From Market Fixing to Market Creating

doi:10.1017/9781108529525.005

3 - From Market Fixing to Market Creating

A New Framework for Innovation Policy*

from Part I - Innovation Policy and Innovation Systems

Published online by Cambridge University Press: 10 August 2018

Mariana Mazzucato

Edited by

Jorge Niosi

Show author details

Jorge Niosi: Affiliation:
Université du Québec, Montréal

Book contents

Get access

Summary

Innovation agencies around the world are increasingly considering socio-economic-technological challenges that can be tackled through innovation policies (EC Innovation Union; OECD Innovation Strategy). The idea is that, through such challenges, which can relate to such issues as climate change, cancer, or the demographic-aging crisis, innovation policy should produce solutions for societal problems. The present chapter argues that such challenge-driven innovation policies require the traditional market failure justification for policy intervention, and even the system failure one, to be complemented with a more active market creating framework. To this end, the chapter draws on and advances an analysis of the role of public policy in the economy that can provide a more strategic and mission-oriented approach (Mazzucato 2018).

Type: Chapter
Information: Innovation Systems, Policy and Management , pp. 79 - 103

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108529525.005 [Opens in a new window]

Publisher: Cambridge University Press

Print publication year: 2018

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Book purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Abbate, J. 1999. Inventing the Internet. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar

Abraham, J. 2010. Pharmaceuticalization of society in context: Theoretical, empirical and health dimensions. Sociology 44(4): 603–622.Google Scholar

Amsden, A. H. 2001. The Rise of “the Rest”: Challenges to the West from Late-Industrializing Economies. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Angell, M. 2005. The truth about the drug companies: How they deceive us and what to do about it. New York: Random House.Google Scholar

Arrow, K. 1951. An Extension of the Basic Theorems of Classical Welfare Economics. Chapter presented at the Second Berkeley Symposium on Mathematical Statistics and Probability, Berkeley, CA.Google Scholar

Block, F. L. 2008. Swimming against the current: The rise of a hidden developmental state in the United States. Politics and Society 36(2, June): 169–206.Google Scholar

Block, F. L. and Keller, M. R.. 2011. State of Innovation: The U.S. Government’s Role in Technology Development. Boulder, CO: Paradigm Publishers.Google Scholar

Brown, R. 2016. “Mission impossible? Entrepreneurial universities in peripheral regional innovative systems.” Industry and Innovation 23(2).Google Scholar

Buchanan, J. M. 2003. Public choice: The origins and development of a research program. Champions of Freedom 31: 13–32.Google Scholar

Chataway, J., Brusoni, S., Cacciatori, E., Hanlin, R., and Orsenigo, L.. 2007. The international AIDS vaccine initiative (IAVI) in a changing landscape of vaccine development: A public/private partnership as knowledge broker and integrator. The European Journal of Development Research 19(1): 100–117.Google Scholar

Cohen, W. M. and Levinthal, D. A.. 1990. Absorptive capacity: A new perspective on learning and innovation. Administrative Science Quarterly 35(1): 128–152.CrossRef Google Scholar

Crouch, C. 2016. The paradoxes of privatization and public-service outsourcing, in Rethinking Capitalism, ed. Jacobs, M. and Mazzucato, M.. Wiley Press.Google Scholar

Dosi, G. 1982. Technological paradigms and technological trajectories: A suggested interpretation of the determinants and directions of technical change. Research Policy 11(3): 147–162.Google Scholar

Dosi, G. and Lovallo, D. 1998. Rational entrepreneurs or optimistic martyrs? Some considerations on technological regimes, corporate entries, and the evolutionary role of decision biases, in Foresights and Oversights in Technological Change, ed. Garud, R., Nayyar, P., and Shapiro, Z., 41–68. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Dosi, G. and Nelson, R. R.. 1994. An introduction to evolutionary theories in economics. Journal of Evolutionary Economics 4(3): 153–172.Google Scholar

