دسته‌بندی ابزارهای سیاست نوآوری تقاضامحور با استفاده از رویکرد فراترکیب

نوع مقاله: مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 پژوهشکده مطالعات فناوری ریاست جمهوری دانشکده مدیریت دانشگاه تهران

2 عضو هیات علمی دانشکده مدیریت، دانشگاه تهران.

3 پژوهشکده مطالعات فناوری

چکیده

سیاست نوآوری تقاضامحور مجموعه‌ای از اقدامات عمومی برای افزایش تقاضای نوآوری، بهبود شرایط ادراک نوآوری یا بهبود بیان تقاضا به منظور ترغیب و انتشار نوآوری می‌باشد. این مقاله با بهره‌گیری از روش فراترکیب به دنبال ارائه دسته‌بندی جدیدی از ابزارهای سیاستی معرفی‌شده در مطالعات این حوزه می‌باشد. به‌این‌منظور بر اساس روش فراترکیب 252 مقاله و کتاب شناسایی شده از پایگاه‌های رسمی مقالات معتبر مورد بررسی قرار گرفته و پس از طی مراحل لازم 105 مقاله و کتاب مورد تحلیل نهایی قرار گرفته. تجزیه‌وتحلیل مقالات و نتایج روش فراترکیب نشان داد که ابزارهای تحریک طرف تقاضای نوآوری را می‌توان در قالب سه زمینه اصلی دسته‌بندی نمود که عبارتند از سیاست‌های محرک تقاضای دستگاه‌های دولتی(B2G)، سیاست‌های محرک تقاضای مصرف‌کنندگان نهایی(B2C) و سیاست‌های محرک تقاضای کسب‌وکارهای بزرگ‌تر (b2B). تحلیل انجام شده بیانگر این است که در دسته سوم از ابزارهای مذکور محققان مطالعات کمتری داشته‌اند و ابزارهای صریح و عملیاتی ارائه نشده و  خلاء پژوهشی در این دسته به چشم می‌آید که نیازمند پژوهش‌های بیشتر است.

کلیدواژه‌ها

موضوعات


عنوان مقاله [English]

Classification of Demand-based Innovation Policy Tools Using Meta-synthesis Approach

نویسندگان [English]

  • Mostafa Mohseni Kiasari 1
  • Mehdi Mohammadi 2
  • Ahmad Jafarnejad 2
  • Nima Garousi Mokhtarzadeh 2
  • Reza Asadifard 3
1 Faculty Of Management, University of Tehran
2 Faculty member of Management, University of Tehran
3 Technology Studies Institute
چکیده [English]

Demand-driven innovation policy is a relatively new field of study in the science and technology policy that researchers have less attention but has been a growing issue recently. Demand-driven innovation policy is a set of public measures to boost demand for innovation, improvement of the conditions for perception of innovation or improvement of demand articulation in order to encourage and disseminate innovation. This paper seeks to provide a new classification of policy tools introduced in the related studies by using of meta-synthesis method. So, 252 articles have been found from official academic sites and have been investigated according to meta-synthesis method which 105 articles have been selected to be analysed. Analyses of articles and the meta-synthesis results indicate that the innovation demand-side stimulation tools can be categorized in three main categories from the perspective that which applicant is concerned. These three categories are: policies that stimulate the government demand (B2G), policies that stimulate the private demand (B2C), and policies that stimulate the large businesses demand (B2B). The analysis of this study shows that in the first category, the quantity of the articles and introduced tools is relatively very high. Also in the third category fewer studies have been carried out in which practical and detailed tools have not been presented. So there is a research gap in third category that needs to be investigated more by researchers.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Demand-driven innovation policy
  • Policy Tools
  • MetaSynthesis

Aschhoff, B. and Sofka, W. 2009. Innovation on demand-Can public procurement drive market success of innovations? Research Policy, 38(8), pp. 1235-1247.

Baindur, S. 2005. A demand-oriented stimulus program for university science commercialization. Ottaw a  Policy  Research  Associates.

Barroso, J. et al. 2003. The Challenges of Searching for and Retrieving Qualitative Studies. Western Journal of Nursing Research, 25(2), pp. 153-178.

Bench, S. and Day, T. 2010. The user experience of critical care discharge: A meta-synthesis of qualitative research. International Journal of Nursing Studies, 47(4), pp. 487-499.

