IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/kyo/wpaper/965.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Innovation Policy and Economic Actors: State, Market and Enterprise

Author

Listed:
  • Satoshi Mizobata

    (Institute of Economic Research, Kyoto University)

Abstract

The paper analyses the contemporary Russian innovation policy and innovation system, and posits that Russia needs to overcome considerable barriers in order for it to become a sound innovative society. After its transformation, Russia changed its innovation policy from government-led to market-led. In the midst of weakened international competitiveness and economic decline, however, its policy has spontaneously changed to one of ‘governmentalization’, showing path-dependent evolution. Throughout the 2000s, the government introduced a succession of innovation modernization programs, but the results appear limited, and the macroeconomic indicators explain how the country continues to be mired by its traditional backwardness, as evidenced by its heavy dependence on energy exports, poor high technology exports, outdated equipment, and other such factors. As a theoretical framework for understanding the innovative society, I apply the ‘market quality theory’, in that market quality determines the content of innovation institutions and barriers they face. Market quality can be measured by institutional arrangements (infrastructure, strength of the ‘rule of game’, and its enforcement), institutional complementarities, and transaction costs. The specificity of the Russian market indirectly characterizes its weakness in market quality, as seen in international rankings such as the Global Competitiveness Index, Corruption Index, and so on. Thus, Russia’s innovation institutions have their specificities and instabilities, and owing to the weak market quality, misuse of institutions, and government failure, its innovation policy has become ‘governmentalized’ instead of following the path of marketization with high quality. Market quality and state/government quality are one and the same. The quality of its state/government is poor owing to its present form of governance and social mistrust. In order to overcome these barriers, I stress on the need for social innovation as a key measure for enhancing the quality of the market/state.

