IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ipt/iptwpa/jrc104899.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

7 ways to boost digital innovation and entrepreneurship in Europe. Key messages from the European innovation policies for the digital shift project

Author

Abstract

This report attempts to summarise findings and conclusions of over 30 studies published within the EURIPIDIS project (European Innovation Policies for the Digital Shift). The objective of EURIPIDIS was to better understand how digital innovation and entrepreneurship work; to assess the EU's digital innovation and entrepreneurship performance; and to suggest how policy makers could make digital innovation and entrepreneurship in the EU work better. Because digital technologies facilitate the modernization of firms and economies, digital innovation and entrepreneurship requires a comprehensive policy response. The current report focuses on 7 issues. (1) Digital innovation and entrepreneurship require skills and capabilities ranging from technical, managerial and financial; entrepreneurial culture; failure acceptance; large funding and innovation-friendly regulatory environment. Capacity building and specific policies are needed in all those fields. (2) Resisting digital disruption and protecting the status quo is likely to be a short-term strategy. Negative social and economic effects need to be mitigated. (3) The ecosystem of digital innovation and entrepreneurship consists of a wide range of different players. Policy responses need to address this heterogeneity. (4) Digital innovation and entrepreneurship takes place through collaborative interactions between various players. To facilitate collaboration, knowledge flow and spillovers need to become a more central focus of public policies. (5) In addition to increasing funding for innovation, closer attention needs to be paid to the availability of funding for scaling-up of digital enterprises. (6) To guarantee technological interoperability and create technology-related network effects, coordination between various players to, for example, set technological standards is needed. (7) Technological complexity combined with the cumulativeness of digital innovation requires a balance between two conflicting goals: the provision of incentives to create new products and the stimulation of knowledge dissemination.

