دانلود رایگان مقاله لاتین سیاست نوآورانه توزیع حساس از سایت الزویر
عنوان فارسی مقاله:
سیاست های نوآورانه توزیع حساس: مفهوم سازی و مثال های تجربی
عنوان انگلیسی مقاله:
Distribution sensitive innovation policies: Conceptualization and empirical examples
سال انتشار : 2017
بخشی از مقاله انگلیسی:
2. Innovation, economic disadvantage, and DSIPs
Economic research on the effects of innovation uncovers a troubling state of affairs. Although for developed countries, technological innovation has become the main source of sustained economic growth, its economic impact is uneven and often excludes certain groups. One reason is that the application of new industrial R&D and its related innovations exacerbates economic hardship by replacing workers with machines. Accelerated technological innovation makes certain occupations irrelevant because new technology substitutes for human labor (Brynjolfsson and McAfee, 2012). While highly skilled workers are often viewed as the beneficiaries of accelerated innovation (seeAcemoglu, 2002; He and Liu, 2008), among the ‘losers’, the share of workers considered low and medium skilled is high. In addition, studies dedicated to the influence that certain modes of financing exert on innovation, and the distribution of rewards within the corporate structure, present a disturbing picture: practices adopted to maximize stock value, such as stock buybacks, benefit stockholders but often channel corporate revenue away from investments in innovation (Lazonick and Mazzucato, 2013; Lazonick, 2014). No less importantly, the goal of share value maximization has all too often come at the expense of retaining workers in the firm. Workers, at all skill levels, face a considerably less stable working environment than did their counterparts a generation ago (Lazonick, 2009). The standard policy response to economic disadvantage is unrelated to innovation policy;instead, it seeks to achieve redistribution by making taxes more progressive and to support the economically disadvantaged and socially excluded by increasing welfare programs. These responses are vital, but researchers in social policy often recognize the limits to increasing taxation rates and expanding the welfare state. High marginal tax rates might hamper economic growth in different ways, and, even more importantly, powerful interests mobilize effective opposition to such redistributive measures (Pierson, 2001; Steinmo, 2002). Accordingly, we argue that governments wishing to address economic inequities (certainly not a ubiquitous goal) should also adopt measures that directly affect the market’s allocation of income.2 Indeed, several recent studies argue that different developed states have turned towards a “social investment state’ model in which programs, such as education and training, that invest in fostering individual economic capacities – especially of the disadvantaged – are prioritized over ‘consumption’ programs (e.g., unemployment benefits) (Morel et al., 2012; Gingrich and Ansell, 2015). “Social investment” programs are motivated by both economic growth and social objectives such as reducing poverty. Thus, for example, increased government support for vocational training is likely to increase the productivity of program participants: something that would contribute to national aggregate economic growth and, concurrently, significantly boost the earning potential of individuals who might otherwise find themselves on the economy’s margins. While the literature focuses on traditional social investment domains, for example Active Labor Market Policies, in principle, innovation policy could also be employed. Hence, we view DSIPs as a component of the social investment state alongside other supply oriented programs. Given the critical role that technological innovation plays in economic growth and in the social distribution of resources, it seems reasonable to assume that S&T and innovation policy could be employed to influence economic disadvantage. Currently, S&T and innovation policy is geared almost exclusively to reaching the overarching goals of increasing domestic firms’ international competitiveness, economic growth, and national security, but this does not mean that what is usually perceived as an economic and security policy could not be employed as a social policy as well.
PDF]Severing the Innovation-Inequality Link: Distribution Sensitive Science ... portal.idc.ac.il/en/schools/government/research/documents/zehavi.pdf Nov 17, 2014 - Severing the Innovation-Inequality Link: Distribution Sensitive .... commentators have argued that innovation policy could be used to offset this ... 6. Distribution sensitive innovation policies: Conceptualization ... - 首页 en.ruc.findplus.cn/search_list.html?h=articles&db=edsggo... Translate this page Distribution sensitive innovation policies: Conceptualization and empirical ... types of innovation policies that address different categories of social disadvantage. [PDF]innovation policies for inclusive development - OECD.org https://www.oecd.org/innovation/inno/scaling-up-inclusive-innovations.pdf to which the distribution of innovation capacities evolves evenly across the ..... for pro-inclusive and grassroots innovations is more sensitive to price, and often ... stephen roper on Twitter: "What is a DDIP? Read about Distribution ... https://twitter.com/SteveRop/status/824617022873108480 Jan 26, 2017 - What is a DDIP? Read about Distribution Sensitive Innovation Policies. #NEWS @ERC_UK BLOG. http://ow.ly/4cZy308mLbR @markhart84 ... Economic Distribution and Innovation Policy in OECD Countries https://www.carloalberto.org/assets/working-papers/no.303.pdf by D Breznitz - 2013 - Cited by 1 - Related articles The few publications that link innovation policy to distribution indicate a ..... generally not sensitive to this technical choice although in a minority of cases ...