IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/prs/ecoprv/ecop_0249-4744_2001_num_150_4_6353.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Les politiques de soutien à l'innovation technologique à l'aune de la théorie économique

Author

Listed:
  • Dominique Guellec

Abstract

[fre] Les politiques de soutien à l’innovation technologique font appel à un ensemble très diversifié d’instruments, tels le brevet, les subventions, les marchés publics, les aides fiscales ou la recherche publique. L’objet de cet article est d’examiner ces instruments sous l’angle de la théorie économique. La condition traditionnellement donnée à l’intervention publique dans ce domaine -que le rendement social de la recherche soit supérieur à son rendement privé -apparaît maintenant comme insuffisante. Du fait d’une information incomplète et asymétrique, l’État peut ne pas bien cibler ses interventions, ou il peut placer les agents face à des incitations contredisant l’objectif de son intervention. L’efficacité relative des différents instruments politiques dépend notamment de la structure d’information spécifique à chaque cas. [eng] Public Support for Technological Innovation in the Light of Economic Theory.. Policies supporting technological innovation rely on a wide variety of instruments, such as patents, subsidies, public procurement, tax breaks and public research. The purpose of this article is to examine these instruments in the light of economic theory. The condition traditionally attached to government intervention in this area, that social return on research be higher than private return, is now seen as not sufficient. Due to incomplete and asymmetrical information, the government may mis-target its intervention or give rise to incentive structures leading agents to behave in a way that contradicts the policy goals. The relative efficiency of the various policy instruments depends notably upon the information structure of each case.

Suggested Citation

  • Dominique Guellec, 2001. "Les politiques de soutien à l'innovation technologique à l'aune de la théorie économique," Économie et Prévision, Programme National Persée, vol. 150(4), pages 95-105.
  • Handle: RePEc:prs:ecoprv:ecop_0249-4744_2001_num_150_4_6353
    DOI: 10.3406/ecop.2001.6353
    Note: DOI:10.3406/ecop.2001.6353
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.3406/ecop.2001.6353
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.persee.fr/doc/ecop_0249-4744_2001_num_150_4_6353
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.3406/ecop.2001.6353?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Goolsbee, Austan, 1998. "Does Government R&D Policy Mainly Benefit Scientists and Engineers?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 88(2), pages 298-302, May.
    2. Kenneth Arrow, 1962. "Economic Welfare and the Allocation of Resources for Invention," NBER Chapters, in: The Rate and Direction of Inventive Activity: Economic and Social Factors, pages 609-626, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    3. Dominique Guellec, 1999. "A la recherche du tant perdu," Revue Française d'Économie, Programme National Persée, vol. 14(1), pages 117-169.
    4. Cohen, Wesley M & Levinthal, Daniel A, 1989. "Innovation and Learning: The Two Faces of R&D," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 99(397), pages 569-596, September.
    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. Gamal Atallah, 2019. "Subsidizing Innovation and Production," Revista Economía, Fondo Editorial - Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú, vol. 42(84), pages 9-35.
    2. Julien Chicot & Mireille Matt, 2015. "Public procurement of innovation: A review of rationales, instruments and design," Post-Print hal-02087762, HAL.

    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. Graevenitz, Georg von, 2004. "Spillovers Reconsidered: Analysing Economic Welfare under complementarities in R&D," Discussion Paper Series of SFB/TR 15 Governance and the Efficiency of Economic Systems 29, Free University of Berlin, Humboldt University of Berlin, University of Bonn, University of Mannheim, University of Munich.
    2. Timothy Swanson & Zacharias Ziegelhoefer, 2011. "Economic Frameworks for thinking about Growth, Sustainability and the role of State Intervention: Paths to Green Economies?," CIES Research Paper series 11-2012, Centre for International Environmental Studies, The Graduate Institute.
    3. José Ángel Zúñiga-Vicente & César Alonso-Borrego & Francisco J. Forcadell & José I. Galán, 2014. "Assessing The Effect Of Public Subsidies On Firm R&D Investment: A Survey," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 28(1), pages 36-67, February.
    4. Sakakibara, Mariko, 1997. "Evaluating government-sponsored R&D consortia in Japan: who benefits and how?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 26(4-5), pages 447-473, December.
    5. Jarle Moen, 2005. "Is Mobility of Technical Personnel a Source of R&D Spillovers?," Journal of Labor Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 23(1), pages 81-114, January.
    6. Thomas Bolli & Martin Woerter, 2013. "Technological Diversification and Innovation Performance," KOF Working papers 13-336, KOF Swiss Economic Institute, ETH Zurich.
    7. Barge-Gil, Andrés & López, Alberto, 2014. "R&D determinants: Accounting for the differences between research and development," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(9), pages 1634-1648.
    8. Antonelli, Cristiano, 2017. "Digital knowledge generation and the appropriability trade-off," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(10), pages 991-1002.
    9. Cristiano Antonelli & Christophe Feder, 2022. "Knowledge properties and the creative response in the global economy: European evidence for the years 1990–2016," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 47(2), pages 459-475, April.
    10. Kancs, d’Artis & Siliverstovs, Boriss, 2016. "R&D and non-linear productivity growth," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(3), pages 634-646.
    11. Nicholas Bloom & John Van Reenen & Heidi Williams, 2019. "A toolkit of policies to promote innovation," Voprosy Ekonomiki, NP Voprosy Ekonomiki, issue 10.
    12. Tom Broekel & Lars Mewes, 2017. "Analyzing the impact of R&D policy on regional diversification," Papers in Evolutionary Economic Geography (PEEG) 1726, Utrecht University, Department of Human Geography and Spatial Planning, Group Economic Geography, revised Sep 2017.
    13. Veugelers, Reinhilde, 1997. "Internal R & D expenditures and external technology sourcing," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 26(3), pages 303-315, October.
    14. Panayotis Dessyllas & Alan Hughes, 2005. "R&D and Patenting Activity and the Propensity to Acquire in High Technology Industries," Working Papers wp298, Centre for Business Research, University of Cambridge.
    15. Gamal Atallah, 2004. "The Allocation Of Resources To Cooperative And Noncooperative R&D," Australian Economic Papers, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 43(4), pages 435-447, December.
    16. Cassiman, Bruno & Perez-Castrillo, David & Veugelers, Reinhilde, 2002. "Endogenizing know-how flows through the nature of R&D investments," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 20(6), pages 775-799, June.
    17. Christopher F Baum & Hans Lööf & Pardis Nabavi, 2019. "Innovation strategies, external knowledge and productivity growth," Industry and Innovation, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 26(3), pages 348-367, March.
    18. Heidrun C. Hoppe & Emre Ozdenoren, 2002. "Intermediation in Innovation," CIG Working Papers FS IV 02-11, Wissenschaftszentrum Berlin (WZB), Research Unit: Competition and Innovation (CIG).
    19. Madan Dhanora & Ruchi Sharma & Walter G. Park, 2021. "Technological Innovations and Market Power: A Study of Indian Pharmaceutical Industry," Millennial Asia, , vol. 12(1), pages 5-34, April.
    20. Bulat Sanditov & Saurabh Arora, 2016. "Social network and private provision of public goods," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 26(1), pages 195-218, 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:prs:ecoprv:ecop_0249-4744_2001_num_150_4_6353. 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: Equipe PERSEE (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.persee.fr/collection/ecop .

    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.