Exploring the emerging knowledge base of ‘the knowledge society’

Science, technology and innovation have grown in importance over the last 50 years as we have moved towards a more knowledge-intensive society (the ‘knowledge society’). A number of new research fields have emerged in an effort to understand these developments and to offer advice to decision-makers in government, industry and elsewhere. This special issue focuses on studies of three relatively distinct though thematically related research fields (innovation studies, entrepreneurship studies, and science and technology studies). The first three articles use a particular methodology based on analysis of the references cited in the chapters to authoritative ‘handbooks’ to identify the core contributions in the three fields. A fourth article examines the relationship between the core literatures in three fields and how this has evolved over time. Other articles look at the evolution of innovation studies as reflected in highly cited papers, at the development of entrepreneurship as seen by a key ‘insider’, and at the creation of new centres in these fields and the difficulties they face. The last article in this special issue shows how interdisciplinary centres in innovation studies suffer from research assessment systems that are intrinsically biased against interdisciplinary research. This introduction presents a synthesis of the articles in this special issue, discusses similarities and differences between the three fields and their development over time, and considers challenges for policy and governance arising from the research presented here.     

Entrepreneurship: Exploring the knowledge base

Entrepreneurship research has a long tradition and since the 1980s the field has grown significantly. In this study we identify the ‘knowledge producers’ who have shaped the field over time and their core entrepreneurship research works. A unique database consisting of all references in twelve entrepreneurship ‘handbooks’ (or state-of-the-art books) has been developed. The chapters in these handbooks were written by experts within the field, and it can be assumed that the most frequently cited references represent ‘core knowledge’ with relevance to entrepreneurship research.From our analysis, it appears that entrepreneurship is a rather changeable field of research, closely linked to disciplines such as ‘management studies’ and ‘economics’. Over time, the field has become more formalized with its own core knowledge, research specialities and an increasing number of ‘insider works’. However, it is still based on some fairly old theoretical frameworks imported from mainstream disciplines, although during the last decade we have seen the emergence of a number of new field-specific concepts and theories. We argue that to successfully develop entrepreneurship research in the future, we need to relate new research opportunities to earlier knowledge within the field, which calls for a stronger ‘knowledge-based’ focus. We would also like to see greater integration between the fields of entrepreneurship and innovation studies in the future.     

Broadening out and opening up technology assessment: Approaches to enhance international development,co-ordination and democratisation

Technology assessment (TA) has a strong history of helping to identify priorities and improve environmental sustainability, cost-effectiveness and wider benefits in the technology policies and innovation strategies of nation-states. At international levels, TA has the potential to enhance the roles of science, technology and innovation towards achieving the Millennium Development Goals, effectively implementing the UN Framework on Climate Change and fostering general global transitions to ‘green economies’. However, when effectively recommending single ostensibly ‘best’ technologies or strategies, TA practices can serve unjustifiably to ‘close down’ debate, failing adequately to address technical uncertainties and social ambiguities, reducing scope for democratic accountability and co-ordination across scales and contexts. This paper investigates ways in which contrasting processes ‘broadening out’ and ‘opening up’ TA can enhance both rigour and democratic accountability in technology policy, as well as facilitating social relevance and international cooperation. These methods allow TA to illuminate options, uncertainties and ambiguities and so inform wider political debates about how the contending questions, values and knowledges of different social interests often favour contrasting innovation pathways. In this way TA can foster both technical robustness and social legitimacy in subsequent policy-making. Drawing on three empirical case studies (at local, national and international levels), the paper discusses detailed cases and methods, where recent TA exercises have contributed to this ‘broadening out’ and ‘opening up’. It ends by exploring wider implications and challenges for national and international technology assessment processes that focus on global sustainable development challenges.     

