Experimental Innovation Policy

Experimental Innovation Policy

China's national policy formulation undergone economic transformation and shaped the making of policies in promotion of private business and stock market regulation. China's distinctive process of central-local interaction in policy generation is one of its core strengths in reforming its economy.

Due to many differences in presumptions and theoretical foundations within neoclassical and evolutionary economics, policy-makers are always confronted with the dilemma of selecting one of these two central models for technology and innovation policy. In light of widely institutionalised ineffectiveness in the field of market and systematic coordination – in Iran as well many other countries – the present investigation presumes that reliance on any of the above doctrines alone is ineffective. An intermediate concept of policy rationales to achieve a comparative structure of policy implications is proposed. Policy rationales (in innovation and technological policy) for neoclassical and evolutionary economics were derived based on a thematic analysis. A spectrum of policy implications of both doctrines was designed and completed in the form of a questionnaire for, together with theoretical foundations and policy rationales by specialists of the field of innovative and technological policy in Iran. Given the institutional conditions and structural frameworks which actually exist, and in spite of wide dissimilarities within the theoretical foundations of neoclassical and evolutionary economics, Clustering of respondents and subsequent test trials show that policy implications of the economics doctrines in the field of innovative and technological policy in Iran are complementary and convergent.

Innovation policy is embedded in local contexts that shape its courses and outcomes. However, the role of context is often neglected in the design and implementation of innovation policies. Critical questions such as what innovation actually means, what kind of innovation policies may be beneficial in a given country and for specific sectors, regions and actors, and what kinds of policies and programs can help promote innovation in a feasible and effective manner are rarely addressed. Focusing on Mediterranean Arab countries with their political and economic proximity to the EU, this article proposes three conceptual shifts towards a context-sensitive approach to innovation policy design and analysis. Drawing on insights from relational economic geography, interpretive policy analysis, and science and technology studies, the article discusses how these three shifts enable new perspectives on innovation policies in Tunisia, Jordan, and Egypt. The article suggests a research agenda that can stimulate discussion and lead to a new approach in innovation studies and policy for Arab countries in the EU's neighborhood.

With global environmental problems worsening, policy makers and nonstate actors are looking for viable solutions through policy innovation, entrepreneurship, and experimentation. Research into the use of experiments to innovate is increasing, but the role of experimentation in policy change has yet to be specifically addressed in the context of climate governance. My aim is to improve understanding by examining how entrepreneurs, key agents of change, might use experiments to advance their climate innovations. Policy entrepreneurs can benefit in several ways from using experiments, including assessing public response to new ideas and learning. I address the question: What role can experiments play in an entrepreneur’s change strategies? To answer this, a set of 18 policy experiments from Dutch water management was analyzed to understand how the policy experiments functioned as 4 different policy change strategies. The results revealed that organizers use experiments to evaluate their preformed ideas, to soften local communities to the idea of experimentation, to build broad but centrally controlled coalitions, and to link with influential political actors and national programs to maintain visibility and relevance. These insights formed a list of suggestions that the experiment organizers identified as key to the change strategies. Based on this, a number of recommendations about design choices were made for entrepreneurs who want to experiment. Analyzing experiments as change strategies contributes a novel perspective on how policy experiments function as venues for invention and provides useful suggestions on how experiments can be designed to improve their influence over policy-making processes.

Despite the increasing use of experiments in policy-making the suitability of experimenting in the public sector context is still under debate. In this article, we focus on experimenting in the field of tax policy and ask: what are the promises and pitfalls of using experimental approaches in tax policy? While the existing discussions on tax policy experimentation focus on randomized controlled trials from a legal perspective, we adopt a broader view and provide a more comprehensive discussion by synthesizing insights from the fields of political science, public policy, public administration, and governance. Our analysis encompasses randomized controlled trials, non-randomized policy pilots and design experiments. We summarize the existing knowledge on using experimental approaches in policy-making and discuss the implications of the knowledge for experimenting in tax policy. We seek to offer a more holistic and critical take on whether we should promote the use of experimental approaches in this domain.

