IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/sip/dpaper/06-009.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Linking Policy Research and Practice in 'STIG Systems': Many Obstacles, but Some Ways Forward

Author

Listed:
  • Philippe Aghion

    (Harvard University Department of Economics)

  • Paul David

    (Economics Department, Stanford University)

  • Dominique Foray

    (Chaire en Economie et Management de l'Innovation (CEMI))

Abstract

This paper reflects on the relevance of systems thinking about the interdependent policy issues bearing on the dynamics of science, technology and innovation in their relationship to economic growth. Considering the approach that characterizes much of the current economics literatures treatment of technology and growth policies, we pose the critical question: what kind of systems paradigm is likely to prove particularly fruitful in that particular problem-domain: Evolutionary, neo-Schumpeterian, and complex system dynamics approaches are conceptually attractive and we analyze their respective virtues while also acknowledging their more serious problematic features. Those become visible quickly when trying connect systems-relevant research with practical policy-making in this field. Not content to have simply identified some significant obstructions in the path toward that goal, the paper also suggests some potentially feasible ways forward.

Suggested Citation

  • Philippe Aghion & Paul David & Dominique Foray, 2006. "Linking Policy Research and Practice in 'STIG Systems': Many Obstacles, but Some Ways Forward," Discussion Papers 06-009, Stanford Institute for Economic Policy Research.
    • Handle: RePEc:sip:dpaper:06-009
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www-siepr.stanford.edu/repec/sip/06-009.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Aghion, Philippe & Howitt, Peter, 1992. "A Model of Growth through Creative Destruction," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 60(2), pages 323-351, March.
    2. Tor Jakob Klette & Jarle Møen, 1999. "From Growth Theory to Technology Policy - Coordination Problems in Theory and Practice," Nordic Journal of Political Economy, Nordic Journal of Political Economy, vol. 25, pages 53-74.
    3. Paul A. David & Dominique Foray, "undated". "Economic Fundamentals of the Knowledge Society," Working Papers 02003, Stanford University, Department of Economics.
    4. Sah, Raaj Kumar & Stiglitz, Joseph E, 1985. "Human Fallibility and Economic Organization," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 75(2), pages 292-297, May.
    5. Pierre Garrouste & Stavros Ioannides (ed.), 2001. "Evolution and Path Dependence in Economic Ideas," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 1790.
    6. Paul A David (with the assistance of John Gabriel Goddard Lopez), 2000. "Knowledge, Capabilities and Human Capital Formation in Economic Growth," Treasury Working Paper Series 01/13, New Zealand Treasury, revised 10 Apr 2001.
    7. Paul A. Davi & dDominique Foray & CNRS and Institut pour le Management de la Recherche et de l`Innovation & Paris-Dauphine University, 2001. "An Introduction to the Economy of the Knowledge Society," Economics Series Working Papers 84, University of Oxford, Department of Economics.
    8. Klette, Tor Jakob & Moen, Jarle & Griliches, Zvi, 2000. "Do subsidies to commercial R&D reduce market failures? Microeconometric evaluation studies1," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 29(4-5), pages 471-495, April.
    9. Mowery, David C. & Simcoe, Timothy, 2002. "Is the Internet a US invention?--an economic and technological history of computer networking," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 31(8-9), pages 1369-1387, December.
    10. Paul M. Romer, 2001. "Should the Government Subsidize Supply or Demand in the Market for Scientists and Engineers?," NBER Chapters, in: Innovation Policy and the Economy, Volume 1, pages 221-252, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    11. Sah, Raaj Kumar & Stiglitz, Joseph E, 1988. "Committees, Hierarchies and Polyarchies," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 98(391), pages 451-470, June.
    12. Paul A. David, 2006. "Reflections on the Patent System and IPR Protection in the Past, Present and Future," Discussion Papers 05-015, Stanford Institute for Economic Policy Research.
    13. David, Paul A. & Rothwell, Geoffrey S., 1996. "Standardization, diversity and learning: Strategies for the coevolution of technology and industrial capacity," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 14(2), pages 181-201.
    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. Anna Kaderabkova & Slavo Radosevic, 2011. "Innovation Policy in Multi-Tier Europe: Introduction," Chapters, in: Slavo Radosevic & Anna Kaderabkova (ed.), Challenges for European Innovation Policy, chapter 1, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    2. Ron Boschma & Rikard Eriksson & Urban Lindgren, 2008. "Labour mobility, related variety and the performance of plants: A Swedish study," Papers in Evolutionary Economic Geography (PEEG) 0809, Utrecht University, Department of Human Geography and Spatial Planning, Group Economic Geography, revised May 2008.