Suggested Citation

  • Daniel Nepelski & Marc Bogdanowicz & Federico Biagi & Paul Desruelle & Giuditta De Prato & Garry Gabison & Giuseppe Piroli & Annarosa Pesole & Nikolaus Thumm & Vincent Van Roy, 2017. "7 ways to boost digital innovation and entrepreneurship in Europe. Key messages from the European innovation policies for the digital shift project," JRC Research Reports JRC104899, Joint Research Centre.
    • Handle: RePEc:ipt:iptwpa:jrc104899
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://publications.jrc.ec.europa.eu/repository/handle/JRC104899
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Garry A. Gabison, 2015. "Venture Capital Principles in the European ICT Ecosystem: How can they help ICT innovation?," JRC Research Reports JRC98783, Joint Research Centre.
    2. Auerswald, Philip E & Branscomb, Lewis M, 2003. "Valleys of Death and Darwinian Seas: Financing the Invention to Innovation Transition in the United States," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 28(3-4), pages 227-239, August.
    3. Alberto Di Minin & Chiara Eleonora De Marco & Cristina Marullo & Andrea Piccaluga & Elena Casprini & Maral Mahdad & Andrea Paraboschi, 2016. "Case Studies on Open Innovation in ICT," JRC Research Reports JRC100823, Joint Research Centre.
    4. Chryssoula Pentheroudakis, 2015. "Innovation in the European Digital Single Market: The Role of Patents," JRC Research Reports JRC96728, Joint Research Centre.
    5. Leyden, Dennis Patrick & Link, Albert N., 2015. "Public Sector Entrepreneurship: U.S. Technology and Innovation Policy," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780199313853.
    6. Jean Paul Simon, 2016. "How to Catch a Unicorn: An exploration of the universe of tech companies with high market capitalisation," JRC Research Reports JRC100719, Joint Research Centre.
    7. Carl Shapiro, 2001. "Navigating the Patent Thicket: Cross Licenses, Patent Pools, and Standard Setting," NBER Chapters, in: Innovation Policy and the Economy, Volume 1, pages 119-150, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    8. Zoltán J. Ács & Pontus Braunerhjelm & David B. Audretsch & Bo Carlsson, 2015. "The knowledge spillover theory of entrepreneurship," Chapters, in: Global Entrepreneurship, Institutions and Incentives, chapter 7, pages 129-144, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    9. David B. Audretsch & Albert N. Link (ed.), 2016. "Essays in Public Sector Entrepreneurship," International Studies in Entrepreneurship, Springer, edition 1, number 978-3-319-26677-0, November.
    10. Giuditta De Prato & Daniel Nepelski & Giuseppe Piroli, 2015. "Innovation Radar: Identifying Innovations and Innovators with High Potential in ICT FP7, CIP & H2020 Projects," JRC Research Reports JRC96339, Joint Research Centre.
    11. Daniel Nepelski & Giuseppe Piroli & Giuditta De Prato, 2016. "European Start-up Hotspots: An Analysis based on VC-backed Companies," JRC Research Reports JRC101215, Joint Research Centre.
    12. Annarosa Pesole & Daniel Nepelski, 2016. "Universities and collaborative innovation in EC-funded research projects: An analysis based on Innovation Radar data," JRC Research Reports JRC104870, Joint Research Centre.
    13. Federico Biagi & Annarosa Pesole & Juraj Stancik, 2016. "Modes of ICT Innovation: Evidence from the Community Innovation Survey," JRC Research Reports JRC101636, Joint Research Centre.
    14. Adam B. Jaffe & Josh Lerner & Scott Stern, 2001. "Innovation Policy and the Economy, Volume 1," NBER Books, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc, number jaff01-1.
    15. Daniel Nepelski & Giuseppe Piroli, 2018. "Organizational diversity and innovation potential of EU-funded research projects," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 43(3), pages 615-639, June.
    16. Weber, Arnd & Haas, Michael & Scuka, Daniel, 2011. "Mobile service innovation: A European failure," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(5), pages 469-480, June.
    17. Martin Fransman, 2014. "Models of Innovation in Global ICT Firms: The Emerging Global Innovation Ecosystems," JRC Research Reports JRC90726, Joint Research Centre.
    18. Andrea Renda, 2016. "Selecting and Designing European ICT Innovation Policies," JRC Research Reports JRC103661, Joint Research Centre.
    19. Daniele Bondonio & Federico Biagi & Juraj Stancik, 2016. "Counterfactual Impact Evaluation of Public Funding of Innovation, Investment and R&D," JRC Research Reports JRC99564, Joint Research Centre.
    20. Vincent Van Roy & Daniel Nepelski, 2016. "Assessment of Framework Conditions for the Creation and Growth of Firms in Europe," JRC Research Reports JRC103350, Joint Research Centre.
    21. Stefano Comino & Fabio Maria Manenti, 2015. "Intellectual Property and Innovation in Information and Communication Technology (ICT)," JRC Research Reports JRC97541, Joint Research Centre.
    22. Vincent Van Roy & Daniel Nepelski, 2017. "Determinants of high-tech entrepreneurship in Europe," JRC Research Reports JRC104865, Joint Research Centre.
    23. Robert Gampfer & Jessica Mitchell & Blagoy Stamenow & Jana Zifciakova & Koen Jonkers, 2016. "Improving access to finance: which schemes best support the emergence of high-growth innovative enterprises? A mapping, analysis and assessment of finance instruments in selected EU Member States," JRC Research Reports JRC102928, Joint Research Centre.
