State of the arts and innovation : before and after the review of the national innovation system

This article examines the relationship between the arts and national innovation policy in Australia, pivoting around the Venturous Australia report released in September 2008 as part of the Review of the National Innovation System (RNIS). This came at a time of optimism that the arts sector would be included in Australia’s federal innovation policy. However, despite the report’s broad vision for innovation and specific commentary on the arts, the more ambitious hopes of arts sector advocates remained unfulfilled. This article examines the entwining discourses of creativity and innovation which emerged globally and in Australia prior to the RNIS, before analysing Venturous Australia in terms of the arts and the ongoing science-and-technology bias to innovation policy. It ends by considering why sector-led policy research and lobbying has to date proved unsuccessful and then suggests what public policy development is now needed.

Applying the open innovation system concept to infrastructure projects

Purpose: The goal of this conceptual paper is to provide tools to help maximise the value delivered by infrastructure projects, by developing methods to increase adoption of innovative products during construction. Methods: The role of knowledge flows in determining innovation adoption rates is conceptually examined. A promising new approach is developed. Open innovation system theory is extended, by reviewing the role of three frameworks: (1) knowledge intermediaries, (2) absorptive capacity and (3) governance arrangements. Originality: We develop a novel open innovation system model to guide further research in the area of adoption of innovation on infrastructure projects. The open innovation system model currently lacks definition of core concepts, especially with regard to the impact of different degrees and types of openness. The three frameworks address this issue and add substance to the open innovation system model, addressing widespread criticism that it is underdeveloped. The novelty of our model is in the combination of the three frameworks to explore the system. These frameworks promise new insights into system dynamics and facilitate the development of new methods to optimise the diffusion of innovation. Practical Implications: The framework will help to reveal gaps in knowledge flows that impede the uptake of innovations. In the past, identifying these gaps has been difficult given the lack of nuance in existing theory. The knowledge maps proposed will enable informed policy advice to effectively harness the power of knowledge networks, increase innovation diffusion and improve the performance of infrastructure projects. The models developed in this paper will be used in planned empirical research into innovation on large scale infrastructure projects in the Australian built environment.

Policy measures for creating an integrated and brand-focused innovation system for film industries in shadow nations : an application to Australia's national film industry

Shadow nations face particular problems in constructing competitive film industries. Shadow nations refer to nations whose relative competitiveness suffers from easy product substitutability by products initiated, produced and distributed by powerful actors, such as media conglomerates located in Hollywood. The dominant literature has so far neglected the developing policy recommendations for dealing explicitly with the challenges of shadow nations. This paper aims to develop and apply a normative model for the development of film industries in shadow nations. The model integrates insights from innovation system studies and place branding. The developed model is applied to the Australian film industry as Australia represents a typical shadow nation within the film industry.

The arts and Australia's national innovation system 1994 - 2008 arguments, recommendations, challenges

Based on 15 years of arts and innovation literature, this paper explores the central proposition that the arts sector - particularly the performing arts, visual arts and crafts, new media arts and creative writing - should be included in Australian Government innovation policy development and play a significant role in national innovation. After a brief overview of innovation policy and the national innovation systems approach in Australia, we examine the marginal place of the arts in Australia's innovation agenda and various attempts to include them. We identify the principal voices that have argued for arts and innovation development: the humanities, arts and social sciences (HASS) sector, digital content industries, arts education and university research, and new media arts. After three main periods of arts and innovation policy activity from the mid.1990s (when the importance of innovation as a key driver of Australia's prosperity was recognised) to early 2008, a fourth period has opened up as part of the Australian Government's Review of the National Innovation System in 2008.

The necessary alignment between technology innovation effectiveness and operational effectiveness

Organisations are increasingly investing in complex technological innovations such as enterprise information systems with the aim of improving the operations of the business, and in this way gaining competitive advantage. However, the implementation of technological innovations tends to have an excessive focus on either technology innovation effectiveness (also known as system effectiveness), or the resulting operational effectiveness; focusing on either one of them is detrimental to the long-term enterprise benefits through failure to achieve the real value of technological innovations. The lack of research on the dimensions and performance objectives that organisations must be focusing on is the main reason for this misalignment. This research uses a combination of qualitative and quantitative, three-stage methodological approach. Initial findings suggest that factors such as quality of information from technology innovation effectiveness, and quality and speed from operational effectiveness are important and significantly well correlated factors that promote the alignment between technology innovation effectiveness and operational effectiveness.