Policy mixes for sustainability transitions: New approaches and insights through bridging innovation and policy studies

There has been an increasing interest in science, technology and innovation policy studies in the topic of policy mixes. While earlier studies conceptualised policy mixes mainly in terms of combinations of instruments to support innovation, more recent literature extends the focus to how policy mixes can foster sustainability transitions. For this, broader policy mix conceptualisations have emerged which also include considerations of policy goals and policy strategies; policy mix characteristics such as consistency, coherence, credibility and comprehensiveness; as well as policy making and implementation processes. It is these broader conceptualisations of policy mixes which are the subject of the special issue introduced in this article. We aim at supporting the emergence of a new strand of interdisciplinary social science research on policy mixes which combines approaches, methods and insights from innovation and policy studies to further such broader policy mix research with a specific focus on fostering sustainability transitions. In this article we introduce this topic and present a bibliometric analysis of the literature on policy mixes in both fields as well as their emerging connections. We also introduce five major themes in the policy mix literature and summarise the contributions made by the articles in the special issue to these: methodological advances; policy making and implementation; actors and agency; evaluating policy mixes; and the co-evolution of policy mixes and socio-technical systems. We conclude by summarising key insights for policy making.     

Brave old world: Accounting for ‘high-tech’ knowledge in ‘low-tech’ industries

‘Lower-tech’ sectors are still commonly regarded as unusual suspects in the modern process of innovation and economic change. In this paper we try to understand better how organisations specialising in traditional businesses have been transformed by a period of paradigm-shift such as the one that characterised the final decades of the twentieth century. We focus on a population of nearly 500 of the world's largest innovative companies to assess the extent to which companies belonging to ‘old-economy’ sectors have been developing cutting-edge knowledge about clusters of new technologies such as ICT, new materials and biotechnology. We find that ‘non-high-tech’ corporations transformed their patent portfolios in a non-trivial way. Companies in mature trades contributed significantly to the development of technologies that are at the core of the so-called Third Industrial Revolution.     

Innovation and firm growth in high-tech sectors: A quantile regression approach

We relate innovation to sales growth for incumbent firms in high-tech sectors. A firm, on average, experiences only modest growth and may grow for a number of reasons that may or may not be related to innovative activity. However, given that the returns to innovation are highly skewed and that growth rates distributions are heavy-tailed, it may be misleading to use regression techniques that focus on the ‘average effect for the average firm’. Using a quantile regression approach, we observe that innovation is of crucial importance for a handful of ‘superstar’ fast-growth firms.     

Openness and innovation—Home and export demand effects on manufacturing innovation: Panel data evidence for Ireland and Switzerland

Recent studies in the tradition of Schmookler have re-emphasised the potential role of demand in stimulating innovation. Here, we reconsider the role of ‘home’ and ‘export’ market demand in stimulating manufacturing innovation using comparable panel data for two small open economies - Ireland and Switzerland. Our analysis is based on the estimation of reduced form innovation production functions using panel data estimators over the sample period 1994-2005. For a range of innovation indicators, however, we find little evidence of any significant market demand effects, with innovation performance instead determined largely by firm-level capability effects and characteristics. In policy and strategy terms this suggests the continued value of measures to improve innovation capability regardless of market demand conditions. In more methodological terms our results suggest the validity of the usual assumption implicit in modelling innovation outputs that supply-side factors predominate.     

Compulsive policy-making—The evolution of the German feed-in tariff system for solar photovoltaic power

In recent years, policy approaches that build upon the notion of innovation systems have enjoyed increasing attention in science, technology and innovation policy. But while the usefulness of systemic thinking in policy-making has been demonstrated in a large number of empirical settings, we still lack a detailed understanding of the dynamics at play when policy makers address systemic problems. In this paper, we show how complex interdependencies and the uncertain nature of technological change shape the process of targeted policy interventions in socio-technical systems. Toward this end we analyzed the evolution of the German feed-in tariff (FIT) system for solar photovoltaic power, a highly effective and widely copied policy instrument targeted at fostering the diffusion and development of renewable energy technologies. We find that the policy has been subject to a considerable amount of changes, many of which are the result of policy makers addressing specific system issues and bottlenecks. Interestingly, however, often these issues themselves were driven by unforeseen technological developments induced by previous policy interventions. We argue that the pattern of policy serving as both a solution to and a driver of technological bottlenecks shows strong similarities with what Rosenberg (1969) called ‘compulsive sequences’ in the development of technical systems. By shedding more light on how the characteristics of socio-technical systems affect policy interventions, our framework represents a first step toward more closely integrating the literature on innovation systems with the work on policy learning.     

