创新概念的理论化和应用的新趋势:对发展有何影响?

IF 1.4 Q3 DEVELOPMENT STUDIES
B. Diyamett
{"title":"创新概念的理论化和应用的新趋势:对发展有何影响?","authors":"B. Diyamett","doi":"10.1080/2157930X.2021.1975360","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT The field of innovation studies is in a crisis: it is a victim of its success. This is because – along with the increasing popularity and use – the clarity of the innovation concept seems to be deflated. More importantly, this field also suffers a methodological crisis. Specifically, there seems to be an increased tendency to turn around the normal relationship between theory, policy and practice: rather than deriving policies from empirically informed theories, there are emerging tendencies for abstract policy ideas to inform theory instead. This paper shows how the work on so-called ‘social innovation’ and on ‘transformative innovation policy’ is leading these tendencies. It argues that these tendencies that are inconsistent with scientific principles are detrimental to the poor and technology-constrained countries. Such countries need evidence-informed innovation policy derived from empirically informed theoretical propositions to build their technological capabilities and spur social and economic development. But the new approaches seem to be weakening the ability of innovation studies to inform policy which is effective for actions in developing countries. The diffusion of these new frameworks is kicking away the ladder. This article thus calls upon innovation and development scholars to put things right by revisiting the emerging models.","PeriodicalId":37815,"journal":{"name":"Innovation and Development","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2021-09-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Emerging trends in theorizing and use of the concept of innovation: what implication for development?\",\"authors\":\"B. Diyamett\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/2157930X.2021.1975360\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT The field of innovation studies is in a crisis: it is a victim of its success. This is because – along with the increasing popularity and use – the clarity of the innovation concept seems to be deflated. More importantly, this field also suffers a methodological crisis. Specifically, there seems to be an increased tendency to turn around the normal relationship between theory, policy and practice: rather than deriving policies from empirically informed theories, there are emerging tendencies for abstract policy ideas to inform theory instead. This paper shows how the work on so-called ‘social innovation’ and on ‘transformative innovation policy’ is leading these tendencies. It argues that these tendencies that are inconsistent with scientific principles are detrimental to the poor and technology-constrained countries. Such countries need evidence-informed innovation policy derived from empirically informed theoretical propositions to build their technological capabilities and spur social and economic development. But the new approaches seem to be weakening the ability of innovation studies to inform policy which is effective for actions in developing countries. The diffusion of these new frameworks is kicking away the ladder. This article thus calls upon innovation and development scholars to put things right by revisiting the emerging models.\",\"PeriodicalId\":37815,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Innovation and Development\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-09-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Innovation and Development\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/2157930X.2021.1975360\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"DEVELOPMENT STUDIES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Innovation and Development","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/2157930X.2021.1975360","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"DEVELOPMENT STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

创新研究领域正处于危机之中:它是其成功的受害者。这是因为——随着越来越多的流行和使用——创新概念的清晰度似乎被削弱了。更重要的是,这一领域也面临着方法论危机。具体来说,理论、政策和实践之间的正常关系似乎出现了一种日益扭转的趋势:不是从经验理论中推导出政策,而是出现了用抽象政策思想来为理论提供信息的趋势。本文展示了所谓的“社会创新”和“变革性创新政策”是如何引领这些趋势的。它认为,这些不符合科学原则的趋势对贫穷和技术受限的国家是有害的。这些国家需要基于实证的创新政策,这些政策来源于基于经验的理论命题,以建立其技术能力并刺激社会和经济发展。但是这些新方法似乎正在削弱创新研究为发展中国家有效行动的政策提供信息的能力。这些新框架的传播正在把梯子踢开。因此,本文呼吁研究创新和发展的学者通过重新审视新兴模式来纠正错误。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Emerging trends in theorizing and use of the concept of innovation: what implication for development?
ABSTRACT The field of innovation studies is in a crisis: it is a victim of its success. This is because – along with the increasing popularity and use – the clarity of the innovation concept seems to be deflated. More importantly, this field also suffers a methodological crisis. Specifically, there seems to be an increased tendency to turn around the normal relationship between theory, policy and practice: rather than deriving policies from empirically informed theories, there are emerging tendencies for abstract policy ideas to inform theory instead. This paper shows how the work on so-called ‘social innovation’ and on ‘transformative innovation policy’ is leading these tendencies. It argues that these tendencies that are inconsistent with scientific principles are detrimental to the poor and technology-constrained countries. Such countries need evidence-informed innovation policy derived from empirically informed theoretical propositions to build their technological capabilities and spur social and economic development. But the new approaches seem to be weakening the ability of innovation studies to inform policy which is effective for actions in developing countries. The diffusion of these new frameworks is kicking away the ladder. This article thus calls upon innovation and development scholars to put things right by revisiting the emerging models.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Innovation and Development
Innovation and Development Social Sciences-Cultural Studies
CiteScore
3.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
24
期刊介绍: conomic development and growth depend as much on social innovations as on technological advances. However, the discourse has often been confined to technological innovations in the industrial sector, with insufficient attention being paid to institutional and organisational change and to the informal sector which in some countries in the South plays a significant role. Innovation and Development is an interdisciplinary journal that adopts a broad approach to the study of innovation, in all sectors of the economy and sections of society, furthering understanding of the multidimensional process of innovation and development. It provides a forum for the discussion of issues pertaining to innovation, development and their interaction, both in the developed and developing world, with the aim of encouraging sustainable and inclusive growth. The journal encourages articles that approach the problem broadly in line with innovation system perspective focusing on the evolutionary and institutional structure of innovation and development. This focus cuts across the disciplines of Economics, Sociology, Political Science, Science and Technology Policy, Geography and Development Practice. In a section entitled Innovation in Practice, the journal includes short reports on innovative experiments with proven development impact with a view to encouraging scholars to undertake systematic inquiries on such experiments. Brief abstracts of degree awarded PhD theses in the broad area of concern for the journal and brief notes which highlight innovative ways of using internet resources and new databases or software are also published.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信