IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/jcmkts/v53y2015i4p786-802.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Convergence of National Innovation Policy Mixes in Europe – Has It Gone Too Far? An Analysis of Research and Innovation Policy Measures in the Period 2004–12

Author

Listed:
  • Kincsö Izsak
  • Paresa Markianidou
  • Slavo Radošević

Abstract

A national innovation policy mix comprises the measures that address the innovation policy challenges of the country in question. The data series of the Erawatch and INNO Policy TrendChart initiatives of the European Commission provide a unique opportunity to explore the profiles of the national innovation policy mixes and their evolution during the past decade. In this article, the innovation policy mix per country and changes in these mixes over time are identified. The analysis covers five main policy mix profiles of the EU Member States. An unexpected similarity and stability is found in the national innovation policy mixes of the Member States even though these countries face different innovation challenges. This reflects extensive transnational policy learning, which is a welcome development, but such a similarity among heterogeneous countries might indicate that innovation policies are not being tailored effectively to the real needs and situations in each Member State.

Suggested Citation

  • Kincsö Izsak & Paresa Markianidou & Slavo Radošević, 2015. "Convergence of National Innovation Policy Mixes in Europe – Has It Gone Too Far? An Analysis of Research and Innovation Policy Measures in the Period 2004–12," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 53(4), pages 786-802, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:jcmkts:v:53:y:2015:i:4:p:786-802
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1111/jcms.12221
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Jakob B. Madsen & Md. Rabiul Islam & James B. Ang, 2010. "Catching up to the technology frontier: the dichotomy between innovation and imitation," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 43(4), pages 1389-1411, November.
    2. Slavo Radosevic & Esin Yoruk, 2014. "Are there global shifts in the world science base? Analysing the catching up and falling behind of world regions," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 101(3), pages 1897-1924, December.
    3. Daron Acemoglu & Philippe Aghion & Fabrizio Zilibotti, 2006. "Distance to Frontier, Selection, and Economic Growth," Journal of the European Economic Association, MIT Press, vol. 4(1), pages 37-74, March.
    4. Jan Fagerberg & David C Mowery & Bart Verspagen, 2009. "The evolution of Norway's national innovation system," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 36(6), pages 431-444, July.
    5. Daniele Archibugi & Andrea Filippetti, 2011. "Is the Economic Crisis Impairing Convergence in Innovation Performance across Europe?," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 49(6), pages 1153-1182, November.
    6. Bruno Amable & Pascal Petit, 2003. "The diversity of social systems of innovation and production during the 1990s," Chapters, in: Jean-Philippe Touffut (ed.), Institutions, Innovation and Growth, chapter 8, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    7. Kravtsova, Victoria & Radosevic, Slavo, 2012. "Are systems of innovation in Eastern Europe efficient?," Economic Systems, Elsevier, vol. 36(1), pages 109-126.
    8. Erik Arnold, 2004. "Evaluating research and innovation policy: a systems world needs systems evaluations," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 13(1), pages 3-17, April.
    9. Aghion, Philippe & Akcigit, Ufuk & Howitt, Peter, 2014. "What Do We Learn From Schumpeterian Growth Theory?," Handbook of Economic Growth, in: Philippe Aghion & Steven Durlauf (ed.), Handbook of Economic Growth, edition 1, volume 2, chapter 0, pages 515-563, Elsevier.
    10. Andrea Filippetti & Antonio Peyrache, 2013. "Is the Convergence Party Over? Labour Productivity and the Technology Gap in Europe," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 51(6), pages 1006-1022, November.
    11. Richard Rose, 1990. "Inheritance Before Choice in Public policy," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 2(3), pages 263-291, July.
    12. Metcalfe, J S, 1994. "Evolutionary Economics and Technology Policy," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 104(425), pages 931-944, July.
    13. Flanagan, Kieron & Uyarra, Elvira & Laranja, Manuel, 2011. "Reconceptualising the 'policy mix' for innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(5), pages 702-713, June.
    14. Metcalfe, J S, 1995. "Technology Systems and Technology Policy in an Evolutionary Framework," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 19(1), pages 25-46, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Zhelyu Vladimirov, 2018. "Discussing Innovation Policy Biases in the New EU Member States," Economic Studies journal, Bulgarian Academy of Sciences - Economic Research Institute, issue 5, pages 3-26.
    2. Vincent Gengnagel & Katharina Zimmermann & Sebastian M. Büttner, 2022. "‘Closer to the Market’: EU Research Governance and Symbolic Power," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 60(6), pages 1573-1591, November.
