IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/mil/wpdepa/2012-20.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The public-private partnership in the Italian satellite telecommunication system design: SIRIO and Italsat (1969-1996)

Author

Listed:
  • Matteo LANDONI

Abstract

In the last decades of the XX Century the expansion in telecommunications urged the development of an innovative satellite network infrastructure. Satellite telecommunication-a network technology-presents public-good characteristic and high-cost and technological-risks. The case of the design of the Italian satellite telecommunication system consists in a peculiar case of public-private partnership (PPP). This paper compares the Sirio and Italsat satellites systems to highlight the differences in the partnership agreements between the public buyer and the firms involved. In both cases the government provided clear signals of market demand to spur innovative activity, however, contractual obligation proved decisive. In the latter case, the public financial support took the form of a purchase agreement of a service with specific requirements at a specific time in the future, creating incentives for innovation and on-time and on-budget implementation. A public agency then was created to coordinate the research efforts of different firms reducing cost and opportunistic threats.

Suggested Citation

  • Matteo LANDONI, 2012. "The public-private partnership in the Italian satellite telecommunication system design: SIRIO and Italsat (1969-1996)," Departmental Working Papers 2012-20, Department of Economics, Management and Quantitative Methods at Università degli Studi di Milano.
    • Handle: RePEc:mil:wpdepa:2012-20
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://wp.demm.unimi.it/files/wp/2012/DEMM-2012_020wp.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. James G. March & Lee S. Sproull & Michal Tamuz, 1991. "Learning from Samples of One or Fewer," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 2(1), pages 1-13, February.
    2. Arthur, W Brian, 1989. "Competing Technologies, Increasing Returns, and Lock-In by Historical Events," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 99(394), pages 116-131, March.
    3. Kenneth Arrow, 1962. "Economic Welfare and the Allocation of Resources for Invention," NBER Chapters, in: The Rate and Direction of Inventive Activity: Economic and Social Factors, pages 609-626, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    4. Malerba, Franco, 1985. "Demand structure and technological change: The case of the European semiconductor industry," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 14(5), pages 283-297, October.
    5. Aschhoff, Birgit & Sofka, Wolfgang, 2009. "Innovation on demand--Can public procurement drive market success of innovations?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(8), pages 1235-1247, October.
    6. Leyden, Dennis Patrick & Link, Albert N., 1999. "Federal laboratories as research partners," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 17(4), pages 575-592, May.
    7. Ron Adner & Daniel Levinthal, 2001. "Demand Heterogeneity and Technology Evolution: Implications for Product and Process Innovation," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 47(5), pages 611-628, May.
    8. Teece, David J., 1980. "Economies of scope and the scope of the enterprise," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 1(3), pages 223-247, September.
    9. Dalpe, Robert & DeBresson, Chris & Xiaoping, Hu, 1992. "The public sector as first user of innovations," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 21(3), pages 251-263, June.
    10. Ozer, Muammer, 2009. "The roles of product lead-users and product experts in new product evaluation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(8), pages 1340-1349, October.
    11. Abernathy, William J. & Clark, Kim B., 1985. "Innovation: Mapping the winds of creative destruction," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 14(1), pages 3-22, February.
    12. Schmookler, Jacob, 1962. "Economic Sources of Inventive Activity," The Journal of Economic History, Cambridge University Press, vol. 22(1), pages 1-20, March.
    13. Malerba, Franco, et al, 1999. "'History-Friendly' Models of Industry Evolution: The Computer Industry," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 8(1), pages 3-40, March.
    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. Mario Benassi & Matteo Landoni, 2019. "State-owned enterprises as knowledge-explorer agents," Industry and Innovation, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 26(2), pages 218-241, February.

