IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/qld/uq2004/403.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Systems thinking, market failure, and the development of innovation policy- The case of Australia

Author

Abstract

Innovation policy is increasingly informed from the perspective of a national innovation system (NIS), but, despite the fact that research findings emphasize the importance of national differences in the framing conditions for innovation, policy prescriptions tend to be uniform. Justifications for innovation policy by organizations such as the OECD generally relate to notions of market failure, and the USA, with its focus on the commercialization of public sector research and entrepreneurship, is commonly portrayed as the best model for international emulation. In this paper we develop a broad framework for NIS analysis, involving free market, coordination and complex-evolutionary system approaches. We argue that empirical evidence supporting the hypothesis that the �free market� can be relied upon to promote innovation is limited, even in the USA, and the global financial crisis provides us with new opportunities to consider alternatives. The case of Australia is particularly interesting: a successful economy, but one that faces continuing productivity and innovation challenges. Drawing on information and analysis collected for a major review of Australia�s NIS, and the government�s 10-year plan in response to it, we show how the free market trajectory of policy-making of past decades is being extended, complemented and refocused by new approaches to coordination and complex-evolutionary system thinking. These approaches are shown to emphasize the importance of systemic connectivity, evolving institutions and organizational capabilities. Nonetheless, despite the fact that there has been much progress in this direction in the Australian debate, the predominant logic behind policy choices still remains one of addressing market failure, and the primary focus of policy attention continues to be science and research rather than demand-led approaches. We discuss how the development and elaboration of notions of systems failure, rather than just market failure, can further improve policy-making in the future.

Suggested Citation

  • Mark Dodgson & Alan Hughes & John Foster & J.S. Metcalfe, 2010. "Systems thinking, market failure, and the development of innovation policy- The case of Australia," Discussion Papers Series 403, School of Economics, University of Queensland, Australia.
  • Handle: RePEc:qld:uq2004:403
    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.

