Innovation policies of Cyprus during the global economic crisis: Aligning financial institutions with National Innovation System

Kapetaniou, Chrystalla; Samdanis, Marios; Lee, Soo Hee

doi:10.1016/j.techfore.2018.02.019

Cited by 25 publications

(24 citation statements)

References 75 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Control policies (Buck and Rath 1970 ; Harding 2000 ; Hart 2001 ; George and Prabhu 2003 ; Molnár 2004 ; Na et al 2007 ; Vermeulen et al 2007a , b ; Vasudeva 2009 ; Niosi 2010 ; Liu et al 2011 ; Andrew 2012 ; Doblinger et al 2016 ; Karaulova et al 2017 ; Corsini et al 2018 ; Kapetaniou et al 2018 ; May and Schedelik 2019 ; Allen et al 2020 ; Oborn et al 2021 )…”

Section: Main Determinants Of Institutional Innovationunclassified

“…Economic conditions (Baker 1989 ; Zweifel 1995 ; Heher 2006 ; Hyvärinen 2006 ; Vermeulen et al 2007b ; Haggard and Zheng 2013 ; Sartor and Beamish 2014 ; Ma et al 2015 ; Fritsch 2015 ; Clark and Monk 2016 ; Pinho 2017 ; Yang et al 2017 ; Elle 2017 ; Vickers et al 2017 ; Kapetaniou et al 2018 ; Yang 2018 ; Jiang and Yuan 2018 ; Aziz et al 2019 ; Corsi and Prencipe 2019 ; Kim et al 2019 )…”

Section: Management Priorities For Institutional Innovationunclassified

“…Policies (Epstein 1994 ; Harding 2000 ; Hart 2001 ; George and Prabhu 2003 ; Molnár 2004 ; Na et al 2007 ; Vermeulen et al 2007b ; Vasudeva 2009 ; Niosi 2010 ; Adebowale 2012 ; Doblinger et al 2016 ; Ito et al 2016 ; Kwon and Motohashi 2017 ; Corsini et al 2018 ; Kapetaniou et al 2018 ; Allen et al 2020 )…”

Section: Management Priorities For Institutional Innovationunclassified

See 2 more Smart Citations

Systematic review of institutional innovation literature: towards a multi-level management model

AlMalki

Durugbo

2022

Manag Rev Q

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Institutional innovation creates smart institutions that idiosyncratically thrive in a world of exponential change. Through policy-driven interventions and experiential learning, managers of institutions become adept at delivering praxis- and crisis-driven innovations required for survival and success. Similarly, the management of institutional innovation remains an interest in research due to links of this form of innovation to economic growth, and the demands of on-going major socioeconomic transformations due to technological advances, increased occurrences of major crises, and emerging socioeconomic challenges. Accordingly, a key question arising from the literature concerns the range of determinants and priorities that influence institutional innovation for delivering society value. Thus, the onus is on scholarship to capture and advance knowledge for harnessing the potency of institutional innovation. The purpose of this article is to analyse the current state of research on institutional innovation. Using the systematic review methodology, we identify and critically appraise 485 peer-reviewed scientific publications between 1969 and 2021. The review finds key determinants and management priorities with a view to developing a multi-level management model of institutional innovation. Guided by insights from the review, the article sets a research agenda for future management studies of institutional innovation.

show abstract

Section: Main Determinants Of Institutional Innovationunclassified

Section: Management Priorities For Institutional Innovationunclassified

See 1 more Smart Citation

Systematic review of institutional innovation literature: towards a multi-level management model

AlMalki

Durugbo

2022

Manag Rev Q

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…We have shown above that the economic crisis has brought about a sharp drop in investment across Europe and that this drop has affected investments in infrastructure and in science, technology and innovation. Since the economic recession has begun, conditions have negatively affected R&D expenditures (Pellens et al 2018;Kapetaniou et al 2018). The gap between the innovation leading countries and the innovation lagging countries is growing (Veugelers 2016).…”

Section: The Response From the European Union So Farmentioning

confidence: 99%

Investment in innovation for European recovery: A public policy priority

Archibugi

Filippetti

Frenz

2019

Science and Public Policy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The 2008 crisis had severe consequences in Europe at many levels. One of them is the significantly lower levels of public and private investments. This article explores to what extent a large plan of public innovation investment could contribute to the overall economic recovery and to opening a new stage of development in the European Union (EU). We argue that key scientific and technological opportunities, currently untapped, exist, which have the potential to accelerate economic growth and to pull in private investments. Decisive instruments, such as the Juncker investment plan and the proposed 2021–7 Framework Programme Horizon Europe, are important steps in that direction. The article concludes by reviving Lundvall’s call for a Council for Innovation and Competence Building that should have the same political weight as the EU Economic and Financial Affairs Council.

show abstract

“…Grilli et al (2018) examine the promising research areas for assessing the effectiveness and impact of financing innovation. The articles by Kapetaniou (2018), Lanahan andFeldman (2015), van Rijnsoevera et al (2015), Padilla-Pé rez and Gaudin (2014), Liu et al (2011) analyze national innovation systems, which focus on improving the efficiency of innovation activities by expanding the availability of financial instruments and their accessibility to entrepreneurs. Bryan and Lemus (2017), Borrá s and Edquist (2013), Nill and Kemp (2009) in their works examine various types of innovation policy tools.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Strategic Planning and Management of High-Tech Developments and Innovative Technical Solutions

Новиков¹,

Amirova²,

Kosykh³

et al. 2019

RWE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The innovation-oriented activity of enterprises is vital to the formation of competitive positions of the national economy on the world scene. Moreover, the importance of innovation is due to the complex modern economic conditions. Because of the sanctions from developed countries, it is necessary to increase production activities within the country in order to meet domestic demand, as well as to improve cooperation with the countries of the Eurasian Economic Union and Southeast Asia. The study focuses on strategic planning and management of high-tech developments and innovative technical solutions. The authors predicted the financing of science in Russia until 2030. The paper uses comparative analysis, systematization, induction, and deduction. Russia has developed a positive trend in financing the R&D sphere until 2030, which will improve its position in the global competitiveness rating. These findings can be used by managers of enterprises with innovation activities, by authorities regulating innovation activities in Russia, and by specialists in the field of innovation.

show abstract

Innovation policies of Cyprus during the global economic crisis: Aligning financial institutions with National Innovation System

Abstract: The version in the Kent Academic Repository may differ from the final published version. Users are advised to check http://kar.kent.ac.uk for the status of the paper. Users should always cite the published version of record.

Cited by 25 publications

References 75 publications

Systematic review of institutional innovation literature: towards a multi-level management model

Systematic review of institutional innovation literature: towards a multi-level management model

Investment in innovation for European recovery: A public policy priority

Strategic Planning and Management of High-Tech Developments and Innovative Technical Solutions

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About