The Tower Of Babel? The Innovation System Approach Versus Mainstream Economics
AbstractThe Innovation systems (IS) approach and the system failures it identifies, play an important role in the design and legitimization of innovation policy. This paper analyses the usefulness of this concept. We conclude that the IS-approach can be useful to visualize the complexity of the innovation processes. However, for policy design this approach is less suited, because system failures aim at symptoms in stead of underlying incentive structures. In our view, policy design should be based on standard economic framework of market- and government failures. Theoretically, an exception is the system failure path dependency. However, the empirical evidence for the existence of this phenomenon is mixed. Furthermore, policy initiatives to tackle path dependence are likely to be subject to severe government failure.
Download InfoIf you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
Bibliographic InfoPaper provided by EconWPA in its series Method and Hist of Econ Thought with number 0403001.
Length: 15 pages
Date of creation: 04 Mar 2004
Date of revision:
Note: Type of Document - pdf; prepared on winXP; pages: 15
Contact details of provider:
Web page: http://184.108.40.206
innovation policy; Innovation systems; market failure;
Find related papers by JEL classification:
- O38 - Economic Development, Technological Change, and Growth - - Technological Change; Research and Development; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Government Policy
This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:
- NEP-ALL-2004-03-07 (All new papers)
- NEP-CBE-2004-03-07 (Cognitive & Behavioural Economics)
- NEP-HPE-2004-03-07 (History & Philosophy of Economics)
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Hall, Bronwyn H., 2002.
"The Financing of Research and Development,"
Department of Economics, Working Paper Series
qt34c1c643, Department of Economics, Institute for Business and Economic Research, UC Berkeley.
- Bronwyn H. Hall, 2003. "The Financing of Research and Development," Finance 0303003, EconWPA.
- Hall, Bronwyn, 2002. "The Financing of Research and Development," Department of Economics, Working Paper Series qt5rf0x9gz, Department of Economics, Institute for Business and Economic Research, UC Berkeley.
- Bronwyn H. Hall, 2002. "The Financing of Research and Development," NBER Working Papers 8773, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Liebowitz, S J & Margolis, Stephen E, 1990. "The Fable of the Keys," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 33(1), pages 1-25, April.
- Adam B. Jaffe, 2002. "Building Programme Evaluation into the Design of Public Research-Support Programmes," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 18(1), pages 22-34, Spring.
- Rodolfo Manuelli & Ananth Seshadri, 2003.
"Frictionless technology diffusion: the case of tractors,"
Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco, issue Nov.
- Rodolfo E. Manuelli & Ananth Seshadri, 2013. "Frictionless technology diffusion: the case of tractors," Working Papers 2013-022, Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis.
- Rodolfo Manuelli & Ananth Seshadri, 2003. "Frictionless Technology Diffusion: The Case of Tractors," NBER Working Papers 9604, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Boone, J. & Damme, E.E.C. van & Smulders, J.A., 2002. "Ideen voor vernieuwing van het innovatiebeleid," Open Access publications from Tilburg University urn:nbn:nl:ui:12-90194, Tilburg University.
- Liebowitz, S J & Margolis, Stephen E, 1995.
"Path Dependence, Lock-in, and History,"
Journal of Law, Economics and Organization,
Oxford University Press, vol. 11(1), pages 205-26, April.
- Richard E. Baldwin & Frédéric Robert-Nicoud, 2007.
"Entry and Asymmetric Lobbying: Why Governments Pick Losers,"
CEP Discussion Papers
dp0791, Centre for Economic Performance, LSE.
- Richard E. Baldwin & Frédéric Robert-Nicoud, 2007. "Entry and Asymmetric Lobbying: Why Governments Pick Losers," Journal of the European Economic Association, MIT Press, vol. 5(5), pages 1064-1093, 09.
- Richard E. Baldwin & Frederic Robert-Nicoud, 2002. "Entry and Asymmetric Lobbying: Why Governments Pick Losers," NBER Working Papers 8756, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Nahuis, R. & Tang, P.J.G., 1999. "Sectoral Productivity Growth and R&D Spillovers in the Netherlands," Discussion Paper 1999-15, Tilburg University, Center for Economic Research.
- Richard R. Nelson & Sidney G. Winter, 2002. "Evolutionary Theorizing in Economics," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 16(2), pages 23-46, Spring.
- David, Paul A, 1985. "Clio and the Economics of QWERTY," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 75(2), pages 332-37, May.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (EconWPA).
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.