Learning From the Past? EU Industrial Policy Challenges

Введение. Ключевую роль в достижении технологического суверенитета и обеспечении национальной безопасности России в условиях геополитических вызовов и угроз играет эффективная промышленная политика. Именно она должна давать импульс к концентрации усилий на важнейших технологических направлениях, развитию высокотехнологичных отраслей промышленности и наукоёмких предприятий и таким образом обеспечивать укрепление конкурентоспособности национальной экономики. Целью данного исследования является определение ключевых приоритетов промышленной политики России в интересах обеспечения национального технологического суверенитета исходя из определённых на федеральном уровне стратегических направлений развития, а также интересов регионов. Методы. В процессе исследования использовались инструменты системного и функционального подходов, общенаучные методы (анализ и синтез, научная абстракция, сравнение, аналогия), а также индикативный анализ. Результаты. Исследование показало, что в современных условиях существует острая необходимость разработки промышленной политики регионов в целях их долгосрочного устойчивого развития и повышения конкурентоспособности. Выявлены ключевые приоритеты национальной промышленной политики, модифицированные в связи с поставленными целями снижения импортозависимости России и обеспечения её технологического суверенитета. Дана оценка показателей состояния промышленного потенциала Республики Мордовия, институциональной среды реализации региональной промышленной политики, оказывающих влияние на обеспечение технологического суверенитета. Заключение. В соответствии с выявленными тенденциями определены стратегические приоритеты формирования региональной промышленной политики в интересах обеспечения национального технологического суверенитета: развитие уже имеющихся и новых производств в соответствии с приоритетными направлениями обеспечения технологического суверенитета страны – медицинская промышленность, электронная и электротехническая промышленность, нефтегазовое машиностроение; обеспечение научно-технической и инновационной деятельности в регионе инфраструктурой опережающего развития; поддержка технологического перевооружения промышленных предприятий региона; повышение инвестиционной привлекательности региона для привлечения инвестиций в высокотехнологичные отрасли промышленности и др. Introduction. An effective industrial policy plays a key role in achieving technological sovereignty and ensuring Russia’s national security in the face of geopolitical challenges and threats. It should give impetus to concentrate efforts on the most important technological areas, develop high-tech industries and knowledge-intensive enterprises, and thus provide for strengthening the competitiveness of the national economy. Goals and objectives. The purpose of this study is to identify the key priorities of Russia's industrial policy in order to ensure national technological sovereignty based on the strategic development directions defined at the federal level, as well as the interests of the regions. Materials and methods. During the research process, tools of systemic and functional approaches, general scientific methods (analysis and synthesis, scientific abstraction, comparison, analogy), as well as indicative analysis were used. Results. The study has shown that in modern conditions there is an urgent need to develop the industrial policy of the regions with the aim of their long-term sustainable development and increasing their competitiveness. The key national industrial policy priorities modified in line with the goals of reducing Russia's import dependence and ensuring its technological sovereignty have been identified. The study has assessed the indicators of the state of the industrial potential of the Republic of Mordovia along with the institutional environment for implementing the regional industrial policy, both having an impact on ensuring technological sovereignty. Conclusion. In accordance with the identified trends, strategic priorities for the formation of the regional industrial policy aimed at strengthening the national technological sovereignty have been determined including the development of existing and emerging industries in compliance with the priority areas of ensuring the country's technological sovereignty (medical industry, electronic and electrical industry, oil and gas engineering), providing advanced development infrastructure for the implementation of scientific, technical and innovation activities in the region, providing support for the technological re-equipment of industrial enterprises in the region, increasing the investment attractiveness of the region in order to attract investment in high-tech industries, etc.

The state-backed internationalization of Chinese companies has led to conflicts in the EU over potential market distortions and security concerns. The EU has responded to this challenge with increasing state intervention and defensive measures in trade and investment regulation, competition policy, and industrial policy. Drawing on comparative capitalisms research and Neo-Gramscian perspectives on European integration, we analyze how European economic governance has changed under the pressure of Chinese competition. Based on 31 semi-structured expert interviews and a document analysis, this exploratory study examines the EU’s response in these policy fields. We observe a gradual, albeit contested change of European Economic Governance in two phases since 2017, primarily driven by a new “China-threat-coalition” in Germany. We argue that there is no overall paradigm shift in the neoliberal mode of European integration, but there are nonetheless significant changes as new “filter functions” have emerged that tend to “bypass” EU economic governance and filter out “market-distorting” state-capitalist influences.

