Original Research Open access

New challenges for innovation policies in an uneven European innovation panorama: lessons from evaluation experiences

Authors

Published
March 18, 2025
Section
Original Research
DOI
10.4081/peasa.52

Abstract

The article addresses the recent changes in science and innovation policy studies from an European perspective. Based on the monitoring and evaluation exercises of four different innovation policy exercises carried out in Spain over the last years, we reflect on the challenges of European innovation policy. The monitoring and evaluation exercises cover different administrative levels (national, regional and European) and methodological approaches (impact evaluation and more qualitative-oriented) including: an impact-evaluation exercise of the Research and Development (R&D) public funding programme for firms granted by the main innovation agency in Spain (The Centre for the Development for Industrial Technology CDTI); two survey-based research on R&D from the workers and from the managerial perspective; and a monitoring exercise on the Smart Specialisation Exercises (S3) of three regions (Extremadura, Valencian Community and Catalonia) and the national S3 programme. We find that it is important to address the strengths and limitations of programmes and policies framed in previous innovation policies (innovation for growth and national systems of innovations), while improving coordination between innovation policies with other policy areas, layers (strategic, managerial and performance) and levels (national and regional). In addition, we signal the importance of broadening the understanding innovation to move towards a more transformative-oriented policy paradigm. We indicate that a broad understanding of innovation is especially important for less developed countries and regions to catch-up.

