Book chapter

La ricerca di uno schema concettuale e di una metodologia appropriati per affrontare le sfide generate dalla dinamica tecno-economica

Mauro Lombardi
University of Florence, Italy - ORCID: 0000-0002-3234-7039


In this chapter, first three traditional frames centered on innovation processes and innovative strategies are analyzed: Linear Model, National Innovation Systems, Evolutonary Approach to the analysis of economic processes. The reasons that lead us to seek a new conceptual frame, which we define adaptive strategic thinking on the basis of a theoretical and empirical literature, are explained.
Read more

Keywords: Traditional frameworks of analysis of innovation, a new theoretical and analytical frame



Pages: 89-111

Published by: Firenze University Press

Publication year: 2021

DOI: 10.36253/978-88-5518-310-9.07

Download PDF

© 2021 Author(s)
Content licence CC BY 4.0
Metadata licence CC0 1.0


Publication year: 2021

DOI: 10.36253/978-88-5518-310-9.07

Download XML

© 2021 Author(s)
Content licence CC BY 4.0
Metadata licence CC0 1.0


  1. Arrow, K.J. 1962. “Economic welfare and the allocation of resources for invention.” In The Rate and Direction of Inventive Activity, edited by R. Nelson, 609-25. Princeton, NJ: National Bureau of Economic Research and Princeton University Press.
  2. Arthur, B. 2009. The Nature of Technology. What it is and How It Evolves. New York: The Free Press.
  3. Arute et al. 2019. “Quantum supremacy using a programmable superconducting processor.” Nature 574: 505-10.
  4. Baas, N.A. 2009. “Hyperstructures Topology And Data.” Axiomates 19: 281-95.
  5. Baas, N.A. 2012. “On structure and organization: an organizing principle.” International Journal of General Systems 42 (2).
  6. Baas, N.A. 2015. On Higher Structures <> (2021-03-10).
  7. Bezdek, J.C. 2016. “Computational Intelligence. What’s in a name. EEE Systems.” Man &Cybernetcis Magazine April: 4-14.
  8. Biamonte J. et al. 2018. “Quantum Machine Learning.” Nature 549: 195-202.
  9. Bonn, I. 2005. “Improving strategic thinking: A multilevel approach.” Leadership and Organization Development Journal 26 (5): 336-54.
  10. Brzezinski, Z. 1980. Between two Ages. The role of America’s power in the technetronic era. New York: The Viking Press.
  11. Bush, V. 1946. Endless Horizons. Washington, DC: Public Affairs Press.
  12. Cho, A. 2019. “Google claims quantum computing milestone.” Science 1364, September 27.
  13. Courtney, H.G., Kirkland, J., e S.P. Viguerie. 2000. Strategy under uncertainty. MGI.
  14. Deloitte Insights. 2020. “Intelligent clinical trials Transforming through AI-enabled engagement.” <> (2021-10-03).
  15. Ehlers, E., e T. Kraft. 2006. Earth System Science in the Antropocene. Emergent Issues and Problems. New York: Springer.
  16. Etzkowitz, H. 2008. The Triple Helix: University-Industry-Government Innovation in Action. New York: Routledge.
  17. Etzkowitz, H., e L. Leydesdorff (eds.). 1997. Universities and the Global Knowledge Economy: A Triple Helix of University-Industry-Government Relations. London: Cassell.
  18. Foray, D. 2018. “Smart specialization strategies as a case of mission-oriented policy – a case study on the emergence of new policy practices.” Industrial and Corporate Change 27 (5): 817-32.
  19. Gault, F. 2010. Innovation Strategies for a Global Economy. Development, Implementation, Measurement and Management. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
  20. Geels, F.W. 2020. “Micro-foundations of the multi-level perspective on socio-technical transitions: Developing a multi-dimensional model of agency through crossovers between social constructivism, evolutionary economics and neoinstitutional theory.” Resea
  21. Geels, F.W. et al. 2017. “Sociotechnical transitions for deep decarbonization.” Science, 22 September.
  22. Gehrke, L. 2015. A Discussion of Qualifications and Skills in the Factory of the Future: A German and American Perspective. Hannover Messe, April 2015.
  23. Gibbons, M. et al. 1994. The New Production of Knowledge: The Dynamics of Science and Research in Contemporary Societies. New York: Sage.
  24. Guzzo, F., Gianelle, C., e E. Marinelli. 2018. “Smart Specialisation at work: the policy makers’ view on strategy design and implementation.” S3 Working Paper Series 15.
  25. Hausmann, R. 2008. “The Other Hand: High Bandwidth Development Policy.” Center for International Development at Harvard University <> (2021-10-03).
  26. Kurz, M. 2017. On the Formation of Capital and Wealth: IT, Monopoly Power and Rising Inequality. WP Stanford University, June.
  27. Kuznetsov, Y. e C. Sabel. 2011. “New Open Economy Industrial Policy: Making Choices without Picking Winners.” The World Bank, «PREM Notes Economic Policy» 161, September.
  28. IPCC. 2019. “Global Warming of 1.5°C.” <> (2021-10-03).
  29. Lagarde, C. 2014. A New Multilateralism, London: Richard Dimbleby Lecture.
  30. Lagarde, C. 2018. “New Economic Landscape, New Multilateralism.” Speech, October 11.
  31. Lazonick, W. 2014. “Profits without Prosperity.” Harvard Business Review, September.
  32. Liedtka, J.M. 1998. “Linking strategic thinking with strategic planning.” Strategy & Leadership 26 (4): 30-5.
  33. Lombardi, M. 2003. “The evolution of local production systems: the emergence of the ‘invisible mind’ and the evolutionary pressures towards more visible ‘minds’.” Research Policy 32 (8): 1443-62.
  34. Lombardi, M. 2019a. “Oligopoli dei big data, ci salverà solo una nuova cultura Antitrust.” Agenda, 2 agosto.
  35. Lombardi, M. 2019b. “È un mondo più iniquo nell’era digitale: il punto sugli studi.” Agenda, 22 gennaio.
  36. March, J. 1991. “Exploration and Exploitation in Organizational Learning.” Organization Science 2 (1), February: 71-87.
  37. Markard, J., Raven, R., e B. Truffer. 2012. “Sustainability transitions: an emerging field of research and its prospects.” Research Policy 41 (6): 955-67.
  38. Mazzucato, M. 2018. Mission-Oriented Research & Innovation in the European Union. A problem-solving approach to fuel innovation-led growth. Luxembourg: Publication Office of the European Union <
  39. Meadows, D.H., Meadows, D.L., Randers, J. et al. 1972. The Limits to Growth. A Report for the Club of Rome. Project on the Predicament of Mankind. New York: Universe Books.
  40. Mokyr, J. 2002. The Gift of Athena. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
  41. Mokyr, J. 2005. “Long-Term Economic Growth and the History of Technology.” In Handbook of Economic Growth, edited by P. Aghion e S. Durlauf, vol. 1B: 1113-1183. Amsterdam: North Holland.
  42. Moon, B.-J. 2013. “Antecedents and outcomes of strategic thinking.” Journal of Business Research 66: 1698-1708.
  43. Morozov, E. 2016. Silicon Valley: I signori del silicio. Torino: Codice Edizioni.
  44. Morozov, E. 2019. “Digital Socialism? The Calculation Debate in the Age of Big Data.” New Left Review 116-117, March-June.
  45. Nelson, R.R. 1959. “The simple economics of basic scientific research.” Journal of Political Economy 67 (3): 297-306.
  46. O’Donovan, D., e N.R. Flower. 2018. “The Strategic Plan is Dead. Long Live Strategy.” Stanford Social Innovation Review January 10: 1-4.
  47. Olsson, O. 2000. “Knowledge as a Set in Idea Space: An Epistemological View on Growth.” Journal of Economic Growth 5: 253-75.
  48. Olsson, O. 2005. “Technological Opportunity and Growth.” Journal of Economic Growth 10: 35-57.
  49. Petit, N. 2016. Technology Giants, The “Moligopoly” Hypothesis and Holistic Competition: A Primer. WP, LCII: Liege Competition and Innovation Institute.
  50. Piaget, J. 1970. Genetic Epistemology. New York: The Norton Company.
  51. Popkin, G. 2017. “China’s quantum satellite achieves ‘spooky action’ at record distance.” Science AAS June 15.
  52. Rieffel, E.G. 2019. Quantum Supremacy using a Programmable Supercomputing Processor. Status Report From: NASA Ames Research Center.
  53. Rieffel, E., e W. Polak. 2000. “An Introduction to Quantum Computing for Non-Physicists.” ACM Comput.Surveys 32: 300-35.
  54. Rip, A. 1995. “Introduction of New Technology: Making Use of Recent Insights from Sociology and Economics of Technology.” Technology Analysis & Strategic Management 7 (4): 417-431.
  55. Rip, A., e R. Kemp. 1998. “Technological change.” In Human Choice and Climate Change, edited by S. Rayner, e E.L. Malone, vol. 2, 327-99. Columbus, OH: Battelle Press.
  56. RISE. 2018. Mission-Oriented Research and Innovation Policy A RISE Perspective. Research, Innovation and Science Policy Experts High-Level Group. Brussels: European Commission.
  57. Rittel, H. W.J., e M.M. Webber. 1973. “Dilemmas in a General Theory of Planning.” Policy Science 4: 155-69.
  58. Saunders, T., e G. Mulgan. 2017. “Governing with Collective Intelligence.” Nesta, January <> (2010-10-03).
  59. Schot, J., e W.E. Steinmueller. 2018. “Three frames for innovation policy: R&D, systems of innovation and transformative change.” Research Policy 47: 1554-1567.
  60. Sheng, A., e X. Cheng. 2017. “The Global Age of Complexity.” Project Syndicate June 17.
  61. Simon, H.A. 1976. “From substantive to procedural rationality.” In Methodological Appraisal in Economics. edited by S.J. Latsis, 129-48. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  62. Simon, H. A. 1978. “Rationality as process and as product of thought.” American Economic Review 68: 1-16.
  63. Simon, H.A. 1996. The Science of the Artificial. New York: The Mit Press.
  64. Steward, F. 2012. “Transformative innovation policy to meet the challenge of climate change: socio-technical networks aligned with consumption and end-use as new transition arenas for a low-carbon society or green economy.” Technology Analysis & Strategic
  65. Teece, D.J. 2017. “Explicating Dynamic Capabilities: The Nature and Microfoundations of (Sustainable) Enterprise Performances.” Strategic Management Journal 28: 1319-50.
  66. Teece, D.J. 2019. “A capability theory of the firm: an economics and (Strategic) management perspective.” New Zealand Economic Papers 53 (1): 1-43.
  67. Teece, D.J., e G. Pisano. 1994. “The dynamic capabilities of enterprises: an introduction.” Industrial and Corporate Change 3(3): 537-56.
  68. Wanzenböck I. et al. 2010. “A framework for mission-oriented innovation policy: Alternative pathways through the problem-solution space.” SOCArXiv Papers, February 19.

Export citation

Selected format

Usage statistics policy

  • 4Chapter Downloads

Cita come:
Lombardi, M.; 2021; La ricerca di uno schema concettuale e di una metodologia appropriati per affrontare le sfide generate dalla dinamica tecno-economica. Firenze, Firenze University Press.


Indici e aggregatori bibliometrici