The article examines the main strategic directions of the EU industrial policy. It is emphasized that the restoration of the national economy is currently a strategic course of economic development, the basic principle of which should be the implementation of state policy aimed at introducing an innovative model of structural restructuring and economic growth, and establishing Ukraine as a high-tech state. It analyzes individual provisions of the New Industrial Strategy for Europe, which aims to increase the competitiveness of EU industry at the global level and lays the foundations for industrial policy. It is noted that the strategic directions and components of the EU industrial development management policy are critically important and appropriate for implementation in the provisions of the national industrial policy, which is the basis in ensuring the competitiveness of domestic products and building inter-industry and intra-industry ties. It is indicated that in the conditions of the need for industrial restoration, the issues of ensuring food security and implementing an effective state industrial policy of the state acquire special importance. The statement is supported regarding the synchronization of the European industrial policy model with the goals of social and environmental development of the EU countries, its flexibility, the use of the competitive mechanism to ensure the modernization of the economic structure, and the expediency of using the experience of developing and implementing the EU industrial policy to form a new strategy for the industrial development of Ukraine. It is determined that the industrial recovery of Ukraine is impossible without the activation of joint initiatives that unite investors, government representatives, institutional and industrial partners, which should be accompanied by the improvement of the legislative framework and the introduction of new economic and legal means of implementing the state industrial policy.

Subject The new European Commission's goal of achieving 'technological sovereignty'. Significance The incoming European Commission, which takes office in November, will next week appear for hearings before the European Parliament. President-elect Ursula von der Leyen’s priorities for the next five years, notably on recovering Europe’s 'technological sovereignty', will be closely scrutinised. Impacts Some of the Commission's proposals on digital tech will be diluted by member states averse to transferring more funds to the EU. Member states will prioritise their national digital strategies, even though this weakens the Commission’s envisaged collective approach. The risk of technological supply chain disruption is now a major consideration for all major economies, including the EU.

Acknowledgements. 1. Introduction: Industrial Policy Issues, Theories and Instruments J. Groenewegen. 2. The Theoretical Analysis of Industrial Policy M. Sawyer. 3. The Implications of Globalization for Industrial, Trade, and Innovation Policies J. Michie. 4. Comprehensive Industrial Policies and the Contemporary Coordination Nexus P. Petit, M. Setterfield. 5. A Simple theory of Cooperative Industrial Policy. Model Building and Practical Experience W. Elsner. 6. Industrial Policy, Industrial Change and Institutional Inertia M. Dietrich, J.E. Burns. 7. Strategic Trade and International Competition Policy R. Markl, W. Meissner. 8. Policy Implications of Purely Strategic Mergers H. Schenk. 9. Contracts and Costs in a Corporate/Government System Dynamics Network: A United States Case F.G. Hayden, S.R. Bolduc. 10. Small and Medium Sized Enterprises (SMEs), Employment Creation, and Industrial Policy P. Schreyer. 11. Policies for Small and Medium Sized Enterprises (SMEs) P. Bianchi. 12. Regional Paths of Institutional Anchoring in the Global Economy. The Case of the North-East of England and Aragon A. Lagendijk. 13. Anything New in Industrial Policy? Myths and Empirical Facts. The Case of some German Regions F. Hellmer, et al. 14. Conclusions: An Industrial Policy Agenda 2000 and Beyond - Experience, Theory and Policy W. Elsner. List of Contributors. List of Tables and Figures. Index.

The resurgence of manufacturing in the Fourth Industrial Revolution and increased state intervention in response to rising global tensions have reignited the debate on European industrial policy. The European Commission’s focus on aligning industrial renewal with digital transition and technological sovereignty has led some scholars to posit a departure from neoliberalism. This article adopts a long-term perspective to investigate the evolution of the European Commission’s narrative on industrial policy, particularly regarding the digital transformation of manufacturing. Through a qualitative analysis of 84 Communications from 1967 to 2022, we argue that the greater prominence of state intervention signifies a reconfiguration of European industrial policy, not a paradigmatic rupture with the past. Notably, the shift from a ‘market failure’ to a ‘systemic failure’ rationale provides the European Commission with greater discretion in directing state aid and policy initiatives, even while maintaining core principles of market regulation.

