Four Are Better Than One—But First, Let Us Plan It Strategically

Author(s):  
Dan Breznitz

This chapter starts the constructive journey of developing a strategy for local innovation-based growth in each stage of production. It does so by first making clear what is (and what is not) innovation policy. Reminding the reader that there are only two innovation actors in the economy (individuals and firms), and only three goals of innovation policy: (i) equipping the agents of innovation with the necessary capacities, (ii) building and sustaining the ecosystem in which they can flourish, and (iii) finding the most effective ways to stimulate said actors to innovate. It then introduces the concept of growth models to develop and build the ideas of the four fundamentals of local innovation-based growth policy: (1) Flows of local–global knowledge, demand, and input; (2) The supply and creation of public and semi-public goods; (3) A local ecosystem that reinforces the firm-level benefits of the previous two fundamentals; and (4) Managing the co-evolution of the previous three fundamentals and the changing role of public policy as the locale grows and excels. Using these tools, the chapter analyzes the case for stage 4 innovation specialization through the case of Shenzhen.

2021 ◽  
pp. 185-188
Author(s):  
Dan Breznitz

This chapter concludes the book, reminding the reader that the act of innovation is what makes humans unique, and urging for a strong belief in human ingenuity. It also briefly summarizes the main points of the book, namely innovation versus invention, innovation and local economic growth, global fragmentation of production, innovation stages, the only two innovation actors, the three goals of innovation policy, and how to adhere to the four fundamentals (flows of local-global knowledge, demand, and inputs; the supply and creation of public and semi-public goods; building a local ecosystem that reinforces the firm-level benefits of the previous two fundamentals; and the co-evolution of the previous three fundamentals).


2019 ◽  
pp. 153-178
Author(s):  
Jason Potts

Chapter 7 examines a life-cycle view of an innovation trajectory that begins with an innovation commons, and considers what happens after the innovation commons collapses when entrepreneurial firms emerge (i.e., the fundamental transformation). This chapter explores how the governance role of an innovation commons will often reform and reconstitute to provide industry-specific public goods through collective action, usually in the form of an industry association. This governance function is associated with what in evolutionary theory is called niche construction. This evolutionary governance model of an innovation trajectory shows the complexities of innovation policy.


Author(s):  
William L. Miller

This book outlines the association between Scotland and England since the Union of the Crowns in 1603. Individual chapters range in focus from the late nineteenth century to the foreseeable future. They cover topics from the monarchy, constitution, parliamentary procedure, public policy and finance to the attitudes, experiences and identities of the ordinary Scots and English — both as majorities and as minorities in each other's country. They also include the natural inequality of the union in consequence of population sizes; trends in culture and identity; the changing role of the state; cross-border sympathy; and the pressure of adversarial politics. Gini's ‘Coefficient of Inequality’ is used to calculate the concentration of income or wealth within countries. Culture and identity are not merely conceptually and empirically distinct, they seem to be trending in opposite directions: cultures are merging, identities diverging. An overview of the chapters included in this book is shown.


Author(s):  
Susana Borrás ◽  
Charles Edquist

Who produces scientific and technical knowledge these days? What type of knowledge is being produced, and for what purposes? This chapter studies the role of public policy in knowledge production (especially R&D activities) relevant for the innovation process from a perspective of innovation systems. It identifies four typical policy-related obstacles and barriers related to knowledge production in an innovation system. Next, it elaborates a set of overall criteria for the selection and design of relevant policy instruments addressing those unbalances. Most importantly, the chapter argues that in most countries innovation policy continues to be subsumed under research policy. An holistic and problem-oriented innovation policy requires that innovation policy and research policy are separated from each other in the design phase—but it must be ensured that they support each other when implemented (in the same way as many other policy areas have to be coordinated with each other).


2012 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. 130-133
Author(s):  
Peter A. Swenson

Public education is one of the most important “public goods” of a democratic society. In recent decades, public policy analysts, public intellectuals, and politicians have debated the state of public education in the United States and have argued about the sorts of public policies that might best promote the academic achievement, educational success, and political socialization of youth. Terry Moe and John Chubb have been important contributors to these debates. Their 1990 book, Politics, Markets, and America's Schools, set the terms of much subsequent discussion about the importance of school autonomy and “educational choice.” Moe's Special Interest extends these arguments through a more frontal critique of the role of teachers unions. This book represents an important contribution to public discussion of school reform. It also incorporates a distinctive perspective on the relationship between power and public policy, and between the role of states and that of markets in the provision of public goods and services. In this symposium, we feature a range of serious commentaries on the book's central arguments about educational policy and politics and on its approach to “engaged” or “applied” political science.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document