IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/indcch/v31y2022i5p1152-1176..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Industrial R&D and national innovation policy: an institutional reappraisal of the US national innovation system
[Public policy to promote entrepreneurship: a call to arms]

Author

Listed:
  • Ibrahim A Shaikh
  • Krithika Randhawa

Abstract

Studies highlight how the once envied US national innovation system (NIS) is now showing signs of slowing down. In this article, we unpack this issue from an industrial R&D perspective. First, we highlight that open innovation (OI) practices (i.e., external sources and markets for technologies) have increased the rate of inventive activity in the current wave of industrial R&D, but financialization skews the firms’ focus on short-term profits and shareholder value maximization. When OI intersects with an institutional context that propagates such shareholder-centric governance of R&D, three social costs are incurred by the US NIS: (i) irrational relationship between risks and rewards, (ii) weak antitrust and intellectual property (IP) rights that result in a lack of business dynamism, and (iii) austerity and weak demand-side policies. We contend that these social costs tilt the R&D trajectory toward incremental R&D at the expense of the blue-sky science needed to retain US leadership in technological innovation. Second, we document three social benefits that public-sector R&D agencies generate for the US NIS: (i) undertaking a technology brokerage role, (ii) creating radical R&D markets, and (iii) embracing stakeholder governance. We emphasize how a hidden “entrepreneurial network state” subtly creates and shapes breakthrough R&D and markets for private sector firms but cannot recoup the rewards for society due to political rhetoric that favors incumbent market power. Third, we recommend both incremental and radical policies to drive institutional reforms that promote a stakeholder-centric form of R&D governance so that the future wave of industrial R&D creates value for society. Overall, we draw attention to the role politics plays in industrial R&D and the US NIS and how small adjustments in institutional dimensions and governance modes can impact the US R&D trajectory and competitiveness.

Suggested Citation

  • Ibrahim A Shaikh & Krithika Randhawa, 2022. "Industrial R&D and national innovation policy: an institutional reappraisal of the US national innovation system [Public policy to promote entrepreneurship: a call to arms]," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 31(5), pages 1152-1176.
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:indcch:v:31:y:2022:i:5:p:1152-1176.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/icc/dtac019
    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.

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Ye Zhu & Minggui Sun, 2022. "The Enabling Effect of Intellectual Property Strategy on Total Factor Productivity of Enterprises: Evidence from China’s Intellectual Property Model Cities," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(1), pages 1-19, December.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • O36 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Open Innovation
    • O38 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Government Policy
    • O51 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Economywide Country Studies - - - U.S.; Canada

    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:oup:indcch:v:31:y:2022:i:5:p:1152-1176.. 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: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/icc .

    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.