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Bengt-Åke Lundvall, 2007. "National Innovation Systems—Analytical Concept and Development Tool," Industry and Innovation, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 14(1), pages 95-119.
    2. Markus Balzat & Horst Hanusch, 2003. "Recent Trends in the Research on National Innovation Systems," Discussion Paper Series 254, Universitaet Augsburg, Institute for Economics.
    3. Metcalfe, Stan & Ramlogan, Ronnie, 2008. "Innovation systems and the competitive process in developing economies," The Quarterly Review of Economics and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 48(2), pages 433-446, May.
    4. Productivity Commission, 2007. "Public Support for Science and Innovation," Research Reports, Productivity Commission, Government of Australia, number 24.
    5. Bartelsman, Eric & Haltiwanger, John C. & Scarpetta, Stefano, 2004. "Microeconomic Evidence of Creative Destruction in Industrial and Developing Countries," IZA Discussion Papers 1374, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    6. John Foster, 2000. "Competitive selection, self-organisation and Joseph A. Schumpeter," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 10(3), pages 311-328.
    7. Markus Balzat & Horst Hanusch, 2004. "Recent trends in the research on national innovation systems," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 14(2), pages 197-210, June.
    8. Mytelka, Lynn K. & Smith, Keith, 2002. "Policy learning and innovation theory: an interactive and co-evolving process," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 31(8-9), pages 1467-1479, December.
    9. Freeman, Christopher & Soete, Luc, 2009. "Developing science, technology and innovation indicators: What we can learn from the past," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(4), pages 583-589, May.
    10. Bergek, Anna & Jacobsson, Staffan & Carlsson, Bo & Lindmark, Sven & Rickne, Annika, 2008. "Analyzing the functional dynamics of technological innovation systems: A scheme of analysis," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(3), pages 407-429, April.
    11. 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.
    12. Akkermans, Dirk & Castaldi, Carolina & Los, Bart, 2009. "Do 'liberal market economies' really innovate more radically than 'coordinated market economies'?: Hall and Soskice reconsidered," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(1), pages 181-191, February.
    13. Dore, Ronald, 2000. "Stock Market Capitalism: Welfare Capitalism: Japan and Germany versus the Anglo-Saxons," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780199240616.
    14. Malerba, Franco & Nelson, Richard & Orsenigo, Luigi & Winter, Sidney, 2008. "Public policies and changing boundaries of firms in a "history-friendly" model of the co-evolution of the computer and semiconductor industries," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 67(2), pages 355-380, August.
    15. Chong Ju Choi & Carla C. J. M. Millar & Caroline Y. L. Wong, 2005. "Knowledge and Exchange," Palgrave Macmillan Books, in: Knowledge Entanglements, chapter 0, pages 65-76, Palgrave Macmillan.
    16. John Foster, 2005. "From simplistic to complex systems in economics," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 29(6), pages 873-892, November.
    17. Florence Jaumotte & Nigel Pain, 2005. "An Overview of Public Policies to Support Innovation," OECD Economics Department Working Papers 456, OECD Publishing.
    18. Charles Edquist & Leif Hommen (ed.), 2008. "Small Country Innovation Systems," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 3981.
    19. Sharif, Naubahar, 2006. "Emergence and development of the National Innovation Systems concept," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(5), pages 745-766, June.
    20. Hart, David M., 2009. "Accounting for change in national systems of innovation: A friendly critique based on the U.S. case," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(4), pages 647-654, May.
    21. Partha, Dasgupta & David, Paul A., 1994. "Toward a new economics of science," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 23(5), pages 487-521, September.
    22. Nill, Jan & Kemp, Ren, 2009. "Evolutionary approaches for sustainable innovation policies: From niche to paradigm?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(4), pages 668-680, May.
    23. Alan Hughes, 2007. "Innovation Policy as cargo cult: Myth and Reality in knowledge-led Productivity Growth," Working Papers wp348, Centre for Business Research, University of Cambridge.
    24. Dodgson, Mark & Mathews, John & Kastelle, Tim & Hu, Mei-Chih, 2008. "The evolving nature of Taiwan's national innovation system: The case of biotechnology innovation networks," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(3), pages 430-445, April.
    25. Alan Hughes, 2010. "Innovation Policy as Cargo Cult: Myth and Reality in Knowledge-Led Productivity Growth," Palgrave Macmillan Books, in: The Innovation for Development Report 2009–2010, chapter 0, pages 101-117, Palgrave Macmillan.
    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. Proksch, Dorian & Haberstroh, Marcus Max & Pinkwart, Andreas, 2017. "Increasing the national innovative capacity: Identifying the pathways to success using a comparative method," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 116(C), pages 256-270.
    2. Thanos Fragkandreas, 2023. "Case study research on innovation systems: paradox, dialectical analysis and resolution," Working Papers 65, Birkbeck Centre for Innovation Management Research, revised 15 May 2023.
    3. 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.
    4. Erzurumlu, S. Sinan & Erzurumlu, Yaman O. & Yoon, YongKi, 2022. "National innovation systems and dynamic impact of institutional structures on national innovation capability: A configurational approach with the OKID method," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 114(C).
    5. Eun Sun Kim & Kuk Jin Bae & Jeongeun Byun, 2020. "The History and Evolution: A Big Data Analysis of the National Innovation Systems in South Korea," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(3), pages 1-20, February.
    6. Coenen, Lars & Benneworth, Paul & Truffer, Bernhard, 2012. "Toward a spatial perspective on sustainability transitions," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(6), pages 968-979.
    7. Havas, Attila, 2016. "Recent economic theorising on innovation: Lessons for analysing social innovation," MPRA Paper 77385, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    8. 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.
    9. Watkins, Andrew & Papaioannou, Theo & Mugwagwa, Julius & Kale, Dinar, 2015. "National innovation systems and the intermediary role of industry associations in building institutional capacities for innovation in developing countries: A critical review of the literature," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(8), pages 1407-1418.
    10. Fernando Jiménez-Sáez & Jon Mikel Zabala-Iturriagagoitia & Jose Luis Zofío, 2013. "Who leads research productivity growth? Guidelines for R&D policy-makers," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 94(1), pages 273-303, January.
    11. Crespo, Nuno Fernandes & Crespo, Cátia Fernandes, 2016. "Global innovation index: Moving beyond the absolute value of ranking with a fuzzy-set analysis," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 69(11), pages 5265-5271.
    12. Proksch, Dorian & Busch-Casler, Julia & Haberstroh, Marcus Max & Pinkwart, Andreas, 2019. "National health innovation systems: Clustering the OECD countries by innovative output in healthcare using a multi indicator approach," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(1), pages 169-179.
    13. Michael P. Schlaile & Sophie Urmetzer & Vincent Blok & Allan Dahl Andersen & Job Timmermans & Matthias Mueller & Jan Fagerberg & Andreas Pyka, 2017. "Innovation Systems for Transformations towards Sustainability? Taking the Normative Dimension Seriously," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(12), pages 1-20, December.
    14. Souzanchi Kashani, Ebrahim & Roshani, Saeed, 2019. "Evolution of innovation system literature: Intellectual bases and emerging trends," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 146(C), pages 68-80.
    15. Soete, Luc & Verspagen, Bart & ter Weel, Bas, 2010. "Systems of Innovation," Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, in: Bronwyn H. Hall & Nathan Rosenberg (ed.), Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, edition 1, volume 2, chapter 0, pages 1159-1180, Elsevier.
    16. Swati Mehta, 2018. "National Innovation System of India: An Empirical Analysis," Millennial Asia, , vol. 9(2), pages 203-224, August.
    17. Bajmócy, Zoltán & Vas, Zsófia, 2012. "Az innovációs rendszerek 25 éve. Szakirodalmi áttekintés evolúciós közgazdaságtani megközelítésben [25 years of innovation systems. A literature review from the angle of evolutionary economics]," Közgazdasági Szemle (Economic Review - monthly of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences), Közgazdasági Szemle Alapítvány (Economic Review Foundation), vol. 0(11), pages 1233-1256.
    18. Weber, K. Matthias & Rohracher, Harald, 2012. "Legitimizing research, technology and innovation policies for transformative change," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(6), pages 1037-1047.
    19. Nasierowski Wojciech & Arcelus Francisco J., 2012. "What is Innovativeness: Literature Review," Foundations of Management, Sciendo, vol. 4(1), pages 63-74, June.
    20. Ricardo Pinto & Isabel Lourenço & Ana Simões, 2022. "Does Innovation Spur Integrated Reporting?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(1), pages 1-20, December.

    More about this item

    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

    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:qld:uq2004:403. 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: SOE IT (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/decuqau.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.