Questions related to Innovation Policy
Economic policy in the European Union's Eastern and Southern neighborhood is embedded in the frameworks offered by EU's enlargement and neighborhood policies. Under these frameworks, regional development and policy play a significant role, as is evident in the current introduction of the smart specialization approach to regional innovation policy in the Western Balkans, Turkey, Ukraine, Moldova, and Tunisia. Further approaches of regional development relevant to EU enlargement and neighborhood countries include the LEADER/CLLD approach, and building capacities in organizations such as regional development agencies according to experiences made in EU member states represents an important complement for the introduction of policy approaches. In this context, the special issue seeks contributions that deal with aspects of regional analysis, policy approaches, and institutional or organizational questions in EU enlargement or neighborhood countries and their regions.
Dr. Maximilian Benner
Please find the complete call here: https://www.mdpi.com/journal/economies/special_issues/regional_policy
Namely, I did not manage to find any sound scientific paper on creating value within the software value chain. I use the conceptualisation of the generic software value chain proposed by Pussep, A. et al. (2011 and 2012), but I am still not completely sure which parts of VC are higher value-added vs. lower value-added elements. In other words, I still wonder if software programming (coding) is among lower value-added activities?
A) As evolutionary-NeoSchumpeterians (or complexity-oriented) economists, we conceive the economy as a dynamic system in which scattered heterogeneous and boundedly-rational agents interact. Local and global interactions involving feedbacks and domain-specific connections involve producing, investing, consuming, distributing incomes, trading in general, learning, innovating, entry/exit, etc. And the ongoing development of the specifc dynamics we propose to explore a problem generate "EMERGENT PROPERTIES".
B) The methodologies we use range from verbal logical arguments (which of course can be genuinely complex) to complex ABMs, passing through non-linear highly stylized models, replicator dynamics and evolving complex networks with the afore-mentioned components.
C)The specific methodology used is not innocous. Thus, whereas verbal arguments involving real complexity are often almost inestricable, ABMs are a bit more enlightening (the less so the higher the scale), and, in my opinion, the subset of low-scale ABMs, enriched-replicator dynamics, networks and non-linear styled complex models are the best. They often even allow for closed-form quasi-exhaustive analysis.
D) The problem is how should we pass from the results we obtain in our theory, to the posing of policy recommendations to be implemented within a reality which we perceive as emerging from a complex system?
Notice that there are two sources of complexity (2 complex realms involved):
1)The inherent complexity of the real system under scrutiny.
2)The often black-boxed complexity of the theory we propose.
We know that even small differences between two evolving complex systems can make a huge difference in their outcomes. If we assume (as we should) that we can never access the "real complex mechanism underlying reality" (just we should aspire to approach it, at least in social sciences), we should be very prudent in our policy prescriptions.
E) The solution prescribed by those using simple models (mainstream economic models or simple statistical models) is not valid, since they begin by assuming that reality is SIMPLE (instead of complex), and they falsely avoid the problem. Why should social reality be simple in its functioning? The historical record of crisis and social distorsions, and the analogies with natural systems point out to a clear failure of the standard approach. Thus, if we accept complexity:
How do you address the issue of double complextity 1) and 2)?
As you know, the CIS survey does not show the names of the companies that have participated in the study. However, do those companies have the same ID (or something similar) if they participate in the survey in different periods, hence allowing them to analyze in different time periods? In other words, if I ask for CIS 2008 and CIS 2010, can I collect data for the same company in the two different surveys?
It seems that innovative economies have healthy fundamental and applied research outputs. How does this impact innovation remains to be determined! What are your views?
I think that the interesting point about innovation is uncertainty. However, by studying its structure, its propagation.. one can raise some arguments about R&D policies. Disruptive Innovation is part of what they call, in Schumpeterian economics, creative destruction. That's why decision making is by far more important than models in Innovation. That's the reason why reaction is critical in Innovation policy. And, finally, at the very end, knowledge and understanding of history shapes our view of big picture which is catalytic in decision making.
Nowadays, higher education institutions are manadated to produce new knowledge and technologies to make their nation competent in their economy and an alrounded advancement. In so doing, research and innovation are key instrumnets to address the institutions own problems, the problems of the local community, and a nation at large. What does the literature say in this regard? And what are the instruments of data collection to examine the leadership and management of research and innovation at policy and practice levels in higher education?
I currently work on the research project for the OECD, Observatory of Public Sector Innovation on systems approaches being applied to public policy/public services. We finished the initial framework for public managers and we seek comments, examples for the text. The draft version of the text is published on hackpad until November 20, 2016 for comments (see links below). We are especially interested in any empirical cases where systems thinking was used to transform public policies/services.
I would like to conduct a study which takes about 2 weeks to be completed. Prior the 2 weeks, Participants are introduced to the concept of ideation or generation of ideas, then they are asked to come up with at least 10 ideas a day. These daily 10 ideas are supposed to be in one category (For example: 10 ideas about how I can be more productive today, 10 ideas about how to solve a certain problem and etc.) .
They complete tests of creativity, subjective well-being and some other tests before the completion of 2 weeks and after 2 weeks to see if coming up with 10 ideas a day makes any changes in the results of those tests. As research indicates, creativity correlates with subjective well-being *. But is it creativity to come up with 10 ideas a day?
I am asking to please reflect on my hypothesis, as I feel something is missing, or the hypothesis can not be studied.
I also would like to ask what psychological concepts do you think may correlate with creativity or idea machine?
* Peyvastegar, M., & Dastjerdi, E. (2010). Relationship between creativity and subjective well-being. International Journal of Behavioral Sciences, 4(3), 207-213.
