Search

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

PublicationWorking paper
Christian Sandström, Financing of Innovations, Innovation, Innovationspolitik, Karl Wennberg, Nils Karlson
Wokring Paper no 331 Bureaucracies or Markets in Innovation
Download

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.


Similar content

Third-Generation Innovation Policy: System Transformation or Reinforcing Business as Usual?
Book chapterPublication
Bergkvist, J. E., Moodysson, J., & Sandström, C.
Publication year

2022

Published in

Questioning the Entrepreneurial State, 201.

Abstract

There has been a shift in innovation policy in recent years toward more focus on systemic transformation and changed directionality. In this chapter, we describe a collection of challenges that such policies need to address. Based on a review of dominant frameworks regarding socio-technical transitions, we compare these theories with examples of innovation policy in different countries. Systemic transformation across an economy usually requires a process of creative destruction in which new competencies may be required, actors need to be connected in novel ways, and institutions may need to be changed. Our empirical illustrations show that support programs and initiatives across Europe do not always seem to result in such a process, as they include mechanisms favoring large, established firms and universities. These actors have often fine-tuned their activities and capabilities to the existing order, and therefore have few incentives to engage in renewal. As the incumbent actors also control superior financial and relational resources, there is a risk that they captivate innovation policies and thus reinforce established structures rather than contributing to systemic transformation.

Utvärderingar av näringspolitik – en intressekonflikt mellan myndigheter, konsult-företag, politik och skattebetalare?
Article (without peer review)Publication
Colin, E., Sandström, C., & Wennberg, C.
Publication year

2021

Published in

Ekon. Debatt, 49, 30-41.

Abstract

Antalet utvärderingar av ekonomisk politik ökar explosionsartat. Det finns dock få systematiska sammanställningar av de utvärderingar som görs och det saknas kunskap om hur utvärderare skiljer sig åt gällande metoder och slutsatser, inte minst inom näringspolitiken. Vi studerar utvärderingar av 110 näringspoli-tiska insatser 2009–19 genom att granska huruvida valet av utvärderare påver-kar utvärderingarnas resultat. Privata konsulter visar sig vara den vanligaste utvärderaren av näringspolitik och deras utvärderingar skiljer sig från andra utvärderare genom att vara övervägande mer positiva till de utvärderade insat-serna. Vi diskuterar intressekonflikter som kan antas föreligga mellan utvärde-rare, myndigheter, den politiska makten och allmänheten.

Colin, E., Sandström, C., & Wennberg, C. (2021). Utvärderingar av näringspolitik–en intressekonflikt mellan myndigheter, konsultföretag, politik och skattebetalare. Ekon. Debatt, 49, 30-41.

Myten om centralisering – Om sjukvården som ett polycentriskt system
ReportsPublication
Karlson, N. & Lundbäck, M.
Publication year

2021

Published in

Ratioakademiens sjukvårdsprojekt

Abstract

Sammanfattning:
Syftet med denna rapport är att analysera sjukvården utifrån ett polycentriskt perspektiv, i jämförelse med ett monocentriskt, mer centraliserat, samt att diskutera hur ökade polycentriska inslag skulle kunna utveckla svensk vård och omsorg. Författarnas hypotes är att vård- och omsorgssystem som utmärks av en mångfald av finansiärer och utförare, med stora inslag av valfrihet och spritt ansvar, klarar vårduppdraget lika bra eller bättre än mer centraliserade och helt skattefinansierade system.

Show more

Postgiro: 382621-1

|

Bankgiro: 512-6578