共查询到20条相似文献，搜索用时 15 毫秒
1.
Luc Soete 《Research Policy》2019,48(4):849-857
The setting up of the Science Policy Research Unit (SPRU) at Sussex University 50 years ago represented a “transformative change” in the research on science policy and the understanding of the nature and origin of technological change and innovation studies. It influenced policymakers across the world in both the mature Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development countries and the developing world. It made the topic of science, technology and innovation (STI) familiar to business studies scholars. Today though, the analysis of STI appears to be somewhat in crisis. On the one hand, there is growing evidence that the growth and welfare gains of new technologies and innovation are no longer forthcoming in an automatic “trickle-down” fashion. The knowledge and technology diffusion “machine” appears broken. On the other hand, there are growing environmental concerns about the negative externalities of unsustainable fossil-fuel-based growth as industrialization spreads across the globe. STI policy appears somehow stuck in an industrial efficiency and consumerism mode that is unable to address in a satisfactory way the impact of such negative externalities. Can the broader historical approach as popularized within the so-called Science and Technology Studies (STS) tradition provide additional, complementary insights? Yes, if STI and STS scholars are prepared to leave their respective conceptual comfort zones and address in complementary fashion some of the major societal policy challenges confronting science, technology and innovation policy today. 相似文献
2.
任务导向型创新政策:框架理论与实践 《科学学研究》2023,41(1):30-37
任务导向型创新政策是为应对重大社会挑战而兴起的新政策范式，已成为许多国家解决“急、难、险、重”等科学问题的系统性政策干预方案。文章围绕任务导向型创新政策的概念内涵、要素构成、主要特征、理论解释与政策实践等不同维度展开全面分析。研究表明，任务导向型创新政策主要由政策目标、政策主体、政策工具和政策过程等要素构成，并具有方向引导、市场创建、协同参与和动态评估等特征。转型失灵理论为任务导向型创新政策干预创新活动的合法性提供了理论解释。现有任务导向型创新政策实践主要聚焦于保障国防安全、实现产业追赶和应对重大社会挑战三个方面。研究可为中国制定和实施任务导向型创新政策提供理论支撑和经验借鉴。 相似文献
3.
Market creation is moving to the centre of mission-oriented innovation policy. This is particularly visible in the space sector. Agencies such as the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) and the European Space Agency (ESA) are developing market-creating innovation policies in response to (a) the increasing emphasis on societal grand challenges, (b) the rise of a new wave of space companies (often referred to as “New Space”) and (c) the global trend towards interconnecting and interlinking of industries (a trend referred to as Industry 4.0). In this paper we explore the changing nature of mission-oriented innovation policies for market creation for two agencies, NASA and ESA. For these agencies, earlier mission-oriented policies focused on clear challenges with identifiable concrete problems and directed by a strong centralized agency. Contrast this with today, with broadly defined grand challenges, decentralized innovation systems with mixed top-down and bottom-up problem definition. We describe the current drivers and pressures that are creating a window for policy change, and we present examples of how NASA and ESA are responding to these pressures and use this exploration to dig deeper into the evolving frames of market-creating innovation policy in the space sector to identify the challenges for such policies and to further articulate a research agenda. 相似文献
4.
Immigration is a hotly debated and politicized policy area, one in which governments confront fierce opposition from populist parties and negative media narratives altering citizens’ perceptions of the issue. There is also growing scholarly interest in migration; new migrant integration research advocates for a conceptual shift away from focusing on migrant populations and towards rethinking host communities. At the same time, public sector innovation research is developing new approaches for how governments and public organizations can be innovative in dealing with grand challenges such as migration. The aim of this article is to merge these two subfields in order to answer a guiding research question: how can public organizations be innovative to promote integration for migrants? We suggest a typology of different innovation strategies that governments can adopt regarding integration, and we present five illustrative cases from European nations to examine how governments can innovate in order to integrate migrants. We find that governments can use multiple tools to promote integration and respond to grand challenges; governments can use various sources of innovation to address major barriers to migrant integration (e.g. language barriers, negative media and public opinion, and the difficulties of providing concrete assistance). 相似文献
5.
《普罗米修斯》2012,30(1):37-58
Abstract This paper begins with a brief look at the literature on national innovation systems (NIS). Building on the NIS approach, we present a simple conceptual framework. National innovative competence is dependent on the presence of dynamic STI actors, operating within the confines of compatible institutions. We distinguish the roles played by different STI actors and argue that heterogeneous actors engage in innovation for different reasons. Collaborative innovation is not always a natural consequence of engagement in innovation but is characterised by a distinct set of considerations. The latter part of the paper is concerned with the application of this conceptual framework to the case of Ireland. We identify the institutions pertaining to Ireland’s current innovative performance. An outline of STI actors according to their role in the system is then presented. In turn we outline the various contributions of Irish STI actors and explore their motives for engaging in innovation and collaborative innovation. 相似文献
6.
