From local markets to global legitimacy: A materialization perspective on technological innovation system's dynamics

Ayrapetyan, David; Befort, Nicolas; Hermans, Frans Article — Published Version From local markets to global legitimacy: A materialization perspective on technological innovation system's dynamics Research Policy Provided in Cooperation with: Leibniz Institute of Agricultural Development in Transition Economies (IAMO), Halle (Saale) Suggested Citation: Ayrapetyan, David; Befort, Nicolas; Hermans, Frans (2025) : From local markets to global legitimacy: A materialization perspective on technological innovation system's dynamics, Research Policy, ISSN 1873-7625, Elsevier, Amsterdam, Vol. 54, Iss. 1, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2024.105130 , https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0048733324001793 This Version is available at: https://hdl.handle.net/10419/303492 Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen: Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden. Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen. Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in der dort genannten Lizenz gewährten Nutzungsrechte. Terms of use: Documents in EconStor may be saved and copied for your personal and scholarly purposes. You are not to copy documents for public or commercial purposes, to exhibit the documents publicly, to make them publicly available on the internet, or to distribute or otherwise use the documents in public. If the documents have been made available under an Open Content Licence (especially Creative Commons Licences), you may exercise further usage rights as specified in the indicated licence. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ From local markets to global legitimacy: A materialization perspective on technological innovation system's dynamics David Ayrapetyan a,* , Nicolas Befort b , Frans Hermans a a Leibniz Institute of Agricultural Development in Transition Economies (IAMO), Theodor-Lieser-Str. 2, 06120 Halle (Saale), Germany b NEOMA Business School, Chair in Bioeconomy and Sustainable Development, The World We Want AoE, 59 rue Pierre Taittinger, 51100 Reims, France ARTICLE INFO Original content: Supplementary Data_From local markets to global legitimacy: A materialization perspective on technological innovation system’s dynamic (Original data) Keywords: Local scale Materialization Technological innovation system (TIS) Biorefining Case study ABSTRACT The Technological Innovation Systems (TIS) literature has made considerable strides in exploring the spatial aspect of technological innovation dynamics over the past decade. Abandoning the purely national focus on TISs, scholars have theorized TIS dynamics simultaneously along multiple geographical scales, such as regional, national, and global. Yet, the conceptual and empirical insights on the local scale of TISs have been limited. This paper elaborates a local spatial perspective on TISs and elucidates how the local scale interacts with broader scales through structural couplings. We use technological materialization to define the local scale and illustrate our perspective with a case study on a local biorefining TIS evolution in France. Using event-history analysis, we explore how the local scale evolved through functional interactions both within and across the local and broader scales. The results reveal shifting configurations of TIS functions and their interactions at various scales in different periods: while the local scale was characterized by materialization of biorefining technology and local market formation, broader scales played more versatile roles by providing resources to, forming end markets for, and establishing the legitimacy of the local scale. Policy should promote biorefinery-internal markets through technological materialization and disseminate local success stories at broader scales. 1. Introduction Over the past decade, the literature on Technological Innovation Systems (TIS) has been following a particular line of theorizing, encouraging to follow the TIS-relevant actors, networks, and processes to wherever they lead at various geographical scales (Coenen et al., 2012;Binz et al., 2014). Having emerged from the criticism of predominantly national TIS perspective (Markard et al., 2012), this line has motivated scholars to develop various multiscalar conceptualizations of TISs by introducing various geographical scales. For instance, authors have studied different TISs from primarily regional (Rohe, 2020;Rohe and Mattes, 2022), primarily national (Binz et al., 2012;Dewald and Fromhold-Eisebith, 2015), or even primarily global (Binz et al., 2014; Yuan and Li, 2021) perspectives, while using other, secondary, scales to investigate their effect on these primary scales. Furthermore, studying ‘vertical’(Rohe, 2020) or ‘structural’couplings (Bergek et al., 2015; Binz and Truffer, 2017), authors have elaborated on various ontologies of multiscalar interrelations taking place among the primary and secondary scales. In spite of remarkable advances in increasing the spatial sensitivity and resolution of the TIS framework, a lacuna regarding the local scale of TISs remains open as there have been no studies on multiscalar TIS that treat the local scale as primary and analyze its dynamics with broader scales. In this paper, we elaborate a new spatial perspective on TISs with a primary focus on the local scale which connects to all broader, i.e. secondary, scales. To do this, we define the local scale based on the process of technological materialization and illustrate our perspective with a case study on the evolution of a local BioRefining Technological Innovation System (BRTIS) in France. The issue of materiality has gained increasing attention, especially in the literature on the bioeconomy and biorefineries (Birch and Calvert, 2015;Van Assche et al., 2022). We will argue that incorporating the place where technological materialization occurs will allow us to refrain from any a priori spatial delimitations (Coenen et al., 2012;Binz et al., 2014), thereby separating the local from other scales. Starting from the local scale, we distinguish between local functional dynamics and structural couplings with broader scales. The local functional dynamics are the interactions of TIS functions taking place among the actors within the local TIS, i.e. within the local scale. A structural coupling is attained “if specific actors, actor networks or institutions * Corresponding author. E-mail addresses: [email protected] (D. Ayrapetyan), [email protected] (N. Befort), [email protected] (F. Hermans). Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Research Policy journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/respol https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2024.105130 Received 4 May 2023; Received in revised form 23 May 2024; Accepted 17 September 2024 Research Policy 54 (2025) 105130 0048-7333/© 2024 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier B.V. This is an open access article under the CC BY license ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ ). span across or overlap between various subsystems, be this in a specific region or country, in a global non-governmental organization or a transnational corporation”(Binz and Truffer, 2017, p. 2). Structural couplings are thus the multiscalar 1 interactions of TIS functions taking place between the actors at the local TIS and actors situated at broader geographical scales, i.e. regional, national, European, or global (Wieczorek et al., 2015;Andersson et al., 2018). We interpret the evolution of the local BRTIS as a combination of these two types of dynamics. We are therefore interested in the evolution of the local BRTIS, shaped by how actors carry out their activities at local scale and the way they interact with actors at broader scales. Therefore, our research question is: How did the local BRTIS evolve through a combination of local functional dynamics and structural couplings? To answer this question, we use event-history analysis (EHA). We apply the process approach within EHA that makes a strong emphasis on temporal and causal relationships among events (Van de Ven and Poole, 2005). To study the local functional dynamics, we analyze the interactions of TIS functions that have been linked to events occurring only at the local scale. To study the structural couplings, we analyze the interactions of TIS functions that have been linked to events occurring at the local and broader scales. Our study context is the biorefinery of the Bazancourt-Pomacle cluster (BPC) in France. This biorefinery has a 40 year history of innovations and technological materialization, making it one of the most advanced and integrated biorefineries in Europe (Th´ enot et al., 2018; Diakosavvas and Frezal, 2019). From the geographical perspective, the BPC operates one of the largest, yet territorial, biorefineries in the world which also transfers its expertise at the national and global scales (Philp and Winickoff, 2017). Applying principles of circular economy through a system of local by-product markets, this biorefinery produces not only biofuels and bioenergy (which correspond to most of the EU visions on biorefinery technologies (Bauer et al., 2017)), but also a wide range of bio-products such as food, feed, biochemicals, and cosmetic ingredients (Allais et al., 2021). Furthermore, unlike most European biorefineries, the biorefinery of the BPC has passed the pilot and demonstration phases, entering mass markets with most of its technologies (Philp and Winickoff, 2017, 2019). This makes the case particularly relevant for a TIS analysis, since all the TIS functions, including the processes of market formation, can be represented and analyzed. For the sake of brevity, in the remainder of the paper we refer to our case as local BRTIS. The TIS functions and their interactions (Hekkert et al., 2007;Bergek et al., 2008c) serve as analytical lenses for our study. 2 Our study makes three contributions. First, it contributes to the TIS literature by conceptualizing a new spatial perspective on TISs based on processes of technological materialization. Second, the study generates novel insights regarding the geography of eco-innovations in TISs through a finer spatial resolution of TISs and a local perspective on TIS building (Binz and Truffer, 2017;Musiolik et al., 2020;Hansmeier and Kroll, 2024). Lastly, it opens new avenues for locally-tailored innovation policies to promote technological materialization, moving beyond the conventional policy focus on actors, networks, and institutions. The paper proceeds as follows: Section 2 reviews the existing spatial perspectives on TISs and proposes a new local TIS perspective. Section 3 presents our case, the method, and explains the data collection and processing. Section 4 presents the results. Section 5 discusses the empirical, theoretical, and policy implications. Section 6 summarizes the paper and outlines avenues for future research. 