Skapades iPhone av den amerikanska staten?
Sandström, C. (2015). “‘Skapades iPhone av den amerikanska staten?’ Bokanmälan av Mariana Mazzucato: The Entrepreneurial State: Debunking Public vs Private Sector Myths”. Ekonomisk Debatt, 43(3), 92-94.
Sandström, C. (2015). “‘Skapades iPhone av den amerikanska staten?’ Bokanmälan av Mariana Mazzucato: The Entrepreneurial State: Debunking Public vs Private Sector Myths”. Ekonomisk Debatt, 43(3), 92-94.
Aktuell expert
Utdrag: Frågor om statens inblandning i teknikutveckling är på många vis centrala för ekonomisk utveckling, inte minst för Sverige – en liten och öppen ekonomi med en exportindustri som i hög grad är teknikbaserad. Det finns också exempel på stater som under vissa perioder har varit mycket framgångsrika i sina offentliga satsningar på innovationer, bl a Japan och Taiwan. Som ekonomiska varor påminner teknik och kunskap delvis om kollektiva nyttigheter, och det är inte självklart att en marknad tillhandahåller en optimal mängd (Arrow 1962). Samtidigt finns det i västvärlden många exempel på hur staten har misslyckats i sina satsningar på innovation och entreprenörskap (Lerner 2009). Frågor om statens inblandning i innovationsprocessen är därmed både komplexa och viktiga, och Mazzucatos bok adresserar ett viktigt och intressant ämne.
Tyvärr bidrar inte Mazzucatos arbete till att utveckla debatten på området, varken för det vetenskapliga samfundet eller för beslutsfattare. Det är svårt att inte bli besviken på boken, av ett flertal orsaker.
2024
Springer Cham.
This open access book raises some central questions: Do we need moonshot policies to spur innovation and economic growth? What are the risks associated with such policies?
Economic turbulence, the COVID-19 pandemic, and mounting environmental concerns have paved the way for a renaissance of targeted industrial policy. In particular, the idea that society should be organized around large missions is gaining momentum among high-income economies. However, the authors and editors of this volume contend that this shift has occurred without much critical examination, especially as the European Union has adopted these ideas, and Western economies are now increasingly organizing toward the achievement of large, state-formulated goals.
Recognizing the urgent need for continued scholarly attention to question notions of the mission economy, more than 20 scholars discuss the dangers of top-down/vertical approaches to industrial policy and draw attention to the progress of independent enterprise, entrepreneurialism, and market solutions in a sound economy and society. By critically examining mission-oriented innovation policies, using theoretical perspectives and empirical investigations, the book highlights both the mechanisms behind failed missions and alternative approaches. This is a must-read for policy researchers and policymakers alike.
2023
Working Paper No. 368.
This paper reviews theoretical rationales for mission-oriented innovation policy and provides an empirical overview of extant 28 papers and 49 cases on the topic. We synthetize varieties of mission formulations, actors involved, and characteristics of missions described as more or less failed or successful. 59 percent of the studied missions are still ongoing, 33 percent are considered successful and 8 percent as failures. 67 percent of the studied missions have taken place in Europe, 24 percent in North America and 8 percent in Asia. The majority of innovation projects referred to as missions do not fulfill the criteria defined by the OECD. Results suggest that missions related to technological or agricultural innovations are more often successful than broader types of missions aimed at social or ecological challenges. Challenges regarding the governance and evaluation of missions remain unresolved in the literature. We find no case that contains a cost-benefit analysis or takes opportunity cost into account.
2023
Ratio Working Paper Series.
Mission-oriented innovation policies put government and state agencies at the forefront of the innovation process. PrFiguesently, little is known about the interests of the government agencies in charge of implementing mission-oriented innovation policies. In this chapter, we set out to explore the incentives and behavior of such government agencies. We do so by analyzing 30 annual reports from three different government agencies in charge of implementing innovation policies in Sweden over a ten-year period: Sweden’s Innovation Agency (Vinnova), the Swedish Energy Agency (Energimyndigheten) and the Swedish Agency for Economic and Regional Growth (Tillväxtverket). First, we track all cases in these annual reports where an evaluation is mentioned. Identifying 654 instances, we subsequently make a sentiment analysis and code whether these statements are positive, neutral or negative. Our findings show that 84 percent of these instances are positive, 12 percent are neutral and four percent are negative. Second, we relate these results to more critical evaluations and show that these agencies often ignore research that generates more critical results. In sum, our results suggest that government agencies in charge of implementing mission-oriented policies benefit from the enlarged role they are given and that they act according to their own self- interest.