Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
Esteve almirall esade business school   innovation policy -
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.

×
Saving this for later? Get the SlideShare app to save on your phone or tablet. Read anywhere, anytime – even offline.
Text the download link to your phone
Standard text messaging rates apply

Esteve almirall esade business school innovation policy -

169

Published on

Presentation by Esteve Almirall, Esade Business School, on how policy can support digital social innovation (DSI). Presented at February 3rd 2014 DSI workshop in Brussels.

Presentation by Esteve Almirall, Esade Business School, on how policy can support digital social innovation (DSI). Presented at February 3rd 2014 DSI workshop in Brussels.

0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
169
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
1
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
5
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

Report content
Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
No notes for slide

Transcript

  • 1. Digital Social Innovation - Policy Mila Gasco Esteve Almirall ESADE  Business  School   mila.gasco@esade.edu esteve.almirall@esade,edu
  • 2. the need for innovation
  • 3. innovation frameworks
  • 4. Innovation Policy Frameworks 50’s and 60’s Innovation Policy based on the provision of Research and Knowledge National Science Foundation, National Laboratories, DARPA, National Institute of Health (NIH), etc. Vannevar Bush
  • 5. Innovation Policy Frameworks 50’s and 60’s Main factors of change §  The entrance of the industry in basic research. §  Growing importance of academic institutions. §  Success of academic institutions promoting entrepreneurship.
  • 6. Innovation Policy Frameworks 90’s Systems of Innovation Key Idea: Innovation as a result from a complex set of interrelationships between different actors: companies, universities, research institutes, .. Lundval, Freeman, Edquist, ...
  • 7. Innovation Policy Frameworks Systems of Innovation 90’s Main factors of change §  Large stock and availability of knowledge. §  Increased connectivity. §  Good access to financing. §  Highly educated and mobile workforce. §  Need of innovation for competing. §  The experimentation economy.
  • 8. Innovation Policy Frameworks Open Innovation Key Idea: Internal and external knowledge should be at the same level. §  §  §  §  Outside-in movement. Inside-out movement. Coupled. The Importance of the Business Model. Chesbrough, Wim Vanhaverbeke, West, Gassman, ...
  • 9. the need for intervention
  • 10. The need for Intervention a)  Spillovers as an argument for policy legitimation Key idea: Social benefits of Innovation exceed the benefits of individual actors (Gustafson and Autio, 2006) Types of Spillovers (Jaffe, 1996;Griliches, 1992) Knowledge Spillovers. Knowledge developed by one actor becomes available to others, e.g. workforce mobility, publications, informal contacts, . . . Network Spillovers. Technologies developed in separated contexts that are complementary, e.g. hardware and software, . . . Rental Spillovers. Unability of companies to fully appropriate the benefits of Innovation.
  • 11. The need for Intervention b)  Market Failures Key idea: Markets result in suboptimal outcomes (Arrow, 1962; Nelson, 1959) Innovation Market failures (Gustafsson and Autio, 2006; Chaminade and Edquist, 2006) Lack of appropriability. Innovators many times lament that competitors profit more from their innovations (Teece, 1986). Uncertainty. Companies, specially small ones, are reluctant to invest, even if the expected value is positive, because the outcome is uncertain.
  • 12. The need for Intervention b)  Market Failures Key idea: Markets result in suboptimal outcomes (Arrow, 1962; Nelson, 1959) Indivisibility. A very step minimum scale of both knowledge and capital. Asymmetric Information. Companies find sometimes difficult to persuade investors and/or recruit staff. Policies. Subsidizing R&D, promoting basic research at universities, creating and protecting intellectual property rights, . . .
