IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/zbw/fisidp/341396.html

From high-tech strategy to high-tech agenda Germany: An overview of 20 years of the German STI flagship policy

Author

Listed:
  • Wittmann, Florian
  • Weiblen, Nele
  • Hummler, Andreas
  • Lindner, Ralf

Abstract

This discussion paper examines how Germany designs and implements its major federal science, technology, and innovation (STI) policies. Being a flagship policy since 2006, the High-Tech Strategy and its following successors have not only provided a framework for German STI policy but also evolved considerably over time. Shifting towards a mission-oriented approach in 2018 with the High-Tech Strategy 2025, the most recent High-Tech Agenda Germany in turn highlights six key technologies. This paper provides an overview of the federal High-Tech Strategy (and its successors). It analyzes strategy context, priority selection, implementation (including budgeting and instruments), and policy learning. The High-Tech Strategy and its successors have served as the federal government's umbrella STI strategy, coordinating activities across ministries since 2006. Strategy development is coordinated by the Federal Ministry of Research, Technology and Space (Bundesministerium für Forschung, Technologie und Raumfahrt; BMFTR) and has relied on different approaches to prioritize activities including key technologies, missions and demand areas/future tasks. Despite these changing orientations and political priority setting, there is considerable continuity in overarching priorities, reflecting rather a gradual development than radical changes. Serving as an umbrella strategy, it lacks an independent budget and depends on the willingness of ministries to contribute to the strategy, being partly locked in a "STI trap". It focuses mostly on thematically oriented research funding, providing inputs to selected priorities, while acknowledging the importance of framework conditions (that are partly beyond the scope of the federal level, as universities are financed mainly by the regional level). Stakeholder involvement has increased over time but does not include the formulation process. While monitoring has been recently established, echoing repeated calls from advisory bodies, so far, no evaluation has taken place at the strategy level. The recently adopted High-Tech Agenda Germany reflects a paradigm shift, returning to key technologies and promising several innovations, including a stronger involvement of the regional level that so far has been widely absent from this strategy.