    24. Mariana Mazzucato, 2015. "The Green Entrepreneurial State," SPRU Working Paper Series 2015-28, SPRU - Science Policy Research Unit, University of Sussex Business School.
    25. Annarosa Pesole, 2015. "How much does ICT contribute to innovation output? An analysis of the ICT component in the innovation output indicator," JRC Research Reports JRC94372, Joint Research Centre.
    26. Garry A. Gabison, 2015. "Birth, Survival, Growth, and Death of ICT Companies," JRC Research Reports JRC94807, Joint Research Centre.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Daniel Nepelski & Vincent Roy & Annarosa Pesole, 2019. "The organisational and geographic diversity and innovation potential of EU-funded research networks," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 44(2), pages 359-380, April.
    2. Andrea Renda, 2016. "Selecting and Designing European ICT Innovation Policies," JRC Research Reports JRC103661, Joint Research Centre.
    3. Vincent Van Roy & Daniel Nepelski, 2017. "Determinants of high-tech entrepreneurship in Europe," JRC Research Reports JRC104865, Joint Research Centre.
    4. Daniel Nepelski & Giuseppe Piroli, 2018. "Organizational diversity and innovation potential of EU-funded research projects," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 43(3), pages 615-639, June.
    5. Vincent Van Roy & Daniel Nepelski, 2018. "Validation of the Innovation Radar assessment framework," JRC Research Reports JRC110926, Joint Research Centre.
    6. Daniel Nepelski & Vincent Roy, 2021. "Innovation and innovator assessment in R&I ecosystems: the case of the EU Framework Programme," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 46(3), pages 792-827, June.
    7. Iain M. Cockburn & Megan J. MacGarvie, 2011. "Entry and Patenting in the Software Industry," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 57(5), pages 915-933, May.
    8. Alberto Galasso & Mark Schankerman, 2008. "Patent Thickets and the Market for Innovation: Evidence from Settlement of Patent Disputes," CEP Discussion Papers dp0889, Centre for Economic Performance, LSE.
    9. Christopher Hayter, 2015. "Public or private entrepreneurship? Revisiting motivations and definitions of success among academic entrepreneurs," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 40(6), pages 1003-1015, December.
    10. Emilio Bellini & Giuseppe Piroli & Luca Pennacchio, 2019. "Collaborative know-how and trust in university–industry collaborations: empirical evidence from ICT firms," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 44(6), pages 1939-1963, December.
    11. Niklas Elert & Magnus Henrekson, 2019. "The collaborative innovation bloc: A new mission for Austrian economics," The Review of Austrian Economics, Springer;Society for the Development of Austrian Economics, vol. 32(4), pages 295-320, December.
    12. In Hyeock (Ian) Lee, 2022. "Startups, relocation, and firm performance: a transaction cost economics perspective," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 58(1), pages 205-224, January.
    13. Langinier, Corinne, 2006. "Pool of Basic Patents and Follow-Up Innovations," Staff General Research Papers Archive 12647, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    14. Meda Andrijauskiene & Daiva Dumciuviene & Alina Stundziene, 2021. "EU framework programmes: positive and negative effects on member states' innovation performance," Equilibrium. Quarterly Journal of Economics and Economic Policy, Institute of Economic Research, vol. 16(3), pages 471-502, September.
    15. Angus Chu, 2009. "Effects of blocking patents on R&D: a quantitative DGE analysis," Journal of Economic Growth, Springer, vol. 14(1), pages 55-78, March.
    16. Lindholm-Dahlstrand, Asa & Andersson, Martin & Carlsson, Bo, 2016. "Entrepreneurial Experimentation: A key function in Entrepreneurial Systems of Innovation," Papers in Innovation Studies 2016/20, Lund University, CIRCLE - Centre for Innovation Research.
    17. Elert, Niklas & Henrekson, Magnus, 2021. "Innovative Entrepreneurship as a Collaborative Effort: An Institutional Framework," Foundations and Trends(R) in Entrepreneurship, now publishers, vol. 17(4), pages 330-435, June.
    18. Lerner, Josh & Zhu, Feng, 2007. "What is the impact of software patent shifts? Evidence from Lotus v. Borland," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 25(3), pages 511-529, June.
    19. Axel Gautier & Nicolas Petit, 2018. "Optimal enforcement of competition policy: the commitments procedure under uncertainty," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 45(2), pages 195-224, April.
    20. Klaus M. Schmidt, 2014. "Complementary Patents and Market Structure," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 23(1), pages 68-88, March.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ICT; digital economy; big data; innovation;
    All these keywords.

    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:ipt:iptwpa:jrc104899. 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: Publication Officer (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ipjrces.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.