Markus Grillitsch Teis Hansen Lars Coenen Johan Miörner Jerker Moodysson 《Research Policy》2019,48(4):1048-1061
The orientation towards grand societal challenges can be seen as a new wave or paradigm for innovation policy. Such policy aims at system-wide transformation and is often referred to as system innovation policy. While insights from transition studies have provided novel and useful rationales for innovation policy targeting system-wide transformation, it remains unclear how to design, implement and evaluate such policies. The contribution of this paper is to translate and concretize the challenges of system innovation policy towards scope for policy action and analysis. Building on insights from transition studies we group the challenges into four domains: directionality, experimentation, demand articulation, and policy coordination and learning. We relate challenges within the four domains to three generic features of innovation systems: interests and capabilities of actors, networks, and institutions. The derived framework is applied in a case study on the strategic innovation programmes, a recent policy initiative by Vinnova, Sweden’s Innovation Agency, targeting system innovation. 相似文献
8.
《Research Policy》2019,48(9):103826
Test beds and living labs have emerged as a prominent approach to foster innovation across geographical regions and technical domains. They feed on the popular “grand societal challenges” discourse and the growing insight that adequate policy responses to these challenges will require drastic transformations of technology and society alike. Test beds and living labs represent an experimental, co-creative approach to innovation policy that aims to test, demonstrate, and advance new sociotechnical arrangements and associated modes of governance in a model environment under real-world conditions. In this paper, we develop an analytic framework for this distinctive approach to innovation. Our research draws on theories from Science and Technology Studies (STS) and Innovation Studies, as well as in-depth empirical analysis from two case studies – an urban smart energy campus and a rural renewable energy network. Our analysis reveals three characteristic frictions that test beds face: (1) the limits of controlled experimentation due to messy social responses and co-creation activity; (2) a tension between lab-like open-ended experimentation and pressures to demonstrate success; (3) the opposing needs of local socio-cultural specificity and scalability, i.e. the inherent promise of test bed outcomes being generalizable or transferrable because the tested “model society” is presumed to represent a future society at large. These tensions suggest that thinking of test beds as mere technology tests under real-world conditions is insufficient. Rather, test beds both test and re-configure society around a new set of technologies, envisioned futures, and associated modes of governance – occasionally against considerable resistance. By making social order explicitly available for experimentation, test beds tentatively stabilize new socio-technical orders on a local scale in an “as-if” mode of adoption and diffusion. Symmetric attention to the simultaneous co-production of new technical and social orders points to new opportunities and challenges for innovation governance in test-bed settings: Rather than mere enablers of technology, test beds could serve as true societal tests for the desirability of certain transformations. This will require rethinking notions of success and failure, planning with a view towards reversibility, and greater scrutiny of how power is distributed within such settings. Likewise, rather than envisioning test beds as low-regulation zones to drive innovation, they could be strategically deployed to co-develop socially desirable governance frameworks in tandem with emerging technologies in real-time. 相似文献
9.
《Research Policy》2023,52(2):104676
In recent years, a new frame for innovation policy has emerged, namely “transformative innovation policy” (TIP), which aims at addressing transformative change or “Grand Challenges”. Such a shift in policy theory should, ideally, be reflected in policy evaluation, but the literature has so far provided little advice on how to address TIP-related evaluation challenges such as directionality and system-level behavioural additionality. This paper discusses how the evaluation of policy interventions targeting system innovation can be designed to address these challenges. Combining the literature on sustainability transitions with policy evaluation, we propose an integrated evaluation framework composed of three main components: (i) programme theory (programme goals, systems boundaries and desired (or accepted) development paths); (ii) system analysis (transformative outcomes); and (iii) synthesis and overall assessment (including revision of programme theory). By integrating the two sets of literature, we provide a bridge between academic research on transitions and current evaluation practices. We briefly illustrate the applicability of the integrated framework in the BioInnovation Strategic Innovation Programme in Sweden. 相似文献
10.
This opening article in the special issue provides a reflexive overview of the nature and purpose of science, technology and innovation (STI) policy research at present, and makes a case for a collective and critical reflection on the means and ends of our research. The complex interaction between the past, present and future in the STI policy research field is one of the key themes of this article and of the special issue more generally. We first attempt to problematise what current STI policy research is, and then expand on the goals of the special issue. Besides summarising each article, we also discuss how these articles, individually and collectively, provide an overview of a number of epistemic, normative and practical challenges that confront us, articulating the main features of each of these. We end with a call for a sustained, critical and extensive ‘conversation’ among researchers in our field about the nature and purpose of STI policy research and the challenges we face. 相似文献
11.
