IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/has/discpr/1517.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The persistent high-tech myth in the EC policy circles - Implications for the EU10 countries

Author

Listed:
  • Attila Havas

    (Institute of Economics, Centre for Economic and Regional Studies, Hungarian Academy of Sciences)

Abstract

Given the economic, societal and environmental relevance of innovation, this paper contrasts various models of innovation, compares how innovation is understood in mainstream economics and evolutionary economics of innovation and juxtaposes the concomitant policy rationales. By discussing two monitoring tools used by the European Commission to assess its member states’ innovation performance, it argues that the science-push model of innovation is still highly influential in the EC STI policy circles, in spite of the significance of non-R&D types of knowledge in innovation processes. Then it explores various types of opportunity costs stemming from the persistent high-tech myth, considers possible historical and sociological reasons for its perseverance and discusses policy implications of the systemic view of innovation, with an emphasis on the case of the EU10 countries. Policy conclusions include: i) several policies affect innovation processes and performance, perhaps even more strongly than STI policies, and hence policy goals and tools need to be orchestrated across several policy domains; ii) STI policies should promote learning and knowledge-intensive activities in all sectors, including low- and medium-technology industries and services; iii) analysts and policy-makers need to avoid the trap of paying too much attention to simplifying ranking exercises; iv) new indicators that better reflect the evolutionary processes of learning and innovation would be needed to support analysis and policy-making; v) the choice of an economics paradigm to guide policy evaluation is likely to be decisive.

