scholarly journals The Ecological System of Innovation: A New Architectural Framework for a Functional Evidence-Based Platform for Science and Innovation Policy

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert Yawson
Keyword(s):  
Technology Policy ◽  
Innovation Policy ◽  
Innovation System ◽  
Innovation Ecosystem ◽  
Policy Interventions ◽  
Patent Counts ◽  
Scientific Institutions ◽  
Architectural Framework ◽  
Innovative Behaviour ◽  
D Investment

Models on innovation, for the most part, do not include a comprehensive and end-to-end view. Most innovation policy attention seems to be focused on the capacity to innovate and on input factors such as R&D investment, scientific institutions, human resources and capital. Such inputs frequently serve as proxies for innovativeness and are correlated with intermediate outputs such as patent counts and outcomes such as GDP per capita. While this kind of analysis is generally indicative of innovative behaviour, it is less useful in terms of discriminating causality and what drives successful strategy or public policy interventions. This situation has led to the developing of new frameworks for the innovation system led by National Science and Technology Policy Centres across the globe. These new models of innovation are variously referred to as the National Innovation Ecosystem. There is, however, a fundamental question that needs to be answered: what elements should an innovation policy include, and how should such policies be implemented? This paper attempts to answer this question.

scholarly journals The Ecological System of Innovation: A New Architectural Framework for a Functional Evidence-Based Platform for Science and Innovation Policy

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert Yawson
Keyword(s):  
Technology Policy ◽  
Innovation Policy ◽  
Innovation System ◽  
Innovation Ecosystem ◽  
Policy Interventions ◽  
Patent Counts ◽  
Scientific Institutions ◽  
Architectural Framework ◽  
Innovative Behaviour ◽  
D Investment

Models on innovation, for the most part, do not include a comprehensive and end-to-end view. Most innovation policy attention seems to be focused on the capacity to innovate and on input factors such as R&D investment, scientific institutions, human resources and capital. Such inputs frequently serve as proxies for innovativeness and are correlated with intermediate outputs such as patent counts and outcomes such as GDP per capita. While this kind of analysis is generally indicative of innovative behaviour, it is less useful in terms of discriminating causality and what drives successful strategy or public policy interventions. This situation has led to the developing of new frameworks for the innovation system led by National Science and Technology Policy Centres across the globe. These new models of innovation are variously referred to as the National Innovation Ecosystem. There is, however, a fundamental question that needs to be answered: what elements should an innovation policy include, and how should such policies be implemented? This paper attempts to answer this question.

Innovation Policy in China

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Erik Baark
Keyword(s):  
Soviet Union ◽  
Technology Policy ◽  
Innovation Policy ◽  
New Technology ◽  
Innovation System ◽  
Early Period ◽  
Essential Element ◽  
Advanced Technology ◽  
High Tech ◽  
Chinese Government

The Chinese government places high priority on promoting innovation in the country, viewing it as an essential element of economic and social modernization. From an early period of reliance on import of technology from the Soviet Union in the 1950s, China moved to a period of self-reliance and “reverse engineering” in the 1960s, followed by the Open Door phase since the 1980s, where the primary goal was to catch up with the most advanced countries in the world. Since 2006, China has increasingly sought to develop its own advanced technology and become an “innovation superpower.” In the following article on innovation, it is important to be aware of the fact that Chinese policymakers and academics have traditionally seen this field as part of science and technology policy, which emphasized scientific research as a vital element in the development of new technology. However, this approach tended to limit policymakers’ concern to support for research institutes and ignored the crucial role that enterprises could play in developing and implementing technology. This included the delicate balance between transfer of overseas technology and the independent development of technology by Chinese organizations. Therefore, concepts of innovation and of research and development have become very popular in China in recent decades, and policies promoting a Chinese national innovation system are prominent in government statements as well as in the academic literature. This article will focus on policies that the Chinese government has pursued to promote or regulate technology and innovation, including the controversial policy of promoting indigenous innovation. In addition, it addresses the literature on the protection of intellectual property rights, human resources for innovation, development of high-tech industries and high-tech parks, and university-industry linkages.