Bilgram, V., Brem, A. and Voigt, K.-i. 2008. User-centric Innovations in New Product Development — Systematic Identification of Lead Users Harnessing Interactive and Collaborative Online-tools. International Journal of Innovation Management, 12(03), pp. 419-458.

Blind, K. 2004. New Products and Services:Analysis of Regulations Shaping New Markets. ReportKarlsruhe: European Commission.

Bogliacino, F.a.P., Mario 2009. Innovation performance in Europe: a long term perspective?, INNOMETRICS.

Boon, W.P.C., Moors, E.H.M., Kuhlmann, S. and Smits, R.E.H.M. 2011. Demand articulation in emerging technologies: Intermediary user organisations as co-producers? Research Policy, 40(2), pp. 242-252.

Borrás, S. and Edquist, C. 2013. The choice of innovation policy instruments. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 80(8), pp. 1513-1522.

Bottazzi, L., Da Rin, M. and Hellmann, T. 2003. The changing face of the European venture capital industry: Facts and analysis: Survey of European Venture Capital (SEVeCa).

Caiazza, R. 2016. A cross-national analysis of policies affecting innovation diffusion. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 41(6), pp. 1406-1419.

Cantner, U., Graf, H., Herrmann, J. and Kalthaus, M. 2016. Inventor networks in renewable energies: The influence of the policy mix in Germany. Research Policy, 45(6), pp. 1165-1184.

Cardullo, M.W. and Sage, A.P. 2004. Information, knowledge and systems management approaches for a new global reserve currency. Information, Knowledge, Systems Management, 10(1), pp. 427-444.

Caselli, S., Stefano, G. and Perrini, F. 2009. Are Venture Capitalists a Catalyst for Innovation? European Financial Management, 15(1), pp. 92-111.

Christensen, J.L. 2008. The IPR System, Venture Capital and Capital Markets-Contributions and Distortions of Small Firm Innovation? . Aalborg University, DRUID Copenhagen Business School, Department of Industrial Economics and Strategy.

Cohen, B. and Amorós, J.E. 2014. Municipal demand-side policy tools and the strategic management of technology life cycles. Technovation, 34(12), pp. 797-806.

Cunningham, P. and Ramlogan, R. 2012. Compendium of Evidence on the Effectiveness of Innovation Policy Intervention: Innovation Networks. London and Manchester, NESTA and Manchester Institute of Innovation Research.

Edler, J. 2007. Demand-based Innovation Policy. Manchester Business School Working Paper.

Edler, J. 2009. Demand Policies for Innovation in EU CEE Countries. Manchester Business School Working Paper Research Paper No.579.

Edler, J. 2010. Demand Oriented Innovation Policy. In R. K. Smits, S.; Shapira, P. ed. The Theory and Practice of Innovation Policy An International Research Handbook. Cheltenham, Edward Elgar,.

Edler, J. 2011. Innovation in EU CEE – what role for demand based policy? In A. Kaderabkova and S. Radosevic eds. Challenges of innovation policy on European Periphery: A Schumpeterian Perspective. Cheltenham, Edward Elgar.

Edler, J., Cameron, H. and Hajhashem, M. 2015. The intersection of intellectual property rights and innovation policy making - a literature review. World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO).

Edler, J. and Georghiou, L. 2007. Public procurement and innovation—Resurrecting the demand side. Research Policy, 36(7), pp. 949-963.

Edler, J., Georghiou, L., Blind, K. and Uyarra, E. 2012. Evaluating the demand side: New challenges for evaluation. Research Evaluation, 21(1), pp.33-47.

Edler, J. and Yeow, J. 2016. Connecting demand and supply: The role of intermediation in public procurement of innovation. Research Policy, 45(2), pp. 414-426.

Edquist, C. 2009. Public Procurement for Innovation (PPI) – a Pilot Study. Lund University, CIRCLE - Center for Innovation, Research and Competences in the Learning Economy.

Edquist, C. and Hommen, L. 1999. Systems of innovation: theory and policy for the demand side. Technology in Society, 21(1), pp. 63-79.

Edquist, C., Hommen, L. and Tsipouri, L. 2000. Public Technology Procurement and Innovation. New York: Springer US.