Suggested Citation

  • Attila Havas, 2015. "The persistent high-tech myth in the EC policy circles - Implications for the EU10 countries," CERS-IE WORKING PAPERS 1517, Institute of Economics, Centre for Economic and Regional Studies.
  • Handle: RePEc:has:discpr:1517
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://econ.core.hu/file/download/mtdp/MTDP1517.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Malerba, Franco, 2002. "Sectoral systems of innovation and production," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 31(2), pages 247-264, February.
    2. Jensen, Morten Berg & Johnson, Bjorn & Lorenz, Edward & Lundvall, Bengt Ake, 2007. "Forms of knowledge and modes of innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(5), pages 680-693, June.
    3. 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..
    4. Edquist, Charles, 2014. "Efficiency of Research and Innovation Systems for Economic Growth and Employment," Papers in Innovation Studies 2014/8, Lund University, CIRCLE - Centre for Innovation Research.
    5. Grupp, Hariolf & Schubert, Torben, 2010. "Review and new evidence on composite innovation indicators for evaluating national performance," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(1), pages 67-78, February.
    6. Fagerberg, Jan & Fosaas, Morten & Bell, Martin & Martin, Ben R., 2011. "Christopher Freeman: social science entrepreneur," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(7), pages 897-916, September.
    7. Patrick Llerena & Mireille Matt, 2005. "Innovation Policy in a Knowledge-Based Economy : Theory and Practice," Post-Print hal-00279610, HAL.
    8. Peneder, Michael, 2010. "Technological regimes and the variety of innovation behaviour: Creating integrated taxonomies of firms and sectors," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(3), pages 323-334, April.
    9. Paul L. Robertson & Keith Smith, 2008. "Distributed Knowledge Bases in Low- and Medium-Technology Industries," Chapters, in: Hartmut Hirsch-Kreinsen & David Jacobson (ed.), Innovation in Low-Tech Firms and Industries, chapter 6, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    10. Klevorick, Alvin K. & Levin, Richard C. & Nelson, Richard R. & Winter, Sidney G., 1995. "On the sources and significance of interindustry differences in technological opportunities," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 24(2), pages 185-205, March.
    11. Pavitt, Keith, 1984. "Sectoral patterns of technical change: Towards a taxonomy and a theory," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 13(6), pages 343-373, December.
    12. Abdullah Gök & Jakob Edler, 2012. "The use of behavioural additionality evaluation in innovation policy making," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 21(4), pages 306-318, September.
    13. Balconi, Margherita & Brusoni, Stefano & Orsenigo, Luigi, 2010. "In defence of the linear model: An essay," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(1), pages 1-13, February.
    14. Castellacci, Fulvio, 2008. "Technological paradigms, regimes and trajectories: Manufacturing and service industries in a new taxonomy of sectoral patterns of innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(6-7), pages 978-994, July.
    15. Malerba,Franco & Brusoni,Stefano (ed.), 2007. "Perspectives on Innovation," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521685610, November.
    16. Hartmut Hirsch-Kreinsen & David Jacobson (ed.), 2008. "Innovation in Low-Tech Firms and Industries," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 13088.
    17. Freeman, Chris, 1995. "The 'National System of Innovation' in Historical Perspective," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 19(1), pages 5-24, February.
    18. Dodgson, Mark & Hughes, Alan & Foster, John & Metcalfe, Stan, 2011. "Systems thinking, market failure, and the development of innovation policy: The case of Australia," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(9), pages 1145-1156.
    19. Freeman, C., 1991. "Networks of innovators: A synthesis of research issues," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 20(5), pages 499-514, October.
    20. Hariolf Grupp, 1998. "Foundations of the Economics of Innovation," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 1390.
    21. Martin, Ben R., 2012. "The evolution of science policy and innovation studies," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(7), pages 1219-1239.
    22. Bleda, Mercedes & del Río, Pablo, 2013. "The market failure and the systemic failure rationales in technological innovation systems," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(5), pages 1039-1052.
    23. Giada Di Stefano & Alfonso Gambardella & Gianmario Verona, 2012. "Technology Push and Demand Pull Perspectives in Innovation Studies: Current Findings and Future Research Directions," Post-Print hal-00696607, HAL.
    24. Elster Jon, 2009. "Excessive Ambitions," Capitalism and Society, De Gruyter, vol. 4(2), pages 1-33, October.
    25. Laurent Bach & Mireille Matt, 2005. "From Economic Foundations to S&T Policy Tools: a Comparative Analysis of the Dominant Paradigms," Springer Books, in: Patrick Llerena & Mireille Matt (ed.), Innovation Policy in a Knowledge-Based Economy, chapter 1, pages 17-45, Springer.
    26. Richard R. Nelson, 1959. "The Simple Economics of Basic Scientific Research," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 67(3), pages 297-297.
    27. Fagerberg, Jan & Fosaas, Morten & Sapprasert, Koson, 2012. "Innovation: Exploring the knowledge base," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(7), pages 1132-1153.
    28. Di Stefano, Giada & Gambardella, Alfonso & Verona, Gianmario, 2012. "Technology push and demand pull perspectives in innovation studies: Current findings and future research directions," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(8), pages 1283-1295.
    29. Laurent Bach & Mireille Matt, 2005. "From Economic Foundations to S&T Policy Tools : A Comparative Analysis of the Dominant Paradigms," Post-Print hal-00279442, HAL.
    30. Jan Fagerberg, 2015. "Innovation policy, national innovation systems and economic performance: In search of a useful theoretical framework," Working Papers on Innovation Studies 20150321, Centre for Technology, Innovation and Culture, University of Oslo.
