Technology Policy and A-Synchronic Technologies: The Case of German High-Speed Trains

  • Patrick Llerena
  • Eric Schenk


Technology Policy Commercial Exploitation Incremental Innovation Electro Magnetic System German Policy 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

4.7 References

  1. Arthur WB (1989) Competing technologies, increasing returns and lock-in by small historical events. Economic Journal 99: 116–131.Google Scholar
  2. Bowe M, Lee DL (2004) Project evaluation in the presence of multiple embedded real options: evidence from the Taiwan high-speed rail project. Journal of Asian Economics 15: 71–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Büllingen F (1997) Die Genese der Magnetbahn Transrapid. Deutscher Universitäts Verlag, Wiesbaden.Google Scholar
  4. Cohendet P, Llerena P (1989) Flexilibité, information et décision. Economica, Paris.Google Scholar
  5. Cohendet P, Schenk E (1999) Irréversibilités, compatibilité et concurrence entre standards technologiques. In: Callon M et al. (eds.) Réseau et coordination. Economica, Paris: 65–109.Google Scholar
  6. Cowan R (1991) Tortoises and hares: choice among technologies of unknown merit. Economic Journal 101: 801–814.Google Scholar
  7. ECOSIP (1993) Pilotages de projet et entreprises: diversités et convergences. Economica, Paris.Google Scholar
  8. Farrell J, Saloner G (1986) Installed base and compatibility:innovation, product preannouncements, and predation. American Economic Review 76: 940–955.Google Scholar
  9. Foray D (2001) Choix technologiques dans les projets de ruptures technologiques. Rapport final pour le PREDIT. IMRI, Université Paris Dauphine.Google Scholar
  10. Habermeier KF (1990) Product use and product improvement. Research Policy 19:271–283.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. HSB mbH. (1971a) Studie über ein Schnellverkehrsystem (Kurzbericht: System-analyse und Ergebnisse). Schriftreihe des Bundesministers für Verkehr.Google Scholar
  12. HSB mbH. (1971b) Ein neuartiges Verkehrssystem für die Bundesrepublik Deutschland. Schriftreihe des Bundesministers für Verkehr.Google Scholar
  13. Jänsch E, Keil J (1999) ICE und Transrapid: Konzeptionnelle Planungen für Elemente im HGV-Angebot der DB AG. Bahn Report 99, ETR Edition.Google Scholar
  14. Kester C (1984) Today’s options for tomorrow’s growth. Harvard Business Review 62: 153–160.Google Scholar
  15. March JG (1991) Exploration and exploitation in organizational learning. Organization Science 2: 71–87.Google Scholar
  16. Münchschwander P (Ed.) (1989) Schienenschnellverkehr, vol. 1–4. R.v. Decker’s Verlag, G. Schenck, Heidelberg.Google Scholar
  17. MVP-Versuchs und Planungsgesellschaft für Magnetbahnsysteme mbH. (1988) Einsatzfelder neurer Schnellbahnsysteme, vol. 1–4.Google Scholar
  18. Nightingale P (2000) Economies of scale in pharmaceutical experimentation. Industrial and Corporate Change 9: 315–359.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Pisano GP (1996) Learning-before-doing in the development of new process technologies. Research Policy 25: 1097–1119.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Rosenberg N (1982) Inside the black box: Technology and economics. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
  21. Saubesty C, Vernimmen S (1999) Incrémentalisme et rupture technologique: étude de cas à la SNCF. IMRI, Université Paris Dauphine.Google Scholar
  22. Von Hippel E (1988) The sources of innovation. Oxford University Press, Oxford.Google Scholar
  23. Von Hippel E, Tyre M (1995) How ‘learning by doing’ is done: problem identification in novel process equipment. Research Policy 24: 1–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  • Patrick Llerena
    • 1
  • Eric Schenk
    • 2
  1. 1.BETAStrasbourg
  2. 2.LICIAStrasbourg

Personalised recommendations