Entrepreneurship policy development : New Zealand in comparison

This paper first examines the impact of entrepreneurship research on policy development in 20 countries of the Global Entrepreneurship Monitor project. Curiously, despite its entrepreneurial endowments, the impact on New Zealand falls behind other countries. For a deeper insight, the paper then compares entrepreneurship and innovation policies in New Zealand and Sinaloa, Mexico. New Zealand has a robust innovation policy yet places little emphasis on the needs of actual individual entrepreneurs and their decision to choose self-employment. In Sinaloa, the emphasis is on creating more and better entrepreneurs, but there is no innovation policy. Both sides have something to learn from the other.

Policy rhetoric and the renovation of English schooling: the case of Creative Partnerships

Facing difficulties in the implementation of its ‘standards’ agenda, the English government has recently introduced a set of policy strategies and initiatives which seek to promote enjoyment, innovation and creativity in education. One such initiative is Creative Partnerships (CP). Funded predominantly from the Arts portfolio, CP brings creative practitioners into schools with the intention of bringing change to teaching and learning, and, more widely, of achieving whole school change. Using a corpus of policy texts and interviews, we examine the claims made within CP about innovation and indicate the rhetorical means by which the impression of radical change is married to the standards agenda. In particular, we highlight the ways in which texts re-work traditions of progressive change. We argue that this rhetorical recuperation of the ideals of an earlier period is a sign of a more general policy adjustment in English education. However, since it is combined with a continuing commitment to market-driven change, it cannot be said to be indicative of a new policy settlement.

Three arguments against ‘soft innovation’: towards a richer understanding of cultural innovation

This paper critiques recent research on innovation in the cultural and creative industries. In particular, this paper examines Paul Stoneman’s idea of ‘soft innovation’ as a jumping off point for discussing theories of cultural innovation more broadly. Three critiques are advanced. Firstly, soft innovation is a theoretical perspective that has developed from neoclassical economics, and is therefore vulnerable to criticisms levelled at neoclassical explanations of economic behaviour. Secondly, the theory of soft innovation can be criticised for being contin- gently inaccurate: the observed reality of cultural industries and marketplaces may not reflect the theory’s premises. Thirdly, because soft innovation defines the significance of an innovation in terms of marketplace success, it implies that only high-selling cultural products are significant, a difficult claim to substantiate. This paper concludes by arguing that our understanding of innovation in the cultural sphere can benefit from a multi-disciplinary approach grounded in the full gamut of human creativity.

Australian cultural and innovation policies: never the twain shall meet?

 In recent years, Australian cultural policy-makers have begun to pay more attention to innovation policy. Several of the Australian states specifically address issues of innovation in their formal cultural policies, and the Australia Council for the Arts has published an Innovation Strategy which purports to constitute 'a coordinated approach to supporting creativity as one of Australia's most valuable assets' (Australia Council 2006).

However, despite this prima facie policy commitment to supporting and fostering innovation in the arts and cultural industries, there remains a disconnect between cultural and innovation policies in Australia. On the one hand, cultural policies in Australia are confused and incoherent in their approach to cultural innovation, and many policy settings as they apply to cultural industries are antithetical to the aims of fostering innovation and R&D. Meanwhile, innovation policies continue to pay only marginal attention to the creative arts and cultural industries. This disconnect will be briefly examined in three fields of cultural policy: arts and cultural funding; copyright and intellectual property policy; and broadcast media policy.

It is argued that rather than promoting innovation, existing policy frameworks in all three areas, when not specifically framed around the protection of vested interests, are often contradictory and inimical to the disruptive influence of innovative artists, technologies and firms. Possible reasons for the disconnect include pragmatic matters of busy ministers and low policy priorities, and conceptual confusion over the status and value of culture.

Multilateral rules on competition policy: an overview of the debate

Includes bibliography

Innovation in Eastern Europe : a case study of Czech Republic

In this study we evaluate innovative performance of the economies of Central and Eastern Europe (CEE) based on the available statistics of innovation processes. We compare such country-level indicators as educational levels, investments in R&D, FDI, trade and licensing flows, patents and scientific articles, and find that the most developed CEE economies are also the most innovative. At the same time, as supported by the results of the interviews in Czech Republic, one of the top performers in the CEE region, its economy is facing a number of challenges that are similar to other middle-income countries around the world. We suggest addressing these challenges from the prospective of the Middle Income Trap, when a middle-income economy to sustain growth must learn to compete with advanced economies in high-skill innovation. Development of effective innovation policy should be a priority for the CEE countries to escape from the middle income trap.