    31. Havas, Attila & Nyiri, Lajos, 2007. "National system of innovation in Hungary," MPRA Paper 67161, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    32. Michael Peneder, 1999. "The Austrian Paradox: "Old" Structures but High Performance?," Austrian Economic Quarterly, WIFO, vol. 4(4), pages 239-247, October.
    33. Charles Edquist, 2011. "Design of innovation policy through diagnostic analysis: identification of systemic problems (or failures)," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 20(6), pages 1725-1753, December.
    34. Benoît Godin, 2008. "The Moral Economy of Technology Indicators," Chapters, in: Hartmut Hirsch-Kreinsen & David Jacobson (ed.), Innovation in Low-Tech Firms and Industries, chapter 4, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    35. Freeman, Chris, 1994. "The Economics of Technical Change," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 18(5), pages 463-514, October.
    36. Giovanni Dosi, 2000. "Sources, Procedures, and Microeconomic Effects of Innovation," Chapters, in: Innovation, Organization and Economic Dynamics, chapter 2, pages 63-114, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    37. Patrick Llerena & Mireille Matt (ed.), 2005. "Innovation Policy in a Knowledge-Based Economy," Springer Books, Springer, number 978-3-540-26452-1, June.
    38. Edquist, Charles, 2011. "Innovation Policy Design: Identification of Systemic Problems," Papers in Innovation Studies 2011/6, Lund University, CIRCLE - Centre for Innovation Research.
    39. Robertson, Paul & Smith, Keith & von Tunzelmann, Nick, 2009. "Innovation in low- and medium-technology industries," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(3), pages 441-446, April.
    40. Castellacci, Fulvio, 2008. "Innovation and the competitiveness of industries: comparing the mainstream and the evolutionary approaches," MPRA Paper 27523, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    41. Sharif, Naubahar, 2006. "Emergence and development of the National Innovation Systems concept," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(5), pages 745-766, June.
    42. Richard R. Nelson, 1995. "Recent Evolutionary Theorizing about Economic Change," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 33(1), pages 48-90, March.
    43. Hendry David, 2009. "Comment on "Excessive Ambitions" (by Jon Elster)," Capitalism and Society, De Gruyter, vol. 4(2), pages 1-21, October.
    44. Malerba,Franco & Brusoni,Stefano (ed.), 2007. "Perspectives on Innovation," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521866644, November.
    45. Franco Malerba, 2009. "Increase Learning, Break Knowledge Lock-ins and Foster Dynamic Complementarities: Evolutionary and System Perspectives on Technology Policy in Industrial Dynamics," Chapters, in: Dominique Foray (ed.), The New Economics of Technology Policy, chapter 4, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    46. Mowery, David C. & Langlois, Richard N., 1996. "Spinning off and spinning on(?): the federal government role in the development of the US computer software industry," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 25(6), pages 947-966, September.
    47. Mowery,David C. & Nelson,Richard R. (ed.), 1999. "Sources of Industrial Leadership," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521645201, November.
    48. Laranja, Manuel & Uyarra, Elvira & Flanagan, Kieron, 2008. "Policies for science, technology and innovation: Translating rationales into regional policies in a multi-level setting," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(5), pages 823-835, June.
    49. Giovanni Dosi & Christopher Freeman & Richard Nelson & Gerarld Silverberg & Luc Soete (ed.), 1988. "Technical Change and Economic Theory," LEM Book Series, Laboratory of Economics and Management (LEM), Sant'Anna School of Advanced Studies, Pisa, Italy, number dosietal-1988, March.
    50. David C. Mowery, 2009. "Plus ca change," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 18(1), pages 1-50, February.
    51. Chris Freeman & Luc Soete, 1997. "The Economics of Industrial Innovation, 3rd Edition," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 3, volume 1, number 0262061953, December.
    52. Flanagan, Kieron & Uyarra, Elvira & Laranja, Manuel, 2011. "Reconceptualising the 'policy mix' for innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(5), pages 702-713, June.
    53. Smith, Keith, 2002. "What is the 'Knowledge Economy'? Knowledge Intensity and Distributed Knowledge Bases," UNU-INTECH Discussion Paper Series 2002-06, United Nations University - INTECH.
    54. Jakob Edler & Martin Berger & Michael Dinges & Abdullah Gök, 2012. "The practice of evaluation in innovation policy in Europe," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 21(3), pages 167-182, July.
    55. Thomas Hatzichronoglou, 1997. "Revision of the High-Technology Sector and Product Classification," OECD Science, Technology and Industry Working Papers 1997/2, OECD Publishing.
    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. Aleksander Szpor & Attila Havas & Vera Czesana & Lubica Slusna & Miroslav Balog, 2014. "Innovation Policies in the Visegrad Countries," Books and Reports published by IBS, Instytut Badan Strukturalnych, number visegradinnovate, February.
    2. Attila Havas, 2015. "Various approaches to measuring business innovation: their relevance for capturing social innovation," CERS-IE WORKING PAPERS 1554, Institute of Economics, Centre for Economic and Regional Studies.
    3. Agnė Paliokaitė, 2019. "An innovation policy framework for upgrading firm absorptive capacities in the context of catching-up economies," Journal of Entrepreneurship, Management and Innovation, Fundacja Upowszechniająca Wiedzę i Naukę "Cognitione", vol. 15(3), pages 103-130.
    4. Attila Havas, 2016. "Social and Business Innovations: Are Common Measurement Approaches Possible?," Foresight and STI Governance (Foresight-Russia till No. 3/2015), National Research University Higher School of Economics, vol. 10(2), pages 58-80.
    5. Havas, Attila, 2016. "Recent economic theorising on innovation: Lessons for analysing social innovation," MPRA Paper 77385, University Library of Munich, Germany.

