Conceptual article
Innovation systems and policy design: the European experience
Juan Vicente García Manjón
Professor, Department of Business Economics, European University Miguel de Cervantes, Spain
Elena Romero Merino
Professor, Department of Business Economics, European University Miguel de Cervantes, Spain
PP: 33 - 42
Abstract
There is a growing interest in a better understanding of the logic and design of innovation policies. Although many different innovation base theories have tried to explain the innovation phenomena, the systemic innovation approach constitutes a reference point for scholars and policy makers. However, this perspective also finds difficulties in its application, mainly concerning the formulation and design of innovation policies. To overcome these inconveniences, we have review the market failure theories, the functional or the activities approach in an attempt to provide a framework of reference for the implementation of innovation policies. Finally, we have introduced the EU case as a paradigmatic example of the formulation and implementation of innovation policies in a unique scenario with multiple National Members States and regional bodies but a common coordinating mechanism of policymaking.
Keywords
innovation rationales, innovation policy design, systemic institutional approach, system failures, functional perspective, Europe
Article Text
Nowadays, innovation policies are a key issue in all developed countries in order to promote economic growth and social welfare. There is a growing interest from scholars and policymakers in a better understanding of how the innovation process encompasses the different players, what the optimal mobilization of resources is, and how the generated knowledge can reach society and business. The action of policymakers coexists at various levels, since the implementation of innovation policies comes from different spatial environments and orientations.
However, the implementation of innovation policies is not exempt from difficulties, mainly concerning its preceding formulation (Abramovsky, Harrison & Simpson, 2004). Due to this complexity, it is suitable to describe the innovation rationale before focusing on the definition and design of innovation policies. The literature concerning the concept of innovation rationale drives us from the neoclassical approach to the endogenous growth theory, the neo Marshallian approach, and finally to the systemic institutional theories, which put forward the concept of innovation system.
With a clearer notion of the innovation phenomena, it is time to formulate and implement innovation policies. To step forward to the innovation policy design, policymakers can also lean on different academic approaches such as the market or system failures approach (Smith 1999), the functional perspective (Edquist 2005), or the innovation system activities (Chaminade & Edquist 2005).
Though there are manifold examples of the implementation of innovation systems and the characterization of innovation policies in different environments, we point out the experience at European level. The necessity of harmonizing innovation policies at different layers, due to the existence of a common coordinating mechanism of innovation policies at European level, makes EU an optimal place for analysing the existing innovation systems and policy frameworks.
Summing up, the purpose of this paper is twofold; on one hand to make a literature review about innovation rationales, the systemic institutional approach and different orientations in policy implementation, while on the other hand the aim is to analyse practical experiences of policy design which provides examples of the application of the referred theories.
The present article is organised as follows: succeeding this introduction, the theoretical background of innovation policy rationales is provided in section 2; the design of innovation policies is treated in section 3; section 4 aims at providing an outline of the European experience in the design of innovation systems and the implementation of innovation policies, while section 5 closes the study with main conclusions.
References
Abramovsky L, Harrison R and Simpson H. (2004) Increasing Innovative Activity in the UK? Where now for Government Support for Innovation and Technology Transfer? The Institute for Fiscal Studies Briefing Note No. 53.
Arundel A and Hollanders H (2005) Policy, Indicators and Targets: Measuring the Impacts of Innovation Policies, European Trend Chart of Innovation. MERIT.
Aydalot P (1986) Milieux Innovateurs en Europe. Economica, Paris.
Balaz V, KluvankovaT and Zajac, S (2005) Conceptual economic issues of regional innovations, Institute for Forecasting, Slovak Academy of Science.
Bergek A, Jacobsson S, Carlsson B, Lindmarki, S, and Rickne A (2005) Analysing the dynamics and functionality of sectoral innovation systems - a manual. Paper presented at the 10 Year Anniversary DRUID Summer Conference, June 27-29, Copenhagen.
Carlsson B (2007) Innovation systems: a survey of the literature from a Schumpeterian perspective, in Hanusch and Pyka (eds.) Elgar Companion to Neo-Schumpeterian Economics. pp. 857-871, Edward Elgar, Cheltenham,
Carlsson B, Jacobsson S (1997) In search of useful public policies: key lessons and issues for policy makers, in Carlsson (ed) Technological Systems and Industrial Dynamics. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht.
Competitiveness Council (2006) Council conclusions on 'A broad-based innovation strategy: strategic priorities for innovation action at the EU level'. Presented at the 2769th Council meeting, 4 December, Brussels.
Cooke P and Schienstock G (2000) Structural competitiveness and learning regions, Enterprise and Innovation Management Studies 1 (3): 265-280.
Cooke P, Uranga MG and Etxebarria G (1997) Regional innovation systems: institutional and organizational dimensions, Research Policy 26: 475-491.
Chaminade C and Edquist C (2005) From Theory To Practice: The Use of Systems of Innovation Approach in Innovation Policy. Lund University, Lund.
Charles D, Nauwelaers C, Moutin B and Bradley D (2000) Assessment of the regional innovation and technology transfer strategies and infrastructures (RITTS) scheme. European Commission. Luxembourg.
