Wind energy can contribute to national climate, energy and economic goals by expanding clean energy and supporting economies through new manufacturing industries. However, the mechanisms for achieving these interlinked goals are not well understood. Here we analyse the wind energy manufacturing global value chain, using a dataset on 389 component supplier firms (2006–2016) that work with 13 original equipment manufacturers. We assess how technology complexity, that is, the knowledge intensity and difficulty of manufacturing components, shapes the location of suppliers. For countries without existing wind industries, we find evidence of the emergence of suppliers for only low-complexity components (for example, towers and generators). For countries with existing wind industries, we find that suppliers’ evolution, that is, changes in their international supply relationships, is less likely for high-complexity components (for example, blades and gearboxes). Our findings show the importance of understanding technologies along with firms and countries within global value chains for achieving policy goals.
Subscribe to Journal
Get full journal access for 1 year
only $8.25 per issue
All prices are NET prices.
VAT will be added later in the checkout.
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.
Rent or Buy article
Get time limited or full article access on ReadCube.
All prices are NET prices.
The database on the global manufacturing value chain developed for this study was built on third-party reports published by Navigant Consulting, with additional details obtained from Orbis, Amadeus, Bloomberg and Derwent World Patents Index. Restrictions apply to the availability of these third-party data and so the dataset is not publicly available. Data are however available upon reasonable request from the corresponding author. Supplier data (without the supplier company name) are available at https://github.com/kavsurana/tech-complexity-project/. The source data underlying Figs. 1–6 are provided as source data. The source data underlying Supplementary Figs. 1 and 2 are provided as Supplementary Data 1 and 2.
The source and code to replicate the analysis are available at https://github.com/kavsurana/tech-complexity-project/.
Renewable Capacity Statistics 2020 (IRENA, 2020); https://www.irena.org/publications/2020/Mar/Renewable-Capacity-Statistics-2020
World Energy Outlook 2019 (IEA, 2019); https://www.iea.org/reports/world-energy-outlook-2019
U.S. Wind Energy Manufacturing and Supply Chain: A Competitiveness Analysis (Global Wind Network, 2014); https://energy.gov/sites/prod/files/2014/09/f18/U.S.%20Wind%20Energy%20Manufacturing%20and%20Supply%20Chain%20Competitiveness%20Analysis_0.pdf
Wiser, R. et al. Expert elicitation survey on future wind energy costs. Nat. Energy 1, 16135 (2016).
Wiser, R. et al. 2018 Wind Technologies Market Report 103 (US Department of Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable, 2018).
Industrial Strategy: Offshore Wind Sector Deal (HM Government, 2019); https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/790950/BEIS_Offshore_Wind_Single_Pages_web_optimised.pdf
Hansen, U. E., Nygaard, I., Morris, M. & Robbins, G. The effects of local content requirements in auction schemes for renewable energy in developing countries: aA literature review. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 127, 109843 (2020).
Schmidt, T. S., Schmid, N. & Sewerin, S. Policy goals, partisanship and paradigmatic change in energy policy — analyzing parliamentary discourse in Germany over 30 years. Clim. Policy 19, 771–786 (2019).
Lewis, J. I. The rise of renewable energy protectionism: emerging trade conflicts and implications for low carbon development. Glob. Environ. Polit. 14, 10–35 (2014).
Stokes, L. C. & Warshaw, C. Renewable energy policy design and framing influence public support in the United States. Nat. Energy 2, 17107 (2017).
Haakonsson, S. J. & Kirkegaard, J. K. Configuration of technology networks in the wind turbine industry. A comparative study of technology management models in European and Chinese lead firms. Int. J. Technol. Manag. 70, 281–299 (2016).
Binz, C. & Truffer, B. Global innovation systems—a conceptual framework for innovation dynamics in transnational contexts. Res. Policy 46, 1284–1298 (2017).
Pietrobelli, C. & Rabellotti, R. Global value chains meet innovation systems: are there learning opportunities for developing countries? World Dev. 39, 1261–1269 (2011).
Jurowetzki, R., Lema, R. & Lundvall, B.-Å. Combining innovation systems and global value chains for development: towards a research agenda. Eur. J. Dev. Res. 30, 364–388 (2018).
Lema, R. & Lema, A. Technology transfer? The rise of China and India in green technology sectors. Innov. Dev. 2, 23–44 (2012).
Lewis, J. I. Building a national wind turbine industry: experiences from China, India and South Korea. Int. J. Technol. Global. 5, 281–305 (2011).
Surana, K. & Anadon, L. D. Public policy and financial resource mobilization for wind energy in developing countries: a comparison of approaches and outcomes in China and India. Glob. Environ. Change 35, 340–359 (2015).