    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. Havas, Attila, 2014. "Mit mér(j)ünk?. Az innováció értelmezései - szakpolitikai következmények [The theory and measurement of innovation and its mutual effect on policy]," Közgazdasági Szemle (Economic Review - monthly of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences), Közgazdasági Szemle Alapítvány (Economic Review Foundation), vol. 0(9), pages 1022-1059.
    2. Havas, Attila, 2016. "Recent economic theorising on innovation: Lessons for analysing social innovation," MPRA Paper 77385, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    3. Attila Havas, 2016. "Social and Business Innovations: Are Common Measurement Approaches Possible?," Foresight-Russia Форсайт, CyberLeninka;Федеральное государственное автономное образовательное учреждение высшего образования «Национальный исследовательский университет «Высшая школа экономики», vol. 10(2 (eng)), pages 58-80.
    4. Attila Havas, 2015. "Various approaches to measuring business innovation: their relevance for capturing social innovation," CERS-IE WORKING PAPERS 1554, Institute of Economics, Centre for Economic and Regional Studies.
    5. Attila Havas, 2014. "Trapped by the high-tech myth: the need and chances for a new policy rationale," Chapters, in: Hartmut Hirsch-Kreinsen & Isabel Schwinge (ed.), Knowledge-Intensive Entrepreneurship in Low-Tech Industries, chapter 9, pages 193-217, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    6. Havas, Attila, 2014. "Types of knowledge and diversity of business-academia collaborations: Implications for measurement and policy," MPRA Paper 65908, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 23 May 2015.
    7. Attila Havas & K. Matthias Weber, 2016. "The ‘fit’ between forward-looking activities and the innovation policy governance sub-system," CERS-IE WORKING PAPERS 1601, Institute of Economics, Centre for Economic and Regional Studies.
    8. Dosi, Giovanni & Nelson, Richard R., 2010. "Technical Change and Industrial Dynamics as Evolutionary Processes," Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, in: Bronwyn H. Hall & Nathan Rosenberg (ed.), Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 0, pages 51-127, Elsevier.
    9. Havas, Attila & Weber, K. Matthias, 2017. "The 'fit' between forward-looking activities and the innovation policy governance sub-system: A framework to explore potential impacts," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 115(C), pages 327-337.
    10. Jakob Edler & Jan Fagerberg, 2017. "Innovation policy: what, why, and how," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press and Oxford Review of Economic Policy Limited, vol. 33(1), pages 2-23.
    11. Sepehr Ghazinoory & Meysam Narimani & Shiva Tatina, 2017. "Neoclassical versus evolutionary economics in developing countries: convergence of policy implications," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 27(3), pages 555-583, July.
    12. Havas, Attila, 2011. "Governing policy processes and foresight," MPRA Paper 38119, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    13. Giovanni Dosi & Richard Nelson, 2013. "The Evolution of Technologies: An Assessment of the State-of-the-Art," Eurasian Business Review, Springer;Eurasia Business and Economics Society, vol. 3(1), pages 3-46, June.
    14. Rakas, Marija & Hain, Daniel S., 2019. "The state of innovation system research: What happens beneath the surface?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(9), pages 1-1.
    15. Strong, Derek Ryan, 2017. "The Early Diffusion of Smart Meters in the US Electric Power Industry," Thesis Commons 7zprk, Center for Open Science.
    16. Havas, Attila, 2004. "EU Enlargement and Innovation Policy in Central European Countries: The case of Hungary," MPRA Paper 69872, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    17. Fagerberg, Jan, 2018. "Mobilizing innovation for sustainability transitions: A comment on transformative innovation policy," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(9), pages 1568-1576.
    18. Bleda, Mercedes & del Río, Pablo, 2013. "The market failure and the systemic failure rationales in technological innovation systems," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(5), pages 1039-1052.
    19. Attila Havas, 2002. "Does Innovation Policy Matter in a Transition Country? – The case of Hungary," CERS-IE WORKING PAPERS 0205, Institute of Economics, Centre for Economic and Regional Studies.
    20. Havas, Attila, 2007. "O alargamento da UE e a política de Inovação nos países da Europa Central: O caso da Hungria [EU enlargement and innovation policy in Central European countries: The case of Hungary]," MPRA Paper 69874, University Library of Munich, Germany.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Innovation processes; Sources; forms and types of knowledge; Models of innovation; High-tech myth; Low- and medium-technology sectors; Economics paradigms; STI policy rationales; Measurement of innovation; Composite indicators; Scoreboards; league tables; European Commission; Central and Eastern European countries;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • O31 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Innovation and Invention: Processes and Incentives
    • O38 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Government Policy
    • B52 - Schools of Economic Thought and Methodology - - Current Heterodox Approaches - - - Historical; Institutional; Evolutionary; Modern Monetary Theory;
    • Y10 - Miscellaneous Categories - - Data: Tables and Charts - - - Data: Tables and Charts

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:has:discpr:1517. 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: Nora Horvath (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/iehashu.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.