IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/tefoso/v147y2019icp174-184.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Convergence of innovation policies in the European aerospace industry (1960–2000)

Author

Listed:
  • Landoni, Matteo
  • ogilvie, dt

Abstract

This paper contributes to an understanding of the evolution of the space industry and the role innovation policy and industrial change have played in that process. It looks at the impact of business-government interactions on the emerging space industry and how it evolved from the consolidation of aerospace businesses to the government creating national agencies to support the industry (through the use of innovation policy instruments) at the same time that privatization of the aerospace businesses occurred.

Suggested Citation

  • Landoni, Matteo & ogilvie, dt, 2019. "Convergence of innovation policies in the European aerospace industry (1960–2000)," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 147(C), pages 174-184.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:tefoso:v:147:y:2019:i:c:p:174-184
    DOI: 10.1016/j.techfore.2019.07.007
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0040162518310023
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.techfore.2019.07.007?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    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. Johann Peter Murmann, 2013. "The Coevolution of Industries and Important Features of Their Environments," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 24(1), pages 58-78, February.
    2. Archibugi, Daniele & Filippetti, Andrea, 2018. "The retreat of public research and its adverse consequences on innovation," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 127(C), pages 97-111.
    3. Antonelli, Cristiano & Crespi, Francesco, 2013. "The "Matthew effect" in R&D public subsidies: The Italian evidence," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 80(8), pages 1523-1534.
    4. Howells, Jeremy, 2006. "Intermediation and the role of intermediaries in innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(5), pages 715-728, June.
    5. Raymond S. Isenson, 1966. "Technological Forecasting in Perspective," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 13(2), pages 70-83, October.
    6. Watkins, Andrew & Papaioannou, Theo & Mugwagwa, Julius & Kale, Dinar, 2015. "National innovation systems and the intermediary role of industry associations in building institutional capacities for innovation in developing countries: A critical review of the literature," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(8), pages 1407-1418.
    7. Bengt-Åke Lundvall, 2007. "National Innovation Systems—Analytical Concept and Development Tool," Industry and Innovation, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 14(1), pages 95-119.
    8. Raghu Garud & Arun Kumaraswamy & Peter Karnøe, 2010. "Path Dependence or Path Creation?," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 47(4), pages 760-774, June.
    9. Jack S. Levy, 2008. "Case Studies: Types, Designs, and Logics of Inference," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 25(1), pages 1-18, February.
    10. Callon, M., 1980. "The state and technical innovation: a case study of the electrical vehicle in France," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 9(4), pages 358-376, October.
    11. Robinson, Douglas K.R. & Mazzucato, Mariana, 2019. "The evolution of mission-oriented policies: Exploring changing market creating policies in the US and European space sector," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(4), pages 936-948.
    12. Braun, Dietmar, 1993. "Who Governs Intermediary Agencies? Principal-Agent Relations in Research Policy-Making," Journal of Public Policy, Cambridge University Press, vol. 13(2), pages 135-162, April.
    13. Mariana Mazzucato, 2016. "From market fixing to market-creating: a new framework for innovation policy," Industry and Innovation, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 23(2), pages 140-156, February.
    14. Ben R. Martin, 2016. "R&D policy instruments -- a critical review of what we do and don’t know," Industry and Innovation, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 23(2), pages 157-176, February.
