Summarizing the experience of different countries in the transformation of approaches to public innovation policies is not among the widely
discussed issues in the Russian economic literature. At the same time, to create a basis for understanding and finding solutions to the complex challenges
of innovation development that a country may face it is necessary to investigate the evolution of innovation policy. The purpose of the paper is to discuss
the stages of the innovation policy transformation. These stages are considered as the basis to create of public innovation policies typology. Unlike many
studies devoted to such typologies, this study takes into account not only the path of developed countries in improving the public innovation policy, but
also the actual challenges that determine the policy framework in catching up countries. The paper has the following structure. First, the main terms are
revealed. Then, based on the analysis of scientific literature, the stages of evolution public innovation policy and their key features are identified. This paper
also takes stock the bottlenecks of different innovation policies types.
Keywords: innovation system, technological development, types of innovation policy, policy measures, system failures, global crisis
- Golichenko O. G., Samovoleva S. A. (2008). Tax legislation as an element of institutional support for the national innovation system. Ekonomicheskaya nauka sovremennoy Rossii. 3 (42). 66–80 (in Russian).
- Golichenko O.G.. Samovoleva S.A. (2014). Public Policy in National Innovation System: Theory and Practice. Innovatsii. 10 (192), 83–94 (in Russian).
- Golichenko O. et al. (2016). Public policy and actors’ behavior models in national innovation system/ ed. O. G. Golichenko, S. A. Moscow: RUDN (in Russian).
- Zemtsov S. P. (2022). Technological entrepreneurship as a development factor of Russia. Journal of the New Economic Association, 1 (53), 212–223 in Russian).
- Ivanova N. (2016) Innovation policy: theory and practice. Mirovaya ekonomika i mezhdunarodnye otnosheniya. 60 (1), 5–16 (in Russian).
- Ivanova N. (2021). Innovative competition in the global economy. Fifth International Economic Symposium, 728–734 (in Russian).
- Polterovich V. (2010). Strategy of modernization of the Russian economy: system of interactive growth management. Journal of the New Economic Association, 7, 158–160 (in Russian).
- Razvadovskaya Y., Kaplyuk E. Rudneva K. (2019). Models of Innovation Policy and Decision-Making Systems: Evolution and Prospects. Tomsk State University Journal of Economics, 47, 80–98 (in Russian).
- Samovoleva S. (2019). Technological knowledge absorption as a factor of innovation development. Voprosy Ekonomiki, 11, 150–158 (in Russian).
- Simachev Y., Kuzyk M., Kuznetsov B. & Pogrebnyak E. (2014). Russia on the path towards a new technology industrial policy: Exciting prospects and fatal traps. Foresight, 8 (4), 6–23 (in Russian).
- Arrow K. (1962). Economic Welfare and the Allocation of Resources for Invention, in: Nelson, R. R. (Ed). The Rate and Direction of Inventive Activity. Princeton University Press, Princeton, 609–625.
- Bagattoll C. & Brandão T. (2021). Contesting the mainstream narrative? A conceptual discussion on the politics of science, technology, and innovation from the periphery. Journal of Scientometric Research, 10 (1s), s5-s20.
- Brown R. (2021). Mission-oriented or mission adrift? A critical examination of mission-oriented innovation policies. European Planning Studies, 29 (4), 739–761.
- Borrás S., & Edquist C. (2013). The choice of innovation policy instruments. Technological forecasting and social change, 80 (8), 1513–1522.
- Chaminade C. & Lundvall B. Å. (2019). Science, technology, and innovation policy: Old patterns and new challenges. In Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Business and Management.
- Chung S. (2002). Building a national innovation system through regional innovation systems. Technovation, 22 (8), 485–491.
- Cirera X., Maloney W. F. (2017) The innovation paradox: Developing-country capabilities and the unrealized promise of technological catch-up. World Bank Publications.
- Cooke P. (2001). Regional innovation systems, clusters, and the knowledge economy. Industrial and corporate change, 10 (4), 945–974.
- Dezhina I. G. (2017). Science and innovation policy of the Russian government: A variety of instruments with uncertain outcomes. Public Administration Issues, 5, 7–26.
- Diercks G., Larsen H. & Steward, F. (2019). Transformative innovation policy: Addressing variety in an emerging policy paradigm. Research Policy, 48 (4), 880–894.