  • 13. The need for Intervention c)  System Failures Innovation System: All important economic, social, political, organizational, institutional and other factors that influence the development, diffusion and use of innovations (Edquist, 1997) Key idea: Identification and removal of bottlenecks that can hinder the system is of primary importance.
  • 14. The need for Intervention c)  System Failures System Failures (O’Doherty and Arnold, 2003; Gustafon and Autio, 2006) Capability failures. Underdeveloped parts: venture capital, research organizations, etc. Network failures. Support for interorganizational collaboration, risky and prone to failure, limiting inter-organizational learning and preventing innovation.
  • 15. The need for Intervention c)  System Failures System Failures (O’Doherty and Arnold, 2003; Gustafon and Autio, 2006) Institutional failures. Institutions such as patent laws or norms, influence the relation between universities, research centers and companies. Inability to (re)-configure needed institutions. Framework failures. Referring to both the regulatory framework and social conditions such as culture, sophisticated consumer demand and so on. Policies. Incubators, Collaborative Programs, Support for Research Organizations, etc.
  • 16. The need for Intervention 1)  2)  3)  4)  Spillovers Market Failures System Failures Ecosystem Failures
  • 17. 2003 - 2014
  • 18. 2003
  • 19. 2003 dyadic relationships company to company 2014 multiple relationships ecosystems
  • 20. 2003 own the innovation 2014 Innovation of others
  • 21. 2003 buy & license 2014 foster & enable
  • 22. 2003 IP 2014 governance business models
  • 23. 2003 Intermediaries for search 2014 Intermediaries for enabling processes and maintaining communities
  • 24. 2003 2014 incubators accelerators
  • 25. 2003 Competing with your own products and services 2014 Competing with the ecosystem
  • 26. Platform Service - govs. - orchestrators Providers resources to regulate (zero-sum game) resources to leverage on (non zero-sum game)
  • 27. Platform Service - govs. - orchestrators Providers developed in-house always fall short high-cost no sharing local offer fragmented co-developed with users, communities free and not-free empowering entrepreneurship driven by innovation stimulating growth
  • 28. innovation policy
  • 29. innovation policy 1)  More targeted 2)  With more specific objectives 3)  Tapping into behavioral mechanisms 4)  Applied to non-linear systems 5)  In complex environments 6)  New affordabilities because of IT 7)  Poorly evaluated
  • 30. e-i r nt ve n innovation policy 1)  Co-created using with distant agents 2)  Experimental 3)  Higher level of abstraction depending on the capabilities of the agents.
  • 31. Open Data - success story ?? -
  • 32. 1)  > 385.000 data sets (2011) 2)  > 200 organizations including federal agencies, sub-agencies and PPP 3)  > 50 Open Data challenges with prices going from $30 to $15,000,000
  • 33. … however … > 4M downloads since 2009 1)  out of the 137 apps for android only 24% have more than 10K downloads 2)  no app ranked in top 100 3)  Open Data downloads declining since 2011
  • 34. … example … Dept of Energy Challenge Leafully (leafully.com) allows citizens to analyze their own energy behavior First prize $100,000 A year later only a few thousands users out of the 34M potential users
  • 35. DSI - Analysis
  • 36. DSI WORK BY THE EU Policy perspective •  •  •  •  •  •  •  •  •  The Renewed Social Agenda The Integrated Lisbon Guidelines for Growth and Jobs The Strategic Guidelines and Regulations on Cohesion Policy The second pillar of the Common Agricultural Policy The Sustainable Development Strategy for an Enlarged EU The 2020 Vision for the European Research Area The Innovation Union A European Information Society for Growth and Employment The Digital Agenda 39  
  • 37. DSI WORK BY THE EU Main programs and supporting schemes The European Regional Development Fund The European Social Fund Open Method of Coordination The European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development The Framework Programmes for Research and Technological Development •  The Lifelong Learning Programme and other educational and cultural programmes •  The Competitiveness and Innovation Framework Programme •  •  •  •  •  40  
