216Lundvall, B. A. (1992). National systems of innovation: Towards a theory of innovation and

interactive learning. Printer Publishers. Mokyr, J. (1994). Cardwell’s law and the political economy of technological progress. Research

Policy, 23(5), 561–574.

217Third-Generation Innovation Policy: System Transformation or Reinforcing. . .

Nelson, R. R., & Winter, S. G. (1982) An evolutionary theory of economic change. Harvard University Press. Nilsson, M., & Moodysson, J. (2015). Regional innovation policy and coordination: Illustrations from southern Sweden. Science and Public Policy, 42(2), 147–161. North, D. (1990). Institutions, economic theory and economic performance. Institutions, institutional change and economic performance. Cambridge University Press. OECD. (2018). Reviews of innovation policy: Austria 2018. Potts, J., Allen, D.W., & MacDonald, T.J. (2016, September 7). Keep your friends close, your enemies closer: The case for inclusive innovation policy. Sandström, C., Jörnmark, J., Björklund, M., & Hvarfner, K. (2019). Innovationspolitik – ett överutbud av stöd & hinder? Ekonomisk Debatt, 47(7), 67–70. Schot, J., & Steinmueller, E. (2018). Framing innovation policy for transformative change: Innovation policy 3.0. SPRU Science Policy Research Unit, University of Sussex. Schumpeter, J. A. (1942). Socialism, capitalism and democracy. Harper and Brothers. Scott, S. M. (1995). Institutions and organizations. Sage. Technopolis. (2020). Metautvärdering av andra omgången strategiska innovationsprogram efter sex år. VR 2020:19. Vinnova. Technopolis. (2019). Sexårsutvärdering av det strategiska innovationsprogrammet för gruv- & metallutvinnande industri – STRIM, VR 2019:18. Vinnova. Tushman, M. L., & Anderson, P. (1986). Technological discontinuities and organizational environments. Administrative Science Quarterly, 31(3), 439–465.

Open Access This chapter is licensed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this chapter are included in the chapter's Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the chapter's Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder.

220Less from More: China Built Wind Power,

but Gained Little Electricity

Jonas Grafström

Abstract This chapter investigates Chinese wind power development and concludes that innovation cannot be pushed by the efforts of many, and that when the state clariﬁes directions and objectives, these can be achieved but with severe and unexpected side effects. Two topics are explored: wind curtailment and low technological development, both examples of unproductive entrepreneurship induced by government policies. The goal of wind power capacity expansion leads to construction (i.e., generation capacity) but little electricity. Examples of failures include low grid connectivity with, some years averaging 15% of generation capacity broken or