NOvation Forum

For decades the term “innovation” has worn a halo, as though innovation necessarily brings societal benefits. But this Forum raises questions about whether and how innovation may be “for the public good.” I contend that innovation for the public good entails an inversion of power in economic theory and practice as well as in technology. 

In economics, power inversion is the recognition of the public economy system. Since the dynamics of markets cannot, on their own, produce innovation that solves complex collective-need problems, we must recognize the public economy and restore it to economic theory. To produce innovation for the public good, we must then put theory to practice.

How so? Consider the current transformation of electrical energy supply. The locus of power and agency in future electricity generation and supply systems will depend, in great measure, on the design and programming of emerging technologies, particularly devices called “inverters.” Technological choices and investments that public and private leaders are making today will determine how, when, and whether people have access to electricity in the future. In order for the emerging innovations to be in the public’s interest, we need literally to harness the power of inverters and similar technologies for the public good, which means recognizing the public economy and mobilizing its power.

Innovation is presented as the solution to address grand societal challenges. Taking this new policy motto seriously requires to renew the dominant imaginary of innovation defined by a series of attributes – technology centeredness, market relatedness, competition, entrepreneurialism, diffusion, exclusivity and creative destruction – and above all by the belief that innovation is always good. 

To contribute to such an endeavour, this presentation will start with the discussion of five innovation myths. This discussion of deep-rooted beliefs that condition a narrow understanding of innovation and innovation policies is crucial for reimagining innovation.

The discussion of three literature streams (Democratising innovation, Responsible innovation, Transformative change) that currently feed the innovation renewal allows consideration of explorations in academia as well as in public policy. 

A re-imagination and re-invention of innovation is underway, and this dynamic is constituted of different actors from different traditions but still has some limitations.