Innovation for development and poverty reduction: an integrative literature review

Abstract

Purpose This paper develops a critical analysis of the innovation discourse, arguing that a more contextualised understanding of the challenges of innovation for development and poverty reduction in low income economies will help us to unravel new development opportunities and provide alternatives to conventional capitalist paths to innovation. Design/methodology/approachWe offer an integrative review of the literatures addressing the topic of innovation emerging from within developing countries. We argue that a literature review that offers an initial conceptualisation and synthesis of the literature to date on the theme of innovation from within developing countries provides for a more valuable contribution than a reconceptualization of existing models. FindingsThe article highlights different narratives of innovation, their emergence their implications. Originality/valueThis article shows that the recent evolution of the discourse of development is increasingly intertwined with elements that originated in other discursive worlds. The last three decades of innovation research have been characterised by a 'cross-pollination' between different disciplines: development studies, science and technology studies (STS), business management and organization studies.

Inclusive Innovation in Developed Countries: The Who, What, Why, and How

“…The difference then lies in the way in which excluded groups are to be considered and to which extent the various dimensions of inclusion or exclusion are thematized in each model. Indeed, the literature places great emphasis on the nature of inclusion, highlighting the need of inclusion not simply as users or consumers of innovations, but also as producers, and designers of innovation (Chataway et al, 2014;Foster & Heeks, 2015;Heeks et al, 2014;Pansera & Martinez, 2017).…”

“…As a result, policies began to focus more on building scientific and technological capacity and infrastructure (Brook et al, 2013 emerging literature has renewed its focus on innovation for development -as compared to science and technology capacity and infrastructure. This emerging perspective considers innovation occurring in developing countries -using terms such as "frugal innovation" (Lehner & Gausemeier, 2016;Zeschky et al, 2011), "reverse innovation" (Chataway et al, 2014), "Jugaad innovation", "bottom of the pyramid (BOP) innovation" (Hall et al, 2012;Prahalad, 2005), "Gandhian innovation", "empathetic innovation" and "pro-poor vs. fromthe-poor", "long-tail and long-tailoring innovation", "below-the-radar innovation" -and explicitly acknowledges social contexts characterized by resource constraints and insecurities (Pansera & Martinez, 2017).…”

Traditional ecological knowledge in innovation governance: a framework for responsible and just innovation

“…While current debates about innovation do not converge on one definition, much of the literature treats contributions to societal goals at least as a minimal condition for genuine innovations (e.g. UNICEF 2010; Betts, Bloom, and Omata 2012;Pansera and Martinez 2017), so that change in the context of a specific community qualifies as innovative only if it aligns with the societal goals of that community. If innovation is understood in terms of this minimal condition, economic growth and technological modernization turn out to be neither necessary nor sufficient for innovation.…”

Public Policies on Innovation and Small Businesses in a Swinging Economy

“…This is where the social role of innovation in the small business and context-oriented, bottom-up policy-making may give the support a country needs to prosper. 6 In the context of swinging economies and developing countries, the small business may be a local answer to socioeconomic development, given its capability of implementing local solutions -such as Indian jugaad, Brazilian gambiarra, and Chinese chuangxin, all some sort of bricolage in their own contexts -to local problems (Deaton, 2017;George et al, 2015;Pansera & Martinez, 2017). 7 For example: Isenberg (2010) points out that even though certain extremely poor and war-torn nations such as Rwanda in Africa have been successful in creating entrepreneurial ecosystems and reduced poverty considerably, with job creations and GDP-growth, most of the governments in emerging and developing economies fail because they develop unattainable goals as a result of bad policy-making practices.…”

“…India has more than one Brazil of poor people, and half of them are chronically poor and will remain poor forever (Mahapatra, 2017;OXFAM International, n.d.). Bad policy approaches and ill-fitted "narratives of innovation" (Pansera & Martinez, 2017, p. 5) are singled out as reasons to the chronicity of poverty in India (Mehta & Shah, 2003;Pansera & Martinez, 2017).…”