12.
This paper presents an analytical framework for assessing the emergence of a new policy paradigm labelled “transformative innovation policy”, which can be seen as layered upon, but not fully replacing, earlier policy paradigms of science and technology policy and innovation systems policy. The paper establishes conceptual diversity in this emerging policy paradigm. Despite a common agenda for transformative change, there are notable differences concerning the understanding of the innovation process. Two global initiatives to promote such new innovation policies, Mission Innovation and the Global Covenant of Mayors for Climate and Energy, are used to illustrate how different articulations of transformative innovation policy are expressed in practice. These may be seen as a positive expression of the breadth of the emerging policy paradigm. While there are grounds for such a positive reading, this paper ends with a caution by stressing the political nature of paradigm change and the strong legacy of an economic, firm-centred and technology-oriented tradition in innovation policy. It makes a plea for more emphasis on a broader conceptualization of transformative innovation, and suggests that a socio-technical understanding of innovation provides several appropriate analytical concepts that can help to shape our thinking and understanding of transformative innovation policy. 相似文献
13.
Challenging the “deficit model” of innovation: Framing policy issues under the innovation imperative
As innovation is increasingly becoming an imperative for policymakers around the globe, there is a growing tendency to frame policy problems as problems of innovation. This logic suggests that we are unable to address grand societal challenges and ensure economic competitiveness because our societies, institutions, scientific activities or individual predispositions are not sufficiently geared towards innovation. In this paper, we analyze this “deficit model” of innovation in which a lack of innovation is routinely invoked as the main obstacle to social progress. Drawing parallels to research on the deficit model of public understanding of science (PUS), we develop a theoretical framework that captures the dynamics and normative implications of deficit construction, highlighting five salient dimensions: problem diagnoses, proposed remedies, the role of expertise, implied social orders, and measures of success. We apply this framework to three empirical case studies of recent innovation strategies in Luxembourg, Singapore, and Denmark. Attention to this deficit framing around innovation is important, we argue, because it is an essential part of how innovation transforms societies in the 21st century: not only through new technological possibilities or economic growth, but also by shaping public discourse, narrowing policy options, and legitimizing major institutional interventions. The implied pro-innovation bias tends to marginalize other rationales, values, and social functions that do not explicitly support innovation. It further delegates decisions about sweeping social reconfigurations to innovation experts, which raises questions of accountability and democratic governance. Experiences from the history of PUS suggest that, without a dedicated effort to transform innovation policy into a more democratic, inclusive, and explicitly political field, the present deficit logic and its technocratic overtones risks significant social and political conflict. 相似文献
14.
《Research Policy》2019,48(10):103612
The policy mix concept has become popular in innovation policy literature. It is particularly relevant for complex challenges such as sustainable industrial transitions that require joined-up interventions from different policy domains. Yet finding the right policy mix for a given challenge is strongly conditioned by the governance context in which individual policies emerge and evolve over time. In particular, the evaluation of policy mixes in a regional context is often neglected.This paper aims to deepen understanding of the interaction between governance processes and policy mix evaluation in the specific context of smart specialisation strategies. These newly popular regional innovation strategies are ideal laboratories for analysing policy mixes due to their place-based nature, their directionality, their experimental character and potential orientation towards grand societal challenges, and their complex governance context.The paper builds on the smart specialisation literature, the innovation policy and policy evaluation literature, and the literature on governance in pluralistic contexts to build a conceptual framework for analysing the governance of policy-mix evaluation. The conceptual arguments are illustrated by the Basque Country case in Spain, providing insights on the establishment of a strategic innovation policy mix evaluation process in a complex setting of institutions and actors. 相似文献
15.
This paper studies the role of technology standards in firms’ product innovation in terms of both incremental innovation (within a technology life cycle) and radical innovation (beyond the present technology cycle). We first develop a theoretical model which predicts that technology standards can be used by firms as an “insurance” hedging against the risky process of developing new products. This insurance mechanism fosters incremental innovation and product growth especially for those further away from the technological frontier. Using data from a weighted panel of UK manufacturing firms over seven years, we find that the use of technology standards over past years significantly enables a firm’s incremental innovation while also reducing its incentive to deliver radical innovation. Additionally, we show that this relationship is contingent on a firm’s R&D intensity in line with predictions of our theoretical model. 相似文献
16.