2. Toward a local perspective in technological innovation systems 2.1. Definition and functions Technological innovation system's perspective originated from the theory of evolutionary economics (Winter and Nelson, 1982). Along with the related national (Lundvall, 1988), regional (Cooke et al., 1997), and sectoral (Malerba, 2002) delineations of innovation systems, the TIS approach is designed to study innovation dynamics within the limits of a particular technology (Markard et al., 2015). A TIS is defined by Carlsson and Stankiewicz (1991, p. 93) as “[…] a dynamic network of agents interacting in a specific economic/industrial area under a particular institutional infrastructure and involved in the generation, diffusion, and utilization of technology.”Four elements are therefore present in any TIS: technology, actors, networks, and institutions (Jacobsson and Bergek, 2011). The technology in focus can be defined either narrowly or broadly, depending on the aims and scope of the TIS analysis (Markard et al., 2015). Actors are primarily the firms within the whole value chain of the technology, but can also include other organizations, research institutes, and government bodies (Bergek et al., 2008b). Networks represent the types of relations that TIS actors establish among themselves and with other actors. These can be knowledge/research networks, political networks, as well as commercial networks linking actors to the relevant markets. Finally, institutions are the various rules and norms, both formal and informal, that regulate the interactions among the actors. Hekkert et al. (2007) and Bergek et al. (2008a) refined the TIS concept by introducing the TIS functions. These are understood as the key processes taking place in a TIS that serve its purpose of developing, diffusing, and utilizing technology. TIS functions can influence and reinforce each other, creating various short or long functional ‘chains’ connected by causal logic. Table 1 presents and describes a set of eight TIS functions. 2.2. Challenging the national perspective on TISs The TIS framework has been popular in innovation studies (Markard et al., 2015), because it can explain how (well) the development and diffusion of an emerging (often more sustainable) technology takes Table 1 A set of eight functions to study technological innovation systems. Function Description F1: Entrepreneurial activities Actors' actions to utilize business opportunities presented by resources, knowledge, networks, and markets. F2: Knowledge development Applied and fundamental research on new technological options and processes. F3: Knowledge diffusion Networking among TIS actors pursuing joint R&D projects and the exchange of technological knowledge. F4: Guidance of search The process of orientation and selection among different directions of technological development. F5: Market formation Introduction of the new technology/product to the niche or mass market. F6: Resource mobilization Inflows of financial, human, or natural resources to maintain and develop the TIS. F7: Creation of legitimacy Actors' actions to legitimize the new technology to the government, media, and users. F8: Materialization Creation of TIS-related physical infrastructure such as plants, factories, and pipeline facilities. (Source: adapted based on Hekkert et al. (2007);Bergek et al. (2008a);Bergek et al. (2008c);Suurs and Hekkert (2009);Hellsmark (2010);Hermans et al. (2019).) 1 In TIS literature the term ‘multiscalar’has been used to indicate the existence of more than one geographical scale (e.g. regional, national, and global). Yet, other streams of literature use this term to indicate the existence of multiple types of scales, such as institutional, administrative, temporal, or other structural scales (Gibson et al., 2000;Raven et al., 2012). 2 The TIS framework is not new to the literature on biorefining technology. BRTIS has been the subject of many case studies, such as by Hellsmark et al. (2016),Hansen and Coenen (2017),Giurca and Sp¨ ath (2017),Frishammar et al. (2019), and Tsvetanova et al. (2022). D. Ayrapetyan et al. Research Policy 54 (2025) 105130 2 place. Different TIS functions can serve as targets for policies aiming to support emerging sustainable technologies and moderate the resistance of the incumbent actors (Walrave and Raven, 2016). According to Coenen et al. (2012), the increasing tendency to inform technology policies of countries has led TIS scholars to delineate their studies predominantly to the national scale. There have been numerous case studies of TISs defined and analyzed within the boundaries of one country. 3 However, the tendency to define TISs nationally has faced criticism (Berkhout et al., 2009;Markard et al., 2012) as scholars began to stress that the spatial context relevant to understand technological innovations is more sophisticated. Different geographical scales, i.e. local, regional, national, global, become relevant and interrelated during innovation processes (Binz and Truffer, 2017). Focusing solely on the national scale risks overlooking important influences and effects extending beyond the national boundary as well as might ignore the different ways in which innovation processes end up distributed unevenly at the sub-national, i. e. regional and local scales (Binz et al., 2014). Consequently, scholars such as Coenen et al. (2012),Binz et al. (2014), and Mi¨ orner and Binz (2021) have called to follow the relevant actors, networks, and processes to wherever they lead instead of setting a priori spatial boundaries. These calls also tied in with discussions within human geography on the ‘politics of scale’and ‘scale as a social construction’(Marston, 2000; Bulkeley, 2005;Moore, 2008). These authors criticize the hierarchical nature of geographical scales that views scales as laddered containers on which the different levels form the “[…] bounded, areal units encompassing and defining the people and processes supposedly located within them”(Moore, 2008, p. 212). As a result, scholars began to implement different frameworks and methodologies, allowing them to dive deeper into the spatial complexity of technological innovation processes. 2.3. Existing multiscalar conceptualizations of TISs The literature on multiscalar TISs can be analyzed from the perspective of primary and secondary geographical scales. This feature is critical for our study, and, therefore, we propose a distinction between primary and secondary scales to review the existing multiscalar TIS perspectives and conceptualize our own. A primary scale is that from the perspective of which a given TIS is being studied. Secondary scales are those included in the analysis as well, apart from the primary scale. Fig. 1 (a–d) illustrates how different studies have conceptualized multiscalar TISs using primary and secondary scales and highlights the interrelations among those scales. Following Binz and Truffer (2017) we will use term ‘structural coupling’to characterize the interrelations among primary and secondary scales. The global innovation systems perspective has been reified in studies that treated the global scale of TISs as primary and the national scale as secondary (Fig. 1a). Accordingly, Binz et al. (2014) conceptualized the membrane bioreactor TIS in general, i.e. at the global scale. Analyzing bibliometric data, the authors studied the spatiality of the knowledge creation processes within this technology. They found that over time the knowledge ‘flowed’from the global knowledge pool to certain continents and, ultimately, concentrated in specific countries. Similarly, they revealed how actors created spaces of dense innovative activities that did not coincide with national borders, but instead could cross borders and shift spatial configurations over time. Following the same spatial conceptualization, Yuan and Li (2021) studied the global characteristics of battery electric vehicles TIS. Analyzing patent data, the authors revealed how the roles of technology donors and recipients are unevenly shared among countries such as Japan, China, the U.S., Germany, and Korea, and how the distribution of these roles change over time. Binz and Truffer (2017) developed a framework to systematize the global perspective on TIS. In their framework, TIS resources, such as knowledge, markets, investments, and legitimacy can be situated at sub-global scales and interact through ‘structural couplings’. Specific resources and their multiscalar dynamics can then be analyzed at transnational, national, and regional scales which over time shift and are re-defined by the relevant actor-networks and institutions. Taking the national scale as primary, studies have focused on the national-global dynamics in TIS formation (Fig. 1b). Accordingly, Binz et al. (2012) studied the functional interactions of the membrane bioreactor TIS between the Chinese and the global context. They figured out the most probable trajectories for China to leapfrog the trial-anderror process of developed countries in implementing this technology. Building on the TIS functions framework, Andersson et al. (2018) applied a resource lens to their study on the tidal kite TIS in Sweden. They studied whether different resources such as knowledge, competence, and enabling technologies ‘stick’more to the national or global scale during the TIS emergence. The local, regional, national, and global scales have been integrated in studies that treated the national scale as primary and the other scales as secondary (Fig. 1c). Analyzing the processes of knowledge generation, technology production, and market formation, Dewald and Fromhold-Eisebith (2015) found that the formation of the German photovoltaic TIS could be characterized by the convergence of these processes from the local, regional and global scales to the national scale. Adopting a stricter functional approach, Nevzorova (2022) studied the development of the Russian biogas TIS, in which certain TIS functions were fulfilled more at the local, regional, or global scales with a transfer of these functions to the national scale to a greater or lesser extent. Finally, Rohe (2020) and Rohe and Mattes (2022) paid exclusive attention to the regional scale in their studies on onshore wind TIS in different German regions (Fig. 1d). In particular, the framework of Rohe (2020) focused on the formation of the TIS resource portfolio in the German Oldenburger Land. He conceptualized ‘vertical couplings’to study how some of the regional resources are actually created at the national and global scales, as well as emerge from local concentrations of TIS processes. Similarly, Rohe and Mattes (2022) studied the same TIS in three German regions. In particular, they revealed how the patterns of knowledge development and market formation functions vary along the regions and interact with the local, national, and global scales. In summary, scholars have gone beyond the nationally-bound TIS perspective by choosing one primary scale, e.g. the regional, national, or global scale, and, simultaneously, considering its interrelations with secondary scales during the development of a TIS. However, none of these studies treated the local scale as the starting point for the analysis by assigning it a primary role. Moreover, the existing multiscalar TIS conceptualizations (Fig. 1 a–d) still operate with pre-defined spatial boundaries for all the incorporated scales (Coenen et al., 2012). 