India’s Science, Technology and Innovation Policy: Choices for Course Correction with Lessons Learned from China

2018 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
G.D. Sandhya
Keyword(s):  
Structural Changes ◽  
Technology Policy ◽  
Innovation Policy ◽  
Industrial Sector ◽  
Lessons Learned ◽  
Innovation Ecosystem ◽  
Technology And Innovation ◽  
Brics Countries ◽  
Science Technology ◽  
Science Technology And Innovation

<p>A large number of developed and emerging economies have introduced S&amp;T reforms and some of them such as Japan, South Korea and later China have used them for gaining competitive advantage in science, technology and innovation through well crafted S&amp;T policies and appropriate strategies. So far, India has pronounced four major S&amp;T policies beginning with the Science Policy Resolution (SPR) in 1958, Technology Policy in 1983; S&amp;T Policy in 2003 and Science Technology and Innovation Policy in 2013. In a period of six decades India has created a huge S&amp;T infrastructure and made impressive achievements in space, defence and atomic energy, yet the feat is not as impressive in the industrial sector. In innovation competitiveness, R&amp;D and human resource, the indices related to global manufacturing, competition, innovation and knowledge, India has not performed as well in comparison to other BRICS countries. In this paper an attempt has been made to look at, how comprehensive India’s STI policies with regard to policy components; a roadmap; strategies for execution and boldness in terms of identifying and recognising the failures and recommend major structural changes. What is intended is to understand the relationship between the domain of S&amp;T policy and intended outcomes; the mismatch between the policy expectations and outcomes. An attempt is being made to identify possibility for correction  by taking lessons from other economies, such as China.</p><p> </p><p><strong>Keywords</strong>:   S&amp;T policies, Innovation policies, Innovation ecosystem</p>

University–industry cooperation and the transition to innovation ecosystems in Japan

2017 ◽  
Vol 31 (6) ◽  
pp. 373-387 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marina Ranga ◽  
Tomasz Mroczkowski ◽  
Tsunehisa Araiso
Keyword(s):  
Innovation Policy ◽  
Academic Research ◽  
Innovation System ◽  
The United States ◽  
Policy Framework ◽  
Regional Innovation ◽  
Innovation Ecosystem ◽  
Entrepreneurial Spirit ◽  
Venture Business ◽  
University Industry

This article looks at the evolution of university–industry collaboration (UIC) policies in Japan since the mid-1990s to the present and analyses their role in shaping the country’s innovation ecosystem. UIC policies are examined within a multidimensional innovation policy framework that encompasses five Science and Technology Basic Plans and a vast array of support measures for venture business, intellectual property, innovation networks and business promotion, all reflecting an extensive top-down government intervention with ambitious goals. A dense network of UIC centres has been established throughout the country, mostly in universities, and these centres are tightly embedded in regional innovation structures. In spite of the sustained government policy intervention, Japan lags behind the United States and Europe in a ranking of the top 20 global ecosystems and has some of the world’s lowest entrepreneurial indicators, as defined by the Global Entrepreneurship Monitor. The authors argue that a likely cause for the lag is Japan’s slow and still incomplete transition from a ‘traditional’ innovation system to a modern innovation ecosystem with a strong entrepreneurial spirit and culture, effective intermediaries between university and industry, high absorptive capacity in companies using academic research, cross-boundary mobility of workforce and ideas and global outreach. The experience of Osaka University and Hokkaido University, two UIC leaders in Japan and internationally, supports this hypothesis.

National Planning and Local Technology Zones: Experimental Governance in China's Torch Programme

2013 ◽  
Vol 216 ◽  
pp. 896-919 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sebastian Heilmann ◽  
Lea Shih ◽  
Andreas Hofem
Keyword(s):  
Innovation Policy ◽  
Innovation System ◽  
High Technology ◽  
Top Down ◽  
National Programme ◽  
Local Implementation ◽  
National Planning ◽  
Innovative Potential ◽  
Organizational Patterns ◽  
Definition Of

AbstractMany studies raise doubts about the effectiveness of the institutions, programmes and instruments that shape the Chinese national innovation system. This article scrutinizes central–local interactions in the national Torch Programme that has governed a large group of high-technology zones since 1988. The Torch Programme's procedural practices challenge widely shared assumptions about the dirigiste character of Chinese innovation policy. It combines centralized definition of programme objectives with extensive local implementation experiments. As three case studies demonstrate, bottom-up policy innovations are effectively fed back into national programme adjustments and into horizontal policy diffusion. The array of organizational patterns and promotional instruments that emerges from competitive “experimentation under the shadow of hierarchy” (ESH) goes way beyond what could have been initiated from top down. We hypothesize that the procedural strengths displayed in the Torch Programme may provide better indicators of future innovative potential in China's high-technology zones than retrospective statistical indices and benchmarks that are derived from OECD experience.

