BlueTech Research, Vancouver, Canada.
Sub-Department of Environmental Technology, Wageningen UR, Wageningen, The Netherlands.
Water Environ Res. 2019 Feb;91(2):144-156. doi: 10.1002/wer.1013.
This paper analyzes six case studies of new water technology innovations in the last three decades and investigates the differences in timelines for moving through the various stages of water technology commercialization. The concept of two different types of innovation was explored: Crisis/Needs Driven and Value Driven. It was found that the case studies that mapped to the Crisis/Needs Driven innovation moved relatively quickly compared to Value Driven innovations and in most cases involved new entrants. New entrants refer to new companies or start-ups that have recently entered the water technology market. The case studies, which could be mapped to Value Driven innovation, had a slower rate of technology diffusion, and they involved a combination of existing companies as well as new entrants. PRACTITIONER POINTS: The paper identifies two key types of innovation: Crisis/Needs Driven and Value Driven. Legislation was observed to be a key driver for the adoption of new technology innovation in the water sector. The Crisis/Needs driven innovations studied were observed to diffuse through the Water Technology Diffusion model at up to twice the pace of Value driven innovation. Crisis/Needs driven innovation typically involves disruptive innovation offered by new entrants, whereas with Value driven innovation, the solutions are provided by both existing companies as well as new entrants. It is also observed that in most cases a technology that is adopted in order to meet a crisis or need in the market is more expensive at the outset compared with incumbent solutions. While value driven adoption has a slower cycle for adoption, it presents a lower risk as it is less dependent on external factors and timing of implementation of regulations or the occurrence of some public health related or environmental crisis.
本文分析了过去三十年中的六个新水技术创新案例研究，并调查了在水技术商业化的各个阶段中不同的时间差异。探讨了两种不同类型的创新概念：危机/需求驱动型和价值驱动型。研究发现，与价值驱动型创新相比，与危机/需求驱动型创新相匹配的案例研究进展相对较快，并且在大多数情况下涉及新进入者。新进入者是指最近进入水技术市场的新公司或初创企业。可以映射到价值驱动型创新的案例研究，其技术扩散速度较慢，涉及现有公司和新进入者的组合。
本文确定了两种关键类型的创新：危机/需求驱动型和价值驱动型。立法被观察到是水行业采用新技术创新的关键驱动因素。所研究的危机/需求驱动型创新被观察到以价值驱动型创新的两倍速度通过水技术扩散模型扩散。危机/需求驱动型创新通常涉及新进入者提供的颠覆性创新，而价值驱动型创新则由现有公司和新进入者提供解决方案。还观察到，在大多数情况下，为满足市场中的危机或需求而采用的技术在一开始就比现有解决方案昂贵。虽然价值驱动型采用的采用周期较慢，但风险较低，因为它不太依赖于外部因素以及法规实施的时间或某些公共卫生相关或环境危机的发生。
