Ratio logo white

Ratio is an interdisciplinary research institute, with a research focus on the conditions of business and enterprise.

08-441 59 00info@ratio.se

802002-5212

Sveavägen 59 4trp

11359 Stockholm

Bankgiro: 512-6578

PublicationsSeminarsPeople

Popular

News archive
Publications
Seminars
People
Start
About
Contact us
Labour market research
Competitiveness research
Climate and environmental research
Swedish flag iconPå svenska
PublicationWorking paper

Working Paper no. 331: Bureaucrats or Markets in Innovation Policy? – A critique of the entrepreneurial state

Download PDF

Abstract

This paper takes stock of recent suggestions that the state apparatus is a central and underappreciated actor in the generation, diffusion and exploitation of innovations enhancing growth and social welfare. We contrast such a view of “the entrepreneurial state” with theories and empirical evidence of the microeconomic processes of innovation in the modern economy which focus on well-functioning markets, free entry and competition among firms, and independent entrepreneurship as central mechanisms in the creation and dissemination of innovations. In doing so, we identify several deficiencies in the notion of an entrepreneurial state by showing that (i) there is weak empirical support in the many hundreds empirical studies and related meta analyses evaluating the effectiveness of active industrial and innovative policies, that (ii) these policies do not take account of the presence of information and incentive problems which together explain why attempts to address purported market failures often result in policy failures, and that (iii) the exclusive focus on knowledge creation through R&D and different forms of firm subsidies ignores the equally important mechanisms of knowledge dissemination and creation through commercial exploitation in markets. We discuss how a more theoretically well-founded focus on the state as investing in knowledge generation and securing the conditions of free and competitive markets will lead to a more innovative economy.

Karlson, N., Sandström, C. & Wennberg, K. (2020). Bureaucrats or Markets in Innovation Policy? – A critique of the entrepreneurial state. Working Paper no. 331. Stockholm: Ratio.

Details

Author
Karlson, N., Sandström, C. & Wennberg, K.
Publication year
2020

Related

  • Professor

    Karl Wennberg

    +46705105366karl.wennberg@ratio.se
  • Professor, Founder and former CEO

    Nils Karlson

    +46708670351nils.karlson@ratio.se

Similar content

Article (with peer review)

Director turnover in new venture boards: From homophilous to resource-contingent processes

Balachandran, C., & Wennberg, K.
Download

Publication year

2025

Published in

Journal of Business Venturing

Abstract

Boards are a vital resource for early-stage ventures, offering advice, funding connections, and strategic guidance — especially when directors bring diverse expertise. Yet, as ventures grow and succeed, that diversity can erode. Our study of over 28,000 Swedish ownermanaged firms shows that directors whose expertise differs from that of the founder(s) are more likely to leave—not during hardship, but when the business is performing well. Interviews with several founders and directors further suggest that as ventures mature, they increasingly rely on internal capabilities and shift toward boards that reflect the founder’s evolving preferences. These dynamics lead to more homogenous boards over time, potentially narrowing the range of perspectives available in the board. For founders and policymakers, the findings highlight a key challenge: keeping diverse directors around not just at the start, but as the company scales.

Article (with peer review)

The emergence and impact of the entrepreneurship industry

Brattström, A., Eabrasu, M., Hunt, R., Sandström, C., & Wennberg, K.
Download

Publication year

2025

Published in

Small Business Economics

Abstract

This special issue introduces the concept of the “entrepreneurship industry” (EI), a rapidly expanding global sector comprising actors, services, and infrastructures that promote and commodify entrepreneurial activity. Moving beyond traditional demand-side views of entrepreneurship, the issue explores how EI shapes entrepreneurial behavior through cultural norms, institutional structures, and policy interventions. The six featured articles examine diverse facets of EI, including its cultural biases, framing dynamics, venture production regimes, intermediary roles, and sector-specific support mechanisms. Collectively, these contributions reveal how EI influences who becomes an entrepreneur, what ventures are legitimized, and how success is defined. The issue also highlights the paradoxes and unintended consequences of EI, such as exclusionary practices and innovation theater. By conceptualizing entrepreneurship as an industry, the issue opens new avenues for research into the socio-political construction of entrepreneurial ecosystems and calls for more inclusive, context-sensitive approaches in policy, education, and practice.

Article (with peer review)

How the organisation of mission arenas regulates attention away from regional problems and solutions: An attention-based view

Bergkvist, J.-E., Essén, A., Wennberg, K., & Krohwinkel, A.
Download

Publication year

2025

Published in

Economy and Society

Abstract

Mission-oriented innovation policies (MOIPs) are promoting the formation of ‘mission arenas’ (MAs) where actors collectively try to address societal ‘wicked problems’. Yet, little is known about how attention — and subsequently time and effort — towards specific problems and solutions, and their geographical dimensions, unfolds within MAs. We conducted a multiple-case study of four MAs mandated and granted public funding to address self-articulated ‘missions’ in public health. We identify four distinct types of MA organisation with different attention-regulating properties that contribute to significant variation in MAs’ flexibility and breadth of attention. We propose a model explicating how all four MA organisations regulate attention in ways that impede future attention to regional problems and solutions — a finding that serves to problematise assumptions about attention in the MOIP literature

Show more