Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-wq2xx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-25T05:12:15.869Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Innovation and growth: The Australian Productivity Commission’s policy void?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2023

Robert Dalitz
Robert Dalitz*
Affiliation:
University of Canberra, Australia
*
Robert Dalitz, University of Canberra, Building 26 (Scrivener), 27 Thynne St, Bruce, ACT 2617, Australia. Email: rob.dalitz@canberra.edu.au
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Governments’ economic policies need to be based on a coherent view of the role of innovation and productivity in sustaining growth. This article analyses advice on fostering innovation from Australia’s main statutory economics adviser, the Productivity Commission. It argues that the Productivity Commission’s comprehensive 2007 report, Public Support for Science and Innovation, contributed to a policy vacuum hampering government support for innovation for nearly a decade. First, within the Productivity Commission’s understanding of innovation was a contradiction between its required policy targeting criteria and the impossibility of meeting these criteria. Second, the resulting stance on innovation policy was at odds with research and theory on the drivers of innovation and hence growth – particularly innovation systems theories and those based on evolutionary economics. The ensuing innovation policy vacuum suggests that the Productivity Commission placed the abstract ideological ‘purity’ of neoclassical economic theory above empirical exploration of how government can best support Australia’s future economic development. Since late 2015, moves to fill this policy vacuum have included a Senate inquiry, a government department restructure, and the creation of a new Innovation and Science statutory advisory board. Whether these initiatives foster sustained innovation will depend on the extent to which they adopt approaches based on innovation systems or evolutionary economics, and transcend the static neoclassical mindset espoused by the Productivity Commission.

Keywords

O2O3O4Evolutionary economicsgrowthinnovation policyinnovation systemsmacroeconomic policyorganisational learningproductivityproductivity commissionpublic policyspillovers
Type
Symposium Articles
Information
The Economic and Labour Relations Review , Volume 27 , Issue 2: Symposium: Permanent Productivity Crisis - the Productivity Commission’s role in economic and social policy in Australia , June 2016 , pp. 199 - 214
Copyright
© The Author(s) 2016

