Slavo Radosevic

1. Transformative Innovation Policy (TIP) asks public policy to do more than correct market failures or support isolated technology projects. It asks policy to shape the direction of change, to eng...

The global economy has undergone two significant shifts in recent decades: digitalisation and the green transition. While each has been studied extensively, their intersection remains underexplored. This study reviews metrics for assessing digital and green transformations, both separately and jointly, and identifies key challenges in evaluating their complementarities and trade-offs. By mapping current approaches and offering a comprehensive framework, the paper highlights gaps. The paper proposes a theory-driven metrics framework to support integrated strategies for sustainable innovation and structural transformation toward a green and digital economy.

The exact nature of industrial/innovation (I/I) policy challenges and the best way to address them are unknown ex ante. This requires a degree of experimentation, which can be problematic in the context of an accountable public administration and leaves the question of how to reconcile the experimental nature of I/I policy with the need for public accountability, a crucial but unresolved issue. The trade-off between experimentation and accountability requires a governance model that will allow continuous feedback loops among the various stakeholders and ongoing evaluation of and adjustments to activities as programmes are implemented. We propose an ‘action learning’ approach, incorporating the governance mechanism of ‘learning networks’ to handle the problems of implementing experimental governance of new and untried I/I policies. We resolve the issue of accountability by drawing on the literature on network governance in public policy. By integrating control and learning dimensions of accountability, this approach enables us to resolve conceptually and empirically trade-offs between the need for experimentation and accountability in I/I policy.

This paper explores the pace and direction of technological development by using a technology upgrade conceptual and measurement framework. This approach is applied to a sample of 164 economies worldwide between 2002 and 2019. Within the framework of technology upgrading, the paper focuses on digitalisation and “greening” as its two significant structural features. We explore their relationship with different components of technology upgrading and the relationship between technology upgrading components and different indicators of macroeconomic productivity. We have adopted a longitudinal fixed effects regression method with control for unobserved heterogeneity, clustered standard errors, and time dummies. Our results show that the growth of research and development (R&D) capabilities does not translate into aggregate productivity growth. There is a lack of unconditional relationship between aggregate productivity growth, digitalisation and greening. However, there are “latecomer advantages” to basic digitalisation for lower middle- and low-income economies and “latecomer liabilities” in the greening of the economy for upper-middle-income economies. In addition, levels of digitalisation and greening do not correlate, suggesting these two transformation processes are not yet integrated into ‘ICT-assisted greening’. When we control for income levels, the impact of components of technology upgrading on productivity is isolated to specific components and significant only for some income groups. The absence of a significant simultaneous effects of several components of technology upgrading on productivity points to large transformation failures. We conclude that the role of science and technology systems in spurring sustainable development would require a broad scope for science and technology (S&T) policies, their coordination, and integration with non-innovation policies.

This paper explores the determinants of productivity gaps within the European Union in computing, chemicals, basic metals and food manufacturing – four sectors that vary in terms of the intensity of sectoral R&D. Our analysis reveals that the main causes of these productivity gaps are intensity of unembodied or disembodied R&D activity and R&D embodied in purchased equipment and machinery, and their interplay. While disembodied and embodied R&D are both associated positively to closing productivity gaps, the interaction between the two does not have the same effect. There is no complementarity between these technology acquisition modes, despite both disembodied and embodied technology are crucial for productivity catch up. In a policy context, this suggests possible lack of coordination between R&D policy and technology transfer (that is, foreign direct investment, trade and industrial policy). We show, also, that the productivity gap between ‘peripheral’ (southern and eastern) and ‘north’ EU countries is widening.

The globalisation trend of the past few decades, driven to a large extent by the proliferation of GVCs, has led to a set of significant changes in patterns of technology upgrading and new modes of interaction between domestic technology efforts and external sources of technological knowledge. Whether this new dynamic will lead to continuing increase in the economic importance of emerging economies will ultimately depend on whether their productivity growth will be driven by technology upgrading, requiring active and coordinated activity orchestrated by a variety of state and non-state actors under diverse sectoral, regional and national innovation systems. The new dynamic also reinforces the focus on local–global interfaces which becomes ever more important once we recognize that in the 21st century technology upgrading challenges depend much more on improvements in connectivity and on the industrial ecosystem. Still, the globalization process experienced in the past few decades—reflected in this collection of papers—may need to be recalibrated in the face of the drastic geopolitical changes that the process itself has brought about.