There are increasing criticisms of dominant models for scaling up health systems in developing countries and a recognition that approaches are needed that better take into account the complexity of health interventions. Since Reform and Opening in the late 1970s, Chinese government has managed complex, rapid and intersecting reforms across many policy areas. As with reforms in other policy areas, reform of the health system has been through a process of trial and error. There is increasing understanding of the importance of policy experimentation and innovation in many of China’s reforms; this article argues that these processes have been important in rebuilding China’s health system. While China’s current system still has many problems, progress is being made in developing a functioning system able to ensure broad population access. The article analyses Chinese thinking on policy experimentation and innovation and their use in management of complex reforms. It argues that China’s management of reform allows space for policy tailoring and innovation by sub-national governments under a broad agreement over the ends of reform, and that shared understandings of policy innovation, alongside informational infrastructures for the systemic propagation and codification of useful practices, provide a framework for managing change in complex environments and under conditions of uncertainty in which ‘what works’ is not knowable in advance. The article situates China’s use of experimentation and innovation in management of health system reform in relation to recent literature which applies complex systems thinking to global health, and concludes that there are lessons to be learnt from China’s approaches to managing complexity in development of health systems for the benefit of the poor.

Nordic policy makers have long been aware of the fact that prosperity requires more than just, say, well-functioning labor markets and/or generous social and educational policies. It also requires that the capabilities of the labor force are put to productive use in a way that enhances the productivity of the nation and hence the returns for the stakeholders. Nordic policy makers have therefore for a long time experimented with various policy instruments supporting productivity growth. Over the years different labels have been attached to such policy experiments (science, technology, industry policy etc.), but more recently the term innovation policy has become more widely used, and this practice is also adopted here. The paper provides an account of how innovation policies have evolved in three Nordic countries (Sweden, Norway and Finland) and considers the possible lessons from what has been done. The discussion informed by the literature on national innovation systems (introduced in the second section of the paper).

The use of policy experiments or innovations, especially at the local level, since the opening and reform in China is well documented. Less understood is why and how these innovations are developed. This paper further enriches our existing understanding by bringing to light an institutional element that has been relatively under-studied: the role of mission-driven local government agency. Informed by detailed on-site ethnography and process-tracing, I use meso-level and micro-level analyses of Baoding (Hebei) to illustrate how such an organization ushered in unique changes to local governance to facilitate two prolonged instances of policy innovation since the early 2000s: clean energy industry cluster and low-carbon city. Building on the insights from the literatures on communities of practice and experimentalist governance, I argue that the ways in which the local agency engendered and sustained the innovations can best be described as “collective” experimentalist governance. The analyses suggest that local innovations in China cannot always be understood as an epiphenomenon of centrally-coordinated policy experimentation, cross-regional competition or learning, or local leadership that previous studies have frequently emphasized. The findings contribute to recent scholarship that has revealed varieties of local governance in contemporary China.

Purpose: In June 2018, the European Union (“EU”) decided to use missions as tools of innovation policy in accordance with the market-shaping, mission-oriented innovation policy approach. It stemmed from the EU’s efforts to improve the efficiency of innovation policy when it comes to handling major social challenges. In the first quarter of 2020, the EU had to unexpectedly face another social challenge, the COVID-19 pandemic, and the economic and social crisis that followed. This article analyses the actions undertaken by the EU at the supranational level within its innovation policy in relation to the COVID-19 crisis. It also aims to assess the coherence of the EU’s interventions with the mission-oriented innovation policy approach implemented and promoted by the EU. Design/Methodology/Approach: The research is descriptive and analytical in nature. First, it covers a case study of the EU’s supranational innovation policy. Second, it searches, on a theoretical level, for the reasons of discrepancies between the market-shaping and mission-oriented policy approach promoted by the EU and the interventions that the EU in fact conducts in relation to the COVID-19 crisis. Findings: The results of the research point to certain incoherence in the EU’s innovation policy when tackling major policy platforms. On one hand, the EU implements and promotes a mission-oriented policy as a more efficient way of solving major social challenges. On the other hand, its actions (and plans) hardly consider the application of an innovation policy mission as a means for fighting the most recent and crucial challenge, namely the COVID-19 crisis. Originality/Value: This is the first study to point out the incoherence that currently characterise the EU’s innovation policy on the supranational level.

