合法性的配置如何塑造技术创新系统的方向性:以瑞典植物性肉类替代品为例

IF 13.3 1区 管理学 Q1 BUSINESS
Helena Fornstedt , Thomas Taro Lennerfors , Johnn Andersson , Paul Plummer
{"title":"合法性的配置如何塑造技术创新系统的方向性:以瑞典植物性肉类替代品为例","authors":"Helena Fornstedt ,&nbsp;Thomas Taro Lennerfors ,&nbsp;Johnn Andersson ,&nbsp;Paul Plummer","doi":"10.1016/j.techfore.2025.124283","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Sustainability challenges call for a shift towards plant-based proteins. This paper aims to analyze the development of plant-based meat alternatives in Sweden with a focus on legitimation processes. We divide legitimation into cognitive, normative, pragmatic and regulative varieties, and argue that configurations of legitimacy shape the directionality of innovation. We integrate this conceptualization into an analytical framework based on the technological innovation systems approach and analyze data from 41 interviews and multiple secondary sources. The analysis shows that the development of plant-based meat alternatives has been driven by a supportive configuration of strong normative legitimacy for low climate impact, increasing cognitive legitimacy based on associations with meat-based diets, increasing pragmatic legitimacy ensuring profitability for producers and convenience for consumers, and low regulative legitimacy due to weak policy support. This has shaped directionality towards the development of highly refined products that mimic meat, rather than towards simpler plant-based products, which may bring sustainability benefits but require more substantial behavioral change. Our findings suggest that policymakers can influence all four kinds of legitimacy, but have an especially important role in actively targeting regulative legitimacy. Other stakeholders can shape cognitive, normative, and pragmatic legitimacy to propel plant-based meat alternatives in desired direction.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48454,"journal":{"name":"Technological Forecasting and Social Change","volume":"220 ","pages":"Article 124283"},"PeriodicalIF":13.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"How configurations of legitimacy shape directionality in technological innovation systems: The case of plant-based meat alternatives in Sweden\",\"authors\":\"Helena Fornstedt ,&nbsp;Thomas Taro Lennerfors ,&nbsp;Johnn Andersson ,&nbsp;Paul Plummer\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.techfore.2025.124283\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><div>Sustainability challenges call for a shift towards plant-based proteins. This paper aims to analyze the development of plant-based meat alternatives in Sweden with a focus on legitimation processes. We divide legitimation into cognitive, normative, pragmatic and regulative varieties, and argue that configurations of legitimacy shape the directionality of innovation. We integrate this conceptualization into an analytical framework based on the technological innovation systems approach and analyze data from 41 interviews and multiple secondary sources. The analysis shows that the development of plant-based meat alternatives has been driven by a supportive configuration of strong normative legitimacy for low climate impact, increasing cognitive legitimacy based on associations with meat-based diets, increasing pragmatic legitimacy ensuring profitability for producers and convenience for consumers, and low regulative legitimacy due to weak policy support. This has shaped directionality towards the development of highly refined products that mimic meat, rather than towards simpler plant-based products, which may bring sustainability benefits but require more substantial behavioral change. Our findings suggest that policymakers can influence all four kinds of legitimacy, but have an especially important role in actively targeting regulative legitimacy. Other stakeholders can shape cognitive, normative, and pragmatic legitimacy to propel plant-based meat alternatives in desired direction.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48454,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Technological Forecasting and Social Change\",\"volume\":\"220 \",\"pages\":\"Article 124283\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":13.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-08-26\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Technological Forecasting and Social Change\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"91\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0040162525003142\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"管理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"BUSINESS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Technological Forecasting and Social Change","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0040162525003142","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"BUSINESS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

可持续性挑战要求我们转向以植物为基础的蛋白质。本文旨在分析瑞典植物性肉类替代品的发展,重点是合法化过程。我们将合法性分为认知、规范、实用和监管四种类型,并认为合法性的配置塑造了创新的方向性。我们将这一概念整合到基于技术创新系统方法的分析框架中,并分析了来自41个访谈和多个二手来源的数据。分析表明,植物性肉类替代品的发展受到以下支持性配置的推动:低气候影响的强大规范合法性、基于与肉类饮食关联的认知合法性、确保生产者盈利和消费者便利的务实合法性的增强,以及由于政策支持不力而导致的监管合法性较低。这形成了一个方向,即开发模仿肉类的高度精制产品,而不是更简单的植物性产品,后者可能带来可持续发展的好处,但需要更大的行为改变。我们的研究结果表明,政策制定者可以影响所有四种合法性,但在积极瞄准监管合法性方面具有特别重要的作用。其他利益相关者可以塑造认知、规范和务实的合法性,以推动植物性肉类替代品朝着理想的方向发展。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
How configurations of legitimacy shape directionality in technological innovation systems: The case of plant-based meat alternatives in Sweden
Sustainability challenges call for a shift towards plant-based proteins. This paper aims to analyze the development of plant-based meat alternatives in Sweden with a focus on legitimation processes. We divide legitimation into cognitive, normative, pragmatic and regulative varieties, and argue that configurations of legitimacy shape the directionality of innovation. We integrate this conceptualization into an analytical framework based on the technological innovation systems approach and analyze data from 41 interviews and multiple secondary sources. The analysis shows that the development of plant-based meat alternatives has been driven by a supportive configuration of strong normative legitimacy for low climate impact, increasing cognitive legitimacy based on associations with meat-based diets, increasing pragmatic legitimacy ensuring profitability for producers and convenience for consumers, and low regulative legitimacy due to weak policy support. This has shaped directionality towards the development of highly refined products that mimic meat, rather than towards simpler plant-based products, which may bring sustainability benefits but require more substantial behavioral change. Our findings suggest that policymakers can influence all four kinds of legitimacy, but have an especially important role in actively targeting regulative legitimacy. Other stakeholders can shape cognitive, normative, and pragmatic legitimacy to propel plant-based meat alternatives in desired direction.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
21.30
自引率
10.80%
发文量
813
期刊介绍: Technological Forecasting and Social Change is a prominent platform for individuals engaged in the methodology and application of technological forecasting and future studies as planning tools, exploring the interconnectedness of social, environmental, and technological factors. In addition to serving as a key forum for these discussions, we offer numerous benefits for authors, including complimentary PDFs, a generous copyright policy, exclusive discounts on Elsevier publications, and more.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信