- Cimoli M., Dosi G., & Stiglitz J. (2015). The rationale for industrial and innovation policy. Revista do Serviço Público, 66, 55–68
- Clowater G. B. (2010). Information kiosk on a highway to nowhere: the Science Council of Canada and the retreat from transformative politics, 1978–1992. Bibliotheq̀ ue et Archives Canada, Ottawa.
- Cohen W. M. & Levinthal D. A. (1990). Absorptive capacity: A new perspective onlearning and innovation. Administrative science quarterly, 128–152.
- Edler J. (2006). Demand-based innovation policy. Working report no. 99 Office of technology assessment at the German Bundestag.
- Edler J. & Fagerberg J. (2017). Innovation policy: what, why, and how. Oxford Review of Economic Policy, 33 (1), 2–23.
- Edler J., Gök A., Cunningham P. & Shapira P. (2016). Introduction: Making sense of innovation policy. In Handbook of Innovation Policy Impact. Edward Elgar Publishing.
- Edquist C. (2014). Striving towards a holistic innovation policy in European countries-butlinearity still prevails! STI Policy Review, 5 (2), 1–19.
- Edquist C. & Chaminade C. (2006). Industrial policy from a systems-of-innovation perspective. EIB papers, 11 (1), 108–132.
- Etzkowitz H. & Leydesdorff L. (1995). The Triple Helix — University-industry-government relations: Alaboratory for knowledge based economic development. EASST review, 14 (1), 14–19.
- Grant P. (1983). Technological Sovereignty: Forgotten Factor in the ‘Hi-Tech’ Razzamatazz. Prometheus 1 (2), 239–270.
- Hjalager A. M. & von Gesseneck M. J. (2020). Capacity-, system-and mission-oriented innovation policies in tourism–characteristics, measurement and prospects. Journal of Policy Research in Tourism, Leisure and Events, 12 (2), 197–216.
- Johansson B., Karlsson C., & Backman M. (2007). Innovation policy instruments. Paper No.105 CESIS. Edler J., Blind K., Kroll H., & Schubert T. (2021). Technology sovereignty as an emerging frame for innovation policy: Defining rationales, ends and means (No.70). Fraunhofer ISI Discussion Papers-Innovation Systems and Policy Analysis.
- Kim T. (2017). Academic mobility, transnational identity capital, and stratification under conditions of academic capitalism. Higher Education, 73 (6), 981–997.
- Larrue P. (2021). The design and implementation of mission-oriented innovation policies: A new systemic policy approach to address societal challenges, OECD Science, Technology and Industry Policy Papers, No.100, OECD Publishing, Paris.
- Lundvall B. Å. & Borrás S. (2005). Science, technology and innovation policy. The Oxford handbook of innovation, 599–631.
- March С., Schieferdecker I. (2021). Technological Sovereignty as Ability, Not Autarky, CESifo Working Paper, No. 9139, Center for Economic Studies and Ifo Institute (CESifo), Munich.
- OECD (2015). Innovation Policies for Inclusive Growth. OECD Publishing, Paris.
- OECD (2020). Broad-based Innovation Policy for All Regions and Cities, OECD Publishing, Paris.
- Rothwell R. (1982). Government innovation policy: Some past problems and recent trends. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 22 (1), 3–30.
- Schlaile M. P., Urmetzer S., Blok V., Andersen A. D., Timmermans J., Mueller, Fagerberg M., & Pyka A. (2017). Innovation systems for transformations towards sustainability? Taking the normative dimension seriously. Sustainability, 9 (12), 2253.
- Schot J. & Steinmueller W. E. (2018). Three frames for innovation policy: R&D, systems of innovation and transformative change. Research Policy, 47 (9), 1554–1567.
- Slaughter S., Leslie L. L. (1997). Academic capitalism: Politics, policies, and the entrepreneurial university Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.
- Smith K. (2000). Innovation as a systemic phenomenon: rethinking the role of policy. Enterprise and innovation management studies, 1 (1), 73–102.
- Soete L. (2007). From industrial to innovation policy. Journal of industry, competition and trade, 7 (3–4), 273–284.
- Solow R. M. (1956). A contribution to the theory of economic growth. The quarterly journal of economics, 70 (1), 65–94.
- Weber K. M. & Rohracher H. (2012). Legitimizing research, technology and innovation policies for transformative change: Combining insights from innovation systems and multi-level perspective in a comprehensive ‘failures’ framework. Research Policy, 41 (6), 1037–1047.
- Woolthuis R. K., Lankhuizen M. & Gilsing V. (2005). A system failure framework for innovation policy design. Technovation, 25 (6), 609–619.