There has been increased interest internationally in using public procurement as an innovation policy. China too has employed innovation oriented public procurement (IOPP) to implement its ‘indigenous innovation’ strategy. This thesis explores China’s IOPP policy processes, evaluates the appropriateness of these policies, and explains key issues identified. Literature strands on innovation, policy, public procurement, and IOPP are drawn upon to analyse IOPP and related policies. IOPP processes are conceptualized as dynamics shaped by the institutions, actors and interactions of innovation and public procurement systems. IOPP policies are framed as horizontal mixes of cross-domain interventions, and vertical mixes of goals, rationales, instruments, designed implementation structures, actual implementation processes, and outcomes. A criterion for evaluating policy appropriateness is coherence between the various dimensions. Macro-level policies impact on micro-level processes which in turn provide evidence of implementation. A multi-level case study methodology is adopted to link up macro/national, meso/regional and micro/local levels of policy design, articulation and implementation. Implementation is characterized through three IOPP policy channels, a channel being a characteristic group of policies to promote IOPP. Channel 1 employed ‘innovation catalogues’, which was unexpectedly terminated in 2011 in response to concerns from other countries over China’s perceived protectionist tendency. Channel 1 was found to be a centralized mechanism to implement general IOPP across all regions, sectors and levels of governance. As a one-size-fits-all approach requiring cross-domain, cross-level coordination, it failed to achieve coherence with the institutional fragmentation of China’s innovation and procurement systems. The other two channels were implicit, strategic IOPP approaches i.e. commercialization projects for ‘major technological equipment’ with a rationale of pre-commercial procurement (Channel 2), and demonstration programmes for emerging technologies with a rationale of creating lead markets (Channel 3). These two channels realized better coherence with China’s systems as both were targeted at specific sectors and levels. Cross-case analysis suggests that micro-level IOPP processes were more frequently shaped by local contexts of stakeholders, interactions and informal institutions rather than IOPP policies. Interventionist local governments and proactive suppliers played stronger roles than procurers in initiating IOPP. IOPP cycles followed diverse and informal pathways not always competition-based, which might have breached de jure procurement regulations but China’s weak formal institutions allowed this flexibility. Informal institutions sometimes mitigated flaws of formal ones and facilitated IOPP, but could easily play competing roles (notably regional protectionism) that hinder policy implementation. This thesis contributes to IOPP knowledge by: offering a conceptual approach to IOPP policy analysis concerning implementation and appropriateness evaluation; uncovering China’s IOPP dynamics based on which the understanding of IOPP as a research subject is deepened. Policy implications include lessons for catching-up countries emphasizing institutional capacity and government capability, and more general issues highlighting policy differentiation and complementarity, and intermediation.

The purpose of this thesis is to identify patents invented by researchers at Lund University, to describe the university inventors, and to understand the main factors that influence their patenting activities. The analysis focuses on inventors in relation to their environment. A number of factors influence scientists’ decisions to patent. Internal factors related to individuals such as solving the research puzzle, demonstrating the quality and novelty of the research, and enhancing professional reputation are the main internal factors that trigger researchers to patent. Although external factors such as TTOs and the Third Task are relatively more important for some inventors, internal factors are still the predominant factors. The thesis has also suggested a typology of inventors to show the differences in the level of patenting and in the way they applied for patent and commercialized. This nuanced heterogeneity among inventors emphasizes the need for caution in generalizations, especially regarding the roles and influences of patent legislation and TTOs in university patenting. Adaptive and flexible institutions and organizations may enable scientists to patent by providing them with the necessary resources and skills they may need for patenting rather than applying standard solutions to different cases. This study has made empirical and theoretical contributions to the literature by developing a focus on individual inventors and by emphasizing the characteristics of these inventors and of their external environments. Hence, this dissertation may provide both theoretical insights and empirical evidence to scholars investigating university patenting and inventors. It may also provide insights to policy makers and university administrators on the appropriate roles of institutions and organizations in promoting and assisting patenting activities of university researchers.

Since the regional policy nowadays is an important subject in the European institutions, the involvement of regional and local authorities in the programming, management, evaluation and monitoring of operations is essential for the success of EU level policy. A Regional Problem is defined as a problem that arises in an area of a country where there is dependence on a narrow industrial base often faced with declining manufacturing activity, and lack of general infrastructures. Other challenges include low levels of GDP and a net migration out of a country or region. The EU is trying to overcome these challenges by using the Structural funds financing programs to help firms in these regions. This paper presents a comparative analysis of the innovation policy and the industrial policy at the national and regional levels in Ireland and Finland, over the 1990s. In both countries the period from 1991-99 was marked by expansion, as measured by steady output growth for manufacturing as a whole (albeit at substantially lower levels in Finland than in Ireland). / In general, the evidence presented in this paper suggests a positive relationship between innovation policy as reflected in financial support to firms for R&D and business level investment in R&D and innovation activity. R&D financial assistance to firms has been a significant feature of the industrial development policy in Ireland since the 1980s. At the same time, the proportion of manufacturing firms undertaking R&D, product and process innovations increased steadily throughout the 1990s. In Ireland the construction industry boosted economic development as foreign businesses could find favourable conditions for setting up their businesses. Initially tax and grant incentives were given to firms which were later on complemented by high killed labour that could be utilized in high tech businesses. / zeqavete@gmail.com khanomair82@gmail.com

