IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/h/nbr/nberch/14096.html
   My bibliography  Save this book chapter

Funding Breakthrough Research: Promises and Challenges of the "ARPA Model"

In: Innovation Policy and the Economy, Volume 19

Author

Listed:
  • Pierre Azoulay
  • Erica Fuchs
  • Anna P. Goldstein
  • Michael Kearney

Abstract

No abstract is available for this item.

Suggested Citation

  • Pierre Azoulay & Erica Fuchs & Anna P. Goldstein & Michael Kearney, 2018. "Funding Breakthrough Research: Promises and Challenges of the "ARPA Model"," NBER Chapters, in: Innovation Policy and the Economy, Volume 19, pages 69-96, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    • Handle: RePEc:nbr:nberch:14096
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Gustavo Manso, 2011. "Motivating Innovation," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 66(5), pages 1823-1860, October.
    2. Nathan Rosenberg, 2009. "Uncertainty and Technological Change," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Nathan Rosenberg (ed.), Studies On Science And The Innovation Process Selected Works of Nathan Rosenberg, chapter 8, pages 153-172, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    3. Pierre Azoulay & Joshua S. Graff Zivin & Gustavo Manso, 2011. "Incentives and creativity: evidence from the academic life sciences," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 42(3), pages 527-554, September.
    4. Avery Sen, 2017. "Island + Bridge: how transformative innovation is organized in the federal government," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 44(5), pages 707-721.
    5. Fong Glenn R., 2001. "ARPA Does Windows: The Defense Underpinning of the PC Revolution," Business and Politics, De Gruyter, vol. 3(3), pages 1-26, November.
    6. Henderson, Rebecca M. & Newell, Richard G. (ed.), 2011. "Accelerating Energy Innovation," National Bureau of Economic Research Books, University of Chicago Press, number 9780226326832, December.
    7. Goldstein, Anna P. & Narayanamurti, Venkatesh, 2018. "Simultaneous pursuit of discovery and invention in the US Department of Energy," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(8), pages 1505-1512.
    8. Fuchs, Erica R.H., 2010. "Rethinking the role of the state in technology development: DARPA and the case for embedded network governance," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(9), pages 1133-1147, November.
    9. Colatat, Phech, 2015. "An organizational perspective to funding science: Collaborator novelty at DARPA," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(4), pages 874-887.
    10. Avinash K. Dixit & Robert S. Pindyck, 1994. "Investment under Uncertainty," Economics Books, Princeton University Press, edition 1, number 5474.
    11. Fong, Glenn R., 2001. "ARPA Does Windows: The Defense Underpinning of the PC Revolution," Business and Politics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 3(3), pages 213-237, November.
    12. Scott Stern, 2004. "Do Scientists Pay to Be Scientists?," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 50(6), pages 835-853, June.
    13. Kevin J. Boudreau & Eva C. Guinan & Karim R. Lakhani & Christoph Riedl, 2016. "Looking Across and Looking Beyond the Knowledge Frontier: Intellectual Distance, Novelty, and Resource Allocation in Science," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 62(10), pages 2765-2783, October.
    14. Scherer, F. M. & Harhoff, Dietmar, 2000. "Technology policy for a world of skew-distributed outcomes," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 29(4-5), pages 559-566, April.
    15. Arnd Huchzermeier & Christoph H. Loch, 2001. "Project Management Under Risk: Using the Real Options Approach to Evaluate Flexibility in R...D," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 47(1), pages 85-101, January.
    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. Naudé, Wim & Dimitri, Nicola, 2021. "Public Procurement and Innovation for Human-Centered Artificial Intelligence," IZA Discussion Papers 14021, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    2. Martin Beraja & David Y Yang & Noam Yuchtman, 2023. "Data-intensive Innovation and the State: Evidence from AI Firms in China," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 90(4), pages 1701-1723.
    3. Dominique Foray & Martin Eichler & Michael Keller, 2021. "Smart specialization strategies—insights gained from a unique European policy experiment on innovation and industrial policy design," Review of Evolutionary Political Economy, Springer, vol. 2(1), pages 83-103, April.