Research training and national innovation systems in Australia, Finland and the United States : a policy and systems study supported by 30 case studies of research students in the fields of geospatial science, wireless communication, biosciences, and materials science and engineering

Reforms to the national research and research training system by the Commonwealth Government of Australia sought to effectively connect research conducted in universities to Australia's national innovation system. Research training has a key role in ensuring an adequate supply of highly skilled people for the national innovation system. During their studies, research students produce and disseminate a massive amount of new knowledge. Prior to this study, there was no research that examined the contribution of research training to Australia's national innovation system despite the existence of policy initiatives aiming to enhance this contribution. Given Australia's below average (but improving) innovation performance compared to other OECD countries, the inclusion of Finland and the United States provided further insights into the key research question. This study examined three obvious ways that research training contributes to the national innovation systems in the three countries: the international mobility and migration of research students and graduates, knowledge production and distribution by research students, and the impact of research training as advanced human capital formation on economic growth. Findings have informed the concept of a research training culture of innovation that aims to enhance the contribution of research training to Australia's national innovation system. Key features include internationally competitive research and research training environments; research training programs that equip students with economically-relevant knowledge and the capabilities required by employers operating in knowledge-based economies; attractive research careers in different sectors; a national commitment to R&D as indicated by high levels of gross and business R&D expenditure; high private and social rates of return from research training; and the horizontal coordination of key organisations that create policy for, and/or invest in research training.

Introduction : creative industries and innovation policy

This special issue of Innovation : Management, Policy & Practice (also released as a book: ISBN 978-1-921348-31-0) will explore some empirical and analytic connections between creative industries and innovation policy. Seven papers are presented. The first four are empirical, providing analysis of large and/or detailed data sets on creative industries businesses and occupations to discern their contribution to innovation. The next three papers focus on comparative and historical policy analysis, connecting creative industries policy (broadly considered, including media, arts and cultural policy) and innovation policy. To introduce this special issue I want to review the arguments connecting the statistical, conceptual and policy neologism of ‘creative industries’ to: (1) the elements of a national innovation system; and (2) to innovation policy. In approaching this connection, two overarching issues arise.

Innovation in construction : a case study of the Australian context

The dominant economic paradigm currently guiding industry policy making in Australia and much of the rest of the world is the neoclassical approach. Although neoclassical theories acknowledge that growth is driven by innovation, such innovation is exogenous to their standard models and hence often not explored. Instead the focus is on the allocation of scarce resources, where innovation is perceived as an external shock to the system. Indeed, analysis of innovation is largely undertaken by other disciplines, such as evolutionary economics and institutional economics. As more has become known about innovation processes, linear models, based on research and development or market demand, have been replaced by more complex interactive models which emphasise the existence of feedback loops between the actors and activities involved in the commercialisation of ideas (Manley 2003). Currently dominant among these approaches is the national or sectoral innovation system model (Breschi and Malerba 2000; Nelson 1993), which is based on the notion of increasingly open innovation systems (Chesbrough, Vanhaverbeke, and West 2008). This chapter reports on the ‘BRITE Survey’ funded by the Cooperative Research Centre for Construction Innovation which investigated the open sectoral innovation system operating in the Australian construction industry. The BRITE Survey was undertaken in 2004 and it is the largest construction innovation survey ever conducted in Australia. The results reported here give an indication of how construction innovation processes operate, as an example that should be of interest to international audiences interested in construction economics. The questionnaire was based on a broad range of indicators recommended in the OECD’s Community Innovation Survey guidelines (OECD/Eurostat 2005). Although the ABS has recently begun to undertake regular innovation surveys that include the construction industry (2006), they employ a very narrow definition of the industry and only collect very basic data compared to that provided by the BRITE Survey, which is presented in this chapter. The term ‘innovation’ is defined here as a new or significantly improved technology or organisational practice, based broadly on OECD definitions (OECD/Eurostat 2005). Innovation may be technological or organisational in nature and it may be new to the world, or just new to the industry or the business concerned. The definition thus includes the simple adoption of existing technological and organisational advancements. The survey collected information about respondents’ perceptions of innovation determinants in the industry, comprising various aspects of business strategy and business environment. It builds on a pilot innovation survey undertaken by PricewaterhouseCoopers (PWC) for the Australian Construction Industry Forum on behalf of the Australian Commonwealth Department of Industry Tourism and Resources, in 2001 (PWC 2002). The survey responds to an identified need within the Australian construction industry to have accurate and timely innovation data upon which to base effective management strategies and public policies (Focus Group 2004).