Keywords

References

  1. Arrow K. (1962). Economic welfare and the allocation of resources for invention, pp. 609-625. In: Nelson, R. (Ed.), The rate and direction of inventive activity. Princenton , National Bureau of Economic Research and Princeton University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/9781400879762-024
  2. Bauer P, Fedotenkov I, Genty A, et al. (2020). Productivity in Europe – Trends and drivers in a service-based econom. EUR 30076 EN. Luxembourg, Publications Office of the European Union.
  3. Busom I (2000). An empirical evaluation of the effects of R&D subsidies. Econ Innov New Techno 9:111-148. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/10438590000000006
  4. CESIN-APD (2022). [La innovación en la empresa española]. CESIN-APD. Available from: https://www.apd.es/estudio-cesin-apd-innovacion-empresa-espanola/
  5. Cunningham P, Gök A, Laredo P (2016). The impact of direct support to R&D and innovation in firms, pp. 54-107. In: J. Edler, P. Cunningham, A. Gök, P. Shapira (eds.), Handbook of innovation policy impact. Cheltenham, Edward Elgar Publishing. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4337/9781784711856.00010
  6. Dimos C, Pugh G (2016). The effectiveness of R&D subsidies: a meta-regression analysis of the evaluation literature. Res Policy 45:797-815 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2016.01.002
  7. Dosi G, Llerena P, Labini MS (2006). The relationships between science, technologies and their industrial exploitation: An illustration through the myths and realities of the so-called ‘European Paradox’. Res Policy 35:1450-64. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2006.09.012
  8. European Commission (2018). Mission-Oriented Research and Innovation. Luxembourg, Publications Office of the European Union. Available from: https://op.europa.eu/en/publication-detail/-/publication/5b2811d1-16be-11e8-9253-01aa75ed71a1/language-en
  9. European Commission (2019). Layers, levels and coordination challenges: comparing S3 governance in Puglia and Extremadura, EUR 29735 EN. Luxembourg. Publications Office of the European Union. Available from: https://op.europa.eu/en/publication-detail/-/publication/ee1e83e2-6d4c-11e9-9f05-01aa75ed71a1/language-en
  10. European Commission (2021). China overtakes the EU in high-impact publications. JRC 124597. Available from: https://joint-research-centre.ec.europa.eu/system/files/2021-05/policy_brief_china_overtakes_the_eu_in_high_impact_publications_final_jrc124597.pdf
  11. European Commission (2024a). The future of European competitiveness. Part A - A competitiveness strategy for Europe. Available from: https://commission.europa.eu/document/download/97e481fd-2dc3-412d-be4c-f152a8232961_en?filename=The%20future%20of%20European%20competitiveness%20_%20A%20competitiveness%20strategy%20for%20Europe.pdf
  12. European Commission (2024b). European Innovation Scoreboard 2024. Luxembourg, Publication Office of the European Union. Available from: https://op.europa.eu/en/publication-detail/-/publication/8a4a4a1f-3e68-11ef-ab8f-01aa75ed71a1/language-en
  13. Fagerberg J (2018). Mobilizing innovation for sustainability transitions: A comment on transformative innovation policy. Res Policy 47:1568-76. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2018.08.012
  14. Fagerberg J, Verspagen B. (2009). Innovation studies – The emerging structure of a new scientific field. Res Policy 38:218-33. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2008.12.006
  15. Fernández-Zubieta A (2021a). The case study report of Spain, pp. 121-135. In: I. Perianez-Forte, F. Guzzo, F.B. Hegyi, C. Gianelle (eds.), Case studies on smart specialisation. Luxembourg, Publications Office of the European Union.
  16. Fernández-Zubieta A (2021b). The case study report of Valencian community, pp. 153-171. In: I. Perianez-Forte, F. Guzzo, F.B. Hegyi, C. Gianelle (eds.), Case studies on smart specialisation. Luxembourg, Publications Office of the European Union.
  17. Fernández-Zubieta A (2023). Diffusion of innovation, innovation studies, and innovation policies: cross-fertilisation to improve smart specialisation strategies (S3). Innovation-Abingdon 1-30. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/13511610.2023.2208295
  18. Fernández-Zubieta A, García-Sánchez A, Molero J (2024). The impact of public funding to private R&D: Evidence from Spain. Sociol Tecnocien 14:40-70.
  19. Fiorentin FA, Pereira M, Suarez DV (2018). As times goes by. A dynamic impact assessment of the innovation policy and the Matthew effect on Argentinean firms. Econ Innov New Technol 28:657-73. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/10438599.2018.1557404
  20. FMFCE (2021). [Evaluación del impacto de las ayudas públicas a la innovación de las empresas españolas sobre el volumen, la calidad del empleo y las condiciones del trabajo].[in Spanish]. Madrid, FMFCE. Available from: https://www.fmfce.com/documentos/Observatorio%20FMF_2020_Evaluaci%C3%B3n%20del%20impacto%20de%20las%20ayudas%20p%C3%BAblicas%20a%20la%20innovaci%C3%B3n%20de%20las%20empresas%20espa%C3%B1olas%20sobre%20el%20volumen,%20la%20calidad%20del%20empleo%20y%20las%20condiciones%20de%20trabajo.pdf
  21. Foray D, Goenaga X (2013). The goals of Smart Specialisation. S3 Policy Brief Series. No. 01/2013. Luxembourg, Publications Office of the European Union. JRC82213. Available from: https://publications.jrc.ec.europa.eu/repository/handle/JRC82213