After being among the earliest countries to embark on the East Asian path, Pakistan fell away but was still among the ten fastest growing economies of the world during 1960–90. However, the seeds for the subsequent economic and technological malaise were also sown in that period. This paper provides an overview of recent theoretical and empirical work on industrial policies – more accurately labeled learning, industrial and technology (LIT) policies – and examines their implications for Pakistan. These include a selective, more sharply focused approach than the comprehensive agendas of reforms that have become common. Substantial islands of success with industrial policies have emerged in a variety of institutional and governance settings, different from those of the original East Asian developmental states. They offer valuable lessons. Raising the abysmally low level of investment in Pakistan is a requirement as well as an outcome and an instrument of industrial policies. This argues for a revival of development finance to stimulate investment as well as to direct it towards selective targets. How to mitigate the risks of this and other instruments of industrial policy to get the risk–reward ratio right is another concern of the paper. An important target of such policies should be the technological upgrading of existing industries. There is enormous scope for doing so, with international comparisons suggesting that Pakistani manufacturing does poorly – both in terms of variance in productivity between firms within an industry as well as in introducing new technologies and products. Whilst the constraints of the politics–governance–security/terrorism nexus are beyond the scope of the paper, their salience cannot be underestimated.

Industrial policy has moved into the center of debates on climate policy, as the EU’s Green Deal, China’s green industrial strategy, President Biden’s climate agenda, and green stimulus packages such as South Korea’s reflect. This represents a shift away from climate policy as we know it—as classic environmental policy. Industrial policy and environmental policy differ in their policy goals, policy instruments, and distributional effects. One primarily concerned with economic development, the other with cutting greenhouse gas emissions. This raises questions about policy interactions between industrial and environmental policy in broader climate policy mixes, and how these effect global decarbonization. This paper identifies complementary and conflictual dynamics between industrial policy and environmental policy in both domestic and international climate politics. It shows how green industrial policy can advance climate goals and cooperation, but can also present challenges to deepening climate cooperation and reducing greenhouse gas emissions. Developing an understanding of policy interactions is central to leveraging the potential of industrial policy to accelerate global decarbonization.

The article examines the role of the Industrial Development Fund (IDF) in ensuring Russia's technological sovereignty in the face of unprecedented sanctions pressure. The relevance of the research is due to the need for a scientific understanding of the mechanisms of structural adaptation of the economy and the search for effective tools to support industry in conditions of disruption of production and technological chains and limited access to advanced technologies. The current geopolitical situation dictates the need for a comprehensive reorganization of economic mechanisms, including the modernization of production chains, the diversification of partnerships and the formation of an independent technological base. In these circumstances, an analysis of the activities of the Industrial Development Fund as an institution of state support opens up opportunities for identifying effective methods of activating technological potential and economic restructuring. Additional importance is attached to the study by the need for a theoretical rethinking of the strategic foundations of industrial policy in the face of external pressure, which includes both an assessment of the effectiveness of current supportive initiatives and the development of proposals to optimize the existing tools of state support for the industrial sector. The methodological basis of the study is a comprehensive analysis of the activities of the IDF using a systematic approach, comparative analysis and methods of statistical data processing. The information base was the official data of the IDF, including statistics on the cost structure and conditions of financing programs, as well as scientific publications by domestic researchers. The work analyzes the research of authors from the Institute of Economics of the Russian Academy of Sciences and others. As a result of the research, the author's definition of technological sovereignty is proposed as the ability of the state to ensure sustainable economic development based on its own technological competencies while maintaining selective integration into global chains. The structure of the IDF financing programs is analyzed; the key principles of the Fund's work are identified, including concentration on projects of strategic importance and ensuring the repayment of funds. As part of the scientific discussion, the inconsistency of the position on the priority role of venture capital in achieving technological sovereignty is substantiated. The advantages of the IDF as a key tool for technological development are proved, including the possibility of long-term concessional financing, a systematic approach and coordination with state industrial policy. It is concluded that the IDF is an effective institution for ensuring Russia's technological sovereignty due to the unique opportunities to support strategically important projects, proven mechanisms of expertise and monitoring, as well as the ability to provide a synergistic effect from the interaction of various instruments of state support for industry. The author declares no conflicts of interests.

Unlike other European countries, most industrial policy in Austria still takes place at the Federal level. With recent open access to European funding programmes on the one hand and increasing regional engagement in industrial policy questions on the other, we see ongoing changes in this structure. As a result, industrial policy strategies for Austria are more and more designed in close complementarity with both international and regional strategies. The recent shift toward technology policy observeable in nearly all industrialized countries has also taken place in Austria and has favoured major urban areas. Nevertheless, a consensus-oriented tradition in stabilization and social policy have had remarkable negative effects on laggard regions up to now. The plan of this paper is documenting the actual situation as well as recent chances in Austrian industrial and technology policy. Furthermore, philosophy, principal targets and instruments of new industrial policy at the Lander level (Styria) are examined to offer a closer view on advantages and possible disadvantages of regional industrial policy.

