| 1. |
- Baraldi, Enrico, et al.
(författare)
-
“Betting on Science or Muddling Through the Network” : Two Universities and one Innovation Commission
- 2011
-
Ingår i: The IMP Journal. - Oslo. - 2059-1403 .- 0809-7259. ; 5:3, s. 172-192
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Since the mid 1990s the OECD, the EU and many national innovation policies have pointed to universities as the most important direct providers of solutions to use as sources of innovations for growth and societal welfare. Also, through their respective governments, universities are exposed to rather detailed requirements on how to fulfil the increased direct utilisation of research results. This paper takes a closer look at how two internationally recognised universities from the same country, namely Sweden, addressed the innovation commission. A case study investigates how the Karolinska Institute and Uppsala University interpreted and implemented the Swedish government’s commission on an increased utilisation of publicly funded research for innovation. The main finding is that both universities’ ways of fulfilling this commission are more directed towards ‘betting’ on potential innovations than on ‘muddling through’ the context of innovation.
|
|
| 2. |
- Baraldi, Enrico, et al.
(författare)
-
Exploring the obstacles to implementing economic mechanisms to stimulate antibiotic research and development : a mulit-actor and system-level analysis
- 2016
-
Ingår i: American Journal of Law & Medicine. - Boston : Boston University School of Law. - 0098-8588 .- 2375-835X. ; 42, s. 451-486
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- This Article examines the potential stakeholder-related obstacles hindering the implementation of mechanisms to re-ignite the development of novel antibiotics. Proposed economic models and incentives to drive such development include: Public Funding of Research and Development (R&D), Tax Incentives, Milestone Prizes, End Payments, Intellectual Property (IP) and Exclusivity Extensions, Pricing and Reimbursement Incentives, Product Development Partnerships (PDPs), and the Options Market for Antibiotics model. Drawing on personal experience and understanding of the antibiotic field, as well as stakeholder consultation and numerous expert meetings within the DRIVE-AB project and Uppsala Health Summit 2015, the Authors identify obstacles attributable to the following actors: Universities and Research Institutes, Small and Medium-sized Enterprises (SMEs), Large Pharmaceutical Companies, Marketing Approval Regulators, Payors, Healthcare Providers, National Healthcare Authorities, Patients, and Supranational Institutions. The analysis also proposes a characterization and ranking of the difficulty associated with implementing the reviewed mechanisms. Public Funding of R&D, Pricing and Reimbursement Incentives, and PDPs are mechanisms expected to meet highly systemic barriers (i.e., obstacles across the entire antibiotic value chain), imposing greater implementation challenges in that they require convincing and involving several motivationally diverse actors in order to have much effect.
|
|
| 3. |
- Bennich-Björkman, Li, 1960-, et al.
(författare)
-
Dags för Lemne att lämna
- 2015
-
Ingår i: Upsala Nya Tidning. ; march 13
-
Tidskriftsartikel (populärvet., debatt m.m.)
|
|
| 4. |
|
|
| 5. |
- Eklinder-Frick, Jens Ola, et al.
(författare)
-
Innovation in a globalized world : Proximity-focused policy and border-crossing innovation projects
- 2018
-
Ingår i: The IMP Journal. - 2059-1403 .- 0809-7259. ; 12:2, s. 237-257
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Purpose: Previous IMP research has shown that innovation benefits tend to gravitate across organisational, company and legal borders. However, OECD and EU policy assume that innovation investments will create benefits in close spatial relation to where these were made. The overall purpose of this paper is to consider how opportunities and obstacles of innovation appear from the perspective of: a national policy actor, its regional mediators and a policy supported and research-based firm engaged in innovation. A specific interest is directed to what interactive aspects that are considered by these actors; in the using, producing and developing settings.Design/methodology/approach: Influenced by the research question and theoretical point of departure the authors investigate what type of interfaces our focal actors recognise in the using, producing and developing settings. A total of 41 face-to-face and phone interviews focusing on each actor's approach were conducted; 23 interviews in order to investigate the policy side of innovation attempts, while 18 interviews have been performed in order to understand a single business actor's innovation approach.Findings: The study shows that both the national policy agency and the regional policy mediators primarily operate within a developing setting, and furthermore, applies a rather peculiar interpretation of proximity. As long as the developing setting of the innovation journey is in focus, with the task to transfer academic knowledge advances to commercial actors, the proximity aspect is rather easy to fulfil. However, as soon as the producing and using settings of the innovation is taken into consideration, the innovation, if it survives, will gravitate to a producing setting where it can contribute to investments in place.Originality/value: The study investigates the opportunities and obstacles of innovation; the spatial aspects included, and how these are considered by: a national policy agency, a regional mediator and a policy-supported innovating firm, in order to juxtapose the policy doctrine with the experience of the business actors such policy wishes to support.
|
|
| 6. |
|
|
| 7. |
- Eklinder-Frick, Jens, 1980-, et al.
