IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/rseval/v24y2015i2p213-228..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

An assessment of the Innovation Union Scoreboard as a tool to analyse national innovation capacities: The case of Switzerland

Author

Listed:
  • Dominique Foray
  • Hugo Hollanders

Abstract

This article investigates the Innovation Union Scoreboard (IUS) as a tool to carry out case studies about national innovation capacities in the case of given countries. It clarifies what this statistical framework can offer in terms of information and insights on strengths and weaknesses of a given country relative to the other countries which are also involved in this statistical exercise. The investigation is carried out through the case study of Switzerland; a country that is leading the IUS ranking for many years. The approach will therefore start with the full analysis of the IUS results for Switzerland. Then other statistical evidence as well as qualitative insights will be added to the discussion to identify what really matters to explain success and the potential weaknesses the Swiss policy should care about. The conclusion is that if the IUS can be considered as an important tool to inform innovation policies, it should not be applied in an isolated manner or without relying on other types of indicators and information on the system considered.

Suggested Citation

  • Dominique Foray & Hugo Hollanders, 2015. "An assessment of the Innovation Union Scoreboard as a tool to analyse national innovation capacities: The case of Switzerland," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 24(2), pages 213-228.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:rseval:v:24:y:2015:i:2:p:213-228.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/reseval/rvu036
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Edquist , Charles & Zabala-Iturriagagoitia , Jon Mikel, 2015. "The Innovation Union Scoreboard is Flawed: The case of Sweden – not being the innovation leader of the EU," Papers in Innovation Studies 2015/16, Lund University, CIRCLE - Centre for Innovation Research.
    2. G. Martinidis & N. Komninos & E. Carayannis, 2022. "Taking into Account the Human Factor in Regional Innovation Systems and Policies," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 13(2), pages 849-879, June.
    3. Dominique Foray & Martin Woerter, 2021. "The formation of Coasean institutions to provide university knowledge for innovation: a case study and econometric evidence for Switzerland," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 46(5), pages 1584-1610, October.
    4. Wojciech Nasierowski, 2019. "Assessing Technical Efficiency Of Innovations In Canada: The Global Snapshot," International Journal of Innovation Management (ijim), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 23(03), pages 1-25, April.
    5. Iizuka, Michiko & Hollanders, Hugo, 2017. "The need to customise innovation indicators in developing countries," MERIT Working Papers 2017-032, United Nations University - Maastricht Economic and Social Research Institute on Innovation and Technology (MERIT).
    6. Edquist , Charles & Zabala-Iturriagagoitia , Jon Mikel, 2015. "The Innovation Union Scoreboard is flawed: The Case of Sweden – not the innovation leader of the EU – updated version," Papers in Innovation Studies 2015/27, Lund University, CIRCLE - Centre for Innovation Research.
    7. George Martinidis, 2017. "The Importance of Man Within the System: Defining and Measuring the Human Factor in Innovation, a Review," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 8(2), pages 638-652, June.
    8. George Martinidis & Arkadiusz Dyjakon & Stanisław Minta & Rafał Ramut, 2022. "Intellectual Capital and Sustainable S3 in the Regions of Central Macedonia and Western Macedonia, Greece," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(16), pages 1-17, August.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oup:rseval:v:24:y:2015:i:2:p:213-228.. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/rev .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.