Abstract
Rechargeable lithium batteries are a key component of the global value chain of this chemical element. They have revolutionized different industries in the world (such as the automotive industry), with the intention of reducing the greenhouse effect and combating climate change. The aim of this research is to know the positioning of leading countries in the technology generation of lithium rechargeable batteries and the existing geo-strategic support between them. To achieve this purpose, we created and applied a new linear index to determine the technology regimes and the application of other known indexes (related to attractiveness, specialization and benchmarking) linked to technology generation in lithium batteries from 1993 to 2015. The main results show that China is oriented to technological regimes and that the USA, Germany, South Korea, and Japan are focused on scientific regimes, and the consequences of these regimes are a direct technological competition between China and South Korea (this last country supported by Germany and Japan).
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Data availability
Yes, in https://osf.io/qvdzj/
Notes
For the rest of this study, the terms lithium secondary batteries and lithium rechargeable batteries will be used interchangeably.
The lithium primary batteries are non-rechargeable batteries. They are not addressed in this research.
The results of TSLCI can be negative, when the economy is technology-based; zero (indifferent); or positive, when it is science-based. It is clarified that the first outcome occurs when the degree of scientific linkages of all the participating economies in the global technological generation (which is on the right side of the parenthesis) is higher than the degree of scientific linkages of a specific technology of an economy (which is on the left side of the same parenthesis). The second happens when the right and left sides of the parenthesis are equal. The third occurs when the average on the right side of the parenthesis is lower than the left side of this one. Additionally, it is clarified that the number 100 on the left side of the formula is to record everything in percentage terms (although, for cluster analyses, depending on the scale of the other variable (s), the TSLCI scale has been used in proportions, even when the percentage scale has been maintained in the graphs).
The results of RGR can be a negative numerator and a negative denominator that indicate that technology j and all technologies of the world do not grow; a positive numerator and a negative denominator that gives a negative outcome that indicates that technology j grows but not all technologies; a negative numerator and a positive denominator that gives a negative outcome that indicates that the technology j does not grow but all technologies of the world do; a positive numerator < a positive denominator, whose meaning is that the growth of technology j is less than all the technologies of the world; a positive numerator = a positive denominator that gives an outcome equal to 1, whose meaning is that growth of the technology j is equal to the growth of all the technologies of the world; a positive numerator > a positive denominator that gives a result higher than 1, whose meaning is that technology j is more attractive than all the technologies of the world.
If the RTA is higher than or equal to 1, it means that the economy has revealed technological advantages and is specialized; but if the RTA is less than 1, the economy is not specialized.
References
Aguiar de Medeiros C, Trebat N (2017) Inequality and income distribution in global value chains. J Econ Issues 51(2):401–408. https://doi.org/10.1080/00213624.2017.1320916
Asari M, Sakai SI (2013) Li-ion battery recycling and cobalt flow analysis in Japan. Resour Conserv Recycl 81:52–59. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2013.09.011
Balassa B (1965) Trade liberalization and revealed comparative advantage. Manchester Sch Econ Soc Stud 33:99–123
Böhme G, Van Den Daele W, Krohn W (1978) The “scientification” of technology. Springer, Dordrecht The Dynamics of Science and Technology
Brockhoff KK (1992) Instruments for patent data analyses in business firms. Technovation 12(1):41–59. https://doi.org/10.1016/0166-4972(92)90031-C
Cano-Kollmann M, Cantwell J, Hannigan TJ, Mudambi R, Song J (2016) Knowledge connectivity: an agenda for innovation research in international business. J Int Bus Stud 47(3):255–262. https://doi.org/10.1057/jibs.2016.8
Cohen WM, Nelson RR, Walsh JP (2000) Protecting their intellectual assets: appropriability conditions and why U.S. manufacturing firmspatent (or not) (No. 7552). Cambridge
Comisión Chilena del Cobre (2009) Antecedentes para una Política Pública en Minerales Estratégicos : Litio. Comision chilena del cobre
Dosi G, Nelson RR (2009) Technical change and industrial dynamics as evolutionary processes (2009/07)
Ebensperger A, Maxwell P, Moscoso C (2005) The lithium industry: its recent evolution and future prospects. Res Policy 30(3):218–231. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resourpol.2005.09.001
Echeverría J (2003) The techno-scientific revolution (Spanish). México D.F, Fondo de Cultura Económica
Ernst H (1998) The patent portfolio for strategic R and D planning. World Patent Inf 20(1):91. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0172-2190(98)90095-3
European Patent Office (2016) Espacenet patent search. Retrieved August 15, 2016, from http://www.epo.org/searching-for-patents/technical/espacenet.html#tab1
European Patent Office (2018) Global Patent Index. Retrieved February 9, 2018, from https://www.epo.org/searching-for-patents/technical/espacenet/gpi_de.html#tab-1