4 We conceptualize a novel spatial perspective in TISs by fore-fronting the local scale and treating it as primary, while also considering its interactions with all broader, i.e. secondary, scales (Fig. 1e). In the following section, we will delve deeper into the local scale and link it to the issue of technological materialization. 3 Some examples are the biomass digestion (Negro et al., 2007), biofuel (Suurs and Hekkert, 2009), and agricultural TISs (Hermans et al., 2019) in the Netherlands, offshore wind TIS in Germany (Reichardt et al., 2016), carbon capture and storage TIS in Norway (Van Alphen et al., 2009), wood-frame multi-storey construction TIS in Finland (Lazarevic et al., 2020), and biogas TIS in Brazil (De Oliveira and Negro, 2019). 4 The authors of the reviewed studies referred to cities, clusters, industrial districts/complexes in relation to the local scale; to regional administrative boundaries in relation to the regional scale; to national administrative boundaries in relation to the national scale; and to the global boundary in relation to the global scale. Yet, the global scale represents a natural boundary and not an administrative one. Beyond this scale, the TIS dynamic, in principle, does not extend. Therefore, the criticism of a priori spatial delimitation in case of a global TIS perspective can be seen as an issue that has been bypassed rather than addressed directly. D. Ayrapetyan et al. Research Policy 54 (2025) 105130 3 2.4. The local scale in technological innovation systems Technological innovations often emerge from distinct sub-regional localities and local networks (Coenen et al., 2012). Yet, TIS scholars often use the term ‘local’to describe broader scales corresponding to specific borders such as regions and countries (c.f. Andersson et al. (2018),Rohe (2020). Meanwhile, references to sub-regional local scales in TISs were made either in relation to an arbitrary local scale free from technology generating infrastructure (e.g. Lukkarinen et al. (2018), Hojckova et al. (2020) or in relation to a regionally or nationally aggregated local scale. The latter constituted (often multiple) localities, referred to as industrial complexes, districts, clusters (Dewald and Fromhold-Eisebith, 2015;Nevzorova, 2022) as well as local concentrations of various TIS functions (Rohe, 2020;Rohe and Mattes, 2022). Yet, these were considered in the context of primarily regional or primarily national TIS perspective and can therefore be interpreted as secondary scales (see Fig. 1c and d). To resolve inconsistencies related to the terminological, geographical, and technological dimensions of the local scale, we propose a conceptual definition for the local scale in TISs. In developing such a definition we refrain from setting pre-defined geographical boundaries such as those of a municipality, district, industrial cluster, complex, technological park, or zone (Barry, 2006). Instead, we define the spatiality of the TIS local scale through a particular process known as technological materialization in TIS literature. This process has strong parallels to place-based, i.e. local, activities and therefore serves as the foundation for our definition. Below we outline this as well as the other aspects that we integrate to define the local scale of TISs. First, based on the corresponding literature (Bergek et al., 2008c;Hellsmark, 2010;Bento and Fontes, 2015;Gosens et al., 2015; Steen et al., 2022), we interpret technological materialization as the actual coming into existence of technological infrastructure. The latter includes production plants, pilot and demonstration plants, factories, pipeline exchange facilities, as well as research centers with laboratory and testing equipment. The geographical aspect of our definition of TIS local scale is based on the process of materialization of this infrastructure. Thus, the local scale is ‘materialized’where the corresponding technological infrastructure comes into existence. Self-evidently, we argue that this infrastructure must also be utilized according to the purpose of any TIS. Second, we point to the existence of a specific institutional environment at the local scale of a TIS. Coenen et al. (2012) and Carlsson and Stankiewicz (1991) argue that institutional structures are consequential aspects of TISs. The rules and norms, whether informal or more formalized, coordinate the behavior of the involved actors and structure the future vision of TISs, necessary to attract resources and build legitimacy. For instance, actors involved in biorefining TISs often follow specific formal and informal rules regulating their cooperation, exchanges of by-products, and waste management (Ayrapetyan, 2023). Third, we argue that the geographical area hosting the materialized technological infrastructure must be contiguous, i.e. ‘uninterrupted’. This is the main argument to differentiate the local scale from e.g. a regional scale. For instance, a claim could be made assuming an administrative region being distinguished by materialization of technology. Yet, in reality the technology is materialized in a number of distinct geographical areas within the region. These areas are not contiguous, as they are ‘interrupted’by geographical space with no technological infrastructure. Therefore, each of these separate areas, and not the entire region, could be considered a local scale of a TIS. Lastly, we propose another simple, yet auxiliary argument to point to the sub-regional nature of the local scale: the geographical area hosting the materialized technological infrastructure must be smaller than the region. Considering these four aspects, we define a local scale of a TIS as a small and contiguous geographical area operating under a specific institutional environment and distinguished by materialization and utilization of the corresponding technological infrastructure. Fig. 2 illustrates how a local scale of a TIS can be materialized over time. It can be seen that the boundaries of the TIS local scale are distinguished based on where the technological infrastructure is materialized along the consecutive periods a, b, and c. It is important to note that, first, the distinction between the local and regional scale is a gradual one, and depends on the development phase of the TIS. This conceptualization of the local scale of a TIS can be especially helpful for the identification of the early phases of a TIS or an industrial cluster. Second, materialization is not synonymous to local. Materialization can occur in other regions or other countries and thus can occur at other scales as well. Finally, the scales are not necessarily ordered hierarchically: the local scale can have direct structural couplings with the national, or even the global scale for instance through the notion of ‘glocalisation’(Swyngedouw, 2004). Fig. 1. Multiscalar conceptualizations of TISs in the literature (a-d) and in the current paper (e). Note: the Figure does not imply any temporal sequence along sections ‘a’ to ‘e’. (Sources: own elaboration based on (1): Binz et al. (2014); (2): Yuan and Li (2021); (3): Binz et al. (2012); (4): Andersson et al. (2018); (5): Dewald and FromholdEisebith (2015); (6): Nevzorova (2022); (7): Rohe (2020); (8): Rohe and Mattes (2022).) D. Ayrapetyan et al. Research Policy 54 (2025) 105130 4 3. Methodology We employed a single case study approach (Piore, 2006;Yin, 2018) to study how the local BRTIS evolved through a combination of local functional dynamics and structural couplings. This approach offers more precise conceptual inputs through a deeper understanding and analysis of the selected case (Gerring, 2016;Gustafsson, 2017). The case of the BPC serves as a perfect example because the development of its biorefining technology over the last 40 years was so remarkable that it is now considered as one of the most advanced biorefineries in Europe (Philp and Winickoff, 2019). 