  • 38. DSI WORK BY THE EU Tools •  Knowledge sharing and dissemination •  Participative processes for stakeholders in the preparation and implementation of policies •  Policy coordination and capacity building •  Supporting studies, research and evidence of good practice for policy planning and policy development and for advancing knowledge on social innovation •  Support of social experiments •  Support of social entrepreneurs and enterprises •  Infrastructure and enabling factors 41  
  • 39. DSI Ecosystem Communities Open   hardware  and   open  source   Developers   Smart  ci<zen/Civic   Society   Open  government   Innova<on  labs   Open/big  data   42  
  • 40. MACRO LEVEL ANALYSIS Communities Focal actors Enablers Governance Failures Open hardware and open source Firms supporting Open Source Activists Open Source platforms(giithub) Communities Peer governance. Use of technological platforms. High entry barriers (technological skills). Lack of conflict-resolution mech. Tension bt hierarchy and equality Developers Developers/ entrepreneurs Tech events Accelerators / Incubators VCs Tech blogs & magazines Decentralized. Micro governance High entry barriers (technological skills). Lack of interconnection between developers Lack of visibility Difficulties in value capture Innovation labs Innovation labs themselves Networks (ENoLL) Networked. Formal enabling/servicing structures Lack of interconnection between different types of labs. Cost of being a network member. Open/big data (Local) governments Competition organizers Networks of developers O.D. accelerators O.D. evangelists Top down (govs decide what, when and how to open) Lack of standardization Lack of reuse Little sharing of good practices Lack of visibility of datasets Apps’ discovery problem Internal conflicts in govs Smart citizen/ Civic Society Local govs Intermediary org providing structure. Project based. Use of social media platforms Lack of interconnection between citizens and between initiatives. Lack of awareness. Lack of skills Open democracy Political activists Organizations. Evangelists. Blogs. Distributed. Use of social media platforms Lack of interconnection among groups. 43  
  • 41. MICRO LEVEL ANALYSIS Communi'es   Instruments   Mo'va'ons   Incen'ves   Open  hardware  and  open   source   Gov  contracts  and  procurement     Crea<ng  fast  growing  plaGorms   (companies).   Reducing  cost  (companies).   Value  capture  (companies)   Reputa<on/skills/signaling  (dev)   Scalability.   Less  cost.   Increase  of  profit.   Contracts  /  Employability.     Developers   Seed  funding.   Organiza<on  of  events,     Support  to  entrepreneurs   Incubators  and  accelerators   Building  a  company   Developing  new  products  /   services   Solving  ini<al  support  problems.   Exposure  and  capital.     Innova<on  labs   Public  funding  (ini<al  and  projects).     Fostering  growth.   Bridging  the  digital  gap.   Crea<ng  innova<ve  socie<es.   Providing  support  to  networks   and  civil  society.   Extrinsic  monetary.   Opportuni<es  for  learning  and   networking.   Visibility  and  reputa<on.   Open/big  data   Organiza<on  of  compe<<ons.   Support  for  networking.   Knowledge  sharing  and  dissemina<on.   New  services  (apps).   Poli<cal  incen<ves  (Ci<es).   Reputa<on/learning  (developers).   Value  capture  (apps).   Percep<on  of  transparent  (ci<es)   Services  with  less/no  cost.   Contracts  /  hiring  (developers)   Gains(developers)   Smart  ci<zen  /Civic   Society   Projects.   PlaGorms.   Direct  public  funding.   Intrinsic  &  personal  fulfillment.   Reputa<on.     Personal  sa<sfac<on.   Increase  in  visibility  &  reputa<on.   Open  democracy   Legisla<on  –  transparency  ini<a<ves.   Par<cipa<on  projects.     Increase  in  democracy  (govs).   Reputa<on  (govs).   Intrinsic  mo<va<ons  (ci<zens).   BeZer  electoral  results  (gov).   Personal  fulfillment  (ci<zens).   Development  of  projects   (ci<zens).     44  
  • 42. esteve almirall esteve.almirall@esade.edu

×