359 research outputs found
Conférences de Charles Edquist sur les politiques de l’innovation Conferences on Innovation Policies By Charles Edquist
No full textL’IFRIS a le plaisir de vous convier au cycle de trois conférences que donnera Charles Edquist sur le thème des politiques d’innovation. Ces conférences sont conçues de façon à intéresser un large public, parmi les membres de l’IFRIS et au-delà. Charles Edquist, spécialiste de l’analyse des systèmes d’innovation, discutera des politiques d’innovation en faisant référence à la fois aux STS et aux études de l’innovation
Conférences de Charles Edquist sur les politiques de l’innovation Conferences on Innovation Policies By Charles Edquist
No full textL’IFRIS a le plaisir de vous convier au cycle de trois conférences que donnera Charles Edquist sur le thème des politiques d’innovation. Ces conférences sont conçues de façon à intéresser un large public, parmi les membres de l’IFRIS et au-delà. Charles Edquist, spécialiste de l’analyse des systèmes d’innovation, discutera des politiques d’innovation en faisant référence à la fois aux STS et aux études de l’innovation
Public Procurement for Innovation (PPI) – a Pilot Study
No full textPublic organizations may place an order for something (normally a product or a system) that does not exist. This “something” has to be developed by the supplier before it can be delivered. In other words, R&D and/or innovation are needed before delivery can take place. Until about 10 years ago this phenomenon was called “public technology procurement” Edquist et al 2000). This vocabulary of the 1990s and earlier has changed; the concept of “technology” has been replaced by the concept of “innovation”, reflecting a widening of the content of the notion. The phenomenon is a matter of using public demand (or similar) to trigger innovation. We will use the term “public procurement for innovation (PPI)” to denote this phenomenon. Further definitions are presented in section 2.4.Innovation Systems; innovation policy
Innovation Policy Design: Identification of Systemic Problems
No full text‘Activities’ in innovation systems are the determinants of the development and diffusion of innovations. Examples are R&D, provision of organizations and institutions, financing of innovations, incubation, etc. These activities are partly performed by private organizations and partly by public organizations, the latter performing tasks that constitute innovation policy. As a basis for innovation policy, the problems (failures) in the systems must be identified. This paper focuses upon the design of innovation policy through diagnostic analysis; it provides a framework for identification of systemic problems (or failures) in innovation systems.Innovations systems; innovation policy
Innovation-related Public Procurement as a Demand-oriented Innovation Policy Instrument
No full textThe purpose in this paper is to show how public procurement can be a driver ofinnovation. The purpose and point of departure when using public procurement as an instrument of innovation policy is always to solve societal and environmental problems, to satisfy human needs or to meet global challenges. The paper is aimed at everyone who is involved or interested in public procurement, and especially in how this can promoteinnovation processes. Historically innovation policy has been strongly dominated by supply-push oriented instruments (measures). This linear view is actually still dominating in practical innovation policy pursued, but no longer so much in policy analysis – and certainly not amonginnovation researchers. In other words, the linear view is completely rejected in innovation research, but still dominates innovation policy.Innovation policy is all actions by public organizations that influence innovationprocesses. The choice of innovation policy instruments is a very important part of the formulation of an innovation policy. There are potentially scores, or perhaps hundreds, of innovation policy instruments to choose from. A combination of two or more instruments must often be used to solve each specific problem. They are thus combined into an “instrument mix”.Demand-based innovation policy instruments are those that influence innovation processes from the demand side. In this paper, we will very much concentrate on one kind of demand-side innovation policy instrument: innovation-related public procurement.The reason for choosing innovation-related public procurement in particular, is that it is potentially by far the most powerful kind of demand-side innovation policy instrument available. It might even potentially be the most powerful instrument among all innovation policy instruments. Public procurement of different types may affect both the speed and path of innovation development
Concluding Chapter: Globalisation and Innovation Policy
No full textThe concluding chapter of the “Small Country Innovation Systems” book develops a comparative analysis that deals with only a very few of the many issues addressed empirically by the ten country case studies. The concluding chapter focuses to some extent on issues related to globalization, but devotes most of its attention to innovation policy. The chapter is intended as a contribution to the comparative analysis of NSIs, conceived in the spirit of ‘appreciative theorizing’.Globalization; Innovation Policy; comparative analysis
Comparing National Systems of Innovation in Asia and Europe: Theory and Comparative Framework
No full text
How Much does Sweden Invest in Intangible Assets?
No full textIn this paper I attempt to replicate for Sweden the Corrado, Hulten and Sichel (2006) and Marrano and Haskel (2006) working papers on spending on intangible assets in the US and the UK. Based on their measurement methods the total spending on intangibles in Sweden in 2004 was 277 billion SEK or 10.6 percent of total GDP. Based on total spending it can be estimated that total investment in intangibles was 227 billion or approximately two-thirds of the total investment in fixed capital in 2004. Thus, investment in intangibles was considerable in 2004. The corresponding figures for the UK and the US were 10.9 and 13.1 percent, respectively. Even though the measurement methods of intangibles must be further developed, it could be argued that intangibles in the future should be included in the Swedish national accounts.Intangibles; Investment; Economic growth
- …