    15. Jos� M. Alonso & Judith Clifton & Daniel Díaz-Fuentes & Marcos Fernández-Guti�rrez & Julio Revuelta, 2013. "The race for international markets: Were privatized telecommunications incumbents more successful than their public counterparts?," International Review of Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 27(2), pages 215-236, March.
    16. Rohrbeck, René & Schwarz, Jan Oliver, 2013. "The value contribution of strategic foresight: Insights from an empirical study of large European companies," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 80(8), pages 1593-1606.
    17. Cho, Yonghee & Yoon, Seong-Pil & Kim, Karp-Soo, 2016. "An industrial technology roadmap for supporting public R&D planning," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 107(C), pages 1-12.
    18. Edler, Jakob & Yeow, Jillian, 2016. "Connecting demand and supply: The role of intermediation in public procurement of innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(2), pages 414-426.
    19. Hussain, M. & Tapinos, E. & Knight, L., 2017. "Scenario-driven roadmapping for technology foresight," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 124(C), pages 160-177.
    20. Storz, Cornelia, 2008. "Dynamics in innovation systems: Evidence from Japan's game software industry," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(9), pages 1480-1491, October.
    21. Colombelli, Alessandra & Krafft, Jackie & Quatraro, Francesco, 2013. "Properties of knowledge base and firm survival: Evidence from a sample of French manufacturing firms," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 80(8), pages 1469-1483.
    22. Stefan Kuhlmann & Arie Rip, 2018. "Next-Generation Innovation Policy and Grand Challenges," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 45(4), pages 448-454.
    23. Rogge, Karoline S. & Reichardt, Kristin, 2016. "Policy mixes for sustainability transitions: An extended concept and framework for analysis," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(8), pages 1620-1635.
    24. Fuenfschilling, Lea & Truffer, Bernhard, 2016. "The interplay of institutions, actors and technologies in socio-technical systems — An analysis of transformations in the Australian urban water sector," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 103(C), pages 298-312.
    25. Borrás, Susana & Edquist, Charles, 2013. "The choice of innovation policy instruments," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 80(8), pages 1513-1522.
    26. Kivimaa, Paula & Kern, Florian, 2016. "Creative destruction or mere niche support? Innovation policy mixes for sustainability transitions," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(1), pages 205-217.
    27. Jeremy Howells, 1999. "Research and Technology Outsourcing and Innovation Systems: an Exploratory Analysis," Industry and Innovation, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 6(1), pages 111-129.
    28. Bettman, James R & Park, C Whan, 1980. "Effects of Prior Knowledge and Experience and Phase of the Choice Process on Consumer Decision Processes: A Protocol Analysis," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 7(3), pages 234-248, December.
    29. Graf, Lukas, 2013. "The Hybridization of Vocational Training and Higher Education in Austria, Germany, and Switzerland," EconStor Books, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, number 251577, July.
    30. Asim Ijaz Khwaja & Atif Mian, 2005. "Do Lenders Favor Politically Connected Firms? Rent Provision in an Emerging Financial Market," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 120(4), pages 1371-1411.
    31. Greif, Avner, 1998. "Historical and Comparative Institutional Analysis," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 88(2), pages 80-84, May.
    32. William Lazonick & Mariana Mazzucato, 2013. "The risk-reward nexus in the innovation-inequality relationship: who takes the risks? Who gets the rewards ?," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 22(4), pages 1093-1128, August.
    33. James G. March & Lee S. Sproull & Michal Tamuz, 1991. "Learning from Samples of One or Fewer," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 2(1), pages 1-13, February.
    34. Zhang, Yi & Robinson, Douglas K.R. & Porter, Alan L. & Zhu, Donghua & Zhang, Guangquan & Lu, Jie, 2016. "Technology roadmapping for competitive technical intelligence," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 110(C), pages 175-186.