Suggested Citation

  • Wittmann, Florian & Weiblen, Nele & Hummler, Andreas & Lindner, Ralf, 2026. "From high-tech strategy to high-tech agenda Germany: An overview of 20 years of the German STI flagship policy," Discussion Papers "Innovation Systems and Policy Analysis" 94, Fraunhofer Institute for Systems and Innovation Research (ISI).
  • Handle: RePEc:zbw:fisidp:341396
    DOI: 10.24406/publica-8517
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/341396/1/1971907561.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.24406/publica-8517?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Teichler, Ulrich, 2018. "Recent changes of financing higher education in Germany and their intended and unintended consequences," International Journal of Educational Development, Elsevier, vol. 58(C), pages 37-46.
    2. Scharpf, Fritz W., 2000. "Institutions in comparative policy research," MPIfG Working Paper 00/3, Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies.
    3. Dietmar Braun, 2008. "Organising the political coordination of knowledge and innovation policies," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 35(4), pages 227-239, May.
    4. Borrás, Susana & Laatsit, Mart, 2019. "Towards system oriented innovation policy evaluation? Evidence from EU28 member states," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(1), pages 312-321.
    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. Kidjie Saguin & Michael Howlett, 2022. "Enhancing Policy Capacity for Better Policy Integration: Achieving the Sustainable Development Goals in a Post COVID-19 World," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(18), pages 1-13, September.
    2. Sun, Yutao & Jiang, Lin & Cao, Cong, 2025. "Multiple proximities and inter-agency collaboration within a policy network: The case of innovation policymaking in China," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 141(C).
    3. Henderson, Dylan & Roche, Neil, 2018. "From consensus to conflict in the regional policy mix for broadband deployment: examining the role of informal coordination," 29th European Regional ITS Conference, Trento 2018 184944, International Telecommunications Society (ITS).
    4. Zhaoyang Pan & Liang Ma, 2025. "Research on the evolution and evaluation of Chinese sports industry policies based on intelligent analysis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 20(2), pages 1-24, February.
    5. Elvira Uyarra & Jens Sörvik & Inger Midtkandal, 2014. "Inter-regional Collaboration in Research and Innovation Strategies for Smart Specialisation (RIS3). S3 Working Paper Series no 6/2014," JRC Research Reports JRC91963, Joint Research Centre.
    6. Hufnagl, Miriam, 2025. "Unboxing innovation policy strategies: An empirical exploration on objectives, coordination, and capacity," Discussion Papers "Innovation Systems and Policy Analysis" 91, Fraunhofer Institute for Systems and Innovation Research (ISI).
    7. Yang Gao, 2022. "The Belt and Road Initiative and cascading innovation in China’s domestic railway ecosystem," Journal of International Business Policy, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 5(2), pages 236-258, June.
    8. Adam, Edmund, 2020. "‘Governments base performance-based funding on global rankings indicators’: A global trend in higher education finance or a global rankings literature fiction? A comparative analysis of four performance-based funding programs," International Journal of Educational Development, Elsevier, vol. 76(C).
    9. Xiaoke Zhang, 2022. "Understanding innovation policy governance: A disaggregated approach," Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 39(3), pages 303-329, May.
    10. Jan Fagerberg, 2023. "The global green shift: Where it comes from, how it works, and where it’s heading," Working Papers on Innovation Studies 20230923, Centre for Technology, Innovation and Culture, University of Oslo.
    11. Marc Dijk & Eric Iversen & Antje Klitkou & René Kemp & Simon Bolwig & Mads Borup & Peter Møllgaard, 2020. "Forks in the Road to E-Mobility: An Evaluation of Instrument Interaction in National Policy Mixes in Northwest Europe," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(2), pages 1-20, January.
    12. Lily Kiminami & Shinichi Furuzawa & Akira Kiminami, 2021. "Rice policies for long-tail market-creating innovations: empirical study on consumers’ cognition and behavior in Japan," Asia-Pacific Journal of Regional Science, Springer, vol. 5(3), pages 909-931, October.
    13. Niamh Hardiman, 2006. "Politics and Social Partnership - Flexible Network Governance," The Economic and Social Review, Economic and Social Studies, vol. 37(3), pages 343-374.
    14. Ricard Esparza-Masana, 2022. "Towards Smart Specialisation 2.0. Main Challenges When Updating Strategies," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 13(1), pages 635-655, March.
    15. Feng-Shang Wu & Hong-Ji Huang, 2024. "Why Do Some Countries Innovate Better than Others? A New Perspective of Science, Technology, and Innovation Policy Regimes and National Absorptive Capacity," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(7), pages 1-30, March.
    16. Chung, Chao-chen, 2013. "Government, policy-making and the development of innovation system: The cases of Taiwanese pharmaceutical biotechnology policies (2000–2008)," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(5), pages 1053-1071.
    17. Ron Crawford, 2021. "Focused innovation policy: Lessons from international experience," Working Papers 2021/03, New Zealand Productivity Commission.
    18. Mogues, Tewodaj & Olofinbiyi Tolulope, "undated". "Institutions And Public Agricultural Investments: A Qualitative Study Of State And Local Government Spending In Nigeria," Feed the Future Innovation Lab for Food Security Policy Research Papers 259576, Michigan State University, Department of Agricultural, Food, and Resource Economics, Feed the Future Innovation Lab for Food Security (FSP).
    19. Coburn, Josie & Bone, Frederique & Hopkins, Michael M. & Stirling, Andy & Mestre-Ferrandiz, Jorge & Arapostathis, Stathis & Llewelyn, Martin J., 2021. "Appraising research policy instrument mixes: a multicriteria mapping study in six European countries of diagnostic innovation to manage antimicrobial resistance," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(4).
    20. António Brandão Moniz, 2011. "From the Lisbon strategy to EU2020: illusion or progress for european economies?," IET Working Papers Series 01/2011, Universidade Nova de Lisboa, IET/CICS.NOVA-Interdisciplinary Centre on Social Sciences, Faculty of Science and Technology.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    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:zbw:fisidp:341396. 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: ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/isfhgde.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.