Binz, C., Gosens, J., Hansen, T. & Hansen, U. E. Toward technology-sensitive catching-up policies: insights from renewable energy in China. World Dev. 96, 418–437 (2017).
World Development Report 2020: Trading for Development in the Age of Global Value Chains (World Bank, 2020).
Multinational Enterprises in the Global Economy—Heavily Debated but Hardly Measured (OECD, 2018); https://www.oecd.org/industry/ind/MNEs-in-the-global-economy-policy-note.pdf
Antràs, P. Conceptual Aspects of Global Value Chains NBER Working Paper No. 26539 (NBER, 2019); https://doi.org/10.3386/w26539
Wind Energy Industry Manufacturing Supplier Handbook (AWEA, 2011).
Hobday, M. Product complexity, innovation and industrial organisation. Res. Policy 26, 689–710 (1998).
Huenteler, J., Schmidt, T. S., Ossenbrink, J. & Hoffmann, V. H. Technology life-cycles in the energy sector—technological characteristics and the role of deployment for innovation. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change 104, 102–121 (2016).
Garud, R. & Karnoe, P. Bricolage versus breakthrough: distributed and embedded agency in technology entrepreneurship. Res. Policy 32, 277–300 (2003).
OECD SME and Entrepreneurship Outlook 2019 (OECD, 2019).
Supply Chain Assessment —Wind Energy 2006–2014 (Navigant Research, 2014).
Hausmann, R. et al. The Atlas of Economic Complexity (MIT Press, 2013).
McNerney, J., Farmer, J. D., Redner, S. & Trancik, J. E. Role of design complexity in technology improvement. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 108, 9008–9013 (2011).
Novak, S. & Eppinger, S. D. Sourcing by design: product complexity and the supply chain. Manag. Sci. 47, 189–204 (2001).
Broekel, T. Using structural diversity to measure the complexity of technologies. PLoS ONE 14, e0216856 (2019).
Mealy, P., Farmer, J. D. & Teytelboym, A. Interpreting economic complexity. Sci. Adv. 5, eaau1705 (2019).
Balland, P.-A. & Rigby, D. The geography of complex knowledge. Econ. Geogr. 93, 1–23 (2017).
Fleming, L. & Sorenson, O. Technology as a complex adaptive system: evidence from patent data. Res. Policy 30, 1019–1039 (2001).
Huenteler, J., Ossenbrink, J., Schmidt, T. S. & Hoffmann, V. H. How a product’s design hierarchy shapes the evolution of technological knowledge—evidence from patent-citation networks in wind power. Res. Policy 45, 1195–1217 (2016).
Observatory of Economic Complexity—Product Complexity Rankings (MIT Media Lab, 2011); https://atlas.media.mit.edu/en/rankings/product/hs07/?year_range=2011-2016
Paisemi, F. EU Energy Technology Trade: Import and Export (Publications Office of the European Union, 2017); https://setis.ec.europa.eu/sites/default/files/reports/eu_energy_technology_trade.pdf
Wind, I. HS Codes and the Renewable Energy Sector. Research and Analysis (International Centre for Trade and Sustainable Development, 2008).
Asheim, B. T. & Coenen, L. Knowledge bases and regional innovation systems: comparing Nordic clusters. Res. Policy 34, 1173–1190 (2005).
Lewis, J. I. & Wiser, R. H. Fostering a renewable energy technology industry: an international comparison of wind industry policy support mechanisms. Energy Policy 35, 1844–1857 (2007).
Qiu, Y. & Anadon, L. D. The price of wind power in China during its expansion: technology adoption, learning-by-doing, economies of scale, and manufacturing localization. Energy Econ. 34, 772–785 (2012).
Awate, S., Larsen, M. M. & Mudambi, R. Accessing vs sourcing knowledge: a comparative study of R&D internationalization between emerging and advanced economy firms. J. Int. Bus. Stud. 46, 63–86 (2015).
Nieto, M. J. & Rodríguez, A. Offshoring of R&D: looking abroad to improve innovation performance. J. Int. Bus. Stud. 42, 345–361 (2011).
Dunning, J. H. & Lundan, S. M. The internationalization of corporate R&D: a review of the evidence and some policy implications for home countries. Rev. Policy Res. 26, 13–33 (2009).
Doblinger, C., Dowling, M. & Helm, R. An institutional perspective of public policy and network effects in the renewable energy industry: enablers or disablers of entrepreneurial behaviour and innovation? Entrep. Reg. Dev. 28, 126–156 (2016).
Cox Pahnke, E., McDonald, R., Wang, D. & Hallen, B. Exposed: venture capital, competitor ties, and entrepreneurial innovation. Acad. Manag. J. 58, 1334–1360 (2014).