    35. Reddy, K. Srinivasa & Agrawal, Rajat, 2012. "Designing case studies from secondary sources – A conceptual framework," MPRA Paper 60423, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 2012.
    36. Heger, Tobias & Rohrbeck, René, 2012. "Strategic foresight for collaborative exploration of new business fields," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 79(5), pages 819-831.
    37. Morlacchi, Piera & Martin, Ben R., 2009. "Emerging challenges for science, technology and innovation policy research: A reflexive overview," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(4), pages 571-582, May.
    38. Carlota Perez, 2012. "Innovation systems and policy: not only for the rich?," The Other Canon Foundation and Tallinn University of Technology Working Papers in Technology Governance and Economic Dynamics 42, TUT Ragnar Nurkse Department of Innovation and Governance.
    39. Mireille Matt & Sandrine Wolff, 2004. "Incentives, coordination and learning in government-sponsored vs. spontaneous inter-firm research cooperation," Post-Print hal-00278687, HAL.
    40. Markku Sotarauta & Riina Pulkkinen, 2011. "Institutional Entrepreneurship for Knowledge Regions: In Search of a Fresh Set of Questions for Regional Innovation Studies," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 29(1), pages 96-112, February.
    41. Metcalfe, J S, 1994. "Evolutionary Economics and Technology Policy," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 104(425), pages 931-944, July.
    42. Kieron Flanagan & Elvira Uyarra, 2016. "Four dangers in innovation policy studies -- and how to avoid them," Industry and Innovation, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 23(2), pages 177-188, February.
    43. Peter Clark & Michael Rowlinson, 2004. "The Treatment of History in Organisation Studies: Towards an 'Historic Turn'?," Business History, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 46(3), pages 331-352.
    44. Pietrobelli, Carlo & Puppato, Fernanda, 2016. "Technology foresight and industrial strategy," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 110(C), pages 117-125.
    45. Flanagan, Kieron & Uyarra, Elvira & Laranja, Manuel, 2011. "Reconceptualising the 'policy mix' for innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(5), pages 702-713, June.
    46. Ashish Bharadwaj, 2018. "Environmental Regulations and Innovation in Advanced Automobile Technologies," SpringerBriefs in Economics, Springer, number 978-981-10-6952-9, September.
    47. Söderholm, Patrik & Hellsmark, Hans & Frishammar, Johan & Hansson, Julia & Mossberg, Johanna & Sandström, Annica, 2019. "Technological development for sustainability: The role of network management in the innovation policy mix," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 138(C), pages 309-323.
    48. Judith Clifton & Francisco Com�n & Daniel D�az-Fuentes, 2011. "From national monopoly to multinational corporation: How regulation shaped the road towards telecommunications internationalisation," Business History, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 53(5), pages 761-781, August.
    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. Jessica Catalano & Francesco Giffoni & Paolo Castelnovo, 2021. "The impact of space procurement on suppliers: Evidence from Italy," Working Papers 202102, CSIL Centre for Industrial Studies.
    2. Landoni, Matteo, 2020. "Knowledge creation in state-owned enterprises," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 77-85.
    3. Lee, Junho & Kim, Ikjun & Kim, Hyomin & Kang, Juyoung, 2021. "SWOT-AHP analysis of the Korean satellite and space industry: Strategy recommendations for development," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 164(C).
    4. Shutter Zor & Jingru Chen & Jietie Ailimujiang & Fayao Wang, 2023. "Follow Suit: Imitative governance, resource inclination, and regional innovation efficiency," Review of Economic Assessment, Anser Press, vol. 2(1), pages 25-39, April.
    5. Caliari, Thiago & Ribeiro, Leonardo Costa & Pietrobelli, Carlo & Vezzani, Antonio, 2023. "Global value chains and sectoral innovation systems: An analysis of the aerospace industry," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 65(C), pages 36-48.

