1 / 23

Characteristics of a National Innovation System

Characteristics of a National Innovation System. Presented to: AEA Research Technology and Development Technical Interest Group CES / AEA Evaluation Conference Presented by: George Teather October 28, 2005 Tel: (613) 824-2423 Fax: (613) 824-2583 Email: gteather@sympatico.ca.

brianp
Download Presentation

Characteristics of a National Innovation System

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Characteristics of a National Innovation System Presented to: AEA Research Technology and Development Technical Interest Group CES / AEA Evaluation Conference Presented by: George Teather October 28, 2005 Tel: (613) 824-2423 Fax: (613) 824-2583 Email: gteather@sympatico.ca

  2. Presentation Outline • Explore dimensions of the terms “Innovation”, “Innovation Process” and “National Innovation System” • Examine some specific models, their strengths and weaknesses and applicability • Describe the Canadian Innovation System 2

  3. Innovation • There are a range of definitions, from the narrow technological version to the broader macrolevel interpretation • Cummins in 1998 defined innovation as “The first successful application of a product or process” (successful implies market acceptance -less costly to achieve same results, improved results, or a new application for which there is an existing market demand or one that can be developed ) • OECD defines innovation more broadly as “The process through which new economic and social benefits are extracted from knowledge” (covers complete research to results continuum, includes longer term socio-economic outcomes and impacts resulting from application of knowledge) • Definitions are not in conflict, but are at different locations along the knowledge creation – application – utilization – outcomes continuum 3

  4. Innovation Process Models • Many conventional models of the innovation process used in S&T focus on the early stages of the process of going from “Blue Sky“ to applied research, proof of concept to further technical development and commercialization • Process is assumed to be linear and controlled by the organization or organizations involved in the innovation process • Market acceptance / commercialization is presumed to occur because of the improved technology • Minimize the differences between technological success and commercial success or utilization in the marketplace 4

  5. Innovation Process Models • There is a tendency to focus attention on the R side and ignore the complexities and many steps required to move from technical success to acceptance and utilization of the new or improved technology • The influence of external factors is usually not considered • Little consideration of the difference in the innovation process among technologies and industrial sectors (IT is quite different from pharmaceutical sector, and mining or manufacturing are different again) 5

  6. The Innovation Process(Conventional Technology Development and Application)

  7. The Innovation Process Production / Market Acceptance Utilization / Commercialization

  8. National and International Innovation Systems • Examination of an innovation system requires • identification of the actors involved directly and indirectly in the innovation process, • their role, • the interaction between the actors, and • their level of influence on the system 8

  9. National and International Innovation SystemsExternal Factors • The factors influencing a national innovation system are complex and different for every country • education system (colleges and universities) • Government laboratories • Government funding (GERD) • Government innovation support programs (R, D, technology transfer, economic development) • Private sector (R&D and purchasing) • Public / private partnerships and networks • Legal system • Regulatory system, codes and standards • Investment policies, environment • Sources and levels of early, intermediate and late stage funding • Taxation system, reward for entrepreneurship 9

  10. National Innovation System Education System Government Laboratories National Investment Framework National Standards Regulatory Framework Production / Market Acceptance Utilization / Commercialization Early Stage Funding Intermediate Stage Funding Legal Framework Late Stage Funding

  11. Innovation System Models • Laredo considers a variety of actors and influences • education system / scientific and technical capabilities • public policy, infrastructure • political environment • economic system • National competitive advantages (SWOT) 11

  12. Innovation System Models • Tassey considers innovation system and pathway from knowledge to commercialization / utilization from perspective of an economist • public policy, role of gov’t • important education system / scientific and technical capabilities • contribution of technical infrastructure (infratechnology) • risk reduction (testing, standards) • economic system • Model implicitly identifies: • actors involved at various stages • rationale, opportunities for intervention, 12

  13. National Innovation System (Tassey Model) Production & Strategic Outputs/Market Value- Processes Planning Development Added Innovation - Economic Development - Public Health & Safety - Environmental Protection Risk Reduction Entrepreneurial Activity Applied Technologies Generic Technologies Science Base Economic, Social and Environmental Conditions G. Tassey, National Institute of Standards and Technology, U.S.A. 1991 *

  14. Government Policy Interventions in the National Innovation System Production & Strategic Outputs/Market Value- Processes Planning Development Added Innovation - Economic Development - Public Health & Safety - Environmental Protection Joint Industry Funding and S&T Education and Promotion Government Planning Technical Risk Assistance Reduction Technology National Intellectual Standards and Research Entrepreneurial Activity Property National Test Facilities Rights Facilities Applied Technologies Direct Funding Generic for universities, Technologies Federal labs, industry Improve Research and Production Science Base Efficiency Economic, Social and Environmental Conditions Derived from G. Tassey, National Institute of Standards and Technology, U.S.A. 1991 *

  15. Innovation Environment in Canada • Federal investment in R&D is seventh out of eight G8 countries (GERD = 1.7%) • Innovation performance overall is low • Scientific Research Tax Deduction (SRED) to firms conducting R&D (Frascati definition) is very high • Data on firm expenditures across innovation spectrum • Graph of relative spending of government and industry across innovation spectrum 15

  16. Canadian Innovation SystemPerformers • Basic research - universities, government laboratories, private sector, colleges • Applied research - universities, government laboratories/agencies, private sector • Technology development - government laboratories/agencies, universities, private sector, colleges • Prototype testing - private sector, government laboratories, universities, colleges • Commercialization / utilization – private sector government laboratories / agencies 18

  17. Canadian Innovation SystemFunders • Basic research - Government (Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council, Gov’t Departments/ Agencies) • Applied research - Government (Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council, Gov’t Departments, SRED, IRAP), private sector • Technology development - Government (Gov’t Departments, SRED, Technology Partnerships Canada), private sector • Prototype testing - private sector, Government (IRAP, TPC) • Commercialization / utilization – private sector Government (Gov’t departments) 19

  18. Canadian Innovation Strategy 2002 20

  19. Canadian Innovation Strategy 2002 21

  20. Generic Program Logic Model Program Objective: high level strategic purpose Resources Reach Results HOW? WHO / WHERE? WHAT do we want? WHY? users / clients / co-deliverers / beneficiaries activities outputs direct outcomes intermediate outcomes ultimate impacts • Program deliverables • Policy guidelines, regulations • Communications • plans • - internal communications • - promotion • - info transfer • - consultations • - meetings/events • Funding • Service Outputs • New knowledge • Improved capability • Improved decision making • Target group changes in behaviour / other outcomes • Sector / Industry / Regional Impact • Economic/ Environmental/ Societal Impact • Contribution to organizational objective • Client Service • - addresses needs • - meets / exceeds expectations • - service quality • Behavioral Influence • awareness • understanding • attitude / perception • support • Program / Service Delivery • Client Management • Policy & Issue Management • Financial Management • Human Resources Management • Asset Management • Primary Targets (clients, ultimate beneficiaries) • Co-delivery Agents • Other Stakeholders 22

  21. Spheres of Influence* State Your environment of indirect influence e.g., Industrial sectors, government decision makers, other communities of interest where you do not make direct contact Behavioural Change Your environment of direct influence e.g.people and groups in direct contact with your programs, staff (i.e. clients, target audience, co-delivery partners Time Operational Your operational environment You have direct control over the behaviours within this sphere *reference S. Montague, www.pmn.net 23

More Related