Contenu du sommaire : Journal of Innovation Economics & Management, n°15, 3

There exist two sequential or linear models of innovation in the literature. One is the “linear model of innovation” as such. This model comes from management and economics, and deals with the study of the origin of inventions. The other model, of which the linear model of innovation is one part or step, is that of innovation as a process of invention followed by diffusion. This “model”, or rather the theory on which it is based, comes from anthropology and was invented as a solution to a controversy on the role of invention and diffusion in explaining cultural change. The sequence ‘invention → diffusion' has remained influential in later studies of technological innovation from sociology to management and economics. This paper documents the origin of the sequence and its subsequent use in the study of technological innovation.JEL codes: B2, N14, O15

Innovation is on the agenda of all scientific policies without really being defined. The study of the evolution of the works that argued to have defined a consisting concept of innovation (Bacon, Machiavelli), or developed a coherent theory of innovation (Tarde, Rogers, Schumpeter), provides insight into some weakness of the models of the innovation process (“linear theory”, “chain-linked model”), or even into the contradictions that are occulted by a naïve use of the concept. Innovation therefore appears as a “watchword” legitimizing that “everything changes so that nothing changes”.JEL codes: O31, O31, G38, O32, B25

The “hierarchical and linear model of innovation” (HLMI) is often used to describe how innovations are produced. HLMI presents several shortcomings and one possible way of overcoming them is to consider innovations from a system perspective. In order to achieve this, this article uses Kline and Rosenberg's chain-linked model (CLM, 1985) as a starting point and builds up on it, proposing an improvement rendering CLM more coherent with its systemic bases. The proposed improvement suggests conceiving innovation systems as associations of building blocks and using contemporary engineering diagram-based languages to display them. Nevertheless, this improvement does not challenge the dynamic features of innovation systems.JEL codes: O31

As the business model approach gains empirical and theoretical ground, it is worth analyzing the vision of the innovation process it conveys. Does the business model literature challenge the linear model of innovation? Does it contribute to a better understanding of current innovation processes? In this paper, we show that the linear model of innovation does not require any explicit reflection on the business model and supports a narrow conception of the innovation process. However, new insight is provided by Chesbrough within the framework of the open innovation paradigm. The business model literature appropriates Chesbrough's legacy in an ambiguous way but nevertheless contributes to better conceiving the role of science, technology, and their relationships with business models in value creating innovation processes.JEL codes: O30, M21

Innovation is an often-misunderstood concept that generates confusion. It is systematically associated with research and technology – often in relation to the linear model that underestimates the various factors and the complex processes that lead to it. This sometimes leads to public policies shaped by a misguided and partial view of innovation and a biased analysis of its stimulating factors at a macro and microeconomic level. This paper argues in favor of an enlarged and holistic view of innovation combining R&D and creativity and including recent trends such as design thinking, open innovation, digitalization, sustainable development and CSR, and resource-limited innovation.JEL codes: O30, M21

The aim of this article is to highlight the complexity of the process of innovation used in innovation-oriented public-private partnerships (IPPPs). The characterization of the IPPPs results in the analysis of innovation in IPPPs being positioned at the intersection of many theoretical approaches. This article shows that an interactive representation of innovation, based on design, although useful for studying the innovation process, is however not sufficient to demonstrate the environmental context and the innovation dynamic of the IPPPs. This research proposes an analysis of the complexity of the innovation process of IPPPs by using a case study. This study illustrates the different levels of complexity encountered by the IPPPs, and the need to use an interactive, but also dynamic, analytical framework in order to demonstrate this.JEL codes: I1, O3

To determine the categories of environmental-friendly technology transfers from Japan to China, the patents applications in this field are considered as an appropriate tool. The Chinese technological environment and its indigenous innovation capabilities seem to favour the acquisition of new technologies. By using the Patstat database, this paper points out that technologies transferred from Japan mainly aim at reducing air pollution and at using solar and wind energies.JEL codes: F64, Q55, O33