    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. Simon Wiederhold, 2012. "The Role of Public Procurement in Innovation: Theory and Empirical Evidence," ifo Beiträge zur Wirtschaftsforschung, ifo Institute - Leibniz Institute for Economic Research at the University of Munich, number 43.
    2. Falck, Oliver & Wiederhold, Simon, 2013. "Nachfrageorientierte Innovationspolitik," Studien zum deutschen Innovationssystem 12-2013, Expertenkommission Forschung und Innovation (EFI) - Commission of Experts for Research and Innovation, Berlin.
    3. Murmann, Johann Peter & Frenken, Koen, 2006. "Toward a systematic framework for research on dominant designs, technological innovations, and industrial change," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(7), pages 925-952, September.
    4. Mary Tripsas, 2008. "Customer preference discontinuities: a trigger for radical technological change," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 29(2-3), pages 79-97.
    5. Lalit Manral, 2015. "The demand-side dynamics of entrant heterogeneity," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 25(2), pages 401-445, April.
    6. Corrocher, Nicoletta & Zirulia, Lorenzo, 2010. "Demand and innovation in services: The case of mobile communications," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(7), pages 945-955, September.
    7. Czarnitzki, Dirk & Hünermund, Paul & Moshgbar, Nima, 2020. "Public Procurement of Innovation: Evidence from a German Legislative Reform," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 71(C).
    8. Wei Jin & ZhongXiang Zhang, 2014. "Explaining the Slow Pace of Energy Technological Innovation: Why Market Conditions Matter," CCEP Working Papers 1401, Centre for Climate & Energy Policy, Crawford School of Public Policy, The Australian National University.
    9. Vanessa OLTRA & Maïder SAINT JEAN, 2009. "Environmental Innovations and Industrial Dynamics (In French)," Cahiers du GREThA (2007-2019) 2009-22, Groupe de Recherche en Economie Théorique et Appliquée (GREThA).
    10. Kristina McElheran, 2015. "Do Market Leaders Lead in Business Process Innovation? The Case(s) of E-business Adoption," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 61(6), pages 1197-1216, June.
    11. 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.
    12. Link, Albert N. & Scott, John T., 2001. "Public/private partnerships: stimulating competition in a dynamic market," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 19(5), pages 763-794, April.
    13. Baudisch, Alexander Frenzel, 2007. "Consumer heterogeneity evolving from social group dynamics: Latent class analyses of German footwear consumption 1980-1991," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 60(8), pages 836-847, August.
    14. Korzinov, Vladimir & Savin, Ivan, 2016. "Pervasive enough? General purpose technologies as an emergent property," Working Paper Series in Economics 95, Karlsruhe Institute of Technology (KIT), Department of Economics and Management.
    15. Malerba, Franco, 2007. "Innovation and the dynamics and evolution of industries: Progress and challenges," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 25(4), pages 675-699, August.
    16. Ivanova, Inga A. & Leydesdorff, Loet, 2014. "Rotational symmetry and the transformation of innovation systems in a Triple Helix of university–industry–government relations," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 143-156.
    17. Viktor Slavtchev & Simon Wiederhold, 2011. "The Impact of Government Procurement Composition on Private R&D Activities," Jena Economics Research Papers 2011-036, Friedrich-Schiller-University Jena.
    18. Cohen, Wesley M., 2010. "Fifty Years of Empirical Studies of Innovative Activity and Performance," 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 129-213, Elsevier.
    19. Ajay Bhaskarabhatla, 2016. "The Moderating Role of Submarket Dynamics on the Product Customization–Firm Survival Relationship," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 27(4), pages 1049-1064, August.
    20. Steven Bond‐Smith, 2022. "Discretely innovating: The effect of limited market contestability on innovation and growth," Scottish Journal of Political Economy, Scottish Economic Society, vol. 69(3), pages 301-327, July.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Procurement; Public-private partnership; research and development agreement; space industry;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • N44 - Economic History - - Government, War, Law, International Relations, and Regulation - - - Europe: 1913-
    • N74 - Economic History - - Economic History: Transport, International and Domestic Trade, Energy, and Other Services - - - Europe: 1913-
    • 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

    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:mil:wpdepa:2012-20. 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: DEMM Working Papers (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/damilit.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.