Search results

The Lisbon Agenda that was launched in 2000, and had a set time-period of ten years. The purpose of the Lisbon Agenda was to make the EU the most competitive, knowledge-based economy in the world, and at the same time preserving, or even improving social cohesion and maintain environmental sustainability. The Lisbon Agenda had a large number of goals, in both quantified and qualified measures, in different areas. The main instrument that was put forward was the open method of co-ordination (OMC) that includes indicators, benchmarking, peer pressure, and best practise demonstrations. The forthcoming Lisbon Agenda will certainly need new approaches, and new instruments. One of the areas of instruments that can be further explored is innovation policies where the use of R&D and human capital is enhanced. Human capital is a natural part of a knowledge-based economy, and has positive impacts on growth, and jobs in the economy. Innovation policy instruments are diversified and are integrated in many areas of an economy and on many levels, which make them ideal for the next Lisbon Agenda. The instruments can have a general or specific characteristics and some span over the two characteristics. ; Qc 20120208

"This paper develops a framework for testing discrete complementarities in innovation policy using European data on obstacles to innovation. We propose a discrete test of supermodularity in innovation policy leading to a number of inequality constraints. We apply our test to two types of innovation decisions: to innovate or not, and if so, by how much. We find that industries display a considerable amount of complementarity, with some industries being complementary across all obstacles. We also find that the lack internal human capital (skilled personnel) is complementary to all the other obstacles in almost all industries. In this sense, our results suggest that internal human capital is key for any innovation policy, insofar that it is complementary to all the other factors that might hamper innovation activities." (author's abstract)

Advanced environmental standards such as sustainability require substantial improvements in the environmental performances of present technologies. Governments are faced with the challenge to design green innovation policies able to support producers and users of technologies to comply with such high standards. The paper proposes an evolutionary approach on the dynamics of socio-technological change and innovation, as an analytical basis for the design of such green innovation policies. The main idea suggested is that evolutionary theory can be helpful in clarifying not only the novelty and greenness of innovation, but also the processes of technological variation emergence and selection at various system levels. Such an understanding would facilitate policy-makers in identifying the most appropriate intervention points and styles in order to maximize the scope, quality and endurance of green innovation. The paper departs with the conceptualization of "greenness" of innovation in section 2, and proceeds further, in section 3, with an evolutionary-based inquiry in the innovation dynamics within the economic system, the science/technology system and at their interface. Based on such an approach, section 4 proposes a framework for the design of green innovation policies, taking into account the multidimensional institutional environment of innovations. The framework suggests that green innovation policies should be best conceived by simultaneously affecting selection processes in the three main systems, for which the appropriate combination of intervention points and styles of regulation should be underpinned.

This paper develops a framework for testing discrete complementarities in innovation policy using European data on obstacles to innovation. We propose a discrete test of supermodularity in innovation policy leading to a number of inequality constraints. We apply our test to two types of innovation decisions: to innovate or not, and if so, by how much. We find that industries display a considerable amount of complementarity, with some industries being complementary across all obstacles. We also find that the lack internal human capital (skilled personnel) is complementary to all the other obstacles in almost all industries. In this sense, our results suggest that internal human capital is key for any innovation policy, insofar that it is complementary to all the other factors that might hamper innovation activities. ; In diesem Beitrag wird die Innovationsfähigkeit von Unternehmen in Abhängigkeit von Standortfaktoren – wie etwa die Bereitstellung von Risikokapital, staatliche Regulierungen, und qualifizierte Mitarbeiter – als komplementäres System modelliert. Es wird aufgezeigt, wie die neue Komplementaritätstheorie in der empirischen Innovationsforschung angewandt werden kann, indem die Innovationsfunktion von Unternehmen auf die Eigenschaft der Supermodularität hin überprüft wird. Unter Berücksichtigung dieses Ansatzes wird, anhand von Innovationsdaten aus der CIS Datenbank, die Komplementaritätshypothese für eine Reihe von Industrien und Länder untersucht. Die Ergebnisse zeigen auf, daß viele Branchen von einem beträchtlichen Maße an Komplementarität gekennzeichnet sind. Damit bestätigen die Befunde, daß Innovationen, in bestimmten Branchen, ein koordiniertes Handeln der unterschiedlichen Standortfaktoren voraussetzt. Als höchst komplementär zu allen anderen Standortfaktoren in fast allen Industriezweigen erweist sich der Mangel an qualifiziertem Humankapital. In diesem Sinne bekräftigen unsere Ergebnisse die These, daß Humankapital der Schlüssel für jede Innovationspolitik ist, insbesondere aufgrund der komplementären Beziehung zu allen anderen Faktoren.

This OECD Review of Innovation Policy in Croatiaoffers a comprehensive assessment of the innovation system of Croatia, focusing on the role of government.It suggests that EU integration opens a window of opportunity forstrengthening Croatia's science, technology and innovation systems, and recommends that Croatia improve governance,rebalance the innovation mix and do more to foster business innovation.

What is meant by entrepreneurship, innovation and economic growth is often not clear or very idiosyncratic. This paper starts with a discussion of the nature of entrepreneurship and its relation to innovation. The second section provides an overview of theory and empirical research on the relation between entrepreneurship, innovation and economic growth. The paper continues with a study on entrepreneurship and innovation in the Netherlands in an international and historical perspective. After these conceptual, theoretical and empirical investigations, we turn to policy issues.