Improving the role of equity crowdfunding in Europe's capital markets. Bruegel Policy Contribution Issue 2014/09, August 2014

Crowdfunding is a growing phenomenon that encompasses several different models of financing for business or other ventures. Despite the hype, equity crowdfunding is still the smallest part of the crowdfunding market. Because of its legal framework, Europe has been at the forefront of equity crowdfunding market development. Equity crowdfunding is more complex than other forms of crowdfunding and requires proper checks and balances if it is to provide a viable channel for financial intermediation in the seed and early-stage market in Europe. It is important to explore this new channel of funding for young and innovative firms given the critical role these start-ups can play job creation and economic growth in Europe. We assess the potential role of equity crowdfunding in the overall seed and early-stage financing market and highlight the potential risks of equity crowdfunding. We describe the current state of play in this nascent industry, considering both the innovations introduced by market operators and existing regulation. Currently in Europe there is a patchwork of national legal frameworks related to equity crowdfunding and this should be addressed in a harmonised way.

Does EU regulation hinder or stimulate innovation? CEPS Special Report No. 96, 19 November 2014

Introduction. One frequently hears the question posed in the title to this report, but there is little systematic analytical literature on the issue. Fragmented evidence or anecdotes dominate debates among EU regulatory decision-makers and in European business, insofar as there is a genuine debate at all. This CEPS Special Report focuses on the multi-faceted, ambiguous and complex relationship between (EU) regulation and innovation in the economy, and discusses the innovation-enhancing potential of certain regulatory approaches as well as factors that tend to reduce incentives to innovate. It adopts an 'ecosystem' approach to both regulation and innovation, and study the interactions between the two ecosystems. This general analysis and survey are complemented by seven case studies of EU regulation enabling and disabling innovation, two horizontal and five sectoral ones. The case studies are preceded by a broader contextual analysis of trends in EU regulation over the last three decades. These trends show the significant transformation of the nature as well as improvement of the quality of EU regulation, largely in the deepened internal market, which tend to have a favourable and lasting effect on the rate of innovation in the EU (other things being equal). Among the findings include the following: Regulation can at times be a powerful stimulus to innovation. EU regulation matters at all stages of the innovation process. Different types of regulation can be identified in terms of innovation impact: general or horizontal, innovation-specific and sector-specific regulation. More prescriptive regulation tends to hamper innovative activity, whereas the more flexible EU regulation is, the better innovation can be stimulated. Lower compliance and red-tape burdens have a positive effect on innovation. The authors recommend incorporating a specific test on innovation impacts in the ex-ante impact assessment of EU legislation as well as in ex-post evaluation. There is ample potential for fostering innovation by reviewing the EU regulatory acquis.

Europe's economic challenges and the importance of ideas and innovation. CHALLENGE EUROPE Issue 22 - Challenges and new beginnings: Priorities for the EU's new leadership, September 2014.

How will we Europeans earn our living in 20 or 30 years' time? And how can it be done, while remaining true to our values of fairness, freedom and solidarity? These fundamental questions predate the financial crisis and will still be with us once we have fully overcome it. Of all the groups in society, business leaders are probably most keenly aware of the challenge posed by globalisation. They have their finger on the pulse of global economic activity and keep alerting me that Europe is losing out. The trade unions, generally more focused on the economy's demand side, regularly call for more (public) investment. Their leadership remains highly committed to Europe but they can sense a rise of Euro-scepticism among their members. We must, and can bring these two narratives together. Yes, global change is relentless and our societies must adapt, but we can also preserve what makes Europe such a special place: a unique combination of relative prosperity, solidarity, individual freedoms, and security. This challenge was always on my mind.

A "Triple-I" Strategy for the Future of Europe. Bruges European Economic Policy (BEEP) Briefing 10/2005

The paper lays down a strategy consisting of Innovation, Internalisation of Externalities, and Integration – called Triple I. ‘Innovation’ is seen along value chain management in a systems perspective, driven by competition and participation of stakeholders. ‘Internalisation’ refers to endogenous efforts by industry to assess externalities and to foster knowledge generation that leads to benefits for both business and society. ‘Integration’ highlights the role business and its various forms of cooperation might play in policy integration within Europe and beyond. Looking forward towards measures to be taken, the paper explores some frontiers for a partnership between public and private sector: i) Increasing resource productivity, lowering material cost, ii) Energy integration with Southeast Europe and Northern Africa, iii) Urban mobility services and public transport, iv) Tradable emission permits beyond Europe. Finally, some conclusions from the perspective of the College of Europe are drawn.