  22. Freeman C (1988). Japan: a new national system of innovation, p. 330-48. In: G. Dos, C. Freeman, R.R. Nelson, G. Silverberg, L. Soete (eds.), Technical change and economic theory. London, Pinter Publishers.
  23. Freeman C, Soete L (2009). Developing science, technology and innovation indicators: What we can learn from the past. Res Policy 38:583-9. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2009.01.018
  24. Geels FW (2004). From sectoral systems of innovation to socio-technical systems: Insights about dynamics and change from sociology and institutional theory. Res Policy 33:897-920. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2004.01.015
  25. Huergo E, Trenado M, Ubierna A (2016). The impact of public support on firm propensity to engage in R&D: Spanish experience. Technol Forecast Soc 113:206-19. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2015.05.011
  26. Kattel R, Mazzucato M (2018). Mission-oriented innovation policy and dynamic capabilities in the public sector. Ind Corp Change 27:787-801. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/icc/dty032
  27. Lach S (2002). Do R&D subsidies stimulate or displace private R&D? Evidence from Israel. J Ind Econ 50:369-90. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-6451.00182
  28. Liboreiro PR, Fernández R, García C (2021). The drivers of deindustrialization in advanced economies: A hierarchical structural decomposition analysis. Struct Change Econ D 58:138-52. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.strueco.2021.04.009
  29. Leydesdorff L, Wagner CS, Bornmann L (2014). The European Union, China, and the United States in the top-1% and top-10% layers of most-frequently cited publications: Competition and collaborations. J Informetr 8:606-17. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2014.05.002
  30. Lundvall B-A (1992). National systems of innovation: towards a theory of innovation and interactive learning. London, Pinter.
  31. Marinelli E, Fernández T, Pontikakis D (2021). Towards a transformative Smart Specialisation Strategy: lessons from Catalonia, Bulgaria and Greece, EUR 30642 EN. Luxembourg, Publications Office of the European Union. Available from: https://publications.jrc.ec.europa.eu/repository/handle/JRC124128
  32. Marinelli E, Peirañez Forte I (2017). Smart specialisation at work: The entrepreneurial discovery as a continuous process - S3 Working Paper Series No. 12/2017, European Commission, 2017, JRC108571. Available from: https://publications.jrc.ec.europa.eu/repository/handle/JRC108571
  33. Martin B (2012). The evolution of science policy and innovation studies. Res Policy 41:1219-39. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2012.03.012
  34. Mazzucato M (2015). Innovation systems: from fixing market failures to creating markets. Intereconomics 50:120-5.
  35. Molas-Gallart J, Boni A, Giachi S, Schot J (2021). A formative approach to the evaluation of Transformative Innovation Policies. Res Eval 30:431-42. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/reseval/rvab016
  36. Mowery DC, Rosenberg N (1989). Technology and the pursuit of economic growth. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511664441
  37. National Science Board (2023). Publication outputs: U.S. trends and international comparison. Available from: https://ncses.nsf.gov/pubs/nsb202333
  38. Nelson RR (1959). The simple economics of basic scientific research. J Politic Econ 67:297-306. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1086/258177
  39. Novadays-UCM (2020). [Estudio de evaluación del impacto del régimen de ayudas a proyectos de I+D del CDTI].[in Spanish]. Madrid, UCM. Available from: https://www.cdti.es/sites/default/files/2023-06/informe_final_de_la_evaluacion_de_impacto_del_regimen_de_ayudas_del_cdti_2015-2020.pdf
  40. OECD (2006). Government R&D funding and company behaviour: measuring behavioural additionality. Paris, OECD Publishing. Available from: https://www.oecd.org/en/publications/government-r-d-funding-and-company-behaviour_9789264025851-en.html
  41. OECD (2021). The design and implementation of mission-oriented innovation policies. a new systemic policy approach to address societal challenges. OECD Publishing. Available from: https://www.oecd.org/en/publications/the-design-and-implementation-of-mission-oriented-innovation-policies_3f6c76a4-en.html
  42. Roper S, Hewitt-Dundas N (2016). The legacy of public subsidies for innovation: input, output and behavioral additionality effects. Research Papers 0021. Enterprise Research Centre. Available from: https://www.enterpriseresearch.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/Exec-Summ-legacy-effects-of-inovation-policy-No-21.pdf
  43. Schot J, Steinmueller WE (2018). Three frames for innovation policy: R&D, systems of innovation and transformative change. Res Policy 47:1554-67. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2018.08.011
  44. Teece DJ, Pisano G, Shuen A (1997). Dynamic capabilities and strategic management. Strateg Manage J 18:509-33. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1097-0266(199708)18:7<509::AID-SMJ882>3.0.CO;2-Z

Metrics

Citations and online attention from Dimensions, Altmetric and PlumX.

PlumX Metrics

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

License

Copyright (c) 2025 The Author(s)

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.

PAGEPress has chosen to apply the Creative Commons Attribution NonCommercial 4.0 International License (CC BY-NC 4.0) to all manuscripts to be published.