IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/scippl/v52y2025i2p284-297..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Public perceptions of the US innovation system: moderate support but compelling need for reform

Author

Listed:
  • Jason A Budge
  • Barbara Herr Harthorn
  • Milind Kandlikar
  • Terre Satterfield
  • Laura Halcomb

Abstract

Science and innovation policy in the USA often frame publics as the beneficiaries of new technologies, but little research has yet engaged publics on their views of the innovation system (IS)—the combined efforts of government, industry, and universities to produce and promote new technologies. Based on a national public survey (n = 3,010), we identify three dimensions of public judgments about the IS with public policy implications: (1) US publics hold moderate confidence in the IS to produce benefits for them and to respond to public input; (2) they are slightly more critical of innovation-related environmental harm and the accrual of benefits to large corporations; and (3) they strongly support reforms to ensure safe, responsible, and affordable technological innovation. Multivariate regressions indicate variance of judgments by social location and worldviews, finding equity and justice aspects particularly salient in views on the IS. We discuss implications for innovation policy.

Suggested Citation

  • Jason A Budge & Barbara Herr Harthorn & Milind Kandlikar & Terre Satterfield & Laura Halcomb, 2025. "Public perceptions of the US innovation system: moderate support but compelling need for reform," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 52(2), pages 284-297.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:scippl:v:52:y:2025:i:2:p:284-297.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/scipol/scae082
    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.

    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:scippl:v:52:y:2025:i:2:p:284-297.. 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/spp .

    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.