Sustainability Transitions and Economic Viability: Comparative Insights From Norway and China
Öz
Utilizing the creative destruction framework, this study examines how the economic viability of sustainability transitions evolves across different institutional contexts. Using both qualitative and quantitative data, the study compares two policy architectures: Norway’s demand-driven shift to battery-electric vehicles and China’s supply-focused growth in solar photovoltaic manufacturing. The results show that an institutional design in which regulatory, infrastructural, and fiscal measures interact, combined with consistent policies that earn the public’s and markets’ trust, makes sustainable technologies scalable. Therefore, market maturity and cost reductions are a result of these measures, rather than spontaneous competition – especially in the initial phases of transition.
Anahtar Kelimeler
Sustainability, Creative Destruction, Economic Viability, Norway, China
Etik Beyan
Dear Editor,
The submitted manuscript does not require an ethics committee approval, as the study does not involve any form of primary data collection. The analysis is based entirely on secondary data sources, including publicly available statistical datasets, official policy documents, international reports, and peer-reviewed academic literature. No surveys, interviews, experiments, participant observations, or procedures involving human or animal subjects were conducted within the scope of this research.
Accordingly, the study does not engage with personal data nor any methodology that would necessitate ethical review under institutional or national guidelines. All data used are publicly accessible, and the research adheres fully to established principles of academic integrity and research ethics.
Kaynakça
- Aasness, M. A., & Odeck, J. (2015). The increase of electric vehicle usage in Norway—Incentives and environmental impacts. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 39, 31–37. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trd.2015.06.007
- Acemoglu, D., Aghion, P., Bursztyn, L., & Hemous, D. (2012). The environment and directed technical change. American Economic Review, 102(1), 131–166. https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.102.1.131
- Acemoglu, D., & Johnson, S. (2023). Power and progress: Our thousand-year struggle over technology and prosperity. PublicAffairs.
- Aghion, P., Hepburn, C., Teytelboym, A., & Zenghelis, D. (2019). Path dependence, innovation, and the economics of climate change. In R. Fouquet (Ed.), Handbook on green growth (pp. 1–24). Edward Elgar.
- Aghion, P., & Howitt, P. (1992). A model of growth through creative destruction. Econometrica, 60(2), 323–351. https://doi.org/10.2307/2951599
- Akcigit, U., & Aghion, P. (2021). The Schumpeterian growth paradigm. Annual Review of Economics, 13, 1–23. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-economics-051520-025826
- Akcigit, U., & van Reenen, J. (2023). The economics of creative destruction. Harvard University Press.
- Aldy, J. (2023). Evaluating the economic and environmental impacts of the Inflation Reduction Act. Brookings Papers on Economic Activity.
- Banerjee, A. V., & Duflo, E. (2011). Poor economics: A radical rethinking of the way to fight global poverty. PublicAffairs.
- International Energy Agency. (2025). Global EV Outlook 2025: Electric vehicle charging. https://www.iea.org/reports/global-ev-outlook-2025/electric-vehicle-charging