Paper No. 20670, National Bureau of Economic Research, Cambridge, MA.

  • Trajtenberg, M. (2019). Artificial intelligence as the next GPT: A political-economy perspective. In A. Agrawal, G. Gans, & G. Goldfarb (Eds.), The economics of artificial intelligence: An agenda (pp. 175–186). National Bureau of Economic Research.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Turrell, A. (2021). The star builders. Simon and Schuster.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wenger, E., White, N., Smith, J. D. (2010). Digital habitats: stewarding technology for communities. Cpsquare, Portland, OR.

  • Ziman, J. M. (1994). Prometheus bound. Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

Web References

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Chemical Engineering, National Technical University of Athens, Athens, Greece

    Elias Carayannis, Marco Vinzenzi, John Draper & Nikos Kanellos

Authors
  1. Elias Carayannis
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Marco Vinzenzi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. John Draper
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Nikos Kanellos
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Elias Carayannis.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Carayannis, E., Vinzenzi, M., Draper, J. et al. Can Fusion Be the Next General-Purpose Technology? Theory, Policy, Practice, and Politics Perspectives on Stewarding Fusion Energy Research. J Knowl Econ (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13132-023-01436-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13132-023-01436-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation