The rise of systemic instruments in innovation policy

By Ruud E. H. M. Smits, Stefan Kuhlmann. 2004

721 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Management of Technology and Innovation, Political Science and International Relations, Strategy and Management

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/dda6b3ebd660f31ab0e9d50beb1495ce527ae648

How researchers see this paper

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

In Management of Technology and Innovation

1. L. Klerkx
2. Elvira Uyarra
3. Michaela Trippl
4. C. Leeuwis
5. Franz Tödtling
6. Ben R. Martin
7. Karoline S. Rogge
8. A. Hall

In Political Science and International Relations

1. Ben R. Martin
2. L. Klerkx
3. Michaela Trippl
4. Elvira Uyarra
5. Franz Tödtling
6. Edurne Magro
7. Kieron Flanagan
8. Karoline S. Rogge

In Strategy and Management

1. L. Klerkx
2. C. Leeuwis
3. Marko P. Hekkert
4. Elvira Uyarra
5. A. Hall
6. Simona Negro
7. Karoline S. Rogge
8. Kieron Flanagan

Citations in the corpus

• Strengthening Agricultural Innovation Capacity: Are Innovation Brokers the Answer? (2009, methodology): “A Dutch example is the Innovation Network Rural Areas and Agricultural Systems (INRAAS), described by Smits and Kuhlmann (2004).”
• Local Governments Supporting Local Energy Initiatives: Lessons from the Best Practices of Saerbeck (Germany) and Lochem (The Netherlands) (2015, background): “Moreover, LEI activities might invoke new modes of governance and systemic policy instruments [73–75].”
• Beyond knowledge brokering: an exploratory study on innovation intermediaries in an evolving smallholder agricultural system in Kenya (2011, background): “Following a comprehensive review of various authors who have looked at roles and functions of intermediaries and brokers in supporting and managing innovation processes (van Lente et al., 2003; Smits and Kuhlmann, 2004; Howells, 2006; Klerkx and Leeuwis, 2008b; Kristjanson et al., 2009), we noted si”
• The Impact of Foresight on Innovation Policy-Making: Recent Experiences and Future Perspectives (2010, background): “• Policy-facilitating relates to the function of a foresight exercise as a systemic instrument (Smits and Kuhlmann, 2004), that is, an instrument that complements traditional steering approaches.”
• Guides or gatekeepers? Incumbent-oriented transition intermediaries in a low-carbon era (2020, background): “failures in innovation systems and processes [11,42,50], including information, managerial, cultural and cognitive gaps [51] – although they are not necessarily created to fulfil such explicit purposes [12].”
• Orchestrating innovation networks: The case of innovation brokers in the agri-food sector (2010, background): “Such organizations aim at eliminating obstacles for cooperation and innovation while stimulating and facilitating these processes (Howells 2006 ; Smits and Kuhlmann 2004 ; Winch and Courtney 2007 ).”
• Transformative policy mixes in socio-technical scenarios: The case of the low-carbon transition of the German electricity system (2010–2050) (2020, neutral): “, 2012) but also systemic concerns (Smits and Kuhlmann, 2004; Wieczorek and Hekkert, 2012).”
• Policy mixes for sustainability transitions: An extended concept and framework for analysis (2016, background): “…most noteworthy that we include a systemic purpose of instruments by which we refer to “instruments that support functions operating at system level” (Smits and Kuhlmann, 2004, 11 An alternative analytical lense is provided by Quitzow (2011, 2015a), which includes existing policy instruments and…”
• Rationales for Public Policy Intervention in the Innovation Process: Systems of Innovation Approach (2010, background): “The rationale for public intervention under the systems of innovation perspective has recently received attention among scholars and practitioners (Koch, 2003; OECD, 2001; Smits and Kuhlmann, 2004; Woolthuis et al 2005).”
• Reconceptualising the 'policy mix' for innovation (2011, background): “First, a general recognition that innovation-driven economic success depends on more than traditionally-conceived S&T policies - exemplified by the emergence of 'systemic' rationales and new typologies of innovation policies that emphasise the role of ‗indirect‘ as well as traditional 'direct' measu”
• Complex innovation policy systems: Towards an evaluation mix (2013, background): “2 This can be seen in the evolution of the policy instruments employed (Smits and Kuhlmann, 2004).”
• Unravelling the role of innovation platforms in supporting co-evolution of innovation: Contributions and tensions in a smallholder dairy development programme (2013, background): “…technological and socio-institutio nal arrangements not only in the sense of trying to fit into pre-existing conditions (Leeuwis and Aarts, 2011; Smits and Kuhlmann, 2004 ), but also in actively trying to change the socio-ins titutional environm ent, which has been referred to as effective…”
• Establishment and embedding of innovation brokers at different innovation system levels: insights from the Dutch agricultural sector (2009, background): “Furthermore, innovation brokers may set up networks that disturb existing structures [13], but, as Smits and Kuhlmann [16] argue, destruction of existing networks is sometimes also their goal to overcome lock-in.”