The Policy Framework for the Promotion of Hydrogen and Fuel Cells in Europe: a Critical Assessment. Bruges European Economic Policy (BEEP) Briefing 19/2008

This paper reviews the current EU policy framework in view of its impact on hydrogen and fuel cell development. It screens EU energy policies, EU regulatory policies and EU spending policies. Key questions addressed are as follows: To what extent is the current policy framework conducive to hydrogen and fuel cell development? What barriers and inconsistencies can be identified? How can policies potentially promote hydrogen and fuel cells in Europe, taking into account the complex evolution of such a disruptive technology? How should the EU policy framework be reformed in view of a strengthened and more coherent approach? The paper concludes that the current EU policy framework does not hinder hydrogen development. Yet it does not constitute a strong push factor either. EU energy policies have the strongest impact on hydrogen and fuel cell development even though their potential is still underexploited. Regulatory policies have a weak but positive impact on hydrogen. EU spending policies show some inconsistencies. However, the large scale market development of hydrogen and fuel cells will require a new policy approach which comprises technology specific support as well as a supportive policy framework with a special regional dimension.

Sustainable Development and Collective Learning: Theory and a European Case Study. Bruges European Economic Policy (BEEP) Briefing 7/2004

Network governance of collective learning processes is an essential approach to sustainable development. The first section of the article briefly refers to recent theories about both market and government failures that express scepticism about the way framework conditions for market actors are set. For this reason, the development of networks for collective learning processes seems advantageous if new solutions are to be developed in policy areas concerned with long-term changes and a stepwise internalisation of externalities. With regard to corporate actors’ interests, the article shows recent insights from theories about the knowledge-based firm, where the creation of new knowledge is based on the absorption of societal views. This concept shifts the focus towards knowledge generation as an essential element in the evolution of sustainable markets. This involves at the same time the development of new policies. In this context innovation-inducing regulation is suggested and discussed. The evolution of the Swedish, German and Dutch wind turbine industries are analysed based on the approach of governance put forward in this article. We conclude that these coevolutionary mechanisms may take for granted some of the stabilising and orientating functions previously exercised by basic regulatory activities of the state. In this context, the main function of the governments is to facilitate learning processes that depart from the government functions suggested by welfare economics.

Do Clusters Generate Greater Innovation and Growth? An Analysis of European Regions. Bruges European Economic Research (BEER) Papers 21/October 2011

The analysis of clusters has attracted considerable interest over the last few decades. The articulation of clusters into complex networks and systems of innovation -- generally known as regional innovation systems -- has, in particular, been associated with the delivery of greater innovation and growth. However, despite the growing economic and policy relevance of clusters, little systematic research has been conducted into their association with other factors promoting innovation and economic growth. This article addresses this issue by looking at the relationship between innovation and economic growth in 152 regions of Europe during the period between 1995 and 2006. Using an econometric model with a static and a dynamic dimension, the results of the analysis highlight that: a) regional growth through innovation in Europe is fundamentally connected to the presence of an adequate socioeconomic environment and, in particular, to the existence of a well-trained and educated pool of workers; b) the presence of clusters matters for regional growth, but only in combination with a good ‘social filter’, and this association wanes in time; c) more traditional R&D variables have a weak initial connection to economic development, but this connection increases over time and, is, once again, contingent on the existence of adequate socioeconomic conditions.

Forms and role of the cluster initiatives in fostering innovation in post-industrial regions: A comparative study of environmental clusters in British West Midlands and Spanish Basque country. ACES Working Paper No. 8, August 2008

The objective of this research is to present cluster initiative approaches in post industrial regions characterized by similar economic history and challenges, with additional emphasis on their role in promoting innovation among regional businesses. The research is based on a comparison study of two environmental industry clusters: Environmental Technology Cluster (ET) from British West Midlands and ACLIMA from Spanish Basque Country. The study analyzes clusters' design and their role in fostering innovation based on environment industry clusters. In both regions environmental industry clusters represent strong potential for further dynamic development with grow opportunities driven by legislation introduced at EU, national or regional levels. The paper compares clusters' heterogeneity, goals and priorities, financing schemes, management structure, types of projects, character of private-public partnerships, challenges, as well as clusters' collaboration at regional/national/international levels. Also focus is given on how the clusters enhance innovation and what types of projects are executed by the regions in this field.

Measuring firm innovativeness: towards a composite innovation index built on firm innovative posture, propensity and performance attributes. ACES Working Paper No. 12, 2008

The ability to innovate is generally accepted as a critical success factor to growth and future performance of firms. Yet, this acceptance obscures a comprehensive perspective on how firms can influence their innovation capacity and resulting performance. This paper proposes a '3P' construct of innovation measurement that simultaneously considers the Posture, Propensity and Performance related to a firm's innovation capabilities. We propose and provide empirical support showing that robust measurement of the performance implications of innovation requires the consideration of input, throughput and output factors simultaneously. Single or more limited indicators do not offer the degree of fine-tuning to a firm's innovation system that managers require. Thus, we propose the development, and future research into contingent variations, of a Composite Innovation Index (CII). We further demonstrate its use in comparing innovators and allowing managers to design a firm's innovation system.