3.1. The case: biorefining technology at the Bazancourt-Pomacle cluster As of May 2022, the local BRTIS has materialized into a bioeconomy cluster commonly referred to as the Bazancourt-Pomacle cluster in France. This cluster hosts a biorefinery that integrates a number of advanced technologies of biomass valorization, conforming to the principles of integrated biorefining (Stuart and El-Halwagi, 2012). Bioeconomy clusters often operate integrated biorefineries (Ayrapetyan et al., 2022) that localize the production and processing of natural resources (Deutz and Gibbs, 2008;Ayrapetyan and Hermans, 2020). The geographic proximity of production plants, R&D centers, as well as pilot and demonstration facilities (Hellsmark et al., 2016) in such biorefineries enable the processing of biomass according to the principles of industrial symbiosis and circular economy (Vivien et al., 2019), offering potential improvements in environmental sustainability (Bosman and Rotmans, 2016;Hermans, 2021). The biorefinery of the BPC originated from a sugar factory set up in 1953 between the communities of Bazancourt and Pomacle in the French Champagne-Ardenne region (Schieb et al., 2015). It came into existence due to the efforts of local farmers, who formed a cooperative and lobbied for its construction. For about 40 years, the site produced only sugar by operating the sugar factory. Meanwhile, its model served as an example for regional agroindustries to unite and launch bigger plants for processing wheat and alfalfa as well. Over time, due to the established markets and consistent financial support by the agricultural bank Credit Agricole, regional farmers formed a strong dependence on the existing crops, encouraging them to continue their activities according to this biomass model (Nieddu, 1998). Technological innovations in the use of bio-resources began in the early 1980s with the development of the chemical industry in France. In the region of Champagne-Ardenne, new firms began to specialize in developing non-food outlets from sugar beet and wheat (Grouiez et al., 2023). These firms initially operated in different locations of the region. During the 1990s, they relocated to the site of the sugar factory, forming a technologically innovative infrastructure between the communities of Bazancourt and Pomacle. In this way, the site began its transition from sugar production to a cluster operating a biorefinery. Over time, the biorefinery integrated multiple technologies allowing it to transform different types of biomass into a variety of bio-based products, such as food, feed, biochemicals, biofuels, and cosmetic ingredients. Currently the biorefinery is a highly-industrialized area occupying a territory of 219 ha and hosting 11 firms. The industrial site directly employs 1200 people, ranging from industrial operators to researchers in the natural and social sciences, compared to around 400 people in the early 1990s. The infrastructure of the biorefinery consists of buildings, technological facilities, research centers, production plants, and pipelines owned by different actors. In terms of raw materials processing, it handles 1 million tonnes of wheat and 2.5 million tonnes of sugar beet every year. Thanks to these production capacities, the biorefinery of the BPC is Europe's 3rd largest ethanol producer. The biorefinery makes a strong emphasis on the use of the whole plant by operating a system of by-product and waste exchange, hence fully devoting itself to the idea of circular bioeconomy (Th´ enot et al., 2018;Morales, 2020). 3.2. Event-history analysis To answer our research question, we applied the method of eventhistory analysis. The choice of this method is justified for four reasons. First, events can relate to all TIS functions (Suurs and Hekkert, 2009), which is why EHA is a systematic method in this case. Second, events can happen at different geographical scales (Bunnell and Coe, 2001): from local to global. Third, during the development of a TIS, the Fig. 2. Illustration of the materialization process of a TIS local scale over time. (Sources: own elaboration.) D. Ayrapetyan et al. Research Policy 54 (2025) 105130 5 occurrence of certain events can explain why some later event took place (Hekkert et al., 2007). EHA, according to the process approach, gives primary importance to the temporal sequence of events, in which critical events can be pointed out and causation can be explained (Abbott, 1995; Poole et al., 2000). Hence, the interactions of TIS functions tied to events establish connections between various scales. This enables us to study how the local BRTIS evolved not only through local dynamics, but also through connections to broader scales. Fourth, this method is widely used in TIS research (see e.g. Negro et al. (2007);Suurs and Hekkert (2009);De Oliveira and Negro (2019);Hermans et al. (2019);Reichardt et al. (2016)). The process approach within EHA gives special consideration to the chronological sequence of the events that have causal logic and eventually produce the given outcome (Van de Ven and Poole, 2005). It makes a strong emphasis on the cause-effect dynamics by accounting for different types of causalities (Poole et al., 2000): an event directly leading to another event (efficient causality), broader conditions making the event more or less likely (formal causality), events as serving the end goal (final causality), cause-effect relations between temporally proximate events (immediate causation), and cause-effect relations between temporally remote, long lasting events (distal causality). The process approach is best suited to “tell a narrative or story about how a sequence of events unfolds to produce a given outcome”(Van de Ven and Poole, 2005, p. 1381, emphasis added). Therefore, we adopted the process approach to study how the local BRTIS evolved through a combination of local functional dynamics and structural couplings. For our case, it implied constructing a chronological event-history and interpreting it according to a specific narrative (Pentland, 1999). This narrative represented the event-history of the local BRTIS from the perspective of realization of the eight TIS functions that have been linked to events taking place at different geographical scales. 3.3. Data collection To construct the event-history of the local BRTIS, we used secondary and primary data sources (see Table A.1 in the Appendix A for an overview). Secondary sources involved academic literature, professional journals, websites of industrial and financial news, and websites of the actors at the local BRTIS. These were used to construct an initial eventhistory of the local BRTIS evolution. In addition, we analyzed the data from participatory observations and stakeholder meetings carried out by the second author over a period of ten years (2012–2022). We then complemented these data with a field work at the site of the BazancourtPomacle cluster in January 2020, during which additional primary data were gathered through nine interviews conducted with different stakeholders involved in the activities of the local BRTIS (see Table A.1). The interviews lasting 45–90 min were transcribed, and the transcripts were sent to interview partners for the purpose of verification. Thirdly, the data from the final transcripts as well as from participatory observations and stakeholder meetings were triangulated with the secondary data in order to increase the reliability of the final event-history (Yin, 2018). 3.4. Data processing Data processing unfolded in five stages. First, we extracted all the events (240 in total) related to technological innovations at the local BRTIS. According to Poole et al. (2000, p. 40),“events are what central subjects do or what happens to them”, and the central subjects are the entities that initiate or are influenced by the events. In our case, the central subjects were the actors involved in the technological innovation activities at the local BRTIS. Second, we arranged these events in a chronological order, creating a timeline from 1983 to 2022. Third, we divided the timeline based on the feedback from the interview partners, all of whom agreed on the existence of four evolution periods: emergence (1983–1992), shaping (1992–2003), expansion (2004–2014), and diversification (2014–2022). The interview partners also identified the events that qualified for a beginning of a new period (see Fig. 4) representing thus major shifts in the dynamic of the local BRTIS evolution. Fourth, following the methodology of Suurs and Hekkert (2009), we assigned each event a TIS function (Table 2). Finally, we also assigned each event a geographical scale based on where the event took place. The event was assigned the local scale if it took place within the boundaries of the local BRTIS distinguished by materialization of biorefining technology. The regional scale was assigned to events taking place in the Champagne region but outside of the local BRTIS. The national scale was assigned to events taking place in France but outside of Champagne region. The European scale was assigned to events taking place in any EU country, except of France. Events taking place outside the EU were assigned the global scale. Having assigned each event a TIS function, we linked the pairs of events related in a causal logic to derive the interactions between the assigned TIS functions. In other words, if a certain event led to another event according to any type of causality within the process approach (see Section 3.2), then the two functions, to which we assigned these events, were connected by an arrow (see the Supplementary Data attached to this paper). Determining the causal logic between events was, in most cases, a straightforward process because the very eventhistory of the local BRTIS evolution involved a logical progression of events (see the Supplementary Data). Within the event-history, in most cases an event directly led to another proximate event, indicating to efficient and immediate causality. For the minority of cases involving events stemming from broader conditions (formal causality) as well as temporally remote events (distal causality), we determined the causal logic in coordination with the second author, who has been closely involved in the activities of the local BRTIS and could therefore provide inputs in such cases. After deriving the interactions between the TIS functions, we determined whether such interaction constituted local functional dynamic or structural coupling. If both TIS functions were fulfilled at the local scale, their interaction constituted a local functional dynamic. If one TIS function was fulfilled at the local scale while the other was fulfilled at another scale, their interactions constituted a structural coupling. Let us provide an example of how an excerpt from the event-history can be interpreted as a structural coupling. Consider the following excerpt: “In 2005, national government adopts new regulations favoring the development of biofuels. Motivated by these regulations, local actors invest € 272 million into the construction of a biofuel production plant.”Two Table 2 Scheme of allocation of TIS functions to events. TIS functions Types of events F1: Entrepreneurial activities •Firms entering TIS •Starting project/business •Business expansion F2: Knowledge development •Firms performing R&D •Conducting trials/assessment studies •Filing patents F3: Knowledge diffusion •R&D collaboration •Network creation/expansion F4: Guidance of search •Choosing among technological opportunities •Positive/negative outcomes of trials •Forming positive/negative technology visions •Devising policies/quotas F5: Market formation •Firms entering/creating markets •Obtaining market/production quotas F6: Resource mobilization •Mobilizing financial/human/natural resources •Receiving R&D subsidies F7: Creation of legitimacy •Receiving political endorsement •Improving reputation •Lobbying to government authorities F8: Materialization •Constructing plants, factories, laboratory/testing infrastructure, and pipeline facilities (Source: adapted based on Suurs and Hekkert (2009) and Hellsmark (2010).) D. Ayrapetyan et al. Research Policy 54 (2025) 105130 6 chronological events can be extracted from this excerpt. First event: national government adopts favorable biofuel regulation. Second event: actors at the local BRTIS invest into a new biofuel production plant. In this example, local actors were incentivized to make the investment because of the new biofuel regulation. Therefore, the first event leads to the second event, i.e. the two events are linked in a causal logic. Assigning each event a TIS function and a geographical scale will imply that guidance of search (F4) at the national scale drives resource mobilization (F6) at the local scale. From this, a structural coupling emerges between the national and the local scales (Fig. 3). The way structural couplings are derived in Results follows the same logic. In the narratives of Results section, we quote the TIS functions in parentheses along with a letter indicating the geographical scale, where the respective function was fulfilled: L: Local; R: Regional; N: National; E: European; G: Global. For instance, ‘(F2:R)’indicates that knowledge development (F2) took place at the regional scale (R). 