IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/tik/inowpp/20161111.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Innovation Policy: What, Why & How

Author

Listed:
  • Jakob Edler

    (Manchester Institute of Innovation Research, Alliance Manchester Business School, The University of Manchester)

  • Jan Fagerberg

    (Centre for Technology, Innovation and Culture (TIK), University of Oslo & Department of Business and Management, Aalborg University)

Abstract

During the last two-three decades policy-makers have increasingly became concerned about the role of innovation for economic performance and, more recently, for the solution of challenges that arise (such as the climate challenge). The view that policy may have a role in supporting for innovation has become widespread, and the term innovation policy has become commonly used. This paper takes stock of this rapidly growing area of public policy, with particular focus on the definition of innovation policy (what it is); theoretical rationales (why innovation policy is needed); and how innovation policy is designed, implemented and governed.

Suggested Citation

  • Jakob Edler & Jan Fagerberg, 2016. "Innovation Policy: What, Why & How," Working Papers on Innovation Studies 20161111, Centre for Technology, Innovation and Culture, University of Oslo.
  • Handle: RePEc:tik:inowpp:20161111
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sv.uio.no/tik/InnoWP/tik_working_paper_20161111.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Jakob Edler & Paul Cunningham & Abdullah Gök & Philip Shapira (ed.), 2016. "Handbook of Innovation Policy Impact," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 16121.
    2. K. Matthias Weber & Bernhard Truffer, 2017. "Moving innovation systems research to the next level: towards an integrative agenda," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 33(1), pages 101-121.
    3. Edurne Magro & Mikel Navarro & Jon Mikel Zabala-Iturriagagoitia, 2014. "Coordination-Mix: The Hidden Face of STI Policy," Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 31(5), pages 367-389, September.
    4. Edler, Jakob & Georghiou, Luke, 2007. "Public procurement and innovation--Resurrecting the demand side," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(7), pages 949-963, September.
    5. FaÏz Gallouj & Faridah Djellal, 2010. "The Handbook of Innovation and Services: A Multi-disciplinary Perspective," Post-Print hal-01111763, HAL.
    6. Richard Owen & Phil Macnaghten & Jack Stilgoe, 2012. "Responsible research and innovation: From science in society to science for society, with society," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 39(6), pages 751-760, December.
    7. Castellacci, Fulvio & Lie, Christine Mee, 2015. "Do the effects of R&D tax credits vary across industries? A meta-regression analysis," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(4), pages 819-832.
    8. Erik Arnold, 2004. "Evaluating research and innovation policy: a systems world needs systems evaluations," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 13(1), pages 3-17, April.
    9. Jan Fagerberg & Koson Sapprasert, 2011. "National innovation systems: the emergence of a new approach," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 38(9), pages 669-679, November.
    10. Guerzoni, Marco & Raiteri, Emilio, 2015. "Demand-side vs. supply-side technology policies: Hidden treatment and new empirical evidence on the policy mix," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(3), pages 726-747.
    11. Ben R. Martin, 2016. "R&D policy instruments -- a critical review of what we do and don’t know," Industry and Innovation, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 23(2), pages 157-176, February.
    12. 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.
    13. Philip McCann & Raquel Ortega-Argilés, 2013. "Modern regional innovation policy," Cambridge Journal of Regions, Economy and Society, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 6(2), pages 187-216.
    14. Jan Fagerberg & David C Mowery & Bart Verspagen, 2009. "The evolution of Norway's national innovation system," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 36(6), pages 431-444, July.
    15. Susana Borras & Jakob Edler, 2014. "The governance of change in socio-technical and innovation systems: three pillars for a conceptual framework," Chapters, in: Susana Borrás & Jakob Edler (ed.), The Governance of Socio-Technical Systems, chapter 2, pages 23-48, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    16. Richard R. Nelson, 1959. "The Simple Economics of Basic Scientific Research," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 67, pages 297-297.
    17. Pierson, Paul, 2000. "Increasing Returns, Path Dependence, and the Study of Politics," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 94(2), pages 251-267, June.
    18. Fagerberg, Jan & Laestadius, Staffan & Martin, Ben R. (ed.), 2015. "The Triple Challenge for Europe: Economic Development, Climate Change, and Governance," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780198747413.
    19. van der Have, Robert P. & Rubalcaba, Luis, 2016. "Social innovation research: An emerging area of innovation studies?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(9), pages 1923-1935.
    20. Metcalfe, J S, 1994. "Evolutionary Economics and Technology Policy," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 104(425), pages 931-944, July.
    21. 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.
    22. Steinmueller, W. Edward, 2010. "Economics of Technology Policy," 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 1181-1218, Elsevier.