scholarly journals Formulasi Kebijakan Roadmap Inovasi Daerah di Kabupaten Bekasi

2020 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
pp. 119-131
Author(s):  
Waluyo Zulfikar ◽  
Ipah Ema Jumiati
Keyword(s):  
Public Services ◽  
Innovation Policy ◽  
Dynamic Performance ◽  
Innovation System ◽  
Industrial Area ◽  
Innovation Systems ◽  
Policy Framework ◽  
Policy Coherence ◽  
The Public ◽  
Industrial Zones

Bekasi Regency is the area with the largest industrial area in Southeast Asia, where there are 16 industrial areas with relatively large land area. In addition, there are also seven large industrial zones or industrial zones on an international scale, in line with this, the problem of public service delivery in the Bekasi District Government must be carried out properly to the public. In optimizing the public services, various innovative ideas and ideas are needed to create synergy and efficiency in the provision of these public services. In this study, the innovation system is a unified component that influences the direction of development and speed of innovation, diffusion, and learning processes in the development, mastery, advancement and application/utilization of science and technology. How sub-subsystems (elements / factors) play their roles, their interrelations (including policy coherence), and the dynamics of their interactions determine or influence the dynamic performance of innovation systems. Strengthening the innovation system means structuring the system (holistic, simultaneous, systemic issues) in a structured way. In a policy perspective, strengthening innovation systems means remedial steps that need to be directed to address systemic failures. Therefore, policy strategies need to be developed as a unified innovation policy framework (KKI) to strengthen the system.

scholarly journals Regional Innovation Systems in Poland: How to classify them?

2021 ◽  
Vol 17 (3) ◽  
pp. 987-1003
Author(s):  
Dorota Ciołek ◽  
Anna Golejewska ◽  
Adriana Zabłocka-Abi Yaghi
Keyword(s):  
Innovation Policy ◽  
Innovation System ◽  
Weighted Average ◽  
Innovation Systems ◽  
Regional Innovation Systems ◽  
Regional Innovation ◽  
Metropolitan Regions ◽  
Industrial Enterprises ◽  
Innovation Potential ◽  
And Performance

The literature emphasises the role of regional and local innovation environment. Regional Innovation Systems show differences in innovation outputs determined by different inputs. Understanding these relationships can have important implications for regional and innovation policy. The research aims to classify Regional Innovation Systems in Poland according to their innovation capacity and performance. The analysis covers 72 subregions (classified as NUTS 3 in the Nomenclature of Territorial Units for Statistics) in 2004–2016. Classes of Regional Innovation Systems in Poland were identified based on a combination of linear and functional approaches and data from published and unpublished sources. It was assumed that innovation systems in Poland differ due to their location in metropolitan and non-metropolitan regions, thus, the Eurostat NUTS 3 metro/non-metro typology was applied for this purpose. Panel data regressions as models with individual random effects were estimated separately for metropolitan and non-metropolitan groups of subregions. The study identified common determinants of innovation outputs in both NUTS 3 types: share of innovative industrial enterprises, industry share, unemployment rate, and employment in research and development. Next, NUTS 3 were classified within each of two analysed types in line with output- and input-indices, the latter being calculated as non-weighted average of significant inputs. Last, the subregions were clustered based on individual inputs to enable a more detailed assessment of their innovation potential. The cluster analysis using k-means method with maximum cluster distance was applied. The results showed that the composition of the classes identified within metropolitan and non-metropolitan systems in 2004– 2016 remains unstable, similarly to the composition of clusters identified by inputs. The latter confirms the changes in components of the capacity within both Regional Innovation System types. The observed situation allows us to assume that Regional Innovation Systems in Poland are evolving. In further research, the efficiency of Regional Innovation Systems should be assessed, taking into account the differences between metropolitan and non-metropolitan regions as well as other environmental factors that may determine the efficiency of innovative processes.

scholarly journals The Choice of Innovation Policy Instruments

2019 ◽  
pp. 212-228
Author(s):  
Susana Borrás ◽  
Charles Edquist
Keyword(s):  
Innovation Policy ◽  
Innovation System ◽  
Policy Instruments ◽  
The Political ◽  
Public Agencies ◽  
Instrument Choice ◽  
Different Types ◽  
Policy Mixes

