How innovation commons contribute to discovering and developing new
                        technologies

Allen, Darcy W E; Potts, Jason

doi:10.18352/ijc.644

Cited by 82 publications

(32 citation statements)

References 54 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Hess and Ostrom (2007:3) propose to look at "knowledge as a shared resource, a complex ecosystem that is a commonsa resource shared by a group of people that is subject to social dilemmas" and provide a rich oversight of contemporary research across many disciplines. Because we are concerned with economic issues, one relevant set of research about commons is the stream which considers the act of invention as a collective action problem (Allen 1983;Gächter et al 2010;Allen and Potts 2016). This literature addresses core issues of collective action, such as how to develop institutions to enable intangible common pool resources of information and knowledge.…”

Section: What Is the Problem Of Governance Of Science And Technology?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Conceptualizing evolutionary governance routines: governance at the interface of science and technology with knowledge-intensive innovative entrepreneurship

2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The two main purposes of this article are: 1) To propose a conceptual model for governance at the interface of science and technology with knowledgeintensive innovative entrepreneurship and 2) To develop propositions and propose a future research agenda on evolutionary governance routines. Our proposed conceptualization of governance depends upon an understanding of how different ways of developing rules and norms to interact and make decisions collectively are created and maintained, including two sub-processes. One process is to develop advanced knowledge and the second process is where entrepreneurs transform that knowledge developed as the public good and privatize it through value creation. We propose that a main task for this type of entrepreneur is to manage their engagement in the overall governance in such a way as to be perceived by others as continuing to contribute to the collective action problem. The article provides definitions and propositions in relation to the conceptualization, as well as interesting trajectories for future research.

show abstract

Section: What Is the Problem Of Governance Of Science And Technology?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Conceptualizing evolutionary governance routines: governance at the interface of science and technology with knowledge-intensive innovative entrepreneurship

2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Implementation, diffusion and acceptance within markets distinguishes innovation from pure invention [6]. Innovation success is therefore dependent upon both the technical advancement and the creation of markets, which requires active learning and creative entrepreneurial processes [7,8]. Freeman [9] shows that such activities produce waves of emergence and consolidation that can lead to network-building.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Why Do Companies Pursue Collaborative Circular Oriented Innovation?

2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We investigate why companies collaborate within the circular oriented innovation process. The purpose is to understand what motives trigger collaborative circular oriented innovation, as well as conditions, drivers and barriers. First, we define circular oriented innovation building on sustainable oriented innovation literature. Subsequently, we investigate 11 leading circular economy companies operating within the Netherlands, who developed collaborative circular oriented innovation activities. ‘Hard’ and ‘soft’ dimensions for innovation are identified and applied to delineate the drivers and barriers for collaborative circular oriented innovation. Our findings indicate that collaborations are conducted by entrepreneurially-minded actors through sharing a vision, enthusiasm, and crucially, a credible proposition for a circular economy. Furthermore, collaboration is sought early, to co-develop the problem and solution space and integrate disparate knowledge from across the value network, to mitigate increased complexity. Motives to collaborate vary between personal and organisational, and intrinsic and extrinsic levels. Collaborations start based on a relational basis between ‘CE front-runners’ to advance knowledge through experimentation. ‘Soft’ challenges to advance collaborations towards the competitive remain around culture, and the mindset to share rewards and risks. Without suitable solutions to these challenges, collaborative circular oriented innovation could remain underdeveloped within the transition towards the systemic level.

show abstract

“…Within this networks, the scaling relationships (in addition to short-term transactions, institutional platforms that focus on building longer-term relationships are created) and scaling learning (realizing the longer-term opportunity to evolve institutional designs to accelerate learning among a growing number of participants) effects can be successfully established. Allen & Potts (2016) have proposed an alternative theory, which identifies the institutional origin of new technologies further back in commons when self-organizing groups of technology enthusiasts develop effective governance rules to pool distributed information resources. The study (Egbetokun, et al, 2017) has concluded by proposing that for innovation systems theory to remain relevant in the near future there has to be a shift from systems to networks, i.e.…”

Section: Review Of Institutional Aspect Of Innovative Developmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

INSTITUTIONAL STRATEGIES OF SYSTEM SECURITY OF TECHNOLOGICAL & INNOVATION SYSTEMS

Omelyanenko¹

2019

BJES

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The purpose of this study is to consider the main aspects of system security providing institutional concept within the technological & innovation systems research methodology development through institutional innovations. In this paper, we will consider how the new evolutionary institutional theory of economic systems in the context of the space-time approach can help in organizing strategic management of development path of the innovation system, increasing system security, and effectiveness of its activities through the balance of system structure. Methodology. The scientific novelty of the research and the solution of its tasks deals, first of all, with the application of the non-system approach, which allows one to consider the factors and results of functioning of such complex economic systems as innovation macro projects, innovation processes, institutional and informational environments, etc. within the framework of providing national security. Involvement on a systematic basis of spatiotemporal analysis allows us to consider in the interrelation processes the distribution of flows of innovation resources and functions, on the one hand, and the distribution in time of similar flows. To solve the tasks of research, the classical scientific methods (analysis and synthesis, logical generalization, analogies, comparative comparison, and grapho-analytical methods), and specific methods of high technologies economy and innovation management were used. Results. As a result of the study, the features of the systemic socio-economic patterns of the functioning of innovation system institutions and the mechanism of management of innovation development in the conditions of modern global technological transformations have been determined. In the future, this makes possible the substantiation of promising areas of state regulation (participation) aimed at activating innovation processes in the economy according to the priorities related to scientific and educational, cluster and network development, and the development of a set of models for the harmonization of the system of priorities of national security and sectoral priorities of innovation development. Using the gained knowledge in practice will help to improve the state of national security, resource saving, improve conditions, and increase labour productivity, as well as the transition to sustainable development of the national economy. Practical implications. Systemic coordination of innovation components of state programs, stimulation of innovation activity, involvement of financial strategies in the innovation economy, expansion of international cooperation and activation of demand for high-tech products, increasing the effectiveness of innovation development programs of companies, and launching of national projects have been proposed as the objectives of forming institutional innovations. The proposed institutional and technological design methodology provides for the selection of institutional tools and scaling of the most effective development tools. Value/originality. The proposed network mechanisms for systemic security ensuring provide the improvement of implementing innovative development programs for the largest companies with state participation; further development of priority technological platforms and innovation networks; harmonization of technological priorities and projects formed within the framework of technological platforms, with the tools of state strategies.

show abstract

How innovation commons contribute to discovering and developing new technologies

Cited by 82 publications

References 54 publications

Conceptualizing evolutionary governance routines: governance at the interface of science and technology with knowledge-intensive innovative entrepreneurship

Conceptualizing evolutionary governance routines: governance at the interface of science and technology with knowledge-intensive innovative entrepreneurship

Why Do Companies Pursue Collaborative Circular Oriented Innovation?

INSTITUTIONAL STRATEGIES OF SYSTEM SECURITY OF TECHNOLOGICAL & INNOVATION SYSTEMS

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About