Edquist C (2005) Systems of innovation: perspectives and challenges, in Fagerberg, Mowery and Nelson (eds) The Oxford Handbook of Innovation, , pp. 181-208. Oxford University Press, New York.
Edquist C, Hommen L, Johnson B, Lemola T, Malerba F, Reiss T and Smith K (1998) The ISE Policy Statement-the Innovation Policy Implications of the 'Innovations Systems and European Integration', Research project. TSER programme (DG XII). Linko¨ping University.
EMERIPA Project (2006) Methodology for regional innovation strategy impact assessment and benchmarking. Aristotle University of Thessaloniki - Urban and Regional Innovation research unit (URENIO).
European Commission (EU) (1998) Regional Innovation Strategy Pilot Projects. European Regional Development Fund. Brussels.
European Commission (EU) (1999) Good practices on RITTS, RIS and RTP Pilot Projects across Europe. Brussels: European Commission.
European Commission 2009. Making public support for innovation in the EU more effective: Lessons learned from a public consultation for action at Community level. Commission Staff Working Document. SEC(2009)1197 of 09.09.2009. European Communities. Brussels.
Feldman MP (1994) The Geography of Innovation. Kluwer Academic Press, Boston.
Hertog P den, Rubalcaba L and Segers J. (2008) Is there a rationale for services R&D and innovation policies? International Journal of Services Technology and Management 9 (3-4): 334-354.
Hirst P (1994) Associative Democracy. Polity, Cambridge.
Hollanders H and Cruysen A van (2008) Rethinking the European Innovation Scoreboard: A revised methodology for 2008-2010.Proinno Europe. European Commission.
Klein Woolthuis RK, Lankhuizenb M and Gilsing V (2005): A system failure framework for innovation policy design, Technovation 25: 609-619
Hekkert M, Suurs RAA, Negro S, Kuhlmann S and Smits R (2007) Functions of Innovation Systems: A new approach for analysing technological change; Technological Forecasting and Social Change 74 (4): 413-432.
Langlois RN and Robertson PL (1996) 'Stop crying over spilt knowledge: a critical look at the theory of spill-overs and technical change' Paper presented at the MERIT conference on Innovation, Evolution and Technology, 25-27 August, Maastricht, the Netherlands.
Laranja M, Uyarra E, Flanagan K (2008) Policies for science, technology and innovation:Translating rationales into regional policies in a multilevel setting´, Research Policy 37: 823-835.
Liu X and White S (2001) Comparing innovation systems: a framework and application to China's transitional context, Research Policy 30 (7): 1091-1114.
Lundvall BA (ed) (1992) National Systems of Innovation: Towards a Theory of Innovation and Interactive Learning. Pinter, London.
Malerba F (2002) Sectoral systems of innovation and production, Research Policy 31 (2): 247-264.
Markard J and Truffer B (2008) Technological innovation systems and the multi-level perspective: Towards an integrated framework, Research Policy 37: 596-615.
Martin R and Sunley P (1999) Slow convergence? The new endogenous growth theory and regional development, Economic Geography 74 (3): 201-228.
Metcalfe S and Georghiou L (1998) Equilibrium and evolutionary foundations of technology policy, STI Review 22: 75-100.
Oughton C, Landabaso M, and Morgan K (2002) The Regional Innovation Paradox: Innovation Policy and Industrial Policy, Journal of Technology Transfer 27: 97-110.
Porter M (1998) Clusters and the new economics of competition, Harvard Business Review Nov/Dec: 77-90.
Pyke F, Becattini G and Sengenberger W (eds) (1990) Industrial Districts and Inter-Firm Cooperation in Italy. Geneva International Institute for Labour Studies, Geneva.
Romer PM (1994) The origins of endogenous growth, Journal of Economic Perspectives 8: 3-22.
Scherer FM (1965) Firm size, market structure, opportunity and the output of patented inventions, American Economic Review 55 (5): 1097-1123.
Smith K (1999) Innovation as a systemic phenomenon: rethinking the role of policy, in: Bryant and Wells (eds) A New Economic Paradigm? Innovation-Based Evolutionary Systems, pp. 10-47, Commonwealth of Australia, Department of Industry, Science and Resources, Science and Technology Policy Branch, Canberra.
Rondé P and Hussler C (2005) Innovation in regions: what does really matter?, Research Policy 34: 1150-1172
Smith K (2000) Innovation as a systemic phenomenon: rethinking the role of policy. Enterprise and Innovation Management Studies 1 (1): 73-102.
Steen M van der (1999) Evolutionary Systems of Innovation: Veblian- Oriented Study to the Role of the Government Factor. Van Gorcun, Assen, The Netherlands.
STRINNOP Project (2003) Guide book STRINNOP: How to Strengthen the regional innovation profile: A Pragmatic Approach. STRINNOP Project Consortium.
Uyarra E (2007) Key dilemmas of regional innovation policies. Innovation - The European Journal of Social Science Research 20 (3): 243-261.
Varga A (2000) Local academic knowledge transfers and the concentration of economic activity, Journal of Regional Science 40 (2): 289-309.
eContent Home