The problem of the Italian economy of last years is the low economic growth and international competitiveness crisis of it's productive system. In already so belated europian train is the Italian economy among the lasts wagons. The main aim of this diploma thesis is to analyze Italian innovation policy and it's impact upon export. First chapter describes the term "innovation" and introduces the innovation policy in general. The second chapter analyzes contemporary economic characteristic of Italy in order to understand further issues, especially the development of essential macroeconomics indicators, the structure of Italian economy, the typology of firms and the anticrisis measures with the prediction of the further economic development. Third charter chapter analyzes contemporary main features of the Italian innovation policy: expenditures on reconstruction and development much like on education, describes human and risk capital, patents, scientific publications and technological balance of payments. It focuses also on the impact of the financial crisis upon the innovation activity, on the role of the government in the innovation policy, on it's evaluation with other europian countries and on the upcoming innovation strategies. The last fourth chapter concentrates on the analyze of influence of the innovation policy on the Italian's export. It focuses on the main govermental institutions concerned with export much like on the contemporary development of the Italian's commodity and territorial structure of export. The diploma thesis points out that Italy, as one of the moderate innovators, is not doing enough to become an innovation oriented economy. However Italian innovation policy is the most important instrument to reach this long term goal. Nevertheless Italy has maintained many reforms in its institutional basis or education system, there are still many shortcomings e.g. there is a strong need of evaluation of some old programs and further strengthening of innovation activity of small and medium sized enterprises, the same way as the increase of the government expenditures on all sectors of the innovation policy. The diploma thesis shows clearly that the innovation policy is one of the most important topics not only for Italy, but also for the rest of the world.

The research question animating this project is ‘what is the nature of neoliberalism’s influence on recent and contemporary US climate change policy?’ Situating itself against several growing bodies of literature which have sought to underscore the fetishism of markets in recent environmental and climate policy agendas under neoliberalism – e.g., the work of Heynen et al (2007) on ‘neoliberal environments’; Paterson and Newell’s (2010) work on neoliberalism and carbon markets; and the work of Dryzek et al (2003) on state forms and ecological modernization – this project argues that any such analysis must be predicated on a considerably more nuanced conception of (a) ‘neoliberalism’, (b) the historic role of states in fostering accumulation, and (c) the nature of policy development within any specific neoliberal context. Applying these theoretical re-conceptualizations to the American context, the project argues that a central tension informing contemporary US climate policy under neoliberalism can be understood a stand-off between two prevailing logics in the federal policy process: on the one hand, Washington’s attempt to build on its tradition of using state power to foster high-tech market development by cultivating the alternative energy realm as a developmental state project, and on the other, the anti-regulationist bent of neoliberalism which seeks to delegitimize the ‘pull’ policies required to ‘creatively destroy’ conventional energy and animate domestic alternative energy markets. Against the general conception of the US as a ‘climate laggard’ whose policy options are restricted market mechanisms and generally anathema to progressive ecological modernization, this body of work shows how the US has managed to develop a robust set of interventionist ‘push’ and ‘pull’ climate policies along ‘alternative policy pathways’, despite the prevailing anti-state rhetoric of neoliberalism.

The research question animating this project is ‘what is the nature of neoliberalism’s influence on recent and contemporary US climate change policy?’ Situating itself against several growing bodies of literature which have sought to underscore the fetishism of markets in recent environmental and climate policy agendas under neoliberalism – e.g., the work of Heynen et al (2007) on ‘neoliberal environments’; Paterson and Newell’s (2010) work on neoliberalism and carbon markets; and the work of Dryzek et al (2003) on state forms and ecological modernization – this project argues that any such analysis must be predicated on a considerably more nuanced conception of (a) ‘neoliberalism’, (b) the historic role of states in fostering accumulation, and (c) the nature of policy development within any specific neoliberal context. Applying these theoretical re-conceptualizations to the American context, the project argues that a central tension informing contemporary US climate policy under neoliberalism can be understood a stand-off between two prevailing logics in the federal policy process: on the one hand, Washington’s attempt to build on its tradition of using state power to foster high-tech market development by cultivating the alternative energy realm as a developmental state project, and on the other, the anti-regulationist bent of neoliberalism which seeks to delegitimize the ‘pull’ policies required to ‘creatively destroy’ conventional energy and animate domestic alternative energy markets. Against the general conception of the US as a ‘climate laggard’ whose policy options are restricted market mechanisms and generally anathema to progressive ecological modernization, this body of work shows how the US has managed to develop a robust set of interventionist ‘push’ and ‘pull’ climate policies along ‘alternative policy pathways’, despite the prevailing anti-state rhetoric of neoliberalism.