Techno therapy or nurtured niches? Technology studies and the evaluation of radical innovations

This article contributes to recent discussions in technology studies about applying insights from technology studies to policy decisions about the development and management of technological innovations. It does so by examining two approaches that can be used by policy makers to manage radical technological innovations in mobility and transportation: strategic niche management (SNM) and the PROTEE approach. The SNM approach uses protective ‘niches’ to develop radical innovations, whereas the PROTEE method is grounded in the assumption that technological innovations have a better chance of success if made “vulnerable” by subjecting them to risks and oppositions from the outset. Both SNM and PROTEE have, so far, been applied to retrospective case studies. This paper examines their potential effectiveness in the monitoring of real time innovation projects by comparing their conceptualizations of ‘learning’ and ‘experimenting’. It argues that the two approaches can draw upon each other to achieve a more refined conceptualization of learning and experimenting and in dealing with the problem of change and obduracy in the development of innovation projects.     

First- and second-order additionality and learning outcomes in collaborative R&D programs

In this paper, we distinguish between firm-level learning effects that result from ‘first-order’ and ‘second-order’ additionalities in innovation policy interventions. ‘First-order’ additionalities represent direct firm-level R&D subsidies, whereas ‘second-order’ additionalities result from knowledge spill-overs, horizontal knowledge exchanges between firms, and from other meso- or community-level effects. Analyzing data from collaborative R&D programs in Finland, we show that enhancing identification with a community of practice among R&D program participants (proxy for second-order additionality) enhances firm-level learning outcomes beyond those resulting from direct R&D subsidy (proxy for first-order additionality). Learning effects facilitated by second-order additionality are not confined to technological learning alone, encompassing also business and market learning. We also show that aspects of program implementation enhance identification with a community of practice, which then mediate the relationship between program implementation and firm-level learning outcomes.     

Regionally asymmetric knowledge capabilities and open innovation: Exploring ‘Globalisation 2’—A new model of industry organisation

This paper proposes to review and assess social scientific debate about the origins and nature of innovation in modern society. It focuses on three sub-sets of conceptualisation, critique and commentary that refer specifically to sub-national or regional innovation systems. Research in the latter field has grown enormously in recent years. Moreover, new perspectives from other disciplines than regional science have been promoted. One distinctive view of relevance in that it is focused on the role in innovation of specific ‘entrepreneurial universities’ in relation to industry and government is, of course, the ‘Triple Helix’ approach. This is reviewed and sympathetically critiqued. A second view, less sympathetically critiqued here, is one that itself attacks all so-called ‘new regionalism’ for stressing the importance of institutions, industry embeddedness and the micro-science of regional economic development. Dazzled by ‘Globalisation 1’ and the totalising power of ‘scale’ geographies, this rejection of the worth of spatial analysis at less than the global or national ‘scalar envelope’ is assessed for its potential insights into weaknesses of the regional innovation systems approach but found wanting in both technical accuracy and scholarly competence. Finally, the state of the art in regional innovation systems research is sketched by reference both to recent longitudinal findings and elaborations into specific technological fields, particularly but not only Bioregional Innovation Systems that help move us towards a newer theory of economic geography in the knowledge economy, based on ‘regional knowledge capabilities.’ The analysis conclusively proposes ‘Globalisation 2’, a ‘ground-up’ knowledge-driven evolution of the earlier ‘top-down’ multilateral trade institution and corporately driven ‘Globalisation 1.’     

Contests for cooperation—A new approach in German innovation policy

A new approach in German innovation policy organizes contests of proposals for developing innovation networks. Based on an overview of the different programs, we investigate the advantages and problems of such an approach. We find that this type of policy may have a relatively large impact and can, therefore, be regarded as a rather efficient instrument of innovation policy. Compared to conventional policies, administration of the program is a much more critical issue. The contest approach may stimulate learning effects on the side of the administration but may also require a high degree of flexibility. The main disadvantage is the additional time that is required for conducting the contest. As a distinct ‘picking the winner’ approach, the contest approach is not suited as a means for achieving a leveling-out of regional welfare.     