Engel, D., Rothgang, M., and Eckl, V.. 2016. Systemic aspects of R&D policy subsidies for R&D collaborations and their effects on private R&D. Industry and Innovation 23(2).Google Scholar

Evans, P. 1995. Embedded Autonomy: States and Industrial Transformation (First edition). Princeton, N.J: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar

Flanagan, K. and Uyarra, E.. 2016. Four dangers in innovation policy studies – and how to avoid them. Industry and Innovation 23(2).Google Scholar

Foray, D., David, P. A., and Hall, B.. 2009. Smart specialization: The concept, in Knowledge for Growth. Prospects for Science, Technology and Innovation. Selected chapters from Research Commissioner Janez Potočnik’s Expert Group, 20.Google Scholar

Foray, D., Mowery, D., and Nelson, R. R.. 2012. Public R&D and social challenges: What lessons from mission R&D programs? Research Policy 41(10): 1697–1902.CrossRef Google Scholar

Freeman, C. 1995. The “National System of Innovation” in historical perspective. Cambridge Journal of Economics 19(1): 5–24.Google Scholar

Freeman, C. and Soete, L.. 1997 [1974]. The Economics of Industrial Innovation (3rd edn.). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar

Hirschman, A. O. 1967. Development Projects Observed. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.Google Scholar

Kakabadse, A. and Kakabadse, N.. 2002. Trends in outsourcing: Contrasting USA and Europe. European Management Journal 20(2): 189–198.Google Scholar

Keller, M. R. and Block, F.. 2013. Explaining the transformation in the US innovation system: the impact of a small government program. Socio-Economic Review 11(4): 629–656.Google Scholar

Lazonick, W. and Tulum, O.. 2011. US biopharmaceutical finance and the sustainability of the biotech business model. Research Policy 40(9): 1170–1187.Google Scholar

Lundvall, B. A. 1992. National Innovation System: Towards a Theory of Innovation and Interactive Learning. Pinter: London.Google Scholar

Martin, B. R. 2016. R&D policy instruments – a critical review of what we do and don’t know. Industry and Innovation 23(2).Google Scholar

Mazzucato, M. 2013a. The Entrepreneurial State: Debunking the Public vs. Private Myth in Risk and Innovation. London: Anthem Press.Google Scholar

Mazzucato, M. 2013b. Financing innovation: Creative destruction vs. destructive creation. Industrial and Corporate Change 22(4): 851–867.Google Scholar

Mazzucato, M. 2013c. Debunking the market mechanism: a response to John Kay. Political Quarterly 84(4): 444–447.Google Scholar

Mazzucato, M. and Perez, C. 2015a. “Innovation as growth policy,” in The Triple Challenge: Europe in a New Age. Fagerberg, J., Laestadius, S., and Martin, B. (eds.), Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Mazzucato, M. 2015b. Innovation systems: From fixing market failures to creating markets. Intereconomics 50(3): 120–125.Google Scholar

Mazzucato, M. 2016a. From market fixing to market-creating: A new framework for innovation policy. Special Issue of Industry and Innovation: “Innovation policy – can it make a difference?” 23(2).Google Scholar

Mazzucato, M. 2016b. Innovation, the state and patient capital, in Rethinking Capitalism Economics and Policy for Sustainable and Inclusive Growth, chapter 6, ed. Jacobs, M. and Mazzucato, M.. London: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar

Mazzucato, M. and Penna, C. C. R.. 2014. Beyond market failures: State investment banks and the “mission-oriented” finance for innovation. SPRU Working paper Series 21.Google Scholar

Mazzucato, M. and Perez, C.. 2014. Innovation as growth policy. SPRU Working Paper Series 13.Google Scholar

Mazzucato, M. and Wray, R.. 2015. Financing the capital development of the economy: A Keynes-Schumpeter-Minsky synthesis.” Levy Institute Working Paper No. 837.Google Scholar