This chapter investigates the nexus between the Critical Entities Resilience Directive and EU Industrial Policy. The EU is integrating a resilience framework into its industrial policy to secure its economic sovereignty and enhance its global competitiveness. Industrial resilience, in this context, refers to the capacity of industrial systems to anticipate, absorb, recover from, and adapt to disruptions, which includes dimensions such as supply chain security, technological sovereignty, sustainability, and the ability of public administration to respond to crises. Resilience in energy, transport, banking, financial market infrastructure, and digital infrastructure has become a strategic imperative in response to geopolitical tensions, financial stability challenges, climate risks, and technological vulnerabilities. The EU's evolving approach aims to build a more sustainable, secure, and autonomous economic landscape, ensuring that industrial development aligns with resilience goals while mitigating external risks. In the following pages we critically and constructively discuss this approach and we check its applicability in the case of Greece.

In modern conditions, the issues of choosing a reasonable balance between antitrust and economic regulation, instruments of antimonopoly and industrial policy — vertical and horizontal — have become actualized. This is due to the fact that several factors have intertwined: digitalization that transforms the usual business models and ideas about acceptable conditions for the functioning of markets; the search for solutions to the problems of sustainable development (low-carbon economy); a dramatic change in geopolitical conditions of doing business in Russia. In 2023, the Chair of Competition and Industrial Policy of the Faculty of Economics of Lomonosov Moscow State University turned 10 years old. On June 14, 2023 an anniversary conference was held to discuss a wide range of issues that the school of institutional studies of competition, industrial and competition policy, which has been formed in Russia, touches upon in its research. Within the framework of the conference, a round table was held on applied issues of antimonopoly and industrial policies in new conditions. Researchers, practicing consultants, and business representatives were invited to the discussion.

Industrial policy has begun to move into the center of debates on climate policy. This represents a shift away from climate policy as we know it—as classic environmental policy. Industrial policy and environmental policy differ in their policy goals, policy instruments, and distributional effects, one primarily concerned with economic development, the other with cutting greenhouse gas emissions. This raises questions about policy interactions between industrial and environmental policy in broader climate policy mixes and how these affect global decarbonization. This article identifies complementary and conflictual dynamics between industrial policy and environmental policy in both domestic and international climate politics. It shows how green industrial policy can advance climate goals and cooperation but can also present challenges to deepening climate cooperation and reducing greenhouse gas emissions. Developing an understanding of policy interactions is central to leveraging the potential of industrial policy to accelerate global decarbonization.

Industrial policy is back. After having been considered a taboo since the 1970s, “new industrial policies” are at the core of governments’ strategies to support countries during crises and enable the green and digital transitions. Virtually, every government has used and uses industrial policy, despite continued concerns related to anticompetitive effects, within and across countries, captured by vested interests and the opportunity cost of public funds, which economists have pointed out, based on previous unsuccessful experiences. In this paper, we contribute to the debate on industrial policy by presenting both a sound and simple framework to help design industrial policies and also data that allow the comparison of industrial strategies and their priorities across countries. First, this paper summarises our recent framework for industrial strategies, which is designed to offer practical policy advice and shed light on the complementarities between different policy instruments. Such a framework is particularly useful when designing complex mission-oriented industrial strategies promoting the green transition of the business sector. Second, this paper presents some salient results from the new “Quantifying Industrial Strategies” (QuIS) project, which gathers harmonised data on industrial policy expenditures, policy priorities, and policy instruments, thereby allowing the benchmarking of industrial strategies across countries. Based on the aforementioned conceptual framework, QuIS measures industrial policy expenditures across 9 OECD members, for the period 2019–2021. The data, now publicly available on the OECD website, show the importance of industrial policy expenditures, and the growing role of green industrial policies in countries industrial strategies.

ABSTRACTThe purpose of this study is to illustrate how industrial policy can support health policy through the construction of technological and innovation capabilities. This paper provides insights on this topic by examining the Brazilian ability to make patented antiretroviral (ARV) drugs universally accessible to people living with HIV/AIDS in the country. The Brazilian case study demonstrates the crucial role of industrial policy in making the use of compulsory licensing in price negotiations with pharmaceutical multinational corporations to improve the access to patented ARV drugs. The evidence presented in this paper supports that it is indeed possible to achieve synergies between industrial and health policy in order to improve the access to medicines and promote accumulation of technological capabilities in pharmaceuticals. Several policy instruments and initiatives, both horizontal and vertical, were implemented to support the industrial dimension of the successful Brazilian health strategy. These initiatives include direct support to capacity building, public procurement, and institutional changes. Furthermore, industrial policy initiatives can contribute to success of health programmes either immediately or with a time lag. Finally, the lessons learned from the Brazilian experience are re-specified and its relevance to other less developed countries, particularly those deprived of industrial capabilities, is discussed.