    3. Santos-Arteaga, Francisco J. & Di Caprio, Debora & Tavana, Madjid & O’Connor, Aidan, 2017. "Innovation dynamics and labor force restructuring with asymmetrically developed national innovation systems," International Business Review, Elsevier, vol. 26(1), pages 36-56.
    4. Lauma Muizniece, 2021. "University Autonomy and Commercialization of Publicly Funded Research: the Case of Latvia," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 12(3), pages 1494-1516, September.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Jakob Edler & Jan Fagerberg, 2017. "Innovation policy: what, why, and how," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press and Oxford Review of Economic Policy Limited, vol. 33(1), pages 2-23.
    2. Ljiljana Bozic, 2020. "Sources of Business Growth at Different Levels of Innovativeness: Case of Firms in EU Countries," Managing Global Transitions, University of Primorska, Faculty of Management Koper, vol. 18(2 (Summer), pages 127-145.
    3. Magro, Edurne & Wilson, James R., 2013. "Complex innovation policy systems: Towards an evaluation mix," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(9), pages 1647-1656.
    4. Bleda, Mercedes & del Río, Pablo, 2013. "The market failure and the systemic failure rationales in technological innovation systems," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(5), pages 1039-1052.
    5. Juan Ricardo Perilla Jimenez, 2019. "Mainstream and evolutionary views of technology, economic growth and catching up," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 29(3), pages 823-852, July.
    6. Çağatay Bircan & Ralph De Haas, 2020. "The Limits of Lending? Banks and Technology Adoption across Russia," The Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 33(2), pages 536-609.
    7. Švarc, Jadranka & Dabić, Marina, 2021. "Transformative innovation policy or how to escape peripheral policy paradox in European research peripheral countries," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 67(C).
    8. Jess Benhabib & Jesse Perla & Christopher Tonetti, 2021. "Reconciling Models of Diffusion and Innovation: A Theory of the Productivity Distribution and Technology Frontier," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 89(5), pages 2261-2301, September.
    9. Marc J. Melitz & Stephen J. Redding, 2021. "Trade and innovation," CEP Discussion Papers dp1777, Centre for Economic Performance, LSE.
    10. Lee, Dongyeol, 2016. "Role of R&D in the productivity growth of Korean industries: Technology gap and business cycle," Journal of Asian Economics, Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 31-45.
    11. Fagerberg, Jan, 2018. "Mobilizing innovation for sustainability transitions: A comment on transformative innovation policy," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(9), pages 1568-1576.
    12. Amable, Bruno & Ledezma, Ivan & Robin, Stéphane, 2016. "Product market regulation, innovation, and productivity," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(10), pages 2087-2104.
    13. Predrag Petrović & Goran Nikolić, 2018. "Schumpeterian Growth Theory: Empirical Testing Of Barriers To Competition-Proximity To Frontier Algorithm," Economic Annals, Faculty of Economics and Business, University of Belgrade, vol. 63(217), pages 7-38, April – J.
    14. Fassio Claudio, 2011. "Sectoral invariances or distance-from-the-frontier effect among European mid-low tech sectors," Department of Economics and Statistics Cognetti de Martiis LEI & BRICK - Laboratory of Economics of Innovation "Franco Momigliano", Bureau of Research in Innovation, Complexity and Knowledge, Collegio 201115, University of Turin.
    15. Gros, Daniel & Alcidi, Cinzia, 2014. "The Global Economy in 2030: Trends and Strategies for Europe," CEPS Papers 9142, Centre for European Policy Studies.
    16. Bajmócy, Zoltán & Vas, Zsófia, 2012. "Az innovációs rendszerek 25 éve. Szakirodalmi áttekintés evolúciós közgazdaságtani megközelítésben [25 years of innovation systems. A literature review from the angle of evolutionary economics]," Közgazdasági Szemle (Economic Review - monthly of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences), Közgazdasági Szemle Alapítvány (Economic Review Foundation), vol. 0(11), pages 1233-1256.
    17. Chaminade, Cristina & Intarakumnerd, Patarapong & Sapprasert, Koson, 2012. "Measuring systemic problems in National Innovation Systems. An application to Thailand," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(8), pages 1476-1488.
    18. Isabel Maria Bodas Freitas & Nick von Tunzelmann, 2013. "Alignment of Innovation Policy Objectives: a demand side perspective," DRUID Working Papers 13-02, DRUID, Copenhagen Business School, Department of Industrial Economics and Strategy/Aalborg University, Department of Business Studies.
    19. Bajmócy, Zoltán & Gébert, Judit, 2014. "The outlines of innovation policy in the capability approach," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 38(C), pages 93-102.
    20. Philippe Aghion & Peter Howitt & Susanne Prantl, 2015. "Patent rights, product market reforms, and innovation," Journal of Economic Growth, Springer, vol. 20(3), pages 223-262, September.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:jcmkts:v:53:y:2015:i:4:p:786-802. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journal.asp?ref=0021-9886 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.