4. Results Fig. 4 depicts the timeline of the local BRTIS evolution. The events marked in red signify the beginning of a new period. All the actors appearing on the timeline are listed in Table 3 along with their full names and description of their activities. Below we present the results of the functional analysis of the local BRTIS evolution during the four development periods. We first describe the narrative of each period 5 followed by a summarization of its multiscalar functional dynamics. The latter are illustrated at the end of each period through Figs. 5–8. 4.1. Emergence of the local BRTIS (1983–1992) The early drivers behind the emergence of the biorefining technology in the Champagne region were the evolving markets for sugar beet and wheat products (F5:R), as well as the dependence of the regional farmers' cooperatives on these feedstocks (F4:R) (see Section 3.1). Later in 1980s, the development of the chemical industry in France and the excess of agricultural production further guided the activities (F4:R) toward establishing a plant-based refinery in the region. These drivers led to the mobilization of considerable natural and financial resources (through regional agricultural union Champagne C´ er´ eales) (F6:R) as well as to the founding of the firms (F1:R) interested in developing new knowledge (F2:R) for non-food applications of sugar beet and wheat. The first such attempt of regional players was ADRIAC founded in 1983 to develop bio-based packaging from the residues of the feedstocks. Among other more prominent firms were Sugar Research and Development (SRD) and Ethanol Research and Development (ERD). Their research endeavors (F2:R), often realized in collaboration with other French firms and industries (F3:N), were extraordinarily fruitful (F4:R) and resulted in new technological processes for the production of biobased DHA, hyaluronan (two key products to be marketed later by Soliance), and ethanol fuel. Eventually, SRD and ERD merged to form Agro-Industry Research and Development (ARD) in 1989 (F1:R) which since has been the nucleus of technological innovations at the local BRTIS. The prospects of developing fossil-free outlets legitimized the idea of a biorefinery (F7:R) at the Reims municipality. The latter directed financial resources (F6:R) into two new research structures: CAVISA in 1990 and Europol'Agro in 1992. CAVISA served mainly as an orientation structure (F4:R) within the new technological options, while Europol'Agro laid the basis for non-food applications of alfalfa (F2:R). 4.1.1. Multiscalar functional dynamics Fig. 5 shows the multiscalar functional dynamics of the local BRTIS evolution in the period of emergence. In this period, only local, regional, and national scales are involved. Moreover, the processes of local BRTIS emergence are taking place mostly at the regional scale which contains almost all TIS functions. Only the functions of materialization 6 and guidance of search are fulfilled at the local scale, leading to weak structural couplings. The local-regional couplings were defined by influence from local materialization on regional guidance of search. Meanwhile, the local-national couplings were defined by influence from national knowledge diffusion on local guidance of search. Fig. 3. An example of a structural coupling resulting from interaction of two functions fulfilled at the national and the local scales. Fig. 4. Timeline of the evolution of the local BRTIS. 5 For the sake of brevity, in each period we present only the condensed version of the narrative referring to the most important events and the associated TIS functions. The full event history analysis of the local BRTIS evolution can be found in the Supplementary Data attached to this paper. 6 Although the sugar factory was materialized in 1953, in this particular instance we outline the fulfillment of the corresponding function F8 at the local scale during the period of emergence as well (Fig. 5). This is done to point to the existence of the local scale of the BRTIS represented only by the sugar factory. D. Ayrapetyan et al. Research Policy 54 (2025) 105130 7 4.2. Shaping of the local BRTIS (1992–2003) The local BRTIS began to take shape in 1992 when ARD relocated to the site of the sugar factory (F1,F8:L) initiating the Bazancourt-Pomacle cluster (F3:L). Motivated by the fruitful cooperation among different sectors within CAVISA (F4:R), ARD started to develop a new process of obtaining fructose from chicory roots (F2:L). Successful laboratory trials (F4:L) led to the construction of the Chamtor plant in 1992. Located between ARD and the sugar factory (F1:L), Chamtor materialized the technological infrastructure to process chicory roots (F8:L). Simultaneously, negotiations were held with the EU to obtain market quotas for fructose (F7:E). However, due to a number of technical reasons, the market quotas were not granted (F5:E). Eventually, after major technological redesigning of Chamtor in 1994 (F8:L), the plant switched to processing wheat and formed a market for its production (pastries, cakes, bakeries) at the global scale (F5:G). Being close to the sugar factory enabled Chamtor to create product synergies. In particular, the construction of power lines and pipelines (F8:L) enabled the exchange of electricity and process water leading to the formation of an internal market between the plants (F5:L). The potential of the site to offer new Table 3 Actors involved in the evolution of the local BRTIS. Abbreviation/ name Full name Description ADRIAC Association for the Development of Research in the Food and Packaging Industries Company specializing in developing bio-based and biodegradable packaging for meat products SRD Sugar Research and Development Research unit developing new outlets from the by-products of sugar beet ERD Ethanol Research and Development Research unit exploring options for bio-ethanol production through the fermentation of sugar beet byproducts ARD Agro-Industry Research and Development Applied research company specialized in developing new outlets from the by-products of sugar beet and wheat CAVISA Centre for Analysis and Development of Agricultural Substrata A structure uniting regional producers of sugar beet, wheat, and alfalfa to develop non-food outlets Europol'Agro A joint research structure conducting fundamental and applied research to develop innovative uses for agroresources Chamtor (v.1 & v.2) Production plant owned by the cooperative of wheat growers – Vivescia –and specializing in obtaining fructose from chicory roots (v.1), later in transforming wheat into starch and glucose products (v.2) Soliance Spin-off firm of ARD developing natural active ingredients and new molecules for the cosmetics industry Cristal Union Agricultural cooperative of sugar beet growers IAR-Network Industry and Agro-resources Network Political initiative uniting Champagne-Ardenne and Picardy regions to coordinate research projects and streamline investments LRD Luzerne Research and Development Joint research unit specializing in developing food and feed products from alfalfa Cristanol Production plant specializing in processing sugar beet and wheat by-products into first generation bioethanol FRD Fiber Research and Development R&D firm (extension of ARD) in Troyes specializing in processing hemp fibers into bio-based construction materials Procethol 2G/ Pilot Factory Company specializing in the production of second generation bioethanol from non-food biomass (led to the construction of pilot plant – Pilot Factory) BioAmber/ BioDemo Company specializing in the production of bio-based succinic acid from wheat byproducts (led to the construction of demonstration plant –BioDemo) Air Liquid French multinational company specializing in the purification of CO 2 Wheatoleo Spin-off firm of ARD developing biosurfactants from wheat by-products Table 3 (continued) Abbreviation/ name Full name Description CEBB European Center in Biotechnology and Bioeconomy Joint fundamental research center aiming at creating new economic value from the agricultural resource Global Bioenergies French company specializing in producing bio-isobutene from sugar beet by-products later in producing cosmetics and aviation fuels from derivatives of bio-isobutene Europ´ eenne de Biomasse French company developing new biofuel (black pellets) from wood products Formal governance Jacques de Bohan association of the BPC industrial territory Structured organization coordinating the activities of the industrial, economic, and public stakeholders at the local BRTIS BioDemo 2 Second line of the demonstration plant BioDemo with larger capacity Fig. 5. Multiscalar dynamics of innovation system functions during the emergence of the local BRTIS. Note: in Figs. 5 to 8, the local scale and the associated arrows designating the local functional dynamics are depicted in green. The regional scale and the associated arrows designating the local-regional couplings are depicted in red. The national scale and the associated arrows designating the local-national couplings are depicted in blue. The European scale and the associated arrows designating the local-European couplings are depicted in black. Lastly, the global