Integration of Trend Monitoring into STI Policy
Monitoring trends is a key requirement for national and corporate policy makers to stay up-to-date with socio-economic and technological transformations, to anticipate emerging developments at the global and local levels, and to use this intelligence to prioritize areas for innovation and investment. This chapter aims at discussing how the results of trend monitoring can be integrated into the process of Science, Technology and Innovation policy formulation and business Research & Development planning processes. The chapter starts with an overview of the relevant innovation literature that gives a background in a broader theoretical context, where the technology monitoring activities can be better justified conceptually. This background provides to generate two models, which will portray positioning and functioning of Global Trend Monitoring in the policy and business planning process. Some practical aspects of how and in what form the results of Global Trend Monitoring should be provided to the target communities of policy makers and business planners are elaborated throughout the chapter.
The technology of the comparative analysis of innovation systems of the subjects of the Russian Federation is proposed. The technology is based on usage of non-parametric approaches to metric multidimentional scaling. General technology is illustrated by econometric comparison of the sunjects of the Russian Federation in the direction of "Technological innovations" using data from official statistics.
Science, technology and innovation (STI) involves numerous policy fields which are championed by different government ministries or agencies. A consistent and coherent anticipatory policy mix is understood to be one that ensures a timely development and implementation of various forward-looking policy instruments. Such timely implementation is crucial for the eventual impact of the policy measures. This also requires that foresight for STI policies looks beyond the potential development paths and challenges but includes the time dimension and the outline of necessary policy responses including a relevant implementation framework. In addition the institutions which are part of the National Innovation Systems (NIS) should to be considered thoroughly for a well-balanced and comprehensive policy mix. Not only national but also regional and local actors need to be involved—and they need to be involved not only in the implementation of policy but at much earlier stages in the foresight and subsequent design procedures of the policy mix. One practical approach for convincing and engaging NIS actors at different levels is to stress opportunities which offer advantages to each of them, instead of just focusing on challenges and problems.
Nowadays, the formation and development of an asset management system of "Russian Grids" is one of the key processes and priorities of the company, covering all levels of strategy. On the one hand, the relevance of finding an optimal asset management strategy is caused by a necessity to synchronize the strategies of different business levels with the company’s strategy and to transmit the relationships between the strategies into the key performance indicators of business processes. On the other hand, all the subsidiaries of "Russian Grids" are at different levels of development, and the same goals could not be achieved by all companies at the same time. This article considers one of the possible approaches to searching an optimal asset management strategy for subsidiaries under the general direction of unified asset management strategy development and the corporate strategy. The asset management strategy choice depends on the level of its maturity and efficiency of the company with condition of necessity to synchronize the strategies of different business levels and to decompose relationships between these strategies through corresponding key performance indicators.
In recent years, links between spatial proximity, and firms’ formal and informal contacts have become a sufficient subject for research in the field of innovation, competitiveness and sustainable economic growth. We introduce a model for the quantitative evaluation of the relationship between cluster participation and innovation capabilities, as well with a company’s growth in value. The paper focuses on comparison in mutual effects for companies from transitional and developed economies. We use a sample of 284 traded European companies between 2005 and 2009 which were carefully applied and subjected to panel data analysis techniques. Our empirical findings show the positive mutual effects on innovation capabilities measured as intangible assets and companies’ economic value added for both transitional and developed economies. Hereby these links are stronger in developed countries. Moreover, we identify the complementary factors to clustering, such as industry-level public R&D expenses, country innovation infrastructure development and location in a megalopolis.
This paper reviews the most central analytical and methodological issues that arise in developing national STI strategies. First, an outline of the relationship between national innovation systems and the strategic dimension is presented. The paper shows that science, technology and innovation strategy are often used in different forms and that there is no common understanding yet of the actual meaning and coverage of these strategies. The paper develops the terminology from a discussion of different approaches towards company innovation processes analyzing their evolution in different socioeconomic environments and the role and impact of science, technology and innovation policy on company innovation processes. Based on this conceptual understanding the paper defines national science, technology, innovation, and STI strategy and explains the basic terminology. From these definitions, the strategic dimension including the impact on the stakeholders is discussed. It is shown that a major success factor for STI strategy development is the involvement of stakeholders to vary and extend their use of their portfolio of instruments. Moreover it becomes evident that stakeholders follow their own interests which aren’t necessarily in the interest of the national STI strategies. The analysis shows advantages and disadvantages as well as potentials and limitations of different approaches to develop STI strategies in their ability to describe the reality of innovation processes and to allow conclusions about the relationship between innovation policy and the innovation processes implemented by companies. It is shown that knowledge of these limitations is an important factor to consider in designing consistent and coherent national STI policy which aims at supporting innovation eventually. Finally the paper concludes that the STI policy mix concept needs a more systemic development approach which is integrated in the national STI strategy development and implementation.
The book gives practical guidance for policy makers, analysts and researchers on how to make the most of the potential of Foresight studies. Based on the concept of evidence-based policy-making, Foresight studies are common practice in many countries and are commonly understood as a supportive tool in designing future-oriented strategies. The book outlines approaches and experiences of integrating such Foresight studies in the making and implementation of science, technology and innovation (STI) policies at different national levels. It delivers insights into practical approaches of developing STI policy measures oriented towards future societal and technological challenges based on evidence drawn from comparable policy measures worldwide. Authors from leading academic institutions, international organizations and national governments provide a sound theoretical foundation and framework as well as checklists and guidelines for leveraging the potential impact of STI policies.
Foresight has gained much attention as a tool for developing and informing science, technology and innovation policy and company strategies. It is frequently used for detecting not only potential development paths of technologies but also possible economic and societal changes; and for identifying challenges that nations, societies and companies might face in the future. Raising awareness within the respective communities of trends and challenges is critically important—and the biggest challenge is how we can develop measures to meet these anticipated challenges. Paradoxically, perhaps, it may be more helpful for creating and implementing successful measures if these are elaborated by thinking about grasping opportunities, rather than framing them in terms of threats that have to be responded to. Accordingly there is a need to change the mindsets in science, technology and innovation policy making—and to engender solution and opportunity orientation among scientists and engineers.