IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/scippl/v44y2017i3p417-427..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Policy coordination challenges in governments’ innovation policy—The case of Ontario, Canada

Author

Listed:
  • Merli Tamtik

Abstract

Policy coordination to support coherent approaches in innovation policy has become a major governance puzzle for most countries. Recognizing the diversity of stakeholders involved in the innovation system, it is the synchronized actions of government policy makers that determine the coherence and support for a country’s innovation agenda. By interviewing 30 experts from the federal and provincial governments, industry, and higher education sectors in Ontario, this study examines the relationship between the provincial and federal government in facilitating Canada’s innovation agenda. The Canadian case reveals the factors that shape policy coordination and provides insights on mechanisms that could enhance collaboration in a decentralized innovation systems such as in Canada.

Suggested Citation

  • Merli Tamtik, 2017. "Policy coordination challenges in governments’ innovation policy—The case of Ontario, Canada," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 44(3), pages 417-427.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:scippl:v:44:y:2017:i:3:p:417-427.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/scipol/scw074
    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.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Stefan Kuhlmann & Philip Shapira & Ruud Smits, 2010. "Introduction. A Systemic Perspective: The Innovation Policy Dance," Chapters, in: Ruud E. Smits & Stefan Kuhlmann & Phillip Shapira (ed.), The Theory and Practice of Innovation Policy, chapter 1, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. van Oudheusden, Michiel & Charlier, Nathan & Rosskamp, Benedikt & Delvenne, Pierre, 2015. "Broadening, deepening, and governing innovation: Flemish technology assessment in historical and socio-political perspective," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(10), pages 1877-1886.
    2. Astrid Jaime & Constanza Pérez‐Martelo & Bernardo Herrera & Gonzalo Ordóñez‐Matamoros & Dominique Vinck, 2023. "Functioning strategies of the research groups' leaders in the context of funding and policy instabilities," Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 40(2), pages 282-306, March.
    3. Hilde Nykamp, 2020. "Policy Mix for a Transition to Sustainability: Green Buildings in Norway," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(2), pages 1-17, January.
    4. Weber, K. Matthias & Rohracher, Harald, 2012. "Legitimizing research, technology and innovation policies for transformative change," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(6), pages 1037-1047.
    5. Ebadian, Mahmood & van Dyk, Susan & McMillan, James D. & Saddler, Jack, 2020. "Biofuels policies that have encouraged their production and use: An international perspective," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 147(C).
    6. Loft, Lasse & Schleyer, Christian & Klingler, Michael & Kister, Jutta & Zoll, Felix & Stegmaier, Peter & Aukes, Ewert & Sorge, Stefan & Mann, Carsten, 2022. "The development of governance innovations for the sustainable provision of forest ecosystem services in Europe: A comparative analysis of four pilot innovation processes," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 58(C).
    7. Guridi, Jose A. & Pertuze, Julio A. & Pfotenhauer, Sebastian M., 2020. "Natural laboratories as policy instruments for technological learning and institutional capacity building: The case of Chile's astronomy cluster," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(2).
    8. Borrás, Susana & Laatsit, Mart, 2019. "Towards system oriented innovation policy evaluation? Evidence from EU28 member states," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(1), pages 312-321.
    9. Bleda, Mercedes & del Río, Pablo, 2013. "The market failure and the systemic failure rationales in technological innovation systems," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(5), pages 1039-1052.
    10. Haddad, Christian & Benner, Maximilian, 2021. "Situating innovation policy in Mediterranean Arab countries: A research agenda for context sensitivity," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(7).
    11. Costantini, Valeria & Crespi, Francesco & Martini, Chiara & Pennacchio, Luca, 2015. "Demand-pull and technology-push public support for eco-innovation: The case of the biofuels sector," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(3), pages 577-595.
    12. Denis Gray & Lindsey McGowen & Timothy L. Michaelis & Olena Leonchuk & Drew Rivers, 2022. "A policy mix experiment to promote start-up success: exploratory evaluation of the NSF Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR)/Industry University Cooperative Research Center (IUCRC) membership supp," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 47(1), pages 176-212, February.

    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:scippl:v:44:y:2017:i:3:p:417-427.. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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/spp .

    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.