Legitimizing research, technology and innovation policies for transformative change: Combining insights from innovation systems and multi-level perspective in a comprehensive ‘failures’ framework

The recent policy debates about orientating research, technology and innovation policy towards societal challenges, rather than economic growth objectives only, call for new lines of argumentation to systematically legitimize policy interventions. While the multi-level perspective on long-term transitions has attracted quite some interest over the past years as a framework for dealing with long-term processes of transformative change, but the innovation systems approach is still the dominant perspective for devising innovation policy. Innovation systems approaches stress the importance of improving innovation capabilities of firms and the institutional settings to support them, but they are less suited for dealing with the strategic challenges of transforming systems of innovation, production and consumption, and thus with long-term challenges such as climate change or resource depletion. It is therefore suggested to consider insights from transition studies more prominently in a policy framework that is based on the innovation systems approach and the associated notion of ‘failures’. We propose a comprehensive framework that allows legitimizing and devising policies for transformative change that draws on a combination of market failures, structural system failures and transformational system failures.     

Ownership and firm innovation in a transition economy: Evidence from China

We examine innovation performance of firms in a transition economy from an ownership perspective. We focus specifically on the relationship between ownership structures and firm innovation performance. Drawing on data from 548 Chinese firms we find volume of patent registration to be most strongly influenced by foreign ownership in the firm along with firm affiliation within a business group. The influence of state and institutional ownership on innovation performance is positive but lagged. Contrary to expectations, insider ownership leads to lower innovation performance and concentrated ownership has no significant impact. Our study has two principal contributions. Firstly, we utilize a comprehensive treatment of ownership characteristics, overcoming weakness in previous studies that have used a more narrow focus on ownership type. Secondly, we contribute to understanding of how firms in transition economies build ‘indigenous’ capabilities for innovation by drawing attention to the interplay of foreign and domestic control of agents’ innovation.     

The bumpy road of technology partnerships: Understanding causes and consequences of partnership mal-functioning

Research on technological partnerships has traditionally sought explanation of their high failure rates in partner characteristics and relationship features. This study introduces the notion of a ‘bumpy road’ in technology partnerships which refers to undesired outcomes such as ‘partnership mal-functioning’ and ‘instability’ to the degree to which innovation activities are hampered. We explain how firm-level strategies can reduce the probability of a ‘bumpy road’ in partnerships. We also assess the impact of this ‘bumpy road’ on innovative performance. We find that firms that excel in diversification of external activities (in terms of different types of partners) perform best. Moreover, a persistent product oriented innovation strategy geared at developing new products, new markets, or higher product quality will yield more stable partnership outcomes. Our results confirm that engagement in partnerships is beneficial for innovative performance. However, firms that experienced a ‘bumpy road’ in their technological partnerships have to pay a price in terms of a negative effect on their innovative performance.     

Regulatory policy as innovation: Constructing rules of engagement for a technological zone of tissue engineering in the European Union

This paper addresses the question of the part that regulation plays in processes of innovation in sectors of technology. The politico-economic phenomenon of ‘Europe’ is partly constituted by regulatory regime-building, and new technologies are one of the major sites of regime-building. A constructionist social theory perspective shows that study of the conflictual processes of regulatory policymaking affords insights into the formation of the rules of engagement that constitute technology domains. Adopting the concept of emergent ‘technological zone’ in preference to industrial ‘sector’ or technoscientific network, the paper presents, using empirical research, a detailed account of the case of the debate and development of regulatory policy for therapeutic tissue engineering in the European Union's policy institutions and stakeholder networks. It describes how the jurisdiction of an emergent zone has been formed through such negotiations, providing a counter-example to the common view that regulation ‘lags behind’ innovation. The analysis takes account particularly of the part played by the malleability of the definition of the material technology itself in such constructive governance processes, and it also suggests various consequences for the array of producers of the technology, for market structuring and for the innovation pathways taken by tissue engineering technology. Concluding, the paper argues that there is conceptual advance to be made by bringing together constructionist social theory with innovation studies approaches that highlight the part played by non-firm, public institutions in shaping innovation ecologies.     