scale and the associated arrows designating the local-global couplings are depicted in yellow. The widths of the arrows are proportional to the number of times the respective functional interaction took place. (For interpretation of the references to color in this figure legend, the reader is referred to the web version of this article.) D. Ayrapetyan et al. Research Policy 54 (2025) 105130 8 policies aiming to reinforce virtuous cycles of TIS functions that shift geographical scales over time. Funding This research was funded by the German Federal Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF) (grant number 031B0020) and by the Chair in Bioeconomy and Sustainable Development (NEOMA Business School, Marne Ardennes Chamber of Commerce, Caisse d'Epargne Grand Est Europe, Greater East Region, Carbono). The funding sources had no role in the design and conduct of the study. CRediT authorship contribution statement David Ayrapetyan: Visualization, Writing –original draft, Conceptualization, Formal analysis, Investigation, Methodology. Nicolas Befort: Conceptualization, Investigation, Resources, Validation, Writing –review &editing. Frans Hermans: Conceptualization, Funding acquisition, Project administration, Supervision, Writing –review & editing. Declaration of generative AI and AI-assisted technologies in the writing process During the preparation of this work the authors used ChatGPT 3.5 in order to improve grammar and readability of the Abstract. After using this tool/service, the authors reviewed and edited the content as needed and take full responsibility for the content of the publication. Declaration of competing interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper. Data availability Supplementary data is attached to this article Supplementary Data_From local markets to global legitimacy: A materialization perspective on technological innovation system’s dynamic (Original data) (Mendeley Data) Acknowledgments Special thanks to the handling editor and the two anonymous reviewers who greatly assisted us in improving the paper. Appendix A. Summarization of data sources Source of data Type of data Use in the narrative Academic literature Doctoral theses by Befort (2016) and Nieddu (1998); master's thesis by Pithan (2013); book by Schieb et al. (2015); Journal articles by Th´ enot et al. (2018) and Morales (2020). Historical origins of the local BRTIS evolution, important technological and institutional milestones, strategies of actors, types and dynamics of their internal markets of by-products. Official reports Reports by Cristal Union (2020),van Walwijk (2005), and European Commission (2014). Activities of agricultural cooperative Cristal Union, biofuel legislations and incentives in France, information on bio-surfactant production (Wheatoleo) at the local BRTIS Websites Websites reporting national, financial, and industry news: www.finanzen. at,www.lefigaro.fr,www.lesechos.fr,https://infodujour.fr,www.ene rzine.com,https://renewable-carbon.eu,www.argusmedia.com,www. usinenouvelle.com. Websites of actors of the local BRTIS: www.f-r-d.fr,www.global-bioene rgies.com,www.a-r-d.fr,www.vivescia.com. Websites accessed between January–December 2022. Information on the activities and achievements of different actors at the local BRTIS mostly during the periods of expansion and diversification. Professional journals Articles by Bailey (2022) and Stark (2016). Information on the role of Global Bioenergies in the local BRTIS in 2016 and 2022. Participatory observations and meetings with stakeholders Observation and participation in activities of actors and management bodies at the local BRTIS, as well as meetings with various government actors, investors, and stakeholders (25 meetings, 13 events, 6 research projects, 36 interviews carried out by the second author between 2012 and 2022). Information on current and future projects, confidential projects, actor strategies, and public support. Interviews Nine interviews with: 1. senior researcher of the academic chair of the local BRTIS; 2. project manager of the innovation platform of the local BRTIS; 3. director of the academic chair of the local BRTIS; 4. business development manager of the academic chair at the local BRTIS; 5. senior researcher at the University of Reims; 6. project manager of the innovation platform of the local BRTIS; 7. director of R&D of advanced biofuel development at the local BRTIS; 8. researcher of the academic chair of the local BRTIS; 9. research project manager at the Grand Reims community. Interviews conducted both in-person and online. Information on the history of the local BRTIS, activities of the actors, their knowledge networks and sources of financing. Major projects carried out between 1983 and 2022. Formal and informal institutional frameworks and regulations regarding the formation of internal markets among the local actors. New governance structure implemented at the local BRTIS in 2021. Appendix B. Geographical distribution of TIS functions during the evolution of the local BRTIS The geographical context of entrepreneurial activities related to the evolution of the local BRTIS are presented in Fig. B1. Most of the functions took place at the local and regional scales. During the emergence period, entrepreneurial activities took place predominantly at the regional scale. Over the next two periods, i.e. shaping and expansion, they shifted mostly to local scale. Finally, in the last period, entrepreneurial activities took place at the local scale only. Therefore, we observe a clear pattern of entrepreneurial activities shifting from the regional to the local scale over time. D. Ayrapetyan et al. Research Policy 54 (2025) 105130 15 Fig. B1. The geographical distribution of Entrepreneurial Activities during the evolution of the local BRTIS. We see a slightly different pattern with regard to the geographical context of knowledge development (Fig. B2). In contrast to entrepreneurial activities, the knowledge development processes were distributed more evenly along the local, regional, and national scales. However, this function was still more prevalent at the local scale during the periods of shaping, expansion, and diversification. Fig. B2. The geographical distribution of Knowledge Development during the evolution of the local BRTIS. The function of knowledge diffusion of the local BRTIS had a broader geographical distribution over time compared to the first two functions by taking place at all five geographical scales (Fig. B3). Situated at the regional and national scales in the first period, the processes of knowledge diffusion spread over time to other scales as well. In particular, during the third period knowledge diffusion took place at all five scales –consistent with the geographical ‘expansion’of the dynamics of the local BRTIS. Finally, during the last period the diffusion of knowledge occurred only at the local and global scales. This function therefore shifted over time toward the both ends of geographical distribution, i.e. local and global. Fig. B3. The geographical distribution of Knowledge Diffusion during the evolution of the local BRTIS. With regard to guidance of search, we observe a high frequency of corresponding processes, especially at the local, regional, and national scales (Fig. B4). At the local scale, this function was fulfilled with increasing frequency over the four periods, whereas at the regional scale the frequency was decreasing which indicates to a localization of this function over time. Fig. B4. The geographical distribution of Guidance of Search during the evolution of the local BRTIS. The geographical distribution of market formation (Fig. B5) is characterized by the prevalence of the corresponding processes at the local, national, and global scales. A specific feature of this distribution is that the market formation at the local scale almost always coincided temporally with market D. Ayrapetyan et al. Research Policy 54 (2025) 105130 16 formation at the national or global scales. This is due to the fact that along with forming national or global markets of end products, the firms at the local BRTIS formed markets of by-products among each other at the local scale. Fig. B5. The geographical distribution of Market Formation during the evolution of the local BRTIS. With regard to the mobilization of financial, natural, and industrial resources, the geography of these processes involved all the scales except of the global (Fig. B6). There is no significant shift in geographical distribution of this function over time, except of the absence of this function at the local scale in the first period as opposed to the subsequent periods. Fig. B6. The geographical distribution of Resource Mobilization during the evolution of the local BRTIS. The geographical distribution of processes corresponding to creation of legitimacy (Fig. B7) shows that the legitimacy of BRTIS was established first at the regional scale with a shift to higher scales over time. In the last period, actors of the local BRTIS established their legitimacy mostly at the global scale. Fig. B7. The geographical distribution of Creation of Legitimacy during the evolution of the local BRTIS. References Abbott, A., 1995. Sequence analysis: new methods for old ideas. Annu. Rev. Sociol. 93113. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.so.21.080195.000521. Allais, F., Lescieux-Katir, H., Chauvet, J.-M., 2021. The continuous evolution of the Bazancourt-Pomacle site rooted in the commitment and vision of pioneering farmers when reality shapes the biorefinery concept. EFB Bioecon. J. 100007. https://doi. org/10.1016/j.bioeco.2021.100007. Andersson, J., Hellsmark, H., Sand´ en, B.A., 2018. Shaping factors in the emergence of technological innovations: the case of tidal kite technology. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 132, 191–208. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2018.01.034. Ayrapetyan, D., 2023. Technological Innovations and Sustainability Transitions in the Bioeconomy: A Multiscalar Approach Toward the Development of Bioclusters. Martin-Luther-Universit¨ at Halle-Wittenberg, Universit¨ atsund Landesbibliothek Sachsen-Anhalt, Halle (Saale). https://doi.org/10.25673/110903. Ayrapetyan, D., Hermans, F., 2020. Introducing a multiscalar framework for biocluster research: a meta-analysis. Sustainability 12 (9), 3890. https://doi.org/10.3390/ su12093890. Ayrapetyan, D., Befort, N., Hermans, F., 2022. The role of sustainability in the emergence and evolution of bioeconomy clusters: an application of a multiscalar framework. J. Clean. Prod. 376, 134306. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2022.134306. Bailey, M., 2022. Global bioenergies starts up production of bio-based isobutene. Chem. Eng. https://www.chemengonline. com/global-bioenergies-starts-up-production-of-bio-based-isobutene/? printmode=1#disqus-anchor, 2017. Barry, A., 2006. Technological zones. Eur. J. Soc. Theory 9 (2), 239–253. https://doi. org/10.1177/1368431006063343. Bauer, F., Coenen, L., Hansen, T., McCormick, K., Palgan, Y.V., 2017. Technological innovation systems for biorefineries: a review of the literature. Biofuels Bioprod. Biorefin. 11 (3), 534–548. https://doi.org/10.1002/bbb.1767. Befort, N., 2016. Pour une m´ eso´ economie de l’´ emergence de la bio´ economie: Repr´ esentations, patrimoines productifs collectifs et strat´ egies d’acteurs dans la D. Ayrapetyan et al. Research Policy 54 (2025) 105130 17 r´ egulation d’une chimie doublement verte. Universite de Reims ChampagneArdenne Reims. https://doi.org/10.4000/regulation.12121. Bento, N., Fontes, M., 2015. Spatial diffusion and the formation of a technological innovation system in the receiving country: the case of wind energy in Portugal. Environ. Innov. Soc. Trans. 15, 158–179. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. eist.2014.10.003. Bergek, A., Jacobsson, S., Carlsson, B., Lindmark, S., Rickne, A., 2008a. Analyzing the functional dynamics of technological innovation systems: a scheme of analysis. Res. Policy 37 (3), 407–429. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2007.12.003. Bergek, A., Jacobsson, S., Hekkert, M., 2008b. Functions in innovation systems: a framework for analysing energy system dynamics and identifying goals for systembuilding activities by entrepreneurs and policy makers. In: Foxon, T., K¨ ohler, J., Oughton, C. (Eds.), Innovations for a Low Carbon Economy: Economic, Institutional and Management Approaches. Edward Elgar, Cheltenham. Bergek, A., Jacobsson, S., Sand´ en, B.A., 2008c. ‘Legitimation’and ‘development of positive externalities’: two key processes in the formation phase of technological innovation systems. Tech. Anal. Strat. Manag. 20 (5), 575–592. https://doi.org/ 10.1080/09537320802292768. Bergek, A., Hekkert, M., Jacobsson, S., Markard, J., Sand´ en, B., Truffer, B., 2015. Technological innovation systems in contexts: conceptualizing contextual structures and interaction dynamics. Environ. Innov. Soc. Trans. 16, 51–64. https://doi.org/ 10.1016/j.eist.2015.07.003. Berkhout, F., Angel, D., Wieczorek, A., 2009. Sustainability transitions in developing Asia: are alternative development pathways likely? Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 76 (2), 215–217. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2008.04.003. Binz, C., Truffer, B., 2017. Global Innovation Systems—a conceptual framework for innovation dynamics in transnational contexts. Res. Policy 46 (7), 1284–1298. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2017.05.012. Binz, C., Truffer, B., Li, L., Shi, Y., Lu, Y., 2012. Conceptualizing leapfrogging with spatially coupled innovation systems: the case of onsite wastewater treatment in China. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 79 (1), 155–171. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. techfore.2011.08.016. Binz, C., Truffer, B., Coenen, L., 2014. Why space matters in technological innovation systems—mapping global knowledge dynamics of membrane bioreactor technology. Res. Policy 43 (1), 138–155. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2013.07.002. Binz, C., Truffer, B., Coenen, L., 2016. Path creation as a process of resource alignment and anchoring: industry formation for on-site water recycling in Beijing. Econ. Geogr. 92 (2), 172–200. https://doi.org/10.1080/00130095.2015.1103177. Birch, K., Calvert, K., 2015. Rethinking ‘drop-in’biofuels: on the political materialities of bioenergy. Sci. Technol. Stud. 28 (1), 52–72. https://doi.org/10.23987/sts.55357. Boon, W.P.C., Edler, J., Robinson, D.K.R., 2020. Market formation in the context of transitions: a comment on the transitions agenda. Environ. Innov. Soc. Trans. 34, 346–347. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eist.2019.11.006. Bosman, R., Rotmans, J., 2016. Transition governance towards a bioeconomy: a comparison of Finland and The Netherlands. Sustainability 8 (10), 1017. https://doi. org/10.3390/su8101017. Bulkeley, H., 2005. Reconfiguring environmental governance: towards a politics of scales and networks. Polit. Geogr. 24 (8), 875–902. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. polgeo.2005.07.002. Bunnell, T.G., Coe, N.M., 2001. Spaces and scales of innovation. Prog. Hum. Geogr. 25 (4), 569–589. https://doi.org/10.1191/030913201682688940. Carlsson, B., Stankiewicz, R., 1991. On the nature, function and composition of technological systems. J. Evol. Econ. 1 (2), 93–118. https://doi.org/10.1007/97894-011-0145-5_2. Chandy, R.K., Tellis, G.J., 2000. The incumbent’s curse? Incumbency, size, and radical product innovation. J. Mark. 64 (3), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1509/ jmkg.64.3.1.18033. Coenen, L., Benneworth, P., Truffer, B., 2012. Toward a spatial perspective on sustainability transitions. Res. Policy 41 (6), 968–979. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. respol.2012.02.014. Cooke, P., Uranga, M.G., Etxebarria, G., 1997. Regional innovation systems: institutional and organisational dimensions. Res. Policy 26 (4–5), 475–491. https://doi.org/ 10.1016/s0048-7333(97)00025-5. Cristal Union, 2020. Demande d’autorisation d’augmentation de la capacit´ e de traitement de betteraves, d’extension des p´ erim` etres d’´ epandage et d’irrigation. De Oliveira, L.G.S., Negro, S.O., 2019. Contextual structures and interaction dynamics in the Brazilian Biogas Innovation System. Renew. Sust. Energ. Rev. 107, 462–481. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2019.02.030. Deutz, P., Gibbs, D., 2008. Industrial ecology and regional development: eco-industrial development as cluster policy. Reg. Stud. 42 (10), 1313–1328. https://doi.org/ 10.1080/00343400802195121. Dewald, U., Fromhold-Eisebith, M., 2015. Trajectories of sustainability transitions in scale-transcending innovation systems: the case of photovoltaics. Environ. Innov. Soc. Trans. 17, 110–125. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eist.2014.12.004. Dewald, U., Truffer, B., 2011. Market formation in technological innovation systems—diffusion of photovoltaic applications in Germany. Ind. Innov. 18 (03), 285–300. https://doi.org/10.1080/13662716.2011.561028. Dewald, U., Truffer, B., 2012. The local sources of market formation: explaining regional growth differentials in German photovoltaic markets. Eur. Plan. Stud. 20 (3), 397–420. https://doi.org/10.1080/09654313.2012.651803. Diakosavvas, D., Frezal, C., 2019. Bio-economy and the sustainability of the agriculture and food system: opportunities and policy challenges. In: OECD Food, Agriculture and Fisheries Papers, Vol. No. 136. https://doi.org/10.1787/d0ad045d-en. Paris. European Commission, 2014. Where Next for the European Bioeconomy?. Frishammar, J., S¨ oderholm, P., Hellsmark, H., Mossberg, J., 2019. A knowledge-based perspective on system weaknesses in technological innovation systems. Sci. Public Policy 46 (1), 55–70. https://doi.org/10.1093/scipol/scy037. Gerring, J., 2016. Case Study Research: Principles and Practices. Cambridge university press. Gibson, C.C., Ostrom, E., Ahn, T.-K., 2000. The concept of scale and the human dimensions of global change: a survey. Ecol. Econ. 32 (2), 217–239. https://doi.org/ 10.1016/s0921-8009(99)00092-0. Giurca, A., Sp¨ ath, P., 2017. A forest-based bioeconomy for Germany? Strengths, weaknesses and policy options for lignocellulosic biorefineries. J. Clean. Prod. 153, 51–62. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.03.156. Gosens, J., Lu, Y., Coenen, L., 2015. The role of transnational dimensions in emerging economy ‘Technological Innovation Systems’for clean-tech. J. Clean. Prod. 86, 378–388. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2014.08.029. Grouiez, P., Debref, R., Vivien, F.-D., Befort, N., 2023. The complex relationships between non-food agriculture and the sustainable bioeconomy: the French case. Ecol. Econ. 214, 107974. Gustafsson, J., 2017. Single case studies vs. multiple case studies: a comparative study. Retrieved from. https://www.diva-portal.org/smash/get/diva2:1064378/FULLT EXT01.pdf. Hansen, T., Coenen, L., 2017. Unpacking resource mobilisation by incumbents for biorefineries: the role of micro-level factors for technological innovation system weaknesses. Tech. Anal. Strat. Manag. 29 (5), 500–513. https://doi.org/10.1080/ 09537325.2016.1249838. Hansmeier, H., Kroll, H., 2024. The geography of eco-innovations and sustainability transitions: a systematic comparison. In: ZFW–Advances in Economic Geography, 0. Heiberg, J., Binz, C., Truffer, B., 2020. The geography of technology legitimation: how multiscalar institutional dynamics matter for path creation in emerging industries. Econ. Geogr. 96 (5), 470–498. https://doi.org/10.1080/00130095.2020.1842189. Hekkert, M.P., Suurs, R.A., Negro, S.O., Kuhlmann, S., Smits, R.E., 2007. Functions of innovation systems: a new approach for analysing technological change. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 74 (4), 413–432. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. techfore.2006.03.002. Hellsmark, H., 2010. Unfolding the Formative Phase of Gasified Biomass in the European Union: The Role of System Builders in Realising the Potential of Second-generation Transportation Fuels From Biomass. Chalmers Tekniska Hogskola, Sweden. Hellsmark, H., Mossberg, J., S¨ oderholm, P., Frishammar, J., 2016. Innovation system strengths and weaknesses in progressing sustainable technology: the case of Swedish biorefinery development. J. Clean. Prod. 131, 702–715. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. jclepro.2016.04.109. Hermans, F., 2021. Bioclusters and sustainable regional development. In: Rethinking Clusters. Springer, pp. 81–91. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-61923-7_6. Hermans, F., Geerling-Eiff, F., Potters, J., Klerkx, L., 2019. Public-private partnerships as systemic agricultural innovation policy instruments–assessing their contribution to innovation system function dynamics. NJAS-Wageningen J. Life Sci. 88, 76–95. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.njas.2018.10.001. Hojckova, K., Ahlborg, H., Morrison, G.M., Sand´ en, B., 2020. Entrepreneurial use of context for technological system creation and expansion: the case of blockchainbased peer-to-peer electricity trading. Res. Policy 49 (8), 104046. https://doi.org/ 10.1016/j.respol.2020.104046. Jacobsson, S., Bergek, A., 2011. Innovation system analyses and sustainability transitions: contributions and suggestions for research. Environ. Innov. Soc. Trans. 1 (1), 41–57. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eist.2011.04.006. Lazarevic, D., Kautto, P., Antikainen, R., 2020. Finland’s wood-frame multi-storey construction innovation system: analysing motors of creative destruction. Forest Policy Econ. 110, 101861. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forpol.2019.01.006. Lukkarinen, J., Berg, A., Salo, M., Tainio, P., Alhola, K., Antikainen, R., 2018. An intermediary approach to technological innovation systems (TIS)—the case of the cleantech sector in Finland. Environ. Innov. Soc. Trans. 26, 136–146. https://doi. org/10.1016/j.eist.2017.04.003. Lundvall, B.-Å., 1988. Innovation as an Interactive Process: From User-producer Interaction to the National System of Innovation. Pinter, London. Malerba, F., 2002. Sectoral systems of innovation and production. Res. Policy 31 (2), 247–264. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0048-7333(01)00139-1. Markard, J., Raven, R., Truffer, B., 2012. Sustainability transitions: an emerging field of research and its prospects. Res. Policy 41 (6), 955–967. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. respol.2012.02.013. Markard, J., Hekkert, M., Jacobsson, S., 2015. The technological innovation systems framework: response to six criticisms. Environ. Innov. Soc. Trans. 16, 76–86. https:// doi.org/10.1016/j.eist.2015.07.006. Markard, J., Wirth, S., Truffer, B., 2016. Institutional dynamics and technology legitimacy–a framework and a case study on biogas technology. Res. Policy 45 (1), 330–344. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2015.10.009. Marston, S.A., 2000. The social construction of scale. Prog. Hum. Geogr. 24 (2), 219–242. https://doi.org/10.1191/03091320067408627. Mi¨ orner, J., Binz, C., 2021. Towards a multi-scalar perspective on transition trajectories. Environ. Innov. Soc. Trans. 40, 172–188. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. eist.2021.06.004. Moore, A., 2008. Rethinking scale as a geographical category: from analysis to practice. Prog. Hum. Geogr. 32 (2), 203–225. https://doi.org/10.1177/0309132507087647. Morales, M.E., 2020. Industrial Symbiosis, a Circular Bioeconomy Strategy. The Sugar Beet Case Study at the Bazancourt-Pomacle Platform. Editions Oeconomia. Mousavi, S., Hellsmark, H., S¨ oderholm, P., 2023. How can pilot and demonstration plants drive market formation? Lessons from advanced biofuel development in Europe. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 194, 122703. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. techfore.2023.122703. D. Ayrapetyan et al. Research Policy 54 (2025) 105130 18 Musiolik, J., Markard, J., Hekkert, M., Furrer, B., 2020. Creating innovation systems: how resource constellations affect the strategies of system builders. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 153, 119209. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. techfore.2018.02.002. Negro, S.O., Hekkert, M.P., Smits, R.E., 2007. Explaining the failure of the Dutch innovation system for biomass digestion—a functional analysis. Energy Policy 35 (2), 925–938. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2006.01.027. Nevzorova, T., 2022. Functional analysis of technological innovation system with inclusion of sectoral and spatial perspectives: the case of the biogas industry in Russia. Environ. Innov. Soc. Trans. 42, 232–250. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. eist.2022.01.005. Nieddu, M., 1998. Dynamiques de longue p´ eriode dans l'agriculture productiviste et mutations du syst` eme agro-industriel français contemporain. Universit´ e de Reims Champagne Ardenne, Reims. OECD, 2017. Biorefineries models and policy [press release]. Retrieved from. https://one.oecd.org/document/DSTI/STP/BNCT(2016)16/REV1/en/pdf. Pentland, B.T., 1999. Building process theory with narrative: from description to explanation. Acad. Manag. Rev. 24 (4), 711–724. https://doi.org/10.5465/ amr.1999.2553249. Philp, J., Winickoff, D., 2017. Clusters in industrial biotechnology and bioeconomy: the roles of the public sector. Trends Biotechnol. 35 (8), 682–686. https://doi.org/ 10.1016/j.tibtech.2017.04.004. Philp, J., Winickoff, D., 2019. Innovation ecosystems in the bioeconomy. In: OECD Science, Technology and Industry Policy Papers. OECD Publishing, Paris. https:// doi.org/10.1787/e2e3d8a1-en. Piore, M.J., 2006. Qualitative research: does it fit in economics? 1. Eur. Manag. Rev. 3 (1), 17–23. https://doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.emr.1500053. Pithan, F., 2013. D´ eveloppement d’une m´ ethodologie pour l’analyse d’un ´ ecosyst` eme socio´ economique ´ emergent et le management d’un projet complexe d’innovation – Application au projet PIVERT. University of Technology of Compi` egne. Poole, M.S., Van de Ven, A.H., Dooley, K., Holmes, M.E., 2000. Organizational Change and Innovation Processes: Theory and Methods for Research. Oxford University Press. Raven, R., Schot, J., Berkhout, F., 2012. Space and scale in socio-technical transitions. Environ. Innov. Soc. Trans. 4, 63–78. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eist.2012.08.001. Reichardt, K., Negro, S.O., Rogge, K.S., Hekkert, M.P., 2016. Analyzing interdependencies between policy mixes and technological innovation systems: the case of offshore wind in Germany. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 106, 11–21. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2016.01.029. Rohe, S., 2020. The regional facet of a global innovation system: exploring the spatiality of resource formation in the value chain for onshore wind energy. Environ. Innov. Soc. Trans. 36, 331–344. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eist.2020.02.002. Rohe, S., Chlebna, C., 2021. A spatial perspective on the legitimacy of a technological innovation system: regional differences in onshore wind energy. Energy Policy 151, 112193. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2021.112193. Rohe, S., Mattes, J., 2022. What about the regional level? Regional configurations of Technological Innovation Systems. Geoforum 129, 60–73. https://doi.org/10.1016/ j.geoforum.2022.01.007. Roy, R., Sarkar, M., 2016. Knowledge, firm boundaries, and innovation: mitigating the incumbent’s curse during radical technological change. Strateg. Manag. J. 37 (5), 835–854. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.2357. Schieb, P.-A., Lescieux-Katir, H., Th´ enot, M., Cl´ ement-Larosi` ere, B., 2015. Biorefinery 2030. In: Future Prospects for the Bioeconomy. Springer. Stark, A., 2016. Global Bioenergies Produces Highly Purified Isobutene. Process Worldwide. Steen, M., Andersen, A.D., Finstad, J., Jordal, K., Hansen, T., Hanson, J., Skjølsvold, T.M., 2022. A socio-technical perspective on CCS innovation system dynamics in Norway. In: Proceedings of the 16th Greenhouse Gas Control Technologies Conference (GHGT-16) 23-24 Oct 2022. Stuart, P.R., El-Halwagi, M.M., 2012. Integrated Biorefineries: Design, Analysis, and Optimization. CRC press. Suurs, R.A., 2009. Motors of Sustainable Innovation: Towards a Theory on the Dynamics of Technological Innovation Systems. Utrecht University. Suurs, R.A., Hekkert, M.P., 2009. Cumulative causation in the formation of a technological innovation system: the case of biofuels in the Netherlands. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 76 (8), 1003–1020. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. techfore.2009.03.002. Swyngedouw, E., 2004. Globalisation or ‘glocalisation’? Networks, territories and rescaling. Camb. Rev. Int. Aff. 17 (1), 25–48. https://doi.org/10.1080/ 0955757042000203632. Th´ enot, M., Bouteiller, C., Lescieux-Katir, H., 2018. Agricultural Cooperatives as Agents of Industrial Symbiosis, 1. RECMA, pp. 31–47. Tsvetanova, L., Carraresi, L., Wustmans, M., Br¨ oring, S., 2022. Actors’strategic goals in emerging technological innovation systems: evidence from the biorefinery sector in Germany. Tech. Anal. Strat. Manag. 34 (7), 760–773. https://doi.org/10.1080/ 09537325.2021.1919300. Van Alphen, K., Van Ruijven, J., Kasa, S., Hekkert, M., Turkenburg, W., 2009. The performance of the Norwegian carbon dioxide, capture and storage innovation system. Energy Policy 37 (1), 43–55. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2008.07.029. Van Assche, K., Duineveld, M., Beunen, R., Valentinov, V., Gruezmacher, M., 2022. Material dependencies: hidden underpinnings of sustainability transitions. J. Environ. Policy Plan. 24 (3), 281–296. https://doi.org/10.1080/ 1523908x.2022.2049715. Van de Ven, A., Poole, M., 2005. Alternative approaches for studying organizational change. Organ. Stud. 26 (9), 1377–1404. https://doi.org/10.1177/ 0170840605056907. van Walwijk, M., 2005. Biofuels in France 1990–2005. Vivien, F.D., Nieddu, M., Befort, N., Debref, R., Giampietro, M., 2019. The hijacking of the bioeconomy. Ecol. Econ. 159, 189–197. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. ecolecon.2019.01.027. Walrave, B., Raven, R., 2016. Modelling the dynamics of technological innovation systems. Res. Policy 45 (9), 1833–1844. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. respol.2016.05.011. Wieczorek, A.J., Hekkert, M.P., Coenen, L., Harmsen, R., 2015. Broadening the national focus in technological innovation system analysis: the case of offshore wind. Environ. Innov. Soc. Trans. 14, 128–148. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. eist.2014.09.001. Wilde, K., Hermans, F., 2021. Deconstructing the attractiveness of biocluster imaginaries. J. Environ. Policy Plan. 23 (2), 227–242. https://doi.org/10.1080/ 1523908x.2021.1891872. Winter, S.G., Nelson, R.R., 1982. An Evolutionary Theory of Economic Change. University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign’s Academy for Entrepreneurial Leadership Historical Research Reference in Entrepreneurship. Yin, R.K., 2018. Case Study Research and Applications: Design and Methods. Sage Publications. Yuan, X., Li, X., 2021. Mapping the technology diffusion of battery electric vehicle based on patent analysis: a perspective of global innovation systems. Energy 222, 119897. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2021.119897. D. Ayrapetyan et al. Research Policy 54 (2025) 105130 19