    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. Aghion, Philippe & David, Paul A. & Foray, Dominique, 2009. "Science, technology and innovation for economic growth: Linking policy research and practice in 'STIG Systems'," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(4), pages 681-693, May.
    2. Philippe Aghion & Paul A. David & Dominique Foray, 2007. "Science, Technology and Innovation for Economic Growth: Towards Linking Policy Research and Practice in 'STIG Systems'," Discussion Papers 06-039, Stanford Institute for Economic Policy Research, revised Oct 2008.
    3. Goerke, Björn & Albers, Sönke, 2016. "Long-term effects of subsidies on firm growth: introducing the concept of outcome additionality," EconStor Preprints 142164, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics.
    4. Wolff, Guntram B. & Reinthaler, Volker, 2008. "The effectiveness of subsidies revisited: Accounting for wage and employment effects in business R&D," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(8), pages 1403-1412, September.
    5. Guo, Di & Guo, Yan & Jiang, Kun, 2016. "Government-subsidized R&D and firm innovation: Evidence from China," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(6), pages 1129-1144.
    6. Alex Bell & Raj Chetty & Xavier Jaravel & Neviana Petkova & John Van Reenen, 2019. "Who Becomes an Inventor in America? The Importance of Exposure to Innovation," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 134(2), pages 647-713.
    7. Tuomas Takalo, 2012. "Rationales and Instruments for Public Innovation Policies," Journal of Reviews on Global Economics, Lifescience Global, vol. 1, pages 157-167.
    8. Ornella Wanda Maietta & Fernanda Mazzotta, 2018. "Firm Survival and Innovation: Knowledge Context Matters!," CSEF Working Papers 496, Centre for Studies in Economics and Finance (CSEF), University of Naples, Italy.
    9. Kong, Dongmin & Zhang, Bohui & Zhang, Jian, 2022. "Higher education and corporate innovation," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 72(C).
    10. Zhao, Shukuan & Xu, Baoda & Zhang, Weiyong, 2018. "Government R&D subsidy policy in China: An empirical examination of effect, priority, and specifics," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 135(C), pages 75-82.
    11. Karotkin, D. & Nitzan, S., 1993. "Some Peculiarities of Group Decision Making in Teams," Discussion Paper 1993-3, Tilburg University, Center for Economic Research.
    12. Geir H. Bjertnæs & Tom-Reiel Heggedal & Karl Jacobsen, 2009. "Knowledge spillovers and the timing of R&D policy," DEGIT Conference Papers c014_042, DEGIT, Dynamics, Economic Growth, and International Trade.
    13. Lee, Young Hoon & Kim, YoungJun, 2016. "Analyzing interaction in R&D networks using the Triple Helix method: Evidence from industrial R&D programs in Korean government," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 110(C), pages 93-105.
    14. George W. J. Hendrikse, 1998. "Screening, Competition and the Choice of the Cooperative as an Organisational Form," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 49(2), pages 202-217, June.
    15. Ioannides, Yannis M., 2012. "Complexity and organizational architecture," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 64(2), pages 193-202.
    16. Manuel Trajtenberg, 2002. "Government Support for Commercial R&D: Lessons from the Israeli Experience," NBER Chapters, in: Innovation Policy and the Economy, Volume 2, pages 79-134, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    17. Gagnepain, Philippe & Aguiar Wicht, Luis, 2013. "European Cooperative R&D and Firm Performance: Evidence Based on Funding Differences in Key Actions," CEPR Discussion Papers 9426, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    18. Richard M. H. Suen, 2013. "Research Policy and U.S. Economic Growth," Working papers 2013-18, University of Connecticut, Department of Economics.
    19. Michael Peneder & Karl Aiginger & Gernot Hutschenreiter & Markus Marterbauer, 2001. "Structural Change and Economic Growth," WIFO Studies, WIFO, number 20668, April.
    20. Daniel Gama e Colombo, 2016. "Impact Assessment of Tax Incentives to Foster Industrial Innovation in Brazil: The Case of Law 11,196/05," Working Papers, Department of Economics 2016_30, University of São Paulo (FEA-USP).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Techonological Change; systems paradigm; STIG systems;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • O32 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Management of Technological Innovation and R&D
    • O33 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Technological Change: Choices and Consequences; Diffusion Processes

    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:sip:dpaper:06-009. 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: Anne Shor (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cestaus.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.