(författare)
-
What’s smart about smart specialization – a new EU innovation strategy or more of the same?
- 2020
-
Ingår i: Journal of business & industrial marketing. - : Emerald Group Publishing Limited. - 0885-8624 .- 2052-1189. ; 35:12, s. 1997-2010
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- PurposeThe aim of this paper is to outline what the intended benefits the smart specialization strategy (S3) is meant to create, and through what policy measures; that is, to shed light over what underpinnings S3 is based on, and if the measures based on these can affect the relations between “academia, businesses, and local authorities” – where the public and the private actors might have partly overlapping interests, but with different needs and rationales.Design/methodology/approachThe research design of this paper is based on the industrial marketing and purchasing network approach, that is, the empirical observation that business exchange has a content, which affects and gives imprints on the actors engaged in the exchange. To determine whether the S3 strategy in general, and in the two investigated regions in particular, can affect the embedding of innovations in using, producing and developing settings, and if so how, this study applied the actors–resources–activities model. In addition to investigation of the S3 strategy in general, two case studies were conducted, one each in two European Union regions with rather different business and academic research characteristics: the Marche region in Italy and the Uppsala region in Sweden.FindingsThe S3 measures rest on the judgement of which “domains” to support can be made by policy actors without deeper analysis of how the assumed firms representing these domains are related in terms of how resources are combined and activated. Instead, the S3 policy analysis is based on local policy organizations desk table investigations of what appears as innovative. Hence, in practice, the key S3 measure is still to transfer knowledge from the public to the private sector. This entails that support in terms of how to create change in established resources interfaces, which is a main source of innovation to which both established and emerging localized firms are related, remains out of policy sight.Originality/valueThe ambition with this paper is to discuss what changes S3 – with the ambition to develop and match academic research to business needs – implies and what underpinnings it is resting on. Hence, the focus is directed to what new types of policy arrangements are supposed to result in what types of benefits – and last but not least, the ability for these to interfere with businesses which are interconnected across spatial borders.
|
|
| 8. |
|
|
| 9. |
- Eklund, Magnus, 1976-, et al.
(författare)
-
Two rebelling approaches but only one embraced by policy : On the different policy advices of NIS and IMP
- 2017
-
Ingår i: The IMP Journal. - : Emerald Group Publishing Limited. - 2059-1403 .- 0809-7259. ; 11:3, s. 417-430
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Purpose – The purpose of this paper is twofold, first, to shed light on the different patterns in which international marketing and purchasing (IMP) and national innovation system (NIS) were embedded into the Swedish policy context, where the first approach must be regarded as a relative failure and the second a success, second, to compare their analytical lenses and policy implications through the study of a number of seminal texts of the two approaches.Design/methodology/approach – First, a Swedish case is selected since it provides an example of a policy context where both approaches have been considered and used as sources of inspiration for the design of policy measures. Second, the authors study a selection of the seminal texts of the two approaches in order to identify their basic theoretical assumptions. The emphasis here lies on how the schools view the importance of relations between companies, how they perceive the innovation process, their attitude towards the neoclassical market model and the explicit and implicit implications of their theoretical assumptions for policy.Findings – IMP and its notion of the heterogeneity of resources can provide a much more context grounded analysis than is possible within the NIS/Lundvall framework. However, it requires deep contextual knowledge of individual companies, industries and national and international settings to understand the value of these resources. IMP is “tied to the ground” and radically critical of the atomistic abstractions characterising the neoclassical market view. NIS, on the other hand, requires contextual knowledge on a more superficial level and can co-exist with neoclassical economics.Research limitations/implications – While the authors mainly focus on IMP and NIS, which date back to the 1980s, a later wave of concepts from the 1990s and onwards involve clusters (Porter, 1990), and triple helix (Etzkowitz and Leidesdorff, 1998). However, these latecomers share with NIS the ability to co-exist with neoclassical economics.Practical implications – IMP requires high demands on any policy maker that would adopt it, in terms of acquiring deep contextual knowledge and giving up established views on how the economy worksOriginality/value – The paper reveal that while both IMP and NIS like to present themselves as rebels radically departing from neoclassical economics and the linear model, NIS can still co-exist with neoclassical economics. Furthermore, IMP places high demands on any policy maker that would adopt it, in terms of acquiring deep contextual knowledge and giving up established views on how the economy works. NIS, on the other hand, requires contextual knowledge on a more superficial level.
|
|
| 10. |
|
|