《Research Policy》2019,48(9):103789
This paper analyses Amsterdam’s Startup-in-Residence (SiR) programme as new type of policy to engage startups in the development of urban innovation through a challenge-based public procurement of innovation (PPI) process. The programme is being mimicked by other cities and government agencies, but so far there has not been a rigorous, theoretically-informed analysis of the approach. In this paper, we specify and focus on the role of city-based, public-affiliated intermediaries as initiators, moderators and influencers of conversations between startups and the local government. The main contribution of SiR as a PPI intermediation programme has been to launch new types of fruitful conversations on several levels, that lead to institutional innovations rather than direct solutions for urban problems or startup development. In this sense, SiR fulfils a role inquiring and ascribing urban challenges with values and notions of “worth” that preceded and shaped innovation directions. We also suggest that engaging startups is effective for only a limited bandwidth urban challenges; different types of intermediation are required to foster collaborative innovation in more complex settings. 相似文献
17.
《Research Policy》2022,51(1):104393
In this paper we draw a parallel between the insights developed within the framework of the current COVID-19 health crisis and the views and insights developed with respect to the long term environmental crisis, the implications for science, technology and innovation (STI) policy, Christopher Freeman analyzed already in the early 90′s. With at the time of writing, the COVID-19 pandemic entering in many countries a third wave with a very differentiated implementation path of vaccination across rich and poor countries, drawing such a parallel remains of course a relatively speculative exercise. Nevertheless, based on the available evidence of the first wave of the pandemic, we feel confident that some lessons from the current health crisis and its parallels with the long-term environmental crisis can be drawn. The COVID-19 pandemic has also been described as a “syndemic”: a term popular in medical anthropology which marries the concept of ‘synergy’ with ‘epidemic’ and provides conceptually an interesting background for these posthumous Freeman reflections on crises. The COVID-19 crisis affects citizens in very different and disproportionate ways. It results not only in rising structural inequalities among social groups and classes, but also among generations. In the paper, we focus on the growing inequality within two particular groups: youngsters and the impact of COVID-19 on learning and the organization of education; and as mirror picture, the elderly many of whom witnessed despite strict confinement in long-term care facilities, high mortality following the COVID-19 outbreak. From a Freeman perspective, these inequality consequences of the current COVID-19 health crisis call for new social STI policies: for a new “corona version” of inclusion versus exclusion. 相似文献
18.
随着中国的崛起,其创新政策越来越受到国际力量的关注,并不可避免地受到国际力量的干预和影响。因此,从国际视野审视创新政策及过程对中国科学地制定创新政策具有重要意义。已有研究主要关注全球化影响下创新政策目标、内容和工具的变化,并把创新政策看作一个主权国家的内部政治活动,从政策过程讨论全球化和国际因素对创新政策的影响还不多见。本文从国际视野出发构建了基于“过程—主体—影响力”的创新政策过程三维分析框架,并对“中国自主创新产品政府采购”政策和“中国制造2025”政策的政策过程进行了比较分析。研究认为,中国的创新政策与贸易乃至对外事务的界限模糊化使得创新政策过程成为国际—国内双重博弈的复杂过程,创新政策制定的各个阶段都受到国际因素的影响,各类利益相关者基于形势变化和利益需求在不同政策中发挥的作用有明显区别,政策出台国和政策干预国的相互依赖程度和国际影响力最终决定了一国创新政策的受干预程度。 相似文献
19.
SPRU科研选题的词频分析与计量研究 总被引：11，自引：0，他引：11
本文选择世界著名科技创新与政策研究机构——英国Sussex大学科技政策研究所(SPRU)，对其科研选题进行案例研究。借助WordSmithTools词频分析软件，我们对该机构近年来出版的1003篇(部)论文及著作的目录进行分析，通过对词及词组出现频次的计量，凸显出研究选题的范围与特色。对国际著名科技创新与科技政策研究机构的工作进行扫描，定位世界范围内该领域的前沿，捕捉研究热点，了解其研究思路和研究方法，对于拓展我国科技创新与科技政策研究者的视野，丰富研究方法，提高国家创新系统研究的水平有一定启发和借鉴作用。 相似文献
20.
在回顾和总结创新内涵演变历程的基础上,梳理创新测度的理论基础和主要模型,包括创新线性模型和反馈模型、创新系统模型,分析创新调查和统计方法、国家创新体系和创新能力测度等主要的创新测度方法.最后,分别从创新的性质、创新主体的范围、创新测度数据的质量等方面探讨了在科技变革、数字化、全球化等背景下创新测度面临的挑战及发展趋势. 相似文献