Incorporating a new technology into agent-artifact space. The case of control systems automation.

We contribute to the debate on innovation theory and policy by exploring, through the interpretative framework provided by Lane and Maxfield’s theory of innovation (1997; 2005), a set of case studies concerning the implementation of a new technology for system automation and its incorporation into the structure of agent-artifact space (Lane and Maxfield, 1996). Our purposes are, on the one hand, to illustrate to what extent this theoretical approach can help us make sense of innovation processes, and, on the other, to derive some general implications for innovation theory.innovation, technological systems, complex systems, innovation networks, control systems automation

Recent Trends in the Research on National Innovation Systems

In this paper, we give an overview on recent developments in the research on national innovation systems (NIS). Essentially, we identify three development lines of the concept. These are policy-oriented studies that frequently combine the NIS approach with the terminology of corporate benchmarking, contributions to formalize the concept of NIS through descriptive or analytical models, and NIS studies of countries beyond the group of highly industrialized economies. It follows from the analysis of these research trends that the concept has developed in distinctive directions. In international comparisons of innovation systems, heterogeneity in the structure of the systems is only marginally taken into account, an aspect that may reduce the explanatory power of such system-level comparisons. Contrary to this, historically grown organizational and institutional structures are extensively described and considered in NIS studies of industrializing countries, a characteristic which ties up with early studies of national innovation systems.innovation, national innovation systems, comparative studies

Linking scientific and practical knowledge in innovation systems

New research indicates that firms combining the science-based STI (Science, Technology, Innovation) and the experience-based DUI (Doing, Using, Interacting) modes of innovation are more efficient when it comes to improving innovation capacity and competitiveness. With regard to innovation policy, the STI mode calls for a supply driven policy, typically aimed to commercialise research results. The DUI mode suggests a demand driven policy approach, such as supporting the development of new products or services to specific markets. This paper analyses how the two types of innovation policy and the two innovation modes can be combined in regional innovation systems. The analysis builds on studies of the food industry and related knowledge organisations in two counties, Rogaland County (Norway) and Skåne County (Sweden), and two policy initiatives (NCE Culinology and Skåne Food Innovation Network) aimed at strengthening the innovative capability of the regional innovation systems. The analysis indicates that policies aimed to link science and user driven innovation activity should focus on building absorptive capacity of DUI firms (e.g. through increased scientific competence) and implementation capacity of STI firms (e.g. through increased market and process competence).innovation policy; scientific knowledge; practical knowledge; regional innovation systems; food industry; Norway; Sweden

The Innovation Public Policies and the Firms’ adoption of Innovative Processes - A New Methodological Approach for Evaluation

Today, innovation is present in the discourse of politicians and business leaders. They see innovation as a positive value and as a solution to solve social problems and company’s competitiveness, so organizations are encouraged to adopt innovative practices through incentives and innovation policies. Several economic and sociological studies have shown that Portuguese companies adopt more easily technological innovations (with short-term effects) then organizational and social innovations. In this sense, we will consider innovation public policies effects at Portuguese companies and how they take available opportunities for innovation. The aim is to know if the concept of innovation spread by these policies is multidimensional (eg social, economic and technological) or restricted. We propose to study the factors (internal and external) that affect innovation processes in enterprises through case studies methodology. This research strategy will show us the processes of innovation from within the organizations and analyze the socio-economic context in which organizations operate through a new methodological approach for evaluation.Innovation, Innovation Systems, Public Policies, Enterprises, Territory.

Cluster Complexes: A Framework for Understanding the Internationalisation of Innovation Systems

The literature on clustering that has developed over the last two decades or so has given us a wealth of information on the formation and competitiveness of places in the global economy. Similarly, the systems literature on innovation has been valuable in moving the debate around technology from a focus on the entrepreneur to one than encompasses institutions, government, suppliers, customers and universities. However, there remains an important limit to this research; the borders of political jurisdictions, usually nation states, typically delineate the studies. It is argued in this paper that during an era when the international architecture of production relationships is changing, this view of systems is hindering its further development. This paper briefly examines what we have learnt of innovation systems, including clustering and also explores the limitations of this work. From this foundation it is proposed in this paper that a framework which understands clusters as nodes within extra-territorial networks is a promising approach for internationalising the systems of innovation perspective. The advantage of the approach presented here is that it can simultaneously capture regional specialisations and be disaggregated enough to apply on a technology / sectoral basis. Another principle advantage is that such a framework goes someway towards an understanding of interregional and international trade that is consistent with what other studies have shown of the development of innovation within particular geographic locations. The paper draws from extensive data analysis of industrial interdependencies that cross national borders to support the case for cluster complexes that transcend regional and national borders.innovation systems; clusters; internationalisation

Advances and challenges in innovation studies

The article discusses recent advances and future challenges in innovation studies. First, it separately considers four main strands of research, studying innovation at the organisational, systemic, sectoral and macroeconomic levels. Then, considering the field as a whole, the article points to the existence of important neglected topics and methodological challenges for future research. In fact, several fundamental issues are still unexplored, such as the co-evolution between technological and institutional change; the role of demand; and the impacts of innovation on individual and collective welfare. There are also important methodological challenges, such as the need for more systematic interactions between the different levels of analysis; the importance of an interdisciplinary approach to the study of technological and institutional changes; and the search for a combination of contingent explanations based on case studies with general analytical results based on econometric and formal models.Innovation; Innovation management; innovation systems; innovation and growth

Towards Innovation (Eco)Systems: Enhancing the Public Value of Scientific Research in the Canadian Arctic