The purpose of this chapter is to discuss the different types of instruments of innovation policy, to examine how governments and public agencies in different countries and different times have used these instruments differently, to explore the political nature of instrument choice and design (and associated issues), and to elaborate a set of criteria for the selection and design of the instruments in relation to the formulation of holistic innovation policy. The chapter argues that innovation policy instruments must be designed and combined into mixes that address the problems of the innovation system. These mixes are often called ‘policy mixes’, though we prefer the term ‘instrument mix’. The wide combination of instruments into such mixes is what makes innovation policy ‘holistic’.

scholarly journals Cognitive Instruments Of Public Management Accountability For Development Of National Innovation System

2019 ◽  
Vol 18 (3) ◽  
pp. 114-124
Author(s):  
Svitlana Labunska ◽  
Nataliia Gavkalova ◽  
Andriy Pylypenko ◽  
Olena Prokopishyna
Keyword(s):  
Public Management ◽  
Mutual Influence ◽  
Innovation Policy ◽  
Innovation System ◽  
Economic Security ◽  
National Innovation System ◽  
Innovation Activity ◽  
Fast Diffusion ◽  
Innovation Potential ◽  
Innovation Activities

The main aim of the research was to develop cognitive instruments that allow justification of decisions in national innovation policy. In the theoretical part of research fundamentals of national innovation policies of EU-members and Ukraine were compared to reveal factors that can accelerate innovation development. In the empirical part of research the analysis of innovation capability of Ukrainian enterprises was conducted based on financial, statistic and management reports and it confirmed that companies systematically conducted innovation activities, reached higher levels of innovation potential, innovative business opportunities and margin of economic security and, consequently, have more innovative capacities for innovation of all types. The formation of cognitive analytical base allowed the application of scenario modelling at the level of public management of innovation activity. Cognitive modelling approach was justified firstly by increased volatility in economic conditions of modern realities of crisis in the national economy, and secondly high-cost and risky innovations, fast diffusion of information resources during the introduction of innovation processes, and thirdly, the presence of the mutual influence of objects of national innovation system.

scholarly journals CREATION OF AN INTEGRATED OPEN COWORKING CENTER FOR INNOVATION ENTREPRENEURSHIP IN HIGHER EDUCATION INSTITUTIONS

Management ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 29 (1) ◽  
pp. 35-46
Author(s):  
Iryna М. Goncharenko ◽  
Margarita Išoraitė
Keyword(s):  
Higher Education ◽  
Poverty Reduction ◽  
Institutional Environment ◽  
Innovation Policy ◽  
Innovation System ◽  
Innovative Development ◽  
Transfer Of Knowledge ◽  
Resource Network ◽  
Business Structures ◽  
Four Levels

Introduction. The transition to an innovative development model requires a dramatic increase in the share of innovative products and services by activating innovative entrepreneurship, introducing organizational innovations. One of the effective ways of modernizing the economy is the implementation of the attractor of integrated development of innovation infrastructure at four levels: macro level (national innovation system, free economic zones, venture financing); meso-level (creation of business incubators, technoparks, hacking, coworkings); micro-level (funds attraction, outsourcing, intrapreneurship) and nano-level (freelancing; crowdsourcing).The hypothesis of scientific research is based on the assumption that a new understanding of the priorities of educational and innovation policy and the creation of an appropriate institutional environment for the development of the ecosystem "education – science – business" will promote the establishment of equivalent relations between market actors in accordance with national priorities and world trends in scientific and technological development.The purposeof the research is to provide a comprehensive substantiation of the theoretical and methodological foundations of the formation of a management system of cluster interaction of interactive tools of the innovation chain of knowledge on a new basis, providing the attractor of innovative development of innovation and technological centers of coworking as a platform for the development of educational clusters.The methodology of the research is based on the general scientific methodology – philosophy and system approach, as well as on interdisciplinary methodological approaches – institutional, resource, network and cluster, used in socio-economic sciences.Results. A new approach to the formation of institutional forms of the implementation of innovative entrepreneurship, as well as mechanisms for the formation and functioning of small cluster business structures on the basis (with participation) of university units, allows to provide an efficient transfer of knowledge from the system of education to entrepreneurship in order to provide innovative development as the most entrepreneurial institution of higher education, and cluster action zone.Conclusions. An integrated combination of the proposed approaches to business organization provides introduction of innovative directions of economic activity, creation of additional workplaces, reduction of unemployment, poverty reduction and formation of a stratum of potentially innovative-active people who can create their own business for improving the quality and standard of living of the population.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document