Edquist, C. and Zabala-Iturriagagoitia, J.M. 2012. Public Procurement for Innovation as mission-oriented innovation policy. Research Policy, 41(10), pp. 1757-1769.

Edquist, C. and Zabala-Iturriagagoitia, J.M. 2015. Pre-commercial procurement: a demand or supply policy instrument in relation to innovation? R&D Management, 45(2), pp. 147-160.

Edquist, C., Zabala, J.M. and Timmermans, B. 2012. A Conceptual Framework for Analyzying the Relations between Demand and Public Innovative Procurement and between Knowledge Intensive Entrepreneurship and Innovation. Lund University, CIRCLE.

Elder, J. 2013. Review of Policy Measures to Stimulate Private Demand for Innovation. Concepts and Effects. Nesta Working Paper No. 13/13.

EuropeanCommission 2006. Creating an Innovative Europe. Report of the Independent Expert Group.

Frenkel, A., Maital, S., Leck, E. and Israel, E. 2015. Demand-Driven Innovation: An Integrative Systems-Based Review of the Literature. International Journal of Innovation and Technology Management,12(02).

Galbraith, B. and McAdam, R. 2013. The convergence of ICT, policy, intermediaries and society for technology transfer: evidence from European innovation projects. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management 25(3), pp. 249-252.

Georghiou, L., Edler, J., Uyarra, E. and Yeow, J. 2013. Policy instruments for public procurement of innovation: Choice, design and assessment. Technological Forecasting & Social Change.

Hannon, M.J., Foxon, T.J. and Gale, W.F. 2015. ‘Demand pull’ government policies to support Product-Service System activity: the case of Energy Service Companies (ESCos) in the UK. Journal of Cleaner Production, Volume (108), pp. 900-915.

Hospers, G., Sautet, F. and Desrochers, P. 2008. Silicon Somewhere: Is there a Need for Cluster Policy? In C. Karlsson ed. Handbook of research on innovation and clusters: cases and policies. Cheltenham, Edward Elgar Publishing. pp. 430-446.

Izsak, K. and Edler, J. 2011. Trends and Challenges in Demand-Side Innovation Policies in Europe. technopolis-group.

Kaiser, R. and Kripp, M. 2010. Demand-orientation in national systems of innovation: a critical review of current european innovation policy concepts. Druid Conference on “Opening Up Innovation: Strategy, Organization and Technology”  Imperial College London Business School, Druid.

Ketels, C., Lindqvist, G. and Sölvell 2006. Cluster Initiatives in Developing and Transition Economies. Stockholm, Center for Strategy and Competitiveness.

Kuusisto, J. 2008. Mapping Service Innovation Policy in the Nordic Countries. ServINNo.

Landoni, M. 2011. emand driven innovation policy by forward public procurement: The Italian aerospace industry case. Post-Crisis Post-Lisbon Economic and Social Policy: A New Era?

Lember, V., Kattel, R. and Kalvet, T. 2011. Public procurement, innovation and policy : international perspectives. Urban Studies, 48(7), pp. 1373–1395.

Lundvall, B.-A. 1992. National Systems of innovation, Towards a Theory of Innovation and Interactive Learning. London: London UK and New York, USA: Pinter.

Lundvall, B.-A. 1998. Technological change and economic theory: innovation as an interactive process. From user-producer interaction to the national system 300 The Theory and Practice of Innovation Policy of innovation. In e. a. G. Dosi ed. Technical Change and Economic Theory. London, UK and New York, USA: Pinter. pp. 349-369.

Malhotra, A., Gosain, S. and Sawy, O.A.E. 2005. Absorptive Capacity Configurations in Supply Chains: Gearing for Partner-Enabled Market Knowledge Creation. MIS Quarterly, 29(1), pp. 145-187.

Miles, I. 2010. Demand-led innovation. INNO-GRIPS (Global Review of Innovation Intelligence and Policy Studies).

Moensted, M. 2007. Strategic networking in small high tech firms. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 3(1), pp. 15-27.

Moors, E., Enzing, C., Van Der Giessen, A. and Smits, R. 2003. User–producer interactions in functional genomics innovations. Innovation, 5(2-3), pp. 120-143.

OECD 2014. Intelligent Demand: Policy Rationale, Design and Potential Benefits: OECD Publishing.

