Skip to main content
main-content

Über dieses Buch

This book provides a critical re-examination of the Innovation Union Scoreboard (IUS) as the main tool used by the European Commission and other policy-making bodies to measure national innovation capacity. Given that contemporary societies and economies are to a great extent characterised by the processes of production, dissemination and application (re-combination) of knowledge, the accurate monitoring and measurement of R&D efficiency and innovation performance on national, regional and firm level are of outmost importance. The contextual reconstruction of the model of indicators used by IUS reveals that the accuracy and validity of measurement are not satisfactory, and that substantial modifications of metrics are needed to achieve stronger theoretical significance and policy-relevance. In this work, the »epistemic turn« is emphasised and offered as an alternative, namely in the sense of the shift from a mechanicist-positivist orientation toward a more reflective and contextual post-positivist approach. ​

Inhaltsverzeichnis

Frontmatter

Chapter 1. Introduction

Abstract
The purpose of this publication is to evaluate the achievements and shortcomings of the measurement of cross-national innovation capacity in the context of emerging knowledge mobilisation and innovation-driven development. The theoretical background is based on the intersection of economic sociology, social studies of science and technology, as well as theories of national innovation and learning systems. Seen from a methodological point of view, the author attempts to transcend the limitations of the positivist-empiricist approach by adopting a more contextual and case-based orientation.
Frane Adam

Chapter 2. Methodological and Epistemic Framework: From Positivism to Post-positivism

Abstract
When we talk about positivism, empiricism, post-positivism or the antipositivist (interpretive) approach, we mean the epistemological and methodological frame of reference that defines the attitude and relation of the researcher to the production of data and the selection of research tools and methods.
Frane Adam

Chapter 3. Innovation: Measurement and Indicators

Abstract
Briefly looking at the historical view of innovation data collection, we see that the first attempts to structure a formal guide for gathering R&D data can be traced back to the 1960s. This led to the first Frascati Manual in 1962 (Frascati Manual 2002). However, dealing specifically with collecting and interpreting innovation data, the Oslo Manual is much younger (1992) and so coherent methodological guidelines for innovation data have only been available since the 1990s.
Frane Adam

Chapter 4. Innovation Union Scoreboard: Central Monitoring System for the EU

Abstract
The European Innovation Scoreboard (EIS) has been developed at the initiative of the European Commission to provide a comparative evaluation of the innovation performance with regard to the Lisbon Strategy (Hollanders and van Cruysen 2008). It undergone several changes since its inception (in 2001) up until recently, when it was renamed or better said replaced by its follower the Innovation Union Scoreboard (IUS), which is prepared by the Maastricht Economic and Social Research and Training Centre on Innovation and Technology (MERIT), in collaboration with the Commission’s in-house science service—the Joint Research Centre (JRC).
Frane Adam

Chapter 5. Country Profiles and Patterns Regarding Innovation Performance

Abstract
The EIS-IUS report on the state-of-the-art of innovation performance in EU members and some other countries is published every year. A comparison with main global competitors, like the USA, Japan, Korea and BRIC countries is also a part of this report. However, the main focus is on the mean scores for countries’ individual indicators and how they deviate from the EU average and a calculation of a composite index for each country. Our impression is that these reports (“Country profiles”) give quite a one-sided and static picture without paying much attention to contextual factors and inconsistencies. We believe that a more dynamic approach would be already possible on the basis of the same datasets. However, in order to get a more holistic picture, some other data sources are needed as well as a serious consideration of previous and recent criticism by different authors (as shown in the previous chapter). Above all, a more contextuallyoriented analysis should come to the forefront as it would provide more complex and in-depth insights and conclusions.
Frane Adam

Chapter 6. Some Comparisons with Other Scoreboards

Abstract
Taking into account other scoreboards dealing with the measurement of national innovation performance and comparing the results of the EIS-IUS with them, we can see some convergent or similar results, but also quite different rankings and clusterings of countries are not so rare. It is true that these scoreboards are not always directly comparable since they employ different methodology and datasets (as we mentioned in the first and second chapter). However, if we know the differences (and similarities) their findings can be helpful and can correct the shortcomings of the EIS-IUS.
Frane Adam

Chapter 7. On Policy Implications

Abstract
As mentioned, the IUS does give us a general picture of the state and trends of innovation activity. However, this only applies to those readers and users who carefully read the entire report and are aware of the limitations and weaknesses of indicators and databases. On the other hand, a superficial overview of the results can lead to one-sided or even false conclusions.
Frane Adam

Chapter 8. Concluding Remarks

Abstract
In this publication, we have tried to highlight the achievements and shortcomings of measuring the innovative performance and functioning of national innovation systems (at the EU level) from several different angles. One clearly cannot be satisfied with the current measurement efforts and metrics used by IUS and other scoreboards and studies dealing with this topics.
Frane Adam

Backmatter

Weitere Informationen

Premium Partner

    Marktübersichten

    Die im Laufe eines Jahres in der „adhäsion“ veröffentlichten Marktübersichten helfen Anwendern verschiedenster Branchen, sich einen gezielten Überblick über Lieferantenangebote zu verschaffen. 

    Bildnachweise