Doblinger, C., Surana, K. & Anadon, L. D. Governments as partners: the role of alliances in U.S. cleantech startup innovation. Res. Policy 48, 1458–1475 (2019).
Schilling, M. A. & Phelps, C. C. Interfirm collaboration networks: the impact of large-scale network structure on firm innovation. Manag. Sci. 53, 1113–1126 (2007).
Gereffi, G., Humphrey, J. & Sturgeon, T. The governance of global value chains. Rev. Int. Polit. Econ. 12, 78–104 (2005).
Sturgeon, T., Van Biesebroeck, J. & Gereffi, G. Value chains, networks and clusters: reframing the global automotive industry. J. Econ. Geogr. 8, 297–321 (2008).
Schmidt, T. S. & Huenteler, J. Anticipating industry localization effects of clean technology deployment policies in developing countries. Glob. Environ. Change 38, 8–20 (2016).
Brauch, H. G., Spring, Ú. O., Grin, J. & Scheffran, J. Handbook on Sustainability Transition and Sustainable Peace Vol. 10 (Springer, 2016).
Haakonsson, S., Kirkegaard, J. K. & Lema, R. The decomposition of innovation in Europe and China’s catch-up in wind power technology: the role of KIBS. Eur. Plan. Stud. https://doi.org/10.1080/09654313.2020.1712329 (2020).
Utility Scale Wind Towers from Canada, Indonesia, Korea, and Vietnam Investigation Nos. 701-TA-627-629 and 731-TA-1458-1461 (Preliminary) (USITC, 2019); https://www.usitc.gov/publications/701_731/pub4952.pdf
Wilson, C. et al. Granular technologies to accelerate decarbonization. Science 368, 36–39 (2020).
Future of Wind: Deployment, Investment, Technology, Grid Integration and Socio-economic Aspects (IRENA, 2019); https://www.irena.org/-/media/Files/IRENA/Agency/Publication/2019/Oct/IRENA_Future_of_wind_2019.pdf
Feinerer, I., Hornik, K. & Meyer, D. Text mining infrastructure in R. J. Stat. Softw. 25, 1–54 (2008).
Grün, B. & Hornik, K. topicmodels: an R package for fitting topic models. J. Stat. Softw. 40, 1–30 (2011).
Chan, G. The Commercialization of Publicly Funded Science: How Licensing Federal Laboratory Inventions Affects Knowledge Spillovers. Doctoral thesis, Harvard Univ. (2015); http://isites.harvard.edu/fs/docs/icb.topic1459278.files/CHAN-Gabriel_11-21-14_JMP%20-%20National%20Lab%20Patent%20Licensing.pdf
Kim, G., Park, S. & Jang, D. in Soft Computing in Big Data Processing (eds. Lee, K. M. et al.) 71–80 (Springer International, 2014).
Barrat, A., Barthélemy, M., Pastor-Satorras, R. & Vespignani, A. The architecture of complex weighted networks. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 101, 3747–3752 (2004).
Csardi, G. & Nepusz, T. The igraph software package for complex network research. InterJ. Complex Syst. 1695, 1–9 (2006).
Taglioni, D. & Winkler, D. Making Global Value Chains Work for Development (The World Bank, 2016); https://doi.org/10.1596/978-1-4648-0157-0
Pedersen, T. L. ggforce: accelerating ‘ggplot2’. R package version 0.1 2 (2019).
Hlavac, M. Stargazer: well-formatted regression and summary statistics tables. R package version 5 (2015).
Funding for this research was provided by the US National Science Foundation under grant number 1829252; and the UK Economic and Social Research Council under grant number ES/S010688/1. M. George, L. He, A. Hammerstingl and F. Traimer helped with cleaning and verifying the dataset. D. Li and M. Vigil provided valuable feedback on the concepts behind this paper.
The authors declare no competing interests.
Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Supplementary Tables 1–6, Figs. 1 and 2, and refs. 1–7.
Source data for Supplementary Fig. 1. Comparison of technology complexity calculated from different approaches.
Source data for Supplementary Fig. 2. Distribution of wind component suppliers by country and the processed dataset to calculate results.
Data on number of suppliers by country and by component, and the base dataset.
Data points for the product complexity index using HS02 values.
Source data on suppliers and the country of the OEM they supply to, the base dataset and the complexity dataset.
Summary of the number of countries and firms for each component, the base dataset and the complexity dataset.
Statistical model results and the processed dataset to calculate results.
Summary of data on maximum complexity in a country, the base dataset and the complexity dataset.
About this article
Cite this article
Surana, K., Doblinger, C., Anadon, L.D. et al. Effects of technology complexity on the emergence and evolution of wind industry manufacturing locations along global value chains. Nat Energy 5, 811–821 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41560-020-00685-6
Nature Energy (2020)