    23. Flanagan, Kieron & Uyarra, Elvira & Laranja, Manuel, 2011. "Reconceptualising the 'policy mix' for innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(5), pages 702-713, June.
    24. Jack Spaapen & Leonie van Drooge, 2011. "Introducing ‘productive interactions’ in social impact assessment," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 20(3), pages 211-218, September.
    25. 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.
    26. Metcalfe, J S, 1995. "Technology Systems and Technology Policy in an Evolutionary Framework," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 19(1), pages 25-46, February.
    27. Blind, Knut, 2012. "The influence of regulations on innovation: A quantitative assessment for OECD countries," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(2), pages 391-400.
    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. Liotard, Isabelle & Revest, Valérie, 2018. "Contests as innovation policy instruments: Lessons from the US federal agencies' experience," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 127(C), pages 57-69.
    2. Fagerberg, Jan, 2018. "Mobilizing innovation for sustainability transitions: A comment on transformative innovation policy," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(9), pages 1568-1576.
    3. JUKNEVIČIENĖ, Vita, 2019. "Key Factors For The Successful Implementation Of The National Innovation Policy: The Case Of Lithuania," Annals of Spiru Haret University, Economic Series, Universitatea Spiru Haret, vol. 19(2), pages 25-50.
    4. Daniel Gama e Colombo & Jorge Martinez-Vazquez, 2018. "Fiscal Decentralization and Public R&D Policy: A Country Panel Analysis," International Center for Public Policy Working Paper Series, at AYSPS, GSU paper1820, International Center for Public Policy, Andrew Young School of Policy Studies, Georgia State University.
    5. Serhat Burmaoglu & Ozcan Saritas, 2019. "An evolutionary analysis of the innovation policy domain: Is there a paradigm shift?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 118(3), pages 823-847, March.
    6. Andrea Bastianin & Paolo Castelnovo & Massimo Florio & Anna Giunta, 2019. "Technological Learning and Innovation Gestation Lags at the Frontier of Science: from CERN Procurement to Patent," Papers 1905.09552, arXiv.org.
    7. Aleksandra Zygmunt, 2020. "Do Human Resources and the Research System Affect Firms’ Innovation Activities? Results from Poland and the Czech Republic," Sustainability, MDPI, Open Access Journal, vol. 12(6), pages 1-14, March.
    8. Grashof, Nils, 2020. "Putting the watering can away Towards a targeted (problem-oriented) cluster policy framework," Papers in Innovation Studies 2020/4, Lund University, CIRCLE - Center for Innovation, Research and Competences in the Learning Economy.
    9. Ghazinoory, Sepehr & Nasri, Shohreh & Ameri, Fatemeh & Montazer, Gholam Ali & Shayan, Ali, 2020. "Why do we need ‘Problem-oriented Innovation System (PIS)’ for solving macro-level societal problems?," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 150(C).
    10. Stojčić, Nebojša & Srhoj, Stjepan & Coad, Alex, 2020. "Innovation procurement as capability-building: Evaluating innovation policies in eight Central and Eastern European countries," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 121(C).
    11. Cirillo, Valeria & Martinelli, Arianna & Nuvolari, Alessandro & Tranchero, Matteo, 2019. "Only one way to skin a cat? Heterogeneity and equifinality in European national innovation systems," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(4), pages 905-922.
    12. Maria de Fátima Oliveira & Francisco Gomes da Silva & Susana Ferreira & Margarida Teixeira & Henrique Damásio & António Dinis Ferreira & José Manuel Gonçalves, 2019. "Innovations in Sustainable Agriculture: Case Study of Lis Valley Irrigation District, Portugal," Sustainability, MDPI, Open Access Journal, vol. 11(2), pages 1-19, January.
    13. Qiuyun Zhao & Zeyu Li & Zuoxiang Zhao & Jinqiu Ma, 2019. "Industrial Policy and Innovation Capability of Strategic Emerging Industries: Empirical Evidence from Chinese New Energy Vehicle Industry," Sustainability, MDPI, Open Access Journal, vol. 11(10), pages 1-17, May.
    14. Sophie Urmetzer & Michael P. Schlaile & Kristina B. Bogner & Matthias Mueller & Andreas Pyka, 2018. "Exploring the Dedicated Knowledge Base of a Transformation towards a Sustainable Bioeconomy," Sustainability, MDPI, Open Access Journal, vol. 10(6), pages 1-22, May.
    15. Craig Scott & Hubert Eng & Alexander Dubyk & Jennifer Zwicker, 2020. "Impediments to Health Innovation in Canada: Identifying Policy Barriers in Alberta’s Precision Health Innovation and Commercialization Ecosystem," SPP Research Papers, The School of Public Policy, University of Calgary, vol. 13(5), March.
    16. 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, Open Access Journal, vol. 9(12), pages 1-20, December.
    17. Torregrosa-Hetland, Sara & Pelkonen, Antti & Oksanen, Juha & Kander, Astrid, 2019. "The prevalence of publicly stimulated innovations –A comparison of Finland and Sweden, 1970–2013," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(6), pages 1373-1384.
    18. Aalto, Eero & Gustafsson, Robin, 2020. "Innovation Promotion Rationales and Impacts – A Review," ETLA Reports 99, The Research Institute of the Finnish Economy.

    More about this item

    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
    • 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:tik:inowpp:20161111. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (H&kon Normann). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/tkuiono.html .

    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 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.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.