Some studies claim, that the most succesful firms are established by teams/groups. Still, many believe in the myth of "lone hero-entrepreneur". Should we have education for team entrepreneurship and reasearch for that?
I am working within at least two projects based on achiveing the requirements outlined in The Triple Helix concept. According to Stanford University (on their website) The Triple Helix concept relies "on three main ideas:
(1) a more prominent role for the University in innovation, on a par with Industry and Government in the Knowledge Society;
(2) a movement toward collaborative relationships among the three major institutional spheres, in which innovation policy is increasingly an outcome of interaction rather than a prescription from Government;
(3) in addition to fulfilling their traditional functions, each institutional sphere also “takes the role of the other” performing new roles as well as their traditional function. Institutions taking non-traditional roles are viewed as a major potential source of innovation in innovation."
– https://hstar.stanford.edu/3helix_concept (accessed 13 april 2016)
This last idea, taking the role of the other, sounds very interesting and reflects much of my own situation. I am rather recently employed within industry having previously been active as a Ph.D student and research engineer in academia.
What is your experience of working with this concept and any recomendations you may have which is particularly related to studies of Information and Communications technology (ICT)?
Nations of the world vary in their technological capabilities as they do in other measures of development. these nations can be classified into multiple Technology clubs, such as highly advanced or innovative nations that still create most of the innovations in the global innovation network, then there are those who are good at acquisition and adaptation of innovations originated elsewhere, these nations innovation systems are developing fast. and then there are those who show no signs of active convergence towards becoming an innovation driven economy. The first and second types have innovation systems and thus innovation policies at varying degree of effectiveness. while the third type are passive learners being dragged behind the global innovation train only growing with whatever trickles down, from the global innovation and production system, or serendipitous creative repairs type adaptation.
Effectiveness of institutions and policies is necessary for existence and performance of innovation systems, which are in essence, intentional and created systems not occurring in normal capitalist market mechanisms. thus these technology clubs must also be divided along the policy lines. Whether innovation policy institutions exist and how effective they are, might be a determinant of technological capabilities development.
what would be the measures of effectiveness of innovation policies? Output measures as well as input and throughput measures. What is the bare minimum threshold of effective technology/innovation policy? What policy guidelines should be suitable for such passive learning economies to escape their technology lock-in state?
I am impressed that EU has recognized innovation as critical factor for sustaining quality of life in future. To my knowledge, each country is required to have a policy, infrastructure and investment in innovation. Then, the innovation scorecards were developed. Has anything changed in EU due to this innovation initiative?
I'm looking for papers and books about the economics of science and technological parks, theoretically and empirically.
Theoretically, I want to understand the underlying logic and when science parks are a good or a bad choice.
Empirically, I'm looking for cost-benefit analysis: are they a good investment?
The White Paper on Transport (2011) has set as an objective to reach buy 2030 an essentially CO2 free urban freight distribution in major cities. What are in your opinion the most promising research alleys one should focus on to reach asuch an objective? Should we concentrate on technologY? Regulation? Stakeholder involvement? Innovative policy formulations? And who should we involve in the research? Why?
I am currently trying to estimate the relationship between Labour Productivity Growth and Innovation Policies. The Independent Variables are, 1. Level of Government expenditure on Tertiary Education in initial year, 2. Level of Government expenditure on Research and Development in initial year, 3. Distance to Frontier on Ease of Doing Business Index in initial year, and, 4. Initial year value for the country in Index of Government Effectiveness from World Governance Indicators. The Dependent Variable is Delta of Final and Initial Year Natural Log of Labour Productivity (that is effectively representing the growth in labour productivity between the initial and final year. I want to introduce resource dependence and see if it has an effect on the model. What is the best way to introduce the variable Natural Resource Rents Percent GDP. I am considering to introduce it by multiplying one minus the natural resource rents in initial year to the growth in labour productivity over the entire period. The idea is that this will exclude the natural resource rents portion of the total labour productivity. Another approach would be to do ln[(1 - %GDP.Nat.Res.Rent.Year.N)*Lab.Prod.Year.N] - ln[(1 - %GDP.Nat.Res.Rent.Year.0)*Lab.Prod.Year.0]. Which approach is better? I think the second approach is better. Is there any other approach that you would recomment?
A conglomerates means group of business firms, there maybe different business or there are established in the group by the policy or business objectives of the group. So these firms should have the same origin of philosophy of their group. When the conglomerates move to be an Innovative organization, what's required of their firms in the group? How does the board committee of the group drive and manage their firms to be innovative firms?
I am looking for information about matching grant theory or evidence on the technology development phase. Precisely I am talking about when the applied research has been proved on the concept and needs a new financial stage for continuing to develop the technology.
There are a wide variety of scientific and/or technological parks. But although the flame one way or another, exist within science and technology. So there is a lack of definition in the terminology used?
What are the main variables/indicators that affect the national innovation capacity of the nations, and what type of variable combination is suitable for having positive affect on national innovation capacity and economy?
Any developed standpoint of categorizing company’s innovation evolution process into external and internal paradigm?
Do you know any research looking at innovation from this two main perspective (internal and external) somehow try to distinguish the factors that encourage or hamper innovation? For example R&D expenditure as an internal factor encourage the innovation or maybe competitiveness may encourage innovation as an external factor.
Can you point me to literature, results, examples, methodological contributions on analysing and evaluating cluster or network policies? I refer specifically to policies implemented at national, regional or industry level which try to link business enterprises, universities and research organisations, the public sector and intermediaries to support industry or technology development.
Apart from cross-national studies and methods based on Hofstede´s dimensiones, as in Vaasa & Kadi (2008) or Lanzjan (2011) since my intention is to focus on a strategic research material (Merton, 1957) using qualitative methods