Innovation Policy or Policy for Innovation? – In Search of the Optimal Solution for Policy Approach and Organisation

Chapter

Abstract

Governments believe in the effectiveness of public funding to support innovation support, in part, because of the positive conclusions of impact analyses of such programs. Industry typically claims that it would not have innovated (or innovated so rapidly) without the motivation of continued public support. Given that public support for innovation is available in all countries, industry can be expected to take advantage of these support programs on a global basis. A globally coordinated approach towards public support of industrial innovation is problematic, given the global competition for investment in innovation activities by countries. Contemporary innovation is covering and partially integrating many different fields — management areas at company level, governance and policy fields in the public sector. “Innovation policy” is a misleading term: coherent and consistent policy to support the creation and acceptance of innovation is better understood as “policy for innovation”, with the emphasis on more systemic policy measures.

Keywords

Policy Measure Innovation Activity Public Support Innovation Policy National Innovation System 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. Doloreux D, Parto S (2005) Regional innovation systems: current discourse and unresolved issues. Tech Soc 27:133–153CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Edquist C (2001) The systems of innovation approach and innovation policy: an account of the state of the art. In: Lead paper presented at the DRUID conference, Aalborg, 12–15 June 2001, under theme F: ‘National Systems of Innovation, Institutions and Public Policies’, Draft of 2001-06-01Google Scholar
  3. Gustafsson R, Autio E (2011) A failure trichotomy in knowledge exploration and exploitation. Res Policy 40:819–831CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Johansson B, Karlsson C, Backman M (2007) Innovation policy instruments, CESIS electronic working paper series, paper no.105, Dec 2007Google Scholar
  5. Kuhlmann S (2001) Future governance of innovation policy in Europe – three scenarios. Res Policy 30:953–976CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Laranja M, Uyarra E, Flanagan K (2008) Policies for science, technology and innovation: translating rationales into regional policies in a multi-level setting. Res Policy 37:823–835CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Lundvall BA, Borrás S (2005) Science, technology and innovation policy. In: Fagerberg J, Mowery DC, Nelson RR (eds) Innovation handbook. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 599–631, Chapter 22Google Scholar
  8. Thite M, Wilkinson A, Shah D (2012) Internationalization and HRM strategies across subsidiaries in multinational corporations from emerging economies – a conceptual framework. J World Bus 47:251–258CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Tödtling F, Trippl M (2005) One size fits all? Towards a differentiated regional innovation policy approach. Res Policy 34(2005):1203–1219CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Woolthuis RK, Lankhuizen M, Gilsing V (2005) A system failure framework for innovation policy design. Technovation 25:609–619CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Institute for Statistical Studies and Economics of KnowledgeNational Research University – Higher School of Economics (HSE)MoscowRussia
  2. 2.OECDParisFrance

Personalised recommendations