Porter, M.E. 2000. Location, Competition and Economic Development: Local Clusters in a Global Economy. Economic Development Quarterly, 14(1), pp. 15-34.

Rank, D. 2002. Evaluation of the Networks of Centres of Excellence: Final Report. KPMG Consulting LP.

Rolfstam, M. 2005. Public Technology Procurement as a Demand-side Innovation Policy Instrument – an Overview of Recent Literatureand Events. European Commission.

Rolfstam, M. 2012a. An institutional approach to research on public procurement of innovation. Innovation, The European Journal of Social Science Research, 25(3), pp. 303-321.

Rolfstam, M. 2012b. Public procurement of innovation: demand as in command or facilitation of endogenous knowledge conversion?

Rolfstam, M. 2012c. Understanding  Public  Procurement  of  Innovation: Definitions, Innovation types and Interaction modes. Social Science Research Network.

Roolaht, T. 2010a. The demand-side innovation policies in the context of small EU member country. Estonian Discussions on Economic Policy.

Roolaht, T. 2010b. The demand-side innovation policies in the context of small EU member country. Estonian Discussions on Economic Policy 18.

Rothwell, R. 1984. Technology-Based Small Firms and Regional Innovation Potential: The Role of Public Procurement. Journal of Public Policy, 4(4), pp. 307-332.

Sandelowski, M. and Barroso, J. 2007. Handbook for Synthesizing Qualitative Research. New York: Springer.

Smits, R. 2002. Innovation studies in the 21st century;: Questions from a user’s perspective. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 69(9), pp. 861-883.

Spencer, G.M., Vinodrai, T., Gertler, M.S. and Wolfe, D.A. 2010. Do Clusters Make a Difference? Defining and Assessing their Economic Performance. Regional Studies, 44 (6), pp. 697-715.

Stephenson, K. 2010. How networks of trust can unlock innovation. . NESTA Guest Article.

Strauss, A. and Corbin, J. 1998. Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for Developing grounded theory. Thousand Oaks: CA: Sage.

Summers, J.A. et al. 2008. A preliminary synthesis of qualitative research: Gaining emotional well-being from other parents. Beach Center on Disability State of the Science Conference. Washington, DC.

Swink, M. 2006. Building Collaborative Innovation Capability. Research-Technology Management, 49(2), pp.37-47.

Timmermans, B. and Zabala-Iturriagagoitia, J.M. 2013. Coordinated unbundling: A way to stimulate entrepreneurship through public procurement for innovation. Science and Public Policy, 40(5), pp. 674-685.

Uyarra, E. 2013. Review of Measures in Support of Public Procurement of Innovation. Nesta Working Paper. Nesta.

Uyarra, E. and Ramlogan, R. 2012. The effects of Cluster Policy on innovation. Compendium of Evidence on the Effectiveness of Innovation Policy Intervention. Manchester Institute of Innovation Research.

Vecchiato, R. and Roveda, C. 2014. Foresight  for  public  procurement  and  regional  innovation  policy: The  case  of  Lombardy, 43, pp. 438-450.

Zimmer, L. 2006. Qualitative meta-synthesis: a question of dialoguing with texts. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 53(3), pp. 311-318.

قاضی‌نوری، س.، آزادگان مهر، م.، سیاست نوآوری در تئوری و عمل،1393. اصفهان، نشر دارخوین.

نقی‌زاده، ر.، الهی، ش.، منطقی، م. قاضی‌نوری، س. 1393. فراترکیب مدل‌های نوآوری منطقه‌ای: مروری بر سال‌های 2013-1990. فصلنامه علمی-پژوهشی مدیریت نوآوری سال سوم(شماره چهارم).

نوروزی، ن.، الهی، ش.، حسنزاده، ع. حاجی‌حسینی، ح. 1393. ارائه چارچوبی از ابزارهای سیاستی علم و فناوری، با استفاده از رویکرد فراترکیب. فصلنامه علمی-پژوهشی مدیریت نوآوری 3(2)، صص 124-103.

ودادهیر، ا. 1390. فراترکیب نتایج واکاوی‌های کیفی و مطالعات فرهنگی: واقعیت یا توهم. فصلنامه مطالعات فرهنگی دانشگاه تهران. 22(برگ فرهنگ)،صص 24-45.