Mazzucato, M. 2018. Mission oriented research and innovation in the EU: A problem solving approach to fuel innovation-led growth, ISBN 978-92-79-79918-1 https://publications.europa.eu/en/publication-detail/-/publication/5b2811d1-16be-11e8-9253-01aa75ed71a1/language-en (accessed 1/4/2018)Google Scholar

Motoyama, Y., Appelbaum, R., and Parker, R.. 2011. The national nanotechnology initiative: Federal support for science and technology, or hidden industrial policy? Technology in Society 33(1–2): 109–118.Google Scholar

Mowery, D. C., Nelson, R. R., and Martin, B. R.. 2010. Technology policy and global warming: Why new policy models are needed (or why putting new wine in old bottles won’t work). Research Policy 39(8): 1011–1023.Google Scholar

Nelson, R. R. and Winter, S. G.. 1982. An Evolutionary Theory of Economic Change. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press.Google Scholar

O’Riain, S. 2004. The Politics of High Tech Growth: Developmental Network States in the Global Economy. Boston, MA: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Perez, C. 2002. Technological Revolutions and Financial Capital: The Dynamics of Bubbles and Golden Ages. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar

Polanyi, K. 2001 [1944]. The Great Transformation: The Political and Economic Origins of Our Time (2nd Chapterback, Beacon edn.). Boston, MA: Beacon Press.Google Scholar

Reinert, E. S. 2007. How Rich Countries Got Rich and Why Poor Countries Stay Poor. London: Constable.Google Scholar

Rodrik, D. 2004. Industrial policy for the twenty-first century. John F. Kennedy School of Government Working Paper Series rwp04–047.CrossRef Google Scholar

Rodrik, D. 2013. Green industrial policy. Princeton University Working Paper.Google Scholar

Rodrik, D. 2015. From welfare state to innovation state, Project Syndicate www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/labor-saving-technology-by-dani-rodrik-2015–01 (accessed March 3, 2015).Google Scholar

Rosenberg, N. 1982. Inside the Black Box: Technology and Economics. Boston, MA: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Ruttan, V. W. 2006. Is War Necessary for Economic Growth? Military Procurement and Technology Development. University of Minnesota: Department of Applied Economics.Google Scholar

Soete, L. and Arundel, A.. 1993. An Integrated Approach to European Innovation and Technology Diffusion Policy: A Maastricht Memorandum. Luxembourg: Commission of the European Communities, SPRINT Programme.Google Scholar

Stern, N. H. 2006. The Economics of Climate Change (Stern Review). HM Treasury.Google Scholar

Stirling, A. 2008. “Opening up” and “closing down” power, participation, and pluralism in the social appraisal of technology. Science, Technology & Human Values 33(2): 262–294.Google Scholar

Stirling, A. 2014. Making choices in the face of uncertainty. Themed Annual Report of the Government Chief Scientific Adviser, Chapter 2 (June). Draft mimeo.Google Scholar

Verspagen, B. 2006. Innovation and economic growth, in The Oxford Handbook of Innovation, ed. Fagerberg, J., Mowery, D. C., and Nelson, R. R., 487–513. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Vivarelli, M. 2013a. Is entrepreneurship necessarily good? Microeconomic evidence from developing and developed countries. Industrial and Corporate Change 22(6): 1453–1495.Google Scholar

Wade, R. 1990. Governing the Market: Economic Theory and the Role of Government in East Asian Industrialization. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar

Witt, U. 2003. Economic policy making in evolutionary perspective. Journal of Evolutionary Economics 13(2): 77–94.Google Scholar

Wood, R. 2012. Fallen Solyndra won bankruptcy battle but faces tax war. Forbes, June 11. (www.forbes.com/sites/robertwood/2012/11/06/fallen-solyndra-won-bankruptcy-battle-but-faces-tax-war/) (accessed June 29, 2014).Google Scholar