Suggested Citation

  • Satoshi Mizobata, 2017. "Innovation Policy and Economic Actors: State, Market and Enterprise," KIER Working Papers 965, Kyoto University, Institute of Economic Research.
    • Handle: RePEc:kyo:wpaper:965
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.kier.kyoto-u.ac.jp/DP/DP965.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Edward C. Prescott, 2004. "Why do Americans work so much more than Europeans?," Quarterly Review, Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis, vol. 28(Jul), pages 2-13.
    2. Amable, Bruno, 2003. "The Diversity of Modern Capitalism," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780199261147.
    3. Rostislav Kapelyushnikov & Andrei Kuznetsov & Olga Kuznetsova, 2012. "The role of the informal sector, flexible working time and pay in the Russian labour market model," Post-Communist Economies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 24(2), pages 177-190, November.
    4. Gimpelson, Vladimir & Kapeliushnikov, Rostislav, 2011. "Labor Market Adjustment: Is Russia Different?," IZA Discussion Papers 5588, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    5. Vladimir Gimpelson & Rostislav Kapelyushnikov & Anna Lukyanova, 2010. "Employment Protection Legislation in Russia: Regional Enforcement and Labor Market Outcomes," Comparative Economic Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Association for Comparative Economic Studies, vol. 52(4), pages 611-636, December.
    6. World Bank, 2011. "Russian federation : Social Expenditure and Fiscal Federalism in Russia," World Bank Publications - Reports 2735, The World Bank Group.
    7. repec:cos:jpaper:v:6:y:2011:p:79-90 is not listed on IDEAS
    8. Anikin, Vasiliy, 2013. "Motivation to Work in Russia: The Case of Protracted Transition from Noncompetitive to Competitive System," MPRA Paper 45292, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 05 Mar 2013.
    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. Milan Žák & Petr Vymětal, 2006. "Institucionální aspekty nové komparativní ekonomie: ČR a EU [Institutional aspects of new comparative economy: Czech republic and European union]," Politická ekonomie, Prague University of Economics and Business, vol. 2006(5), pages 583-609.
    2. Demidova, Olga & Marelli, Enrico & Signorelli, Marcello, 2015. "Youth labour market performances in the Russian and Italian regions," Economic Systems, Elsevier, vol. 39(1), pages 43-58.
    3. Vladimir Gimpelson & Aleksey Oshchepkov, 2012. "Does more unemployment cause more fear of unemployment?," IZA Journal of Labor & Development, Springer;Forschungsinstitut zur Zukunft der Arbeit GmbH (IZA), vol. 1(1), pages 1-26, December.
    4. Lilas Demmou & Andreas Wörgötter, 2015. "Boosting Productivity in Russia: Skills, Education and Innovation," OECD Economics Department Working Papers 1189, OECD Publishing.
    5. Andrzej Wojtyna, 2005. "Alternatywne modele kapitalizmu," Gospodarka Narodowa. The Polish Journal of Economics, Warsaw School of Economics, issue 9, pages 1-23.
    6. Ngai, L. Rachel & Pissarides, Christopher A., 2009. "Welfare policy and the distribution of hours of work," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 28698, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    7. D’Erasmo, P. & Mendoza, E.G. & Zhang, J., 2016. "What is a Sustainable Public Debt?," Handbook of Macroeconomics, in: J. B. Taylor & Harald Uhlig (ed.), Handbook of Macroeconomics, edition 1, volume 2, chapter 0, pages 2493-2597, Elsevier.
    8. Hans A. Holter & Dirk Krueger & Serhiy Stepanchuk, 2019. "How do tax progressivity and household heterogeneity affect Laffer curves?," Quantitative Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 10(4), pages 1317-1356, November.
    9. Antonia Diaz & Maria Jose Luengo Prado, 2008. "On the User Cost and Homeownership," Review of Economic Dynamics, Elsevier for the Society for Economic Dynamics, vol. 11(3), pages 584-613, July.
    10. Raddatz, Guido, 2015. "Mehr Arbeit wagen," Argumente zur Marktwirtschaft und Politik 129, Stiftung Marktwirtschaft / The Market Economy Foundation, Berlin.
    11. Girardone, Claudia & Kokas, Sotirios & Wood, Geoffrey, 2021. "Diversity and women in finance: Challenges and future perspectives," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 71(C).
    12. Bruno Amable & Donatella Gatti & Jan Schumacher, 2006. "Welfare-State Retrenchment: The Partisan Effect Revisited," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press and Oxford Review of Economic Policy Limited, vol. 22(3), pages 426-444, Autumn.
    13. Nathalie Greenan & Ekaterina Kalugina & Emmanuelle Walkowiak, 2014. "Has the quality of working life improved in the EU-15 between 1995 and 2005?," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 23(2), pages 399-428.
    14. Herrendorf, Berthold & Rogerson, Richard & Valentinyi, Ákos, 2014. "Growth and Structural Transformation," Handbook of Economic Growth, in: Philippe Aghion & Steven Durlauf (ed.), Handbook of Economic Growth, edition 1, volume 2, chapter 6, pages 855-941, Elsevier.
    15. Antonin Bergeaud & Gilbert Cette & Rémy Lecat, 2014. "Le produit intérieur brut par habitant sur longue période en France et dans les pays avancés : le rôle de la productivité et de l’emploi," Économie et Statistique, Programme National Persée, vol. 474(1), pages 5-34.
    16. Hirte, Georg & Tscharaktschiew, Stefan, 2018. "The impact of anti-congestion policies and the role of labor-supply margins," CEPIE Working Papers 04/18, Technische Universität Dresden, Center of Public and International Economics (CEPIE).
    17. Stefano Bartolini & Francesco Sarracino, 2021. "Happier and Sustainable. Possibilities for a post-growth society," Department of Economics University of Siena 855, Department of Economics, University of Siena.
    18. Edgar Cruz & Xavier Raurich, 2020. "Leisure time and the sectoral composition of employment," Review of Economic Dynamics, Elsevier for the Society for Economic Dynamics, vol. 38, pages 198-219, October.
    19. Bruno Amable, 2009. "The Differentiation of Social Demands in Europe. The Social Basis of the European Models of Capitalism," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 91(3), pages 391-426, May.
    20. Langot, François & Quintero Rojas, Coralia, 2008. "Explaining the Evolution of Hours Worked and Employment across OECD Countries: An Equilibrium Search Approach," IZA Discussion Papers 3364, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Privatization; innovation; market quality; policy; institution; path-dependent; Russia; government; infrastructure;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • D40 - Microeconomics - - Market Structure, Pricing, and Design - - - General
    • E61 - Macroeconomics and Monetary Economics - - Macroeconomic Policy, Macroeconomic Aspects of Public Finance, and General Outlook - - - Policy Objectives; Policy Designs and Consistency; Policy Coordination
    • O31 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Innovation and Invention: Processes and Incentives
    • O32 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Management of Technological Innovation and R&D
    • O38 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Government Policy
    • O57 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Economywide Country Studies - - - Comparative Studies of Countries
    • P16 - Political Economy and Comparative Economic Systems - - Capitalist Economies - - - Capitalist Institutions; Welfare State

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:kyo:wpaper:965. 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: Makoto Watanabe (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/iekyojp.html .

    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.