The Entrepreneurial State: Debunking Public vs. Private Sector Myths

By N. Null. 2015

423 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Knjiga pod nazivom The Entrepreneurial State: Debunking Public vs. Private Sector Myths rezultat je izvješća koje je autorica izradila za thinktank Demos (UK) s primarnim ciljem uvjeravanja vlade da promijeni dosadašnju strategiju te preuzme aktivniju ulogu u poticanju inovacija i poduzetništva kroz preuzimanje dijela rizika. Iz samog naslova knjige, ali i analizirajući ovu knjigu sa šireg stajališta, može se zaključiti da je ključno pitanje koje se postavlja vezano uz ulogu države u ekonomiji koja se nalazi u središtu istraživanja ekonomskog rasta i razvoja. Analizom kolektivnog djelovanja različitih sudionika u procesu poticanja rasta, autorica istražuje i političko-ekonomske aspekte inovacijskog ekosustava iz čega proizlazi njezina podjela na parazitski i simbiotski sustav. Kao što Mazzucato ističe, država ne može (i ne smije) popustiti pred zahtjevima različitih interesnih grupa, jer to obično rezultira zarobljavanjem države1 i parazitskim inovacijskim ekosustavom. Ona mora dinamički surađivati s onim interesnim skupinama koje se smatraju pokretačima tehnoloških promjena i ekonomskog rasta što će rezultirati željenim simbiotskim inovacijskim sustavom. Dakle, državu vidi kao pokretačku snagu inovacija i promjena, a ne samo kao aktera kojem je glavni cilj minimizirati

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/aaec7cd594e8bb33acc40af7e04255bd9f2b6fa6

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

Citations in the corpus

National and Sub-national Policies and Institutions (2014, background): “11), but may also help to compensate for barriers to private 32 investment that may result from long lifetimes of incumbent technologies leading to lengthy 33 transition times from one system/technology to another (Fouquet and Pearson, 2006; Fouquet, 34 2010), uncertainty about future levelized cost”
Regional worlds: from related variety in regional diversification to strategic coupling in global production networks (2020, unknown): “In the United States, for example, different regions and states compete against each other for high value-added jobs and activities embedded in diverse GPN (e.g., Silicon Valley, Research Triangle and Route 128) (Block & Keller, 2011; Mazzucato, 2013; O’Mara, 2019; Saxenian, 1994).”
Policy for innovative entrepreneurship: Institutions, interventions, and societal challenges (2021, background): “Even recent attempts to identify specific government programs as the key drivers of today’s most important technologies (Mazzucato, 2015) are problematic, as they typically consist of “just-so stories” without attention to counterfactual explanations or similarly designed but failed programs (Karlso”
Next-Generation Innovation Policy and Grand Challenges (2018, background): “…move from orchestration to concertation, they remain responsible for the public interest, keeping two major tasks: (1) there is a continued if not increasing need for targeted investment (cf. Mazzucato 2015) in knowledge bases and market creation (not at least through demand-based policies).”
The Politics of Sustainability and Development (2016, unknown): “Mazzucato M. 2013.”
How to Respond to the Fourth Industrial Revolution, or the Second Information Technology Revolution? Dynamic New Combinations between Technology, Market, and Society through Open Innovation (2018, unknown): “Second, systems should be secured to significantly strengthen the entrepreneurial role of national governments, such as the installation and reinforcement of national investment banks [20] (p.”
Building a hidden investment state? The European Investment Bank, national development banks and European economic governance (2019, unknown): “To this end, we draw on recent attempts defining states as ‘developmental networks states’ (Block 2008) or as ‘entrepreneurial’ (Mazzucato 2015) when they dispose over governmental agencies, including state-owned investment”
Perspectives on Cluster Evolution: Critical Review and Future Research Issues (2015, unknown): “This is clearly emphasized by Mazzucato (2013) who stresses the fundamental role of the state, through its various agencies and laboratories, in the development of radical technological innovations, and in the creation of new research based clusters.”
Shaping selection environments for industrial catch-up and sustainability transitions: A systemic perspective on endogenizing windows of opportunity (2019, unknown): “This has recently been discussed under the term of “directionality” of long-term 36 transformative change (Weber and Rohracher, 2012) and which role the state should play in these 37 endeavours (Mazzucato, 2013).”
Inside the high-tech black box: A critique of technology entrepreneurship policy (2014, background): “In recent years, both the OECD and the European Union have strongly endorsed the view that innovation is a key driver of economic growth (European Commission, 2010; OECD, 2010a; Flanagan et al., 2011; Dolfsma and Seo, 2013; Cox and Rigby, 2013; Mazzucato, 2013).”
Three frames for innovation policy: R&D, systems of innovation and transformative change (2018, background): “Recently Mazzucato (2013) focusses on the important role of the state as high-level risk-taker in developing new technologies, an activity that is both downstream and more purposeful than science investment.”