In light of existing unsustainable ways of human life, policy innovations are key to achieve the necessary transition towards sustainable development. This chapter unpacks the concept of policy innovation with a focus on its core characteristics, as well as different types of innovation. It then turns to the sources of innovation such as policy experimentation, how innovations may spread through diffusion processes and ultimately the effects of innovations, which may be detected through careful evaluation. The chapter discusses these conceptual approaches in the context of the UN Sustainable Development goals and what innovations may be expected based on them across different policy sectors. The chapter concludes that while policy innovation may play an important role, one should not subscribe to an uncritical, pro-innovation bias. Future research should study policy innovations in situ, including their characteristics and how they may (not) spread.

Science, technology and innovation (STI) policies are topics that has been much written about in the last decades. However until today no common understanding has been articulated on what these policy fields are and how they are correlated in daily practice of policy making. The book thus pursuits a completely new approach, which goes much beyond existing practices. For the first time the concept of evidence based science, technology and innovation policy making is elaborated and put into context with Foresight studies. Foresight studies are commonly understood as a measure supporting governments, public agencies and companies in designing future oriented strategies. The editorial book brings together contributions from leading international scientists, representatives of national governments and international organisations like the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development.

Transformative Innovation Policies (TIPs) assert that addressing the key challenges currently facing our societies requires profound changes in current socio-technical systems. To leverage such ‘socio-technical transitions’ calls for a different, broad mix of research and innovation policies, with particular attention being paid to policy experiments. As TIPs diffuse and gain legitimacy they pose a substantial evaluation challenge: how can we evaluate these policy experiments with a narrow geographical and temporal scope, when the final objective is ambitiously systemic? How can we know whether a specific set of policy experiments is contributing to systemic transformation? Drawing on TIPs principles as developed by and applied in the activities of the Transformative Innovation Policy Consortium and on the concept of transformative outcomes, this article develops an approach to the evaluation of TIPs that is operational and adaptable to different contexts.

ABSTRACTThe city-state of Singapore is proactive in harnessing policy experimentation to incubate innovations, transfer knowledge and facilitate collaborations across different public sectors. Given the country’s strong knack for pragmatism, international practices and lessons are usually first tested and adapted in policy experiments before scaling up to nationwide policies. Singapore’s practice of policy experimentation, however, has also demonstrated evolution over time. This article reviews the evolving role of experimentation in Singapore’s policy decision-making and implementation, and analyses pilot programmes in public housing to elicit the key attributes and commonalities of its policy experiments. It finds that policy experiments have been increasingly used after the 2011 general election, which witnessed a radical political rebalancing in Singapore’s governance history. Pilot projects have thus transformed from a utilitarian to citizen-centric, design-thinking approach after 2011. Pilot programmes are used for multiple purposes in policy innovations, among which civil service mentoring, knowledge transfer and cross-boundary collaboration are the values primarily pursued. The article discusses the contributions of the findings to the literature and policy implications for practitioners.

Purpose Due to dramatic transformation of the auto industry, governments are implementing innovation policies to ensure the domain of sustainable technologies. According to the literature, developing countries that depend on multinational subsidiaries must invest in complementary innovation to be part of their research and development (R&D) headquarters' long-term plans. This study analyses the Brazilian auto industry innovation policy (Rota 2030) to evaluate if it targets complementarity with the German's one (NPE). It also compares the institutional arrangements of the former against the latter to check for governance gaps.Design/methodology/approachIt applies a case-oriented comparative method (Ragin, 2014) for the analysis of qualitative evidence on secondary data. It investigates evidence of complementarity between Rota 2030 and national platform for electric mobility (NPE) objectives and checks for governance gaps in Rota 2030 using NPE as a reference.FindingsThe results confirmed a loose fitting between the innovation policies mainly for a lack of determinism of Rota 2030 objectives. Governance gaps were also found on Rota 2030 policy formulation and operationalization.Practical implicationsIt contributes for the improvement of Rota 2030, and its analytical frame may be used for the formulation or adjustment of other developing countries' innovation policies.Originality/valueIt contributes with innovation system and policy field development with a theoretical extension coming from the New Institutional Economics (NIE) (Menard, 2018). By examining the performance of “institutional arrangements” during the process of formulation and operationalization of innovation policies, it shows the importance of coordination for their effectiveness.