IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/jinsec/v14y2018i06p1025-1047_00.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Governing the innovation commons

Author

Listed:
  • POTTS, JASON

Abstract

This paper analyses the origin of innovation using institutional economic theory. Because of distributed information and fundamental uncertainty, an efficient institutional context for the economic organization of innovation in its early stages is often that of a common pool resource. The theory of the innovation commons draws upon Hayek, Williamson and Ostrom to present the innovation problem as a combined knowledge problem, implicit contracting problem and collective action governance problem. Innovation commons theory also implies that Kirzner's model of entrepreneurial opportunity discovery extends to higher-order groups, suggesting a multilevel selection model of economic evolution.

Suggested Citation

  • Potts, Jason, 2018. "Governing the innovation commons," Journal of Institutional Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 14(6), pages 1025-1047, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:cup:jinsec:v:14:y:2018:i:06:p:1025-1047_00
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S1744137417000479/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Darcy W E Allen, 2020. "When Entrepreneurs Meet:The Collective Governance of New Ideas," World Scientific Books, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., number q0269, January.
    2. Nicolas Jullien & Karine Roudaut, 2020. "Commun numérique de connaissance : définition et conditions d’existence," Innovations, De Boeck Université, vol. 0(3), pages 69-93.
    3. Suominen, Arho & Deschryvere, Matthias & Narayan, Rumy, 2023. "Uncovering value through exploration of barriers - A perspective on intellectual property rights in a national innovation system," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 123(C).
    4. Magnus Henrekson & Anders Kärnä & Tino Sanandaji, 2022. "Schumpeterian entrepreneurship: coveted by policymakers but impervious to top-down policymaking," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 32(3), pages 867-890, July.
    5. William Bianco & Keith Gaddie & John Rice & Don Shin & Henrik Stahl & Ruth Winecoff & William Kindred Winecoff, 2020. "Incentivizing Innovation in a Knowledge Society," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 101(7), pages 2389-2397, December.
    6. Theo Papaioannou, 2023. "What kind of innovation state matters for social justice? Learning from Poulantzas and going beyond," Review of Evolutionary Political Economy, Springer, vol. 4(2), pages 299-320, July.
    7. CHEAH, Sarah Lai-Yin & HO, Yuen-Ping & LI, Shiyu, 2020. "How the effect of opportunity discovery on innovation outcome differs between DIY laboratories and public research institutes: The role of industry turbulence and knowledge generation in the case of S," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 160(C).
    8. Lewis, Paul, 2021. "Elinor's Ostrom's ‘realist orientation’: An investigation of the ontological commitments of her analysis of the possibility of self-governance," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 189(C), pages 623-636.
    9. Harris,Colin & Cai,Meina & Murtazashvili,Ilia & Murtazashvili,Jennifer Brick, 2020. "The Origins and Consequences of Property Rights," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9781108969055.
    10. Patrick Cohendet & David Grandadam & Raphaël Suire, 2021. "Reconsidering the dynamics of local knowledge creation: Middlegrounds and local innovation commons in the case of FabLabs," Post-Print hal-03622101, HAL.
    11. Bustamante, Pedro & Gomez, Marcela & Murtazashvili, Ilia & Weiss, Martin, 2020. "Spectrum anarchy: why self-governance of the radio spectrum works better than we think," Journal of Institutional Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 16(6), pages 863-882, December.
    12. Plinio Limata, 2020. "Blockchain and Institutions (II): The Realm of Law," CERBE Working Papers wpC36, CERBE Center for Relationship Banking and Economics.
    13. Cohendet Patrick & Grandadam David & Suire Raphaël, 2021. "Reconsidering the dynamics of local knowledge creation: Middlegrounds and local innovation commons in the case of FabLabs," ZFW – Advances in Economic Geography, De Gruyter, vol. 65(1), pages 1-11, March.
    14. Paul Lewis, 2021. "The innovation systems approach: an Austrian and Ostromian perspective," The Review of Austrian Economics, Springer;Society for the Development of Austrian Economics, vol. 34(1), pages 97-114, March.

    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:cup:jinsec:v:14:y:2018:i:06:p:1025-1047_00. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/joi .

    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.