    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. Goldstein, Anna P. & Kearney, Michael, 2020. "Know when to fold ‘em: An empirical description of risk management in public research funding," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(1).
    2. Richard T. Carson & Joshua Graff Zivin & Jordan J. Louviere & Sally Sadoff & Jeffrey G. Shrader, 2022. "The Risk of Caution: Evidence from an Experiment," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 68(12), pages 9042-9060, December.
    3. Kyle Myers & Wei Yang Tham, 2023. "Money, Time, and Grant Design," Papers 2312.06479, arXiv.org.
    4. Colatat, Phech, 2015. "An organizational perspective to funding science: Collaborator novelty at DARPA," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(4), pages 874-887.
    5. Kok, Holmer & Faems, Dries & de Faria, Pedro, 2022. "Pork Barrel or Barrel of Gold? Examining the performance implications of earmarking in public R&D grants," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(7).
    6. Chloe Kim Glaeser & Stephen Glaeser & Eva Labro, 2023. "Proximity and the Management of Innovation," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 69(5), pages 3080-3099, May.
    7. Raffaele Oriani & Luigi Sereno, 2011. "Advanced Valuation Methods: The Real Options Approach," Chapters, in: Federico Munari & Raffaele Oriani (ed.), The Economic Valuation of Patents, chapter 6, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    8. Blandinieres, Florence & Pellens, Maikel, 2021. "Scientist's industry engagement and the research agenda: Evidence from Germany," ZEW Discussion Papers 21-001, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    9. Raffaele Conti & Alfonso Gambardella & Myriam Mariani, 2014. "Learning to Be Edison: Inventors, Organizations, and Breakthrough Inventions," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 25(3), pages 833-849, June.
    10. Sabrina T. Howell, 2017. "Reducing Information Frictions in Venture Capital: The Role of New Venture Competitions," NBER Working Papers 23874, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    11. Alfonso Gambardella & Pooyan Khashabi & Claudio Panico, 2020. "Managing Autonomy in Industrial Research and Development: A Project-Level Investigation," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 31(1), pages 165-181, January.
    12. Richard Carson & Joshua S. Graff Zivin & Jordan Louviere & Sally Sadoff & Jeffrey G. Shrader Jr, 2020. "The Risk of Caution: Evidence from an R&D Experiment," NBER Working Papers 26847, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    13. He, Jie (Jack) & Tian, Xuan, 2013. "The dark side of analyst coverage: The case of innovation," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 109(3), pages 856-878.
    14. Jürgen Janger & Nicole Schmidt & Anna Strauss, 2019. "International Differences in Basic Research Grant Funding. A Systematic Comparison," WIFO Studies, WIFO, number 61664, February.
    15. Julian Kolev & Yuly Fuentes-Medel & Fiona Murray, 2019. "Is Blinded Review Enough? How Gendered Outcomes Arise Even Under Anonymous Evaluation," NBER Working Papers 25759, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    16. Andrey Malenko & Ramana Nanda & Matthew Rhodes-Kropf & Savitar Sundaresan, 2021. "Catching Outliers: Committee Voting and the Limits of Consensus when Financing Innovation," Harvard Business School Working Papers 21-131, Harvard Business School, revised Nov 2023.
    17. Moon, Yongma & Baran, Mesut, 2018. "Economic analysis of a residential PV system from the timing perspective: A real option model," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 125(C), pages 783-795.
    18. Maria Isabella Leone & Raffaele Oriani & Toke Reichstein, 2015. "How much are flexibility and uncertainty worth in patent licensing?," Economia e Politica Industriale: Journal of Industrial and Business Economics, Springer;Associazione Amici di Economia e Politica Industriale, vol. 42(4), pages 371-394, December.
    19. Ke, Qing, 2020. "Technological impact of biomedical research: The role of basicness and novelty," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(7).
    20. Nicolas Carayol & Emeric Henry & Marianne Lanoë, 2020. "Stimulating Peer Effects? Evidence from a Research Cluster Policy," Working Papers hal-03874261, HAL.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • I23 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Education - - - Higher Education; Research Institutions
    • O31 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Innovation and Invention: Processes and Incentives
    • O32 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Management of Technological Innovation and R&D
    • Q55 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Environmental Economics: Technological Innovation

    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:nbr:nberch:14096. 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: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/nberrus.html .

    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.