Marketing/R&D integration in the pharmaceutical industry

Integrating marketing and R&D inputs is one of the fundamental challenges in managing innovation. In the pharmaceutical industry, considering its reputed ‘technology push’ model of innovation, the challenge of integrating marketing and R&D could hardly be greater. Thus, the recent trend among pharmaceutical firms of implementing Marketing/R&D integrating mechanisms calls for upgrading our conceptualization of the innovation process in this industry. It also raises important questions regarding Marketing's contribution in new product development, and how to organize to assure that contribution is leveraged. We use the case of a pharmaceutical firm which recently implemented Marketing/R&D integrating mechanisms to examine Marketing's new roles. We find that the extreme conditions surrounding innovation in the pharmaceutical industry, notably the need to cope with Knightean uncertainty, highlight important contributions of Marketing input in R&D that deserve more attention. We suggest that Marketing's most important contribution under these conditions lies in ‘not getting it wrong’ rather than ‘getting it right,’ in setting minimum criteria in project evaluations rather than definite targets, and in refocusing the attention of R&D staff through the very process of providing this input. Given the value of these contributions, modern pharmaceutical firms would indeed be ill advised to think of drug discovery as merely a linear process. Drug development has become an interactive process where the timing, type and impact of Marketing involvement is balanced and managed via certain organizational mechanisms throughout the R&D process, which is an iterative one.     

Approaching the innovation frontier in Korea: the transition phase to leadership

As leading East Asian latecomer firms begin to compete on the basis of new product development and in-house research and development (R&D), they appear to confront a difficult strategic dilemma. Should they compete as R&D and brand leaders on the international stage or should they continue with their tried and tested formula of low cost catch up competitiveness? Most studies of East Asian firms focus on catch up innovation processes. By contrast, this paper focuses on the challenges facing latecomer firms in the transition phase from catch up to leadership status, in order to assess the ‘strategic dilemma’ argument and examine the nature of transition innovation. Based on in-depth interviews with leading Korean firms, the paper contends that the strategic dilemma argument is a misleading oversimplification of the main innovation challenges facing most Korean firms as they become more technologically advanced. Most of the major exporters (or chaebol) offer a portfolio of products, some of which are technologically advanced and others less advanced. Corporate innovation strategies tend to be executed in relation to the needs of specific products (or closely related product families) rather than ‘the firm’ in its entirety. In addition, many firms in many product areas have yet to reach the innovation frontier stage and even the leading chaebol continue to produce large volumes of products under sub-contracting and licensing agreements. Firm strategies tend to embody a mix of leadership, ‘followership’ and latecomer positions according to the product portfolio of the company in question. The study identifies various strategic options and difficulties facing Korean firms during the transition process and points to promising future research on latecomer transition.     

Why space matters in technological innovation systems—Mapping global knowledge dynamics of membrane bioreactor technology

Studies on technological innovation systems (TISs) often set spatial boundaries at the national level and treat supranational levels as a geographically undifferentiated and freely accessible global technological opportunity set. This article criticizes this conceptualization and proposes instead to analyze relevant actors, networks and processes in TIS from a relational perspective on space. It develops an analytical framework which allows investigating innovation processes (or ‘functions’) of a TIS at and across different spatial scales. Based on social network analysis of a co-publication dataset from membrane bioreactor technology, we illustrate how the spatial characteristics of collaborations in knowledge creation vary greatly over relatively short periods of time. This finding suggests that TIS studies should be more reflexive on system boundary setting both regarding the identification and analysis of core processes as well as in the formulation of policy advice.     

Rethinking the market-technology relationship for innovation

This paper revisits the ‘what causes innovation — market pull or technology push?’ debate to argue that the conceptualisation is flawed and that the firm is the only ‘agent’ capable of innovative action. The paper differentiates between ‘use’, ‘need’ and ‘intended use’ to obtain greater precision with respect to the technology-market matching process that is fundamental to innovation. The validity of the approach is demonstrated through empirical examples. These examples also show the value of distinguishing between two types of market concept used by the innovating firm. These are the ‘reference market’ which is a traded product that is a principal source of ‘use’ ideas for the mental construction of the ‘innovation market’ concept. It is the latter that can be thought to guide the construction of innovative production technology.