مقاله انگلیسی رایگان در مورد مفهوم سازی سیاست نوآورانه توزیع حساس ( الزویر )

مقاله سال 2017

Inequitable distribution and economic disadvantage are increasingly contentious political issue in both developed and developing countries, and it is becoming a defining area of sociopolitical-economic debate. Yet even when the political will exists—which is certainly not a given—the use of traditional state instruments, primarily taxation and social welfare programs, faces political and economic limits (Pierson, 2001; Steinmo, 2002). For this reason, it is important to consider other state instruments that are rarely associated with distributive goals.

Policies that contribute to growth are seen as an unquestionable good. Innovation is essential to economic growth. However, economic growth could be uneven and leave many individuals, and groups, behind. Indeed, some see an inherent link between innovation and growing inequality. In contrast, we ask whether different ways to excel in innovation exist that can ameliorate inequities. Accordingly, we inquire whether and how science and technology and innovation policies can be an instrument of social policy to help address economic inequities—specifically, by supporting disad- ∗ Corresponding author. E-mail address: dan.breznitz@utoronto.ca (D. Breznitz). vantaged groups.1 To do so, we explore which policy programs are likely to achieve this goal and which disadvantaged groups they benefit. In addition, we look into the motivational and political underpinnings of such policies.

This paper is consciously explorative, and our scope is modest. We aim to show that theoretically DSIPs can further distributionrelated objectives in at least four ways. The main objective of this paper is to focus attention on the social role that growth-creation policies could play in addressing economic disadvantages and to introduce what we believe are important theoretical pathways by which innovation policy could influence distribution. The depiction of such pathways is an essentialfirst step in the introductionofmetrics that would help future policy makers to assess the distributive impact of specific DSIPs. Such thinking is broadly aligned with studies centered on the concept of the ‘social investment state’: a state that strives to address social disadvantage, primarily by supporting its citizens’ productive capacities and income (Gingrich and Ansell, 2015).