Fan X, Liu W, Zhu G (2017) Scientific linkage and technological innovation capabilities: international comparisons of patenting in the solar energy industry. Scientometrics 111(1):117–138. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-017-2274-5
Fatma A (2018) Overview of the Japanese Innovation Systems vs. the American Innovation System. J Glob Econ 06(04):4–7. https://doi.org/10.4172/2375-4389.1000312
Freeman C (1995) The ‘National System of Innovation’ in historical perspective. Camb J Econ 19:5–24. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.cje.a035309
Frietsch R, Schmoch ÆU (2010) Transnational patents and international markets. Scientometrics (October 2008):185–200. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-009-0082-2
Furman J, Porter M, Stern S (2002) The determinants of national innovative capacity. Res Policy 31:899–933
Gaines L (2018) Lithium-ion battery recycling processes: research towards a sustainable course. Sustain Mater Technol 17:e00068. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.susmat.2018.e00068
Gilsing V, Bekkers R, Bodas Freitas IM, Van Der Steen M (2011) Differences in technology transfer between science-based and development-based industries: transfer mechanisms and barriers. Technovation 31(12):638–647. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.technovation.2011.06.009
Glänzel W, Meyer M (2003) Patents cited in the scientific literature: an exploratory study of “reverse” citation relations. Scientometrics 58(2):415–428. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1026248929668
González de la Fe T (2009) Triple Helix Model of relations among university, industry and government: a critical analysis. Arbor CLXXXV(738):739–755. https://doi.org/10.3989/arbor.2009.738n1049
Griliches Z (1990) Patent statistics as economic indicators: a survey. J Econ Lit 28(4):1661–1707 Retrieved from https://www.jstor.org/stable/2727442
Grosjean C, Herrera Miranda P, Perrin M, Poggi P (2012) Assessment of world lithium resources and consequences of their geographic distribution on the expected development of the electric vehicle industry. Renew Sust Energ Rev 16(3):1735–1744. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2011.11.023
Gruber PW, Medina PA, Keoleian GA, Kesler SE, Everson MP, Wallington TJ (2011) Global lithium availability: a constraint for electric vehicles? J Ind Ecol 15(5):760–775. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1530-9290.2011.00359.x
Heijs J, Baumert T (2008) Política Regional de I+D e Innovación en Alemania : Lecciones para el Caso Español (No. 63). Madrid. Retrieved from http://eprints.ucm.es/7981/1/63-08.pdf
Hoppmann J, Peters M, Schneider M, Hoffmann VH (2013) The two faces of market support - How deployment policies affect technological exploration and exploitation in the solar photovoltaic industry. Res Policy 42(4):989–1003. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2013.01.002
Hu MC, Mathews JA (2008) China’s national innovative capacity. Res Policy 37(9):1465–1479. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2008.07.003
Humphrey J, Schmitz H (2002) Developing Country Firms in the World Economy: Governance and Upgrading in Global Value Chains. INEF Report
Jurowetzki R, Lema R, Lundvall BÅ (2018) Combining innovation systems and global value chains for development: towards a research agenda. Eur J Dev Res 30(3):364–388. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41287-018-0137-4
Jussani AC, Wright JTC, Ibusuki U (2017) Battery global value chain and its technological challenges for electric vehicle mobility. RAI Rev Adm Inovação 14(4):333–338. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rai.2017.07.001
Lara Rosano F (1998) Technology: concepts, problems, perspectives (Spanish). Siglo Veintiuno de España Editores, Madrid
Lee KR (2014) University-Industry R&D Collaboration in Korea’s National Innovation System. Sci Technol Soc 19(1):1–25. https://doi.org/10.1177/0971721813514262
Leigh WJ (2013) Innovation in social networks: knowledge spillover is not enough. Knowl Manag Res Pract 11(4):422–431
Leydesdorff L (2001) Knowledge-based innovation systems and the model of a triple helix of university-industry-government relations. In New Economic Windows: New Paradigms for the New Millennium (pp. 1–19). Salerno. Retrieved from http://arxiv.org/abs/1001.1308
López-Barajas E (2015) Introduction to Scientific Methodology (Spanish). Unir Editorial, Logroño
Lorenzen M, Mudambi R (2013) Clusters, connectivity and catch-up: Bollywood and Bangalore in the global economy. J Econ Geogr 13(3):501–534. https://doi.org/10.1093/jeg/lbs017
Mayyas A, Steward D, Mann M (2019) The case for recycling: overview and challenges in the material supply chain for automotive li-ion batteries. Sustain Mater Technol 19:e00087. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.susmat.2018.e00087
Meyer M (2000) Does science push technology? Patents citing scientific literature. Res Policy 29(3):409–434. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0048-7333(99)00040-2
Meyer M (2006) Measuring science – technology interaction in the knowledge-driven economy : The case of a small economy. Scientometrics 66(2):425–439
Molero J (2001) Technological innovation and competitiveness in Europe (Spanish). Síntesis, Madrid
Molero J, López S (2016) La Industria Española en las Últimas Cuatro Décadas: Cambio Estructural. Rev Econ ICE:121–138
Molero J, López S (2018) El Patrón de Especialización Revelado por las Ventajas Tecnológicas. La Evolución de la Industria Española Comparada. Economía Industrial, (January), 1–15
