System optimization model of adoption of a new infrastructure with multi-resource and multi-demand sites

Article
  • 147 Downloads

Abstract

This study develops a conceptual system optimization model of adoption of a new infrastructure technology with multiple resource sites and multiple demand sites. With the model, this paper analyzes how the distance, spillover effect, demand, initial investment cost, and learning rate influence the adoption of the new infrastructure technology and presents optimization results of the model in different scenarios. The main findings of the study are: from the perspective of system optimization, (1) different distances among different resource-demand pairs will result in different adoption time of a new infrastructure; (2) technological spillover among different resource-demand pairs will accelerate the adoption of a new infrastructure; (3) it is hard to say that higher demand will pull faster adoption of a new infrastructure, and the optimal time of adopting of a new infrastructure is very sensitive to its technological learning rate.

Keywords

System optimization model technology adoption new infrastructure 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. [1]
    Arrow, K.J. (1962). The economic implications of learning by doing. Review of Economic Studies, 29(3): 155–173.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. [2]
    Arthur, W.B. (1989). Competing technologies, increasing returns, and lock-in by historical events. Economic Journal, 99(394): 116–131.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. [3]
    Bagozzi, R. P., Davis, F. D. & Warshaw, P. R. (1992). Development and test of a theory of technological learning and usage. Human Relations, 45(7): 660–686.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. [4]
    Bass, F. (1969). A new product growth model for consumer durables. Management Science, 15(5):215–227 [Management Science, 50 (Number 12 Supplement), Dec 2004 ISSN 0025-1909, pp. 1833–1840].CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  5. [5]
    Davis, F.D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly, 13(3): 319–340.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. [6]
    Grubler, A. & Gritsevskyi, A. (1998). A model of endogenous technological change through uncertain returns and learning (R&D and investments). Working paper. IIASA, Laxenburg, Austria. <http://www.iiasa.ac.at/Research/TNT/WEB/endog.pdf>.Google Scholar
  7. [7]
    Grubler, A. (2004). Technology and Global Change. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  8. [8]
    Kuan J, Rombe-Shulman S & Shittu E. (2015). The political economy of technology adoption: The case of Saharan salt mining. The Extractive Industries and Society, 2(2): 328–338.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. [9]
    Ma T. (2010). Coping with uncertainties in technological learning. Management Science, 56(1): 192–201.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. [10]
    Ma, T.J. & Chen, H.Y. (2015). Adoption of an emerging infrastructure with uncertain technological learning and spatial reconfiguration. European Journal of Operational Research, 243(3): 995–1003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. [11]
    Ma, T.J. & Chi, C.J. (2012). Spatial configuration and technology strategy of China’s green coal-electricity system. Journal of Renewable and Sustainable Energy, 4, 031806. doi: 10.10631/1.4730419.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. [12]
    Ma, T.J., Grubler, A. & Nakamori, Y. (2009). Modeling technology adoptions for sustainable development under increasing returns, uncertainty, and heterogeneous agents. European Journal of Operational Research, 195(1): 296–306.MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  13. [13]
    Manne, A.S. & Barreto, L. (2002). Learning-by-doing and carbon dioxide abatement. Working paper. Stanford University, Stanford, CA.Google Scholar
  14. [14]
    McDonald, A. & Schrattenholzer, L. (2001). Learning rates for energy technologies. Energy Policy, 29(4): 255–261.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. [15]
    Messner, S. & Strubegger, M. (1994). The energy model MESSAGE III. In J. F. Hake, M. Kleemann, W. Kuckshinrichs, D. Martinsen, & M. Walbeck (eds.), Advances in Systems Analysis: modelling energy-related emissions on a national and global scale (pp. 29–49). Jülich, Germany: Forschungszentrum Jülich.Google Scholar
  16. [16]
    Rogers, E.M. (1962). Diffusion of Innovations. Glencoe: Free Press.Google Scholar
  17. [17]
    Seebregts, A.D. (2001). Energy/environmental modelling using the MARKAL family of models. In Proc. OR2001 conference, energy, and environment session, Duisburg, Germany, September 3–5.Google Scholar
  18. [18]
    Zhuang, X. & Jiang, K.J. (2009). Energy content analyses of coal product from coal-mine to consumer. Research and Approach, 31(9):30–35.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Systems Engineering Society of China and Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of BusinessEast China University of Science and TechnologyShanghaiChina
  2. 2.International Institute for Applied System AnalysisLaxenburgAustria

Personalised recommendations