Over the past decade, the Canadian Arctic has seen an intensification of scientific research designed to foster innovation (i.e., the process of transforming ideas into new products, services, practices or policies). However, innovation remains generally low. This paper argues that before we can meaningfully promote innovation in the Arctic, there is a need to first identify the complex systems that support or inhibit innovation. Few, if any studies have taken a systems approach to enrich our understanding of how existing networks may or may not support innovation in the Canadian Arctic. A promising, but under-explored approach is to consider innovation ecosystems, defined as the multi-level, multi-modal, multi-nodal and multi-agent system of systems that shape the way that societies generate, exchange, and use knowledge. This paper presents innovation (eco)systems as a potentially valuable systems-based approach for policy actors to enhance innovation linkages in the Arctic. From a policy perspective, there is a need to embrace and promote more networked approaches to co-create public value and to consider the lifespan of any innovation. Potential directions for future research include: mapping the actors involved in Arctic innovation ecosystems (including intermediaries and bridging agents) at multiple scales; the role that formal and informal institutions play in shaping co-innovation; case studies to evaluate innovation processes; and an assessment of the coupled functional-structural aspects that influence innovation outcomes in the Canadian Arctic

Principles of Neo-Schumpeterian Economics

Within the last 25 years large progress has been made in Neo-Schumpeterian Economics, this branch of economic literature which deals with dynamic processes causing qualitative transformation of economies basically driven by the introduction of novelties in their various and multifaceted forms. By its very nature, innovation and in particular technological innovation is the most exponent and most visible form of novelty. Therefore it is not very surprising that Neo-Schumpeterian Economics today has its most prolific fields in the studies of innovation and learning behavior on the micro-level of an economy, the studies on industry dynamics on the meso-level and studies of innovation driven growth and competitiveness on the macro-level of the economy. From a general point of view, however, the future developmental potential of socio-economic systems i.e. innovation in a very broad understanding encompassing besides technological innovation also organizational, institutional and social innovation has to be considered as the normative principle of Neo-Schumpeterian Economics. In this sense, innovation plays a similar role in Neo-Schumpeterian Economics like prices do in Neoclassical Economics. Instead of allocation and efficiency within a certain set of constraints, Neo-Schumpeterian Economics is concerned with the conditions for and consequences of a removal and overcoming of these constraints limiting the scope of economic development. Thus, Neo-Schumpeterian Economics is concerned with all facets of open and uncertain developments in socio-economic systems. A comprehensive Neo-Schumpeterian approach therefore has to consider not only transformation processes going on e.g. on the industry level of an economy, but also on the public and monetary side of an economic system. Our contribution introduces those extensions and complements to a comprehensive Neo-Schumpeterian economic theory, and develops some guideposts in the sense of a roadmap for necessary strands of analysis in the future in order to fulfill the claim of becoming a comprehensive approach comparable to neoclassical theory.Neo-Schumpeterian economics, industrial dynamics, public finance, financial markets

Measuring the contribution of higher education to innovation capacity in the EU

The general goals of the study include the provision of evidence on the key factors determining the contribution of higher education institutions (HEIs) to innovation capabilities and expand the understanding of this contribution beyond traditional measures of the role of HEI on innovation capabilities. In this context, the general objective of the study could be verbalised as “to develop a more comprehensive model of the contribution of higher education to innovation capacity”. This objective has been operationalised into the following five specific objectives which define in detail the purpose of the study:  Specific Objective 1: Completion of a comprehensive literature review of existing means and methodologies used for capturing, interpreting and also applying data and evidence related to the contribution of higher education systems to innovation capacity;  Specific Objective 2: Critical assessment of the existing literature, including an identification of gaps and an assessment of the merits of different approaches used;  Specific Objective 3: Development of a new approach, that provides an alternative set of indicators to measure the contribution of HEIs to innovation capacity;  Specific Objective 4: Implementation of the prototype set of alternative metrics;  Specific Objective 5: Discussion of the feasibility of developing new proxies or metrics for capturing the contribution of higher education systems to innovation capacity at the EU level. In general, the objective of the project and its research tools is therefore to propose a set of indicators for future measurements of the innovation impacts of HE that is validated through the opinions of the different stakeholders in the field (through interviews, case studies and a survey)

Celebrating 30 years of Innovation System research : what you need to know about Innovation Systems

On the occasion of the 30th anniversary of Innovation System research, this paper presents an extensive literature review on this large field of innovation research. Building on an analytical basis of the commonalities system and innovation, the authors analyze the four main Innovation System approaches: National Innovation Systems (NIS), Regional Innovation Systems (RIS), Sectoral Innovation Systems (SIS) and Technological Innovation Systems (TIS). The analysis is structured systematically along ten comprehensive criteria. Starting with the founder(s) of each theory and the research program within each Innovation System approach was developed (1), the basic thoughts of each Innovation System approach are explained (2). For five case studies most cited (3), spatial boundaries are examined (4) and units of analyses are derived (5). By comparing the underlying theoretical concept and empirical results, the authors show patterns in the evolution of Innovation System research overall. By studying the basic components (6) and a functional analysis (7), each Innovation System approach is broken down into structural pieces and functional processes. If available, the authors present one or several taxonomies (8) for each Innovation System approach and summarize similar approaches (9), in order to classify and integrate the approaches into the ongoing innovation research. The identification of further research (10) shows which steps will need to be taken in the next years in order to evolve Innovation System research further and deeper. After the conclusion, the extensive table of comparison is presented which can serve as a guideline for academics and practitioners from basic and applied science, industry or policy that need to understand which Innovation System approach may be best for their specific analytical purposes