Moreno Brieva FJ (2015) Cadena De Valor Global Del Litio: Países E Ingresos Nacionales Brutos (2015/20 No. 20). Madrid. Retrieved from http://www.uam.es/docencia/degin/catedra/
Moreno-Brieva F, Marín R (2019) Technology generation and international collaboration in the Global Value Chain of Lithium Batteries. Resour Conserv Recycl 146. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2019.03.026
Moreno-Brieva F, Merino C (2020) African international trade in the global value chain of lithium batteries. Resour Conserv Recycl:1–22. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11027-020-09911-8
Motohashi K, Tomozawa T (2016) Differences in science based innovation by technology life cycles: the case of solar cell technology. J Technol Manag Innov 72(1–3):5–18
Mudambi R (2008) Location, control and innovation in knowledge-intensive industries. J Econ Geogr 8:699–725
Narins TP (2017) The battery business: lithium availability and the growth of the global electric car industry. Ext Ind Soc 4(2):321–328. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.exis.2017.01.013
Nelson RR, Winter SG (1982) An evolutionary theory of economic change, vol 93. Belknap, Cambridge, p 652. https://doi.org/10.2307/2232409
OECD (2001) Measuring Productivity - OECD Manual. OECD, Paris Retrieved from http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/59/29/2352458.pdf%0A
Olivetti EA, Ceder G, Gaustad GG, Fu X (2017) Lithium-ion battery supply chain considerations: analysis of potential bottlenecks in critical metals. Joule 1(2):229–243. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joule.2017.08.019
Pavitt K (1987) The objectives of technology policy. Sci Public Policy 14(4):182–188
Pavitt K, Patel P (1988) The international distribution and determinants of technological activities. Oxf Rev Econ Pol:35–55
Qi Y, Zhu N, Zhai Y, Ding Y (2018) The mutually beneficial relationship of patents and scientific literature: topic evolution in nanoscience. Scientometrics 115(2):893–911. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-018-2693-y
Science Council (2009) Our definition of science. Retrieved September 17, 2019, from https://sciencecouncil.org/about-science/our-definition-of-science/
Soete L (1987) The impact of technological innovation on international-trade patterns - the evidence reconsidered. Res Policy 101–130
Sorensen B (2004) Renewable energy: its physics, engineering, use, environmental impacts economy and planning aspects (Third). Elsevier Academic Press, Roskilde
Stephan A, Schmidt TS, Bening C, Hoffmann VH (2017) The sectoral configuration of technological innovation systems: patterns of knowledge development and diffusion in the lithium-ion battery technology in Japan. Res Policy 46:709–723. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2017.01.009
Sun X, Hao H, Zhao F, Liu Z (2017) Tracing global lithium flow: a trade-linked material flow analysis. Resour Conserv Recycl:50–61
Sun Y, Liu F (2010) A regional perspective on the structural transformation of China’s national innovation system since 1999. Technol Forecast Soc Chang 77(8):1311–1321. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2010.04.012
Valero A, Valero A, Calvo G, Ortego A (2018) Material bottlenecks in the future development of green technologies. Renew Sust Energ Rev 93(May):178–200. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2018.05.041
Vikström H, Davidsson S, Höök M (2013) Lithium availability and future production outlooks. Appl Energy 110:252–266. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2013.04.005
Winter M, Brodd RJ (2004) What are batteries, fuel cells, and supercapacitors? Chem Rev 104(10):4245–4269. https://doi.org/10.1021/cr020730k
World Intellectual Property Organization (2017) International Patent Classification. Retrieved September 29, 2017, from http://web2.wipo.int/classifications/ipc/ipcpub?notion=scheme&version=20170101&symbol=none&menulang=en&lang=en&viewmode=f&fipcpc=no&showdeleted=yes&indexes=no&headings=yes¬es=yes&direction=o2n&initial=A&cwid=none&tree=no&searchmode=smart
Yam RCM, Guan JC, Pun KF, Tang EPY (2004) An audit of technological innovation capabilities in Chinese firms: some empirical findings in Beijing, China. Res Policy 33(8):1123–1140. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2004.05.004
Zhang, S., Ding, Y., Liu, B., and Chang, C. chi. (2017). Supply and demand of some critical metals and present status of their recycling in WEEE. Waste Manag, 65, 113–127. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2017.04.003
Ziemann S, Grunwald A, Schebek L, Müller DB, Weil M (2013) The future of mobility and its critical raw materials. Rev Métall 110(1):47–54. https://doi.org/10.1051/metal/2013052
Acknowledgements
Kaitlyn Adams is thanked for correcting the authors’ writing in English.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
Fernando Moreno-Brieva carried out the introduction, methods, results, discussion, and conclusions.
Carlos Merino supervised and made improvements throughout the document. His contribution to the incorporation of the geostrategic issue stands out.
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Ethics approval and consent to participate
Yes
Consent for publication
Yes
Competing interests
The authors declare no competing interests.
Additional information
Responsible Editor: Philippe Garrigues
Publisher’s note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Appendix
Appendix
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Moreno-Brieva, F., Merino-Moreno, C. Technology generation of lithium batteries in leading countries. Environ Sci Pollut Res 28, 28367–28380 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-021-12726-y
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-021-12726-y