This article was accepted into the corpus but its outbound wikilinks were never NER-processed — typical at the deepest BFS hop or when the run's entity cap was reached. No expansion funnel to show.
| OECD Reviews of Innovation Policy | |
|---|---|
| Title | OECD Reviews of Innovation Policy |
| Publisher | Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development |
| Country | France |
| Language | English, French |
| Firstdate | 1997 |
| Frequency | Irregular |
OECD Reviews of Innovation Policy provides comparative assessments of national innovation systems prepared under the auspices of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development in Paris, offering diagnostic analysis and policy recommendations. The series synthesizes evidence drawn from peer reviews, statistical indicators, and expert missions to inform ministers, ministers’ advisers and senior officials across member and partner countries such as United States, Germany, Japan, United Kingdom, and China. It links to international instruments and dialogues involving actors such as the World Bank, the European Commission, the International Monetary Fund, the United Nations Development Programme, and the G20.
OECD Reviews of Innovation Policy combines comparative work by analysts from the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development with inputs from national ministries, agencies like United Kingdom Research and Innovation, supranational bodies such as the European Investment Bank, and multilateral initiatives like the OECD Innovation Strategy. Reviews commonly reference institutions and programs including National Science Foundation (United States), Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft, Centre national de la recherche scientifique, Japan Science and Technology Agency, and Korea Advanced Institute of Science and Technology. The series situates national policies within international contexts exemplified by forums such as the World Economic Forum, G7, and Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation.
The programme traces intellectual antecedents to postwar comparative studies by organizations like the Organization for European Economic Co-operation and later work by the OECD Science and Technology Policy Division. Early country reports in the late 1990s built on dialogues attended by delegations from Canada, Australia, Italy, Spain, and Sweden. Significant milestones include integration of the reviews with the OECD’s Innovation Strategy (2010), the adoption of new indicators influenced by projects such as the Frascati Manual and the Oslo Manual, and methodological refinements following collaborations with the European Commission’s Directorate-General for Research and Innovation and the World Bank’s Innovation Policy Practice. High-profile review missions involved stakeholders like Bill Gates-funded foundations, delegations from Brazil, and research councils from India.
The primary objective is to diagnose strengths and weaknesses of national innovation systems to improve policy coherence among actors including ministries of finance, ministries responsible for science and technology, and intermediary agencies such as European Research Council-style funders. The scope encompasses supply-side measures tied to institutions such as Universities of Oxford, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, University of Tokyo, and demand-side measures involving procurement by state-owned enterprises and public purchasers like NASA or European Space Agency. Reviews examine linkages with industrial policies pursued by firms such as Siemens, Toyota, and Tencent, and with labour market institutions exemplified by Daimler AG and Accenture.
Methodology combines desk analysis of quantitative series from the OECD Main Science and Technology Indicators, case studies involving firms like Samsung Electronics and Pfizer, interviews with stakeholders including chairs from organisations such as the European Investment Bank and delegations from Singapore, and peer review workshops modeled on arrangements used in UNESCO evaluations. The framework draws on concepts codified in the Frascati Manual and the Oslo Manual to measure research intensity, diffusion, and commercialization pathways involving incubators like Y Combinator and clusters such as Silicon Valley, Shenzhen, and Skåne Science City. Reviews use benchmarks against peers including Norway, Finland, Netherlands, and Switzerland.
The series includes country reviews for France, Germany, Japan, South Korea, Mexico, Turkey, Chile, South Africa, Poland, Portugal, Ireland, Israel, New Zealand, Argentina, and Russia among others, and thematic case studies on sectors such as biotechnology referencing firms like Roche and Amgen, advanced manufacturing citing Bosch and Mitsubishi Heavy Industries, and digital services with examples including Alphabet Inc., Amazon (company), and Alibaba Group. Comparative chapters often feature regional examples like Greater Bay Area and initiatives such as the European Innovation Council.
Reports have influenced reform agendas in ministries and agencies across jurisdictions from Brazil to Sweden, informing policy changes in research funding systems, tax incentives, intellectual property arrangements tied to institutions like the European Patent Office, and public procurement strategies drawing on best practice from Norway and Singapore. The reviews contribute evidence to international dialogues at the G20, G7, and OECD Ministerial Meetings, and have been cited in documents from the World Bank, the Asian Development Bank, and national white papers from administrations including those of Canada and Australia.
Critiques address perceived normative bias toward market-oriented instruments referenced against experiences in Cuba or Venezuela, the challenge of adapting templates for countries with distinctive structures such as India or Nigeria, and concerns about data gaps in coverage of informal sectors prevalent in economies like Ethiopia and Pakistan. Scholars associated with institutions like London School of Economics, Harvard University, École Polytechnique, and University of Cape Town have questioned reliance on indicators such as R&D intensity when assessing innovation in artisanal or indigenous contexts exemplified by regions like Amazonas or Sahel. Others note limits to implementation where domestic politics involve actors such as national parliaments or state-owned enterprises like Petrobras.
Category:Publications of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development