Kieron Flanagan

Understanding the Innovation Impacts of Public Procurement

Public procurement accounts for a significant proportion of overall demand for goods and services and is increasingly seen as an attractive and feasible instrument for furthering the goals of innovation policy. However, public procurement is already expected to address a wide range of social goals. Much of the current debate about harnessing procurement to promote innovation draws upon a limited set of examples which are not representative of the bulk of public purchasing and tend to downplay diversity in procurement practices and in the types of goods and services procured. They also downplay diversity in the nature of innovations and in the range of ways that procurement can impact upon innovation. A one-size-fits-all model is unlikely to work across all procurement contexts yet all types of public procurement are likely to have impacts upon innovation by shaping the demand environment in which suppliers innovate and compete. We propose a framework and typology based on the nature of the goods and services procured in order to explore the potential impacts upon markets and innovation of each. We conclude that public purchasing should first and foremost remain concerned with proximate public policy goals and that, rather than trying to co-opt public procurement into the innovation policy toolbox, policy-makers should focus on promoting innovation-friendly practices across all types of procurement at all levels of governance.

From Regional Systems of Innovation to Regions as Innovation Policy Spaces

The regional systems of innovation concept is well established in academic and practitioner discourses about innovation and economic development. As with the innovation systems approach more generally, the use of the concept has expanded significantly from its initial analytical purpose and has been extensively used to inform policy making. We identify a number of dangers associated with the use of regional systems of innovation as a normative concept which both overstates and at the same time underemphasises the roles regions play as policy-making and implementation spaces. These issues are explored in the paper with an illustration of the North West region of England.

Four dangers in innovation policy studies – and how to avoid them

Abstract The field of innovation policy studies is at a crossroads. It has clearly been influential. However, might it be losing the critical insight necessary to remain so in future? We discuss four dangerous tendencies seen in many innovation policy studies: idealising policy rationales and policy-makers; treating policies as tools from a toolbox; putting too much faith in coordination and intelligent design of ‘policy mixes’; and taking an atemporal approach to innovation policy. Based on these we identify some ways forward that, we argue, would deal better with the complex multi-actor dynamics, fundamental uncertainties and challenges to the implementation, coordination and evaluation of policies and which would make for more relevant and impactful innovation policy studies.

Drivers of international collaboration in research

This report, written jointly by the Technopolis Group and the Manchester Institute of Innovation Research (The University of Manchester), is a synthesis of a project conducted on behalf of the European Commission DG Research. This study seeks to understand what policy considerations are made when establishing and implementing science, technology and innovation (STI) linkages with other countries. The report reviews the various drivers behind international STI co-operation and explores the interactions between these drivers.

The innovation policy mix

As innovation policy instruments are never applied in isolation, this chapter reviews the evidence on policy mixes and the interplay of instruments in innovation policy. The chapter starts with a multi-dimensional conceptualisation of mixes and interplay, in particular distinguishing between designed versus emergent mixes. Overall, the evidence and evaluation practice as to policy mix and interplay are scarce, reflecting not only the challenges of analysing the interplay of instruments, but also the general neglect in policy making to take interplay into consideration. The chapter first presents and analyses evidence from the few evaluations which have explicitly examined how instruments interact, focusing on interplay between direct and indirect measures as well as supply and demand measures. In general, the additive effect of multiple measures targeting the same actor groups is limited. Secondly, the chapter looks at evidence from reviews of policy mixes at the country or system level. Those country reviews have mainly been conducted under the auspices of the OECD or the EU. They highlight the trends of applying policy mixes and comment on their appropriateness, identify common policy gaps and coordination issues, but rarely deliver hard evidence of system-wide interplay. Thirdly, the review looks at instances where policies or instruments have been deliberately used together, as designed mixes across policy institutions or as the portfolios of specific agencies. The chapter finally draws lessons as to policy mix practice using the conceptual framework developed.

Indicator needs for the internationalisation of science policies

Science has long had an international dimension but policy-makers, research funders and research-performing organisations now pay increasing attention to research internationalisation, with a range of motives. Despite this, the evidence base for internationalisation strategy formulation remains weak. In this article we elaborate an approach which identifies likely indicator needs from the policy process, explore examples of existing indicator use, and discuss the extent to which meeting each of our identified indicator needs is feasible. We conclude that decision-makers and indicator designers should work together to ensure that both new indicators and new approaches to mutual policy-learning about their use and utility are developed in parallel. Copyright , Beech Tree Publishing.

Anchoring the innovation impacts of public procurement to place: The role of conversations:

Public procurement is frequently touted as a means of promoting innovation at the sub-national level, but the underlying mechanisms through which this is supposed to work are seldom articulated. In particular, while the relevance of social interaction for innovation is offered as a key rationale for the use of public procurement for innovation, there is little discussion of its corresponding spatial dimensions. This paper contributes to this debate by advancing our understanding of the spatial aspects of public procurement for innovation and thus of the scope for using public procurement to achieve regional innovation policy goals. We connect the public procurement for innovation literature with the literatures on innovation-driven regional development around the notion of ‘conversations’ to capture the spatial and social aspects of interactions relevant for public procurement for innovation. Different forms of spatial anchoring of procurement are explored, presenting different challenges and opportunities for regions. We provide illustrative examples for each type, from which suggestions are derived for promoting place-based ‘innovation-friendly’ procurement.

Benchmarking the Provision of Scientific Equipment

Equipment is critical to the progress of research; therefore its provision is a significant science policy issue. There may be under-investment in equipment relative to other factors of scientific production such as staff. At a European level, inadequate infrastructure is a potential barrier to achievement of objectives, hence its recognition as a theme for the European Research Area. Equipment provision is inherently suited to benchmarking, though the scope of any exercise should be extended from instruments to include the whole policy and service package surrounding equipment. Three approaches to benchmarking are examined: opinion-based surveys; case-studies of matched research groups; and national surveys to a common format. Issues arising from comparison of experience in the UK and Ireland are discussed and conclusions are drawn regarding a possible European approach. Copyright , Beech Tree Publishing.

Powerhouse of science? Prospects and pitfalls of place-based science and innovation policies in northern England

Science and innovation are increasingly seen by the UK government as central to regional economic development policy, with a new emphasis on ‘place’ a prominent feature of related policy initiatives. This is reflected in debates over the ‘Northern Powerhouse’, most visibly through the £235 million investment in the ‘Crick of the North’ Royce Institute for Advanced Materials Research and Innovation, which is the largest single investment in science in the North of England in a generation. At the same time, public investment in science and innovation is ever more focused within the South-East ‘Golden Triangle’, with concentration driven by the Research Excellence Framework and by the pulling power of the labour market in London and the South East. This chapter teases apart the rhetoric from the reality of science and innovation investment in the North, ask what decision makers in the North can do to harness science and innovation in support of economic development, and examining the changing role of universities in local political economies.

Can service blueprinting be applied to innovation policy implementation

This paper explores the potential application of blueprinting, a public service innovation tool, to the design and implementation of innovation policy. Firstly, we briefly summarize some problems often encountered in existing innovation policy processes, especially in less developed countries. Studies suggest that oversimplification and incompleteness of specification of implementation are common problems. Then, we consider blueprinting as an instrument for checking existing policy to improve it and to support the design of new policy systems, taking the example of innovation voucher schemes to show how it could work. We look in particular at the Netherlands innovation voucher system as an example to show how successful policy making processes often consider the five aspects which are the basic components for blueprinting. Based on this case, the pros and cons of the instrument used in policy design and implementation are considered.