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Abramovitz, M (1956) Resource and output trends in the United States since 1870. American Economic Review 46(2): 5–23.Google Scholar
Aghion, P, Roulet, A (2014) Growth and the smart state. Annual Review of Economics 6(1): 913–926.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Arrow, KJ (1962) The Rate and Direction of Inventive Activity. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Arrow, KJ (1969) Classificatory notes on the production and transmission of technological knowledge. American Economic Review 59(2): 29–35.Google Scholar
Australian Government National Innovation and Science Agenda (2016) Welcome to the ideas boom. Available at: http://innovation.gov.au/ (accessed 1 April 2016).Google Scholar
Dodgson, M, Hughes, A, Foster, J, et al . (2011) Systems thinking, market failure, and the development of innovation policy: the case of Australia. Research Policy 40(9): 1145–1156.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Edquist, C (2004) Systems of innovation: perspectives and challenges. In: Fagerberg, J, Mowery, DC, Nelson, RR (eds) The Oxford Handbook of Innovation. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 181–208.Google Scholar
Edquist, C (2011) Design of innovation policy through diagnostic analysis: identification of systemic problems (or failures). Industrial and Corporate Change 20(6): 1–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fagerberg, J (2004) Innovation: a guide to the literature. In: Fagerberg, J, Mowery, DC, Nelson, RR (eds) The Oxford Handbook of Innovation. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 1–26.Google Scholar
Fagerberg, J, Mowery, DC, Nelson, RR (eds) (2004) The Oxford Handbook of Innovation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Firth, L, Mellor, D (2000) Learning and the new growth theories: policy dilemma. Research Policy 29(9): 1157–1163.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Freeman, C (1974) The Economics of Industrial Innovation. Ringwood, VIC, Australia: Penguin.Google Scholar
Freeman, C (1995) The ‘National System of Innovation’ in historical perspective. Cambridge Journal of Economics 19: 5–24.Google Scholar
Freeman, C, Louca, F (2001) As Time Goes by: The Information and Industrial Revolutions in Historical Perspective. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Gordon, J, Zhao, S, Gretton, P (2015) On Productivity: Concepts and Measurement: Productivity Commission Staff Research Note. Canberra, ACT, Australia: Commonwealth of Australia. Available at: http://www.pc.gov.au/research/supporting/concepts-measurement/concepts-and-measurement.pdf (accessed 3 April 2016).Google Scholar
Green, R, Toner, P (2014) Productivity Commission’s myopic failure on industry assistance. The Conversation, 2 July. Available at: https://theconversation.com/productivity-commissions-myopic-failure-on-industry-assistance-28616 (accessed 12 March 2016).Google Scholar
Grossman, GM (1996) Technology in growth theory: comment. In: Fuhrer, JC, Little, JS (eds) Technology and Growth. Conference Proceedings. Boston, MA: Federal Reserve Bank of Boston, Conference Series, pp. 83–89.Google Scholar
Heilbroner, RL (1980) The Worldly Philosophers: The Lives, Times and Ideas of the Great Economic Thinkers. New York: Simon & Schuster.Google Scholar
Jones, E (2016) Australian trade liberalisation policy: the Industries Assistance Commission and the Productivity Commission. Economic and Labour Relations Review 27(2): 181–198.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Knight, FH (1921) Risk, Uncertainty and Profit. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin Harcourt.Google Scholar
Kogut, B, Zander, U (1996) What firms do? Coordination, identity, and learning. Organization Science 7(5): 502–518.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kunda, Z (1990) The case for motivated reasoning. Psychological Bulletin 108(3): 480–498.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lam, A (2002) Alternative societal models of learning and innovation in the knowledge economy. International Social Science Journal 54(1): 67–82.Google Scholar
Lucas, J, Robert, E (1988) On the mechanics of economic development. Journal of Monetary Economics 22(1): 3–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lundvall, B-A (ed.) (1992) National Systems of Innovation: Towards a Theory of Innovation and Interactive Learning. London: Pinter Publishers.Google Scholar
Lundvall, B-A (2002) The learning economy: challenges to economic theory and policy. In: Hodgson, G (ed.) A Modern Reader in Institutional and Evolutionary Economics: Key Concepts. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, pp. 215–241.Google Scholar
Metcalfe, JS (1998) Evolutionary Economics and Creative Destruction. London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mirowski, P (1989) More Heat than Light: Economics as Social Physics, Physics as Nature’s Economics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mowery, DC, Sampat, BN (2004) Universities in national innovation systems. In: Fagerberg, J, Mowery, DC, Nelson, RR (eds) The Oxford Handbook of Innovation. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 209–239.Google Scholar
Nelson, R (1959) The simple economics of basic scientific research. Journal of Political Economy 67(3): 297–306.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nelson, R (1993) National Innovation Systems: A Comparative Analysis. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Nelson, R, Winter, S (1982) An Evolutionary Theory of Economic Change. Boston, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Nelson, R, Winter, S (2002) Evolutionary theorizing in economics. Journal of Economic Perspectives 16(2): 23–46.Google Scholar
OECD (Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development) (2007) Innovation and Growth: Rationale for an Innovation Strategy. Available: http://www.oecd.org/science/inno/39374789.pdf (accessed 1 May 2016).Google Scholar
Parliament of Australia (2015) Australia’s Innovation System (Senate Economics References Committees), 3 December. Available at: http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Committees/Senate/Economics/Innovation_System/Report (accessed 2 April 2016).Google Scholar
Pisano, G (2006) Science Business: The Promise, the Reality, and the Future of Biotech. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Business Press.Google Scholar
Potts, J (2000) The New Evolutionary Microeconomics: complexity, Competence, And Adaptive Behaviour. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
Productivity Commission (PC) (2003) From Industry Assistance to Productivity: 30 Years of ‘The Commission’. Canberra, ACT, Australia: PC. Available at: http://www.pc.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0009/195561/thirtyyearhistory.pdf (accessed 1 April 2016).Google Scholar
Productivity Commission (PC) (2007) Public Support for Science and Innovation: Research Report. Canberra, ACT, Australia: PC. Available at: http://www.pc.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0016/37123/science.pdf (Accessed 1 April 2016).Google Scholar
Productivity Commission (PC) (2010) Annual Report 2009-10: Annual Report Series. Canberra, ACT, Australia: PC. Available at: http://www.pc.gov.au/about/governance/annual-reports/annualreport0910/annual-report-2009-10.pdf (accessed 2 April 2016).Google Scholar
Productivity Commission (PC) (2015) Trade and Assistance Review 2013-14: Annual Report Series. Canberra, ACT, Australia: PC. Available at: http://www.pc.gov.au/research/ongoing/trade-assistance/2013-14/trade-assistance-review-2013-14.pdf (accessed 1 April 2016).Google Scholar
Romer, PM (1986) Increasing returns and long-run growth. Journal of Political Economy 94(5): 1002–1037.Google Scholar
Romer, PM (1990) Endogenous technological change. Journal of Political Economy 98: S71–S102.Google Scholar
Rosenberg, N (ed.) (1971) The Economics of Technological Change. Middlesex: Penguin Books.Google Scholar
Schumpeter, JA (1934) The Theory of Economic Development. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Schumpeter, JA (1939) Business Cycles: A Theoretical, Historical, and Statistical Analysis of the Capitalist Process. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
Schumpeter, JA (1943) Capitalism, Socialism, and Democracy. London: Allen & Unwin.Google Scholar
Smith, K (1998) Innovation as a systemic phenomenon: rethinking the role of policy. In: Bryant, K, Wells, A (eds) A New Economic Paradigm? Innovation-based Evolutionary Systems. Canberra, ACT, Australia: Department of Industry Science and Resources, pp. 17–51.Google Scholar
Solow, RM (1956) A contribution to the theory of economic growth. Quarterly Journal of Economics 70(1): 65–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Solow, RM (1957) Technical change and the aggregate production function. Review of Economics and Statistics 39(3): 312–320.Google Scholar
Solow, RM (1994) Perspectives on growth theory. Journal of Economic Perspectives 8(1): 45–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Turnbull, M (2016) Innovation and science at the centre of government. Media, 23 February. Available at: http://www.malcolmturnbull.com.au/media/innovation-and-science-at-the-centre-of-government (accessed 1 April 2016).Google Scholar
Verspagen, B (2004) Innovation and economic growth. In: Fagerberg, J, Mowery, DC, Nelson, RR (eds) The Oxford Handbook of Innovation. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 487–514.Google Scholar
Wishart, D (2015) The Productivity Commission and the National Competition Policy. In: Paper presented at the seminar on the political economy of permanent productivity crisis, Sydney, NSW, Australia, 25 February. Sydney, NSW, Australia: University of Sydney. Available at: http://sydney.edu.au/arts/political_economy/downloads/events/The_Productivity_Commission_and_the_National_Competition_Policy%E2%80%93David_Wishart.pdf (accessed 1 April 2016).Google Scholar
Woolthuis, RK, Lankhuizen, M, Gilsing, V (2005) A system failure framework for innovation policy design. Technovation 25: 609–619.Google Scholar
Zollo, M, Winter, SG (2002) Deliberate learning and the evolution of dynamic capabilities. Organization Science 13(3): 339–351.CrossRefGoogle Scholar