Inclusive Regional Innovation Policy - A critical survey

1. Inclusive regional innovation policy A critical survey Neil Lee Department of Geography and Environment London School of Economics n.d.lee@lse.ac.uk @ndrlee

3. + +

4. Innovation and inclusive growth commission + + =

5. Innovation leads to inequality between places Cheshire - per capita R&D spending of Denmark, almost as rich as Sweden West Wales and the Valleys - per capita R&D spending of Greece, almost as rich as Malta

6. The literature on innovation and inequality • Innovation → job creation in cities and regions (measured as tech growth, R&D or patenting: Moretti, 2011; Florida, 2014; Lee and Rodriguez-Pose, 2015; Ciarli et al., 2018; Lee and Clarke, 2019; Kemeny and Osman, 2019) • But it also → inequality, with jobs often in low paid non tradeables and higher living costs (Lee and Rodríguez-Pose, 2013; Breau et al. 2014) • Innovative activities often exclude disadvantaged groups and places • Costs > beneﬁts for many people, often the least advantaged

7. The Inclusive Innovation Agenda • Governments invest signiﬁcant sums on innovation - Yet innovation is inherently disruptive - creating winners and losers • The social impact of innovation now forms part of most national innovation strategies (Stanley et al., 2019) • But the idea of Inclusive Innovation is rapidly becoming a new buzzword in local economic development • This presentation presents a critical survey of policy in this area

8. Growing interest in the idea of Inclusive Innovation Google Searches

9. Growing interest in the idea of Inclusive Innovation Scopus Searches

10. Relevant literatures • Inclusive growth - Synergies between growth and inclusion policy (Lupton and Hughes, 2018; Lee, 2019; Green et al., 2019) • Management studies - George et al.’s (2019) Handbook • Innovation studies - Distribution sensitive innovation policies (Zehavi & Breznitz, 2017) • Development studies - Inclusive Innovation in the global south (Heeks et al., 2014) Similar ‘buzzwords’ - “Base of the Pyramid innovation”, “below-the-radar innovation”, “grassroots innovation”, “innovation for inclusive growth” - and Responsible Research and Innovation (Fitjar et al, 2019)

11. What is inclusive innovation? George et al. (2012) “Innovation that beneﬁts the disenfranchised” OECD (2015) “Inclusive innovation projects are initiatives that directly serve the welfare of lower-income and excluded groups” NESTA (2019) “Inclusive innovation policies are directed towards ensuring that the beneﬁts and the risks of innovation are more equally shared. These policies will actively consider whose needs are met by innovation and how excluded social groups could be better served, focus on initiatives that promote broad participation in innovation, and take a democratic and participatory approach to priority-setting and the governance of innovation.”

12. Examples

13. Example

14. Pittsburgh’s agenda • Address the digital divide • Empower city to citizen engagement • Provide open data to Pittsburgh • Improve internal operations and capacity of the city • Advance the clean tech sector • Promote the local business environment

15. Pittsburgh’s agenda • Address the digital divide 👍 • Empower city to citizen engagement 👍 • Provide open data to Pittsburgh - sensible but is it inclusive?🤷 • Improve internal operations and capacity of the city 🤷 • Advance the clean tech sector 👍 • Promote the local business environment (Including: “Branding Pittsburgh an Inclusive Innovation city”🤔

16. A constructive critique

17. Problem 1: Fuzzy concepts

18. “fuzzy concepts” "researchers may believe they are addressing the same phenomena but may actually be targeting quite diﬀerent ones” Markusen (1999: 702)

19. What do we mean by ‘inclusive innovation’? 1. Inclusive innovations - e.g. Tata Nano 2. Inclusivity in who innovates - Address lack of diversity in tech 3. Inclusive decision making for innovation - Involve the disadvantaged in strategy 4. Innovation in Inclusive Sectors - Move from high-tech to foundational industries 5. Innovation for Inclusive Growth - Fund lagging regions → ‘trickle-down’ 6. Innovation in inclusion - Public service innovation for deprived groups 7. Inclusive innovation responses- Deal with the consequences of innovation

22. What do we mean by ‘inclusive innovation’? 1. Inclusive innovations - e.g. Tata Nano 2. Inclusivity in who innovates - Address lack of diversity in tech 3. Inclusive decision making for innovation - Involve the disadvantaged in strategy 4. Innovation in inclusive sectors - Move from high-tech to foundational industries 5. Innovation for Inclusive Growth - Fund lagging regions → ‘trickle-down’ 6. Innovation in inclusion - Public service innovation for deprived groups 7. Inclusive innovation responses- Deal with the consequences of innovation

23. What do we mean by ‘inclusive innovation’? 1. Inclusive innovations - e.g. Tata Nano 2. Inclusivity in who innovates - Address lack of diversity in tech 3. Inclusive decision making for innovation - Involve the disadvantaged in strategy 4. Innovation in inclusive sectors - Move from high-tech to foundational industries 5. Innovation for inclusive growth - Fund lagging regions → ‘trickle-down’ 6. Innovation in inclusion - Public service innovation for deprived groups 7. Inclusive innovation responses- Deal with the consequences of innovation

26. Does fuzziness matter? • Not if it allows different users to cohere around a shared goal - avoiding political difficulties • But fuzzy concepts have often been dropped • And fuzziness stops effective policy development

27. Problem 2: Solutionism • Technology provides ‘easy solution’ to complex social problems • Solutionism of new technology (Morozov, 2013) • Humanitarian Neophilia (Scott-Smith, 2015) • We can learn from failures in the development process: Expensive technology cannot be used by disadvantaged groups (e.g. 3D printers in Brazil, Woodson et al. 2019)

28. Problem 3: Scale • Innovation is global, but the impact is local • Transformative new technologies are highly unlikely to be produced in disadvantaged areas - but the beneﬁts will be felt there • Instead need → 1.Focus on diﬀusion of innovation to disadvantaged groups 2.Consideration of the consequences of innovation

29. Problem 4: Powers Cities and regions rarely have the powers to fully shape their economies Instead, big forces matter - the China shock and technological change Politicians promise unicorns, but deliver donkeys

30. The case for Inclusive Innovation • The problems faced by West Wales or Oxford are very different, so the response must be as well • Where this involves trade-offs we should accept it (we should value growth more in Wales than Oxford) • And some forms of Inclusive Innovation (e.g. diversity in STEM) are both ethically clear and will have a positive, significant impact on the economy - Finding Lost Einsteins

31. Inclusive Innovation Example policies The strategic choices about innovation Ensuring disadvantaged groups are represented in decision making R&D in foundational industries R&D investments in lagging regions Inclusive production of innovation Gender equality in STEM Equal access to entrepreneurship Better digital in schools “Downstream” activities of innovation Innovation diﬀusion Dealing with consequences Considering second order eﬀects

32. Conclusions • The ‘dark side’ of innovation should be central to any modern regional innovation policy • But we need to be careful: policy agendas which work for nations do not align with sub-national powers, policy frameworks are nascent, and there is a long history of solutionism and neophilia • “Inclusive innovation” can only go so far - inclusion will require old policy as well

33. Thank you