Three frames for innovation policy: R&D, systems of innovation and transformative change

被引:887
作者
Schot, Johan [1 ]
Steinmueller, W. Edward [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Sussex, SPRU, Brighton, E Sussex, England
关键词
Transformation; Sustainable development goals; R&D; National systems of innovation; Innovation policy; TECHNOLOGY; SUSTAINABILITY; SCIENCE; ENERGY; TRANSITIONS; ECONOMICS; LESSONS; GROWTH;
D O I
10.1016/j.respol.2018.08.011
中图分类号
C93 [管理学];
学科分类号
12 ; 1201 ; 1202 ; 120202 ;
摘要
Science, technology and innovation (STI) policy is shaped by persistent framings that arise from historical context. Two established frames are identified as co-existing and dominant in contemporary innovation policy discussions. The first frame is identified as beginning with a Post-World War II institutionalisation of government support for science and R&D with the presumption that this would contribute to growth and address market failure in private provision of new knowledge. The second frame emerged in the 1980s globalising world and its emphasis on competitiveness which is shaped by the national systems of innovation for knowledge creation and commercialisation. STI policy focuses on building links, clusters and networks, and on stimulating learning between elements in the systems, and enabling entrepreneurship. A third frame linked to contemporary social and environmental challenges such as the Sustainable Development Goals and calling for transformative change is identified and distinguished from the two earlier frames. Transformation refers to socio-technical system change as conceptualised in the sustainability transitions literature. The nature of this third framing is examined with the aim of identifying its key features and its potential for provoking a re-examination of the earlier two frames. One key feature is its focus on experimentation, and the argument that the Global South does not need to play catch-up to follow the transformation model of the Global North. It is argued that all three frames are relevant for policymaking, but exploring options for transformative innovation policy should be a priority.
引用
收藏
页码:1554 / 1567
页数:14
相关论文
共 131 条
  • [1] ABRAMOVITZ M, 1956, AM ECON REV, V46, P5
  • [2] [Anonymous], 1976, Res. Pol., DOI [10.1016/0048-7333(76)90028-7., DOI 10.1016/0048-7333(76)90028-7, 10.1016/0048-7333(76)90028-7]
  • [3] [Anonymous], 2015, TRANSF OUR WORLD 203
  • [4] [Anonymous], CHALLENGE ADDRESSING
  • [5] [Anonymous], 2003, MODERN SOCIAL IMAGIN
  • [6] [Anonymous], 2010, COMMUNICATION COMMIS, DOI DOI 10.1016/J.RESCONREC.2010.03.010
  • [7] Arrow K.J., 1972, RATE DIRECTION INVEN
  • [8] Arthur W. B., 1983, WP83090 IIASA
  • [9] Bardi Ugo., 2011, The Limits to Growth Revisited
  • [10] Framing processes and social movements: An overview and assessment
    Benford, RD
    Snow, DA
    [J]. ANNUAL REVIEW OF SOCIOLOGY, 2000, 26 : 611 - 639