Some updates on innovation policy:
This week is the annual OECD Ministerial meeting. The overall theme of the meeting is The Crisis and Beyond: For a stronger, cleaner, and fairer world economy. As part of the preparation, OECD has issued a new report: Policy Responses to the Economic Crisis: Investing in Innovation for Long-Term Growth. The report argues that the focus on innovation should increase during the economic crisis, stating that "[T]he crisis should not damage the drivers of long-term growth, but should instead be used as a springboard to accelerate structural shifts towards a stronger, fairer and cleaner economic future." In that vein, they recommend continued support for focused research and public-private partnerships, enacting policies to lower obstacles to entrepreneurship (including addressing the liquidity problems facing start ups and small firms), and continue investments in information technologies and in human capital. The report goes on to describe policies being taken by OECD countries.
Thanks to Intellectual Property Watch for point this out.
- - -
A much more pessimistic view comes from Mike Mandel's recent Business Week cover story The Failed Promise of Innovation in the US. His basic argument is that the innovations of the 1990's have failed to deliver - especially in biotech. I have to say that I find his arguments rather unconvincing. It seems like he desperately wanted all the high tech hype to be real. It wasn't. It couldn't have been. And it won't be in the future. But the failure of reality to live up to the hype does not mean that innovation has failed.
I was especially interested, however, in his comments on trade and innovation. He take the growing trade deficit as an indicator of a lack of innovation. I disagree. The real reasons for the growing trade deficit are many. But part of it was the innovation business model: invent it here, make it over there. That is a failure of trade policy, economic policy and innovation policy, not innovation per se.
- - -
Then there is the story in today's Wall street Journal In Search of Innovation. They use one of my favorite analogies: the dunk under the light post. "Why are you searching here under the light post when you lost your keys over there," asks the cop? "Because this is where the light is," answers the drunk. The authors point out that much of the search for "innovation" is where the current light is -- rather than where the innovations are. They offers a number of tips for how to broaden the search -- all of which generally fall under the rubric of open innovation.
One other thing I would point out is that there definition of innovation is a broad one -- encompassing new products, services and process. One of the most interesting example is this:
- - -
So let me go back to the light post story. In our search for innovation policy, we have been looking in the usually places where there is light. In this case, in technology policy. But I will reiterated what I have said time and time and time again: technology is not the same as innovation. Business gets that. But government policy makers don't. Until we have a broader definition of innovation policy, we will continue to be like the drunk under the light post -- search for answers in all the wrong places.
This week is the annual OECD Ministerial meeting. The overall theme of the meeting is The Crisis and Beyond: For a stronger, cleaner, and fairer world economy. As part of the preparation, OECD has issued a new report: Policy Responses to the Economic Crisis: Investing in Innovation for Long-Term Growth. The report argues that the focus on innovation should increase during the economic crisis, stating that "[T]he crisis should not damage the drivers of long-term growth, but should instead be used as a springboard to accelerate structural shifts towards a stronger, fairer and cleaner economic future." In that vein, they recommend continued support for focused research and public-private partnerships, enacting policies to lower obstacles to entrepreneurship (including addressing the liquidity problems facing start ups and small firms), and continue investments in information technologies and in human capital. The report goes on to describe policies being taken by OECD countries.
Thanks to Intellectual Property Watch for point this out.
A much more pessimistic view comes from Mike Mandel's recent Business Week cover story The Failed Promise of Innovation in the US. His basic argument is that the innovations of the 1990's have failed to deliver - especially in biotech. I have to say that I find his arguments rather unconvincing. It seems like he desperately wanted all the high tech hype to be real. It wasn't. It couldn't have been. And it won't be in the future. But the failure of reality to live up to the hype does not mean that innovation has failed.
I was especially interested, however, in his comments on trade and innovation. He take the growing trade deficit as an indicator of a lack of innovation. I disagree. The real reasons for the growing trade deficit are many. But part of it was the innovation business model: invent it here, make it over there. That is a failure of trade policy, economic policy and innovation policy, not innovation per se.
Then there is the story in today's Wall street Journal In Search of Innovation. They use one of my favorite analogies: the dunk under the light post. "Why are you searching here under the light post when you lost your keys over there," asks the cop? "Because this is where the light is," answers the drunk. The authors point out that much of the search for "innovation" is where the current light is -- rather than where the innovations are. They offers a number of tips for how to broaden the search -- all of which generally fall under the rubric of open innovation.
One other thing I would point out is that there definition of innovation is a broad one -- encompassing new products, services and process. One of the most interesting example is this:
Doctors at the Great Ormond Street Hospital for Children in London, for example, consulted with members of a pit-stop crew from Italy's Ferrari Formula One motor-racing team to explore ways of improving how children were being moved out of heart surgery and into intensive care.In contrast, Mandel's complaint is about the failed promise of high-technology.
So let me go back to the light post story. In our search for innovation policy, we have been looking in the usually places where there is light. In this case, in technology policy. But I will reiterated what I have said time and time and time again: technology is not the same as innovation. Business gets that. But government policy makers don't. Until we have a broader definition of innovation policy, we will continue to be like the drunk under the light post -- search for answers in all the wrong places.
Leave a comment