    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. Magro, Edurne & Wilson, James R., 2019. "Policy-mix evaluation: Governance challenges from new place-based innovation policies," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(10).
    2. Diercks, Gijs & Larsen, Henrik & Steward, Fred, 2019. "Transformative innovation policy: Addressing variety in an emerging policy paradigm," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(4), pages 880-894.
    3. Rogge, Karoline S. & Pfluger, Benjamin & Geels, Frank W., 2020. "Transformative policy mixes in socio-technical scenarios: The case of the low-carbon transition of the German electricity system (2010–2050)," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 151(C).
    4. Ainhoa Arrona, 2017. "Can interpretive policy analysis contribute to a critical scholarship on regional innovation policy studies?," Working Papers 2017R01, Orkestra - Basque Institute of Competitiveness.
    5. Jan Fagerberg & Håkon Endresen Normann, 2022. "Innovation policy, regulation and the transition to net zero," Working Papers on Innovation Studies 20220531, Centre for Technology, Innovation and Culture, University of Oslo.
    6. Söderholm, Patrik & Hellsmark, Hans & Frishammar, Johan & Hansson, Julia & Mossberg, Johanna & Sandström, Annica, 2019. "Technological development for sustainability: The role of network management in the innovation policy mix," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 138(C), pages 309-323.
    7. Diercks, Gijs, 2019. "Lost in translation: How legacy limits the OECD in promoting new policy mixes for sustainability transitions," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(10).
    8. Bhardwaj, Chandan & Axsen, Jonn & Kern, Florian & McCollum, David, 2020. "Why have multiple climate policies for light-duty vehicles? Policy mix rationales, interactions and research gaps," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 135(C), pages 309-326.
    9. Hilde Nykamp, 2020. "Policy Mix for a Transition to Sustainability: Green Buildings in Norway," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(2), pages 1-17, January.
    10. Imbert, Enrica & Ladu, Luana & Morone, Piergiuseppe & Quitzow, Rainer, 2017. "Policy strategies for a transition to a bioeconomy in Europe: the case of Italy and Germany," MPRA Paper 78143, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    11. Edmondson, Duncan L. & Kern, Florian & Rogge, Karoline S., 2019. "The co-evolution of policy mixes and socio-technical systems: Towards a conceptual framework of policy mix feedback in sustainability transitions," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(10).
    12. 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.
    13. Coburn, Josie & Bone, Frederique & Hopkins, Michael M. & Stirling, Andy & Mestre-Ferrandiz, Jorge & Arapostathis, Stathis & Llewelyn, Martin J., 2021. "Appraising research policy instrument mixes: a multicriteria mapping study in six European countries of diagnostic innovation to manage antimicrobial resistance," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(4).
    14. Kergroach, Sandrine, 2019. "National innovation policies for technology upgrading through GVCs: A cross-country comparison," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 145(C), pages 258-272.
    15. Uyarra, Elvira & Zabala-Iturriagagoitia, Jon Mikel & Flanagan, Kieron & Magro, Edurne, 2020. "Public procurement, innovation and industrial policy: Rationales, roles, capabilities and implementation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(1).
    16. Falcone, Pasquale Marcello & Lopolito, Antonio & Sica, Edgardo, 2019. "Instrument mix for energy transition: A method for policy formulation," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 148(C).
    17. Ossenbrink, Jan & Finnsson, Sveinbjoern & Bening, Catharina R. & Hoffmann, Volker H., 2019. "Delineating policy mixes: Contrasting top-down and bottom-up approaches to the case of energy-storage policy in California," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(10).
    18. Serenella Caravella & Francesco Crespi, 2021. "The role of public procurement as innovation lever: evidence from Italian manufacturing firms," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 30(7), pages 663-684, October.
    19. Maximilian Benner, 2021. "System-level agency and its many shades: How to shape the system for path development?," PEGIS geo-disc-2021_10, Institute for Economic Geography and GIScience, Department of Socioeconomics, Vienna University of Economics and Business.
    20. Markus M Bugge & Lars Coenen & Are Branstad, 2018. "Governing socio-technical change: Orchestrating demand for assisted living in ageing societies," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 45(4), pages 468-479.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Policy mix; Innovation intermediaries; Innovation policy; Space industry; Aerospace industry; Privatization; Policy history;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • L5 - Industrial Organization - - Regulation and Industrial Policy
    • L6 - Industrial Organization - - Industry Studies: Manufacturing
    • N4 - Economic History - - Government, War, Law, International Relations, and Regulation
    • N8 - Economic History - - Micro-Business History
    • P1 - Political Economy and Comparative Economic Systems - - Capitalist Economies

    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:eee:tefoso:v:147:y:2019:i:c:p:174-184. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/00401625 .

    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.