The research question animating this project is ‘what is the nature of neoliberalism’s influence on recent and contemporary US climate change policy?’ Situating itself against several growing bodies of literature which have sought to underscore the fetishism of markets in recent environmental and climate policy agendas under neoliberalism – e.g., the work of Heynen et al (2007) on ‘neoliberal environments’; Paterson and Newell’s (2010) work on neoliberalism and carbon markets; and the work of Dryzek et al (2003) on state forms and ecological modernization – this project argues that any such analysis must be predicated on a considerably more nuanced conception of (a) ‘neoliberalism’, (b) the historic role of states in fostering accumulation, and (c) the nature of policy development within any specific neoliberal context. Applying these theoretical re-conceptualizations to the American context, the project argues that a central tension informing contemporary US climate policy under neoliberalism can be understood a stand-off between two prevailing logics in the federal policy process: on the one hand, Washington’s attempt to build on its tradition of using state power to foster high-tech market development by cultivating the alternative energy realm as a developmental state project, and on the other, the anti-regulationist bent of neoliberalism which seeks to delegitimize the ‘pull’ policies required to ‘creatively destroy’ conventional energy and animate domestic alternative energy markets. Against the general conception of the US as a ‘climate laggard’ whose policy options are restricted market mechanisms and generally anathema to progressive ecological modernization, this body of work shows how the US has managed to develop a robust set of interventionist ‘push’ and ‘pull’ climate policies along ‘alternative policy pathways’, despite the prevailing anti-state rhetoric of neoliberalism.

The trade-off between innovation and access is a critical problem in pharmaceutical innovation policy. Without adequate intellectual property protection, knowledge is insufficiently appropriable and the output of innovation is sub-optimal. Patents and sui generis forms of intellectual property are policies utilized by the state to foster innovation, creating temporary monopolies for firms to reward their investments in research and development. This paper explores the topic of pharmaceutical innovation policy by discovering the key legal developments that influence the creation of internationally protected and harmonized minimum standards of IP rights. Equipped with a theoretical understanding of IP as a social contract and knowledge about incentives that the law provides, the status quo system of rewarding pharmaceutical innovation is observed though an analysis of the market for new chemical entities, developing an understanding of the relationship between incentives for innovation and market outcomes. Utilizing an extensive analysis of literature, promising policy options are explored for realigning incentives to better optimize the incremental benefits of pharmaceutical innovation while improving access, including public funding of clinical trials, incorporating value-for-money stipulations into reimbursement and marketing approval decisions, and creating prize-based rewards that delink the market for innovations from the market for pharmaceutical products.

The thesis deals with the innovation policy of Israel as part of its export policy and it is pointing out selected innovation policy in correct or incorrect manner. The first chapter presents the theoretical concept of innovation factors and their targets. The content of the second chapter is the historical development of the national economy, with a focus on its position within the Middle East. The third chapter is devoted to the leading export companies and as well as high tech products.

This thesis comprises three chapters with the patent litigation as a central theme. The first chapter develops a methodology to compare the quality of patent litigation systems in six major economies: United States, United Kingdom, Germany, Japan, Korea, China. Quality is defined as whether it provides a fair and just legal environment for nullifying weak patents and adjudicating infringement actions. Ultimately, this study presents heterogeneity in the quality of the sample systems. Litigation systems with rigorous and predictable adjudication have a low risk of opportunistic and anti-competitive filings.In the second paper (Chapter 2), I explore the relationship between technology ownership frag- mentation and the opposition filing in European Patent Office (EPO). I develop a two-stages game, in which opposition can be used for an ex ante negotiation (e.g. licensing). The framework presents that high litigation risk happens under two kinds of conditions: when the ownership to external technologies is highly concentrated, profit dissipation is over the licensing revenue for the potential licensee; when the ownership to external technologies is widely fragmented, transaction cost is high for the entrance. That is, the opposition, replacing the licensing, will be frequently used. To empirically test this hypothesis, we use a data set that covers patent opposition cases during the period 1985-2005, and construct application-based “fragmentation index”. Finally, regression results confirm that opposition likelihood displays an U-shape re- lationship with the number of potential technology suppliers. Besides, the effect of ownership patterns is stronger in discrete product industries. This analysis controls for differences in filing, granted rate and other technological observed characteristics. Results are robust to alternative estimation strategies that account for over-dispersion in the patent counts data and industry heterogeneity.The third paper proposes that system designs influence the incidence of patent litigation risk. I construct three one-to-one matching data sets by total 2748 European patents, which includes 916 patents without any challenge, 916 patents having been challenged in the opposition at the European Patent Office (EPO), and 916 having been challenged in Germany Federal Patent Court (BPatG). the EPO and the BPatG follow different procedures to reexamine, amend or revoke a granted decision. To explore different filing patterns in two litigation systems, I provide a much more rigorous definition to describe patent quality: Novelty, Unique, Impact, which has been operationalized and utilized in the technological radicalness literature. By comparing litigated cases to control groups, I find a high degree of significance between opposition risk and ex ante-identifiable factors - Novelty, while a high degree of significance between invalidation trials and ex post indicator of technological radicalness - Impact. Moreover, I also confirm that the filing in the opposition is less constrained with firm’s patent portfolios and technological conditions. / Doctorat en Sciences économiques et de gestion / info:eu-repo/semantics/nonPublished