Determinants of China’s regional innovation capacity

This paper investigates the determinants of China’s regional innovation capacity (RIC) and variations in these determinants between different types of regions. Based on the framework of national innovation capacity (NIC) and research on innovation system, this paper develops a framework of RIC in the Chinese context. Using panel data from 1991 to 2009, clustering analysis is first employed to classify regions according to their innovation development path. Panel data regressions with fixed effect model are conducted to explore the determinants of RIC and how these vary across the different regional clusters. We find that the 30 regions can be clustered into three groups, and there are considerable differences in the drivers of RIC between these different regional groups.

Creative industries and innovation in a knowledge economy

The cultural and creative industries contribute to the knowledge economy by their role in reproducing cultural knowledge and through provision of entertainment, experience and leisure goods with cultural content, for which they are widely acknowledged as suffering serious market failure problems (Baumol and Bowen, 1966; Throsby and Withers, 1979). But they also contribute to the innovation process, an aspect that has only recently been appreciated. Specifically, the creative industries are a driver of the knowledge economy by their contribution to the innovation process on the demand side of consumer uptake of new ideas and by their facilitation of consumer-producer interaction. The creative industries are, in this respect, a legitimate part of the innovation system of a knowledge economy.

Determinants of regional innovation capacity in China

Since the 1980s, when the concept of innovation systems(IS) was first presented(Freeman, 2004), a large body of work has been done on IS. IS is a framework that consists of elements related to innovation activities, such as innovation actors,institutional environments, and the relationship between those elements (Lundvall,1992; Nelson, 1993). Studies on NIS/RIS aim to understand the structures and dynamics of IS (Lundvall, 1992; Nelson, 1993), mainly through case studies and comparative case studies(Archibugi, 1996; MacDowall, 1984; Mowery, 1998;Radosevic, 2000). Research on IS has extended from the national level (NIS) to the regional level (RIS) (Cooke, Uranga, & Etxebarria, 1997; Cooke, Uranga, & Etxebarria, 1998), and from developed economies to developing economies. RIS is vital, especially for a large and diverse countries(Edquist, 2004) like China. More recently, based on the literature of NIS, Furman, Porter and Scott (2002)introduced the framework of national innovation capacity (NIC), which employs a quantitative approach to understanding to what degree elements of NIS impact on innovation capacity. Regional innovation capacity (RIC) is the adaption of NIC at the regional level. Although regional level research is important there is limited work done on RIC and there is even less in transitional economies, which are different to developed countries. To better understand RIC in transitional countries this thesis conducted a study of 30 administrative regions in Mainland China between 1991 and 2005. To establish the key factors driving RIC in China the study explored the impact of three elements in the innovation system;(a) innovation actors, (b) innovation inputs, and (c)international and domestic innovation system interactions.

Australian innovation ecosystem: A critical review of the national innovation support mechanisms

Innovation is understood as the combination of existing ideas or the generation of new ideas into new processes, products and services, and widely viewed as the main driver of growth in contemporary economies. In the age of the knowledge economy, successful economic development is intimately linked to a country’s capacity to generate, acquire, absorb, disseminate, and apply innovation towards advanced technology products and services. This development approach is labelled as knowledge-based economic development and highly associated with a capacity embodied in a country’s national innovation ecosystem. The research reported in this paper aims to critically review the Australian innovation ecosystem in order to provide a better understanding on the potential impacts of policy and support mechanisms on the innovation and knowledge generation capacity. The investigation places Australia’s innovation system and national-level innovation support mechanisms under the microscope. The methodology of the study is twofold. Firstly, it undertakes a critical review of the literature and government policy documents to better understand the innovation policy and support mechanisms in the country. It, then, conducts a survey to capture Australian innovation companies’ perceptions on the role and effectiveness of the existing innovation incentive programs. The paper concludes with a discussion on the key insights and findings and potential policy and support directions of the country to achieve a flourishing knowledge economy.