This is a rather timely discussion, as I had the chance to discuss innovation policy, ecosystems and the domestic politics that have influenced the last three decades of innovation in Australia with Dr John Howard, founder of the Acton Institute for Policy Research and Innovation. The timeliness is due to his recent publication Thinking in Public: Australia’s Missing Innovation Policy - Will it Ever Be Found? that is now available at Amazon (Paperback) and for the Kindle version.

We start our conversation around John’s entry into the innovation policy world, which started with an ARC project commissioned on university – business relationships from near the turn of the century. John then embarked on his PhD on the triple helix model which prompted in John’s mind the broader question of “how does it actually work?” A key report that emerged from our conversation with a report commissioned by (the then) Department of Industry, Science and Resources on the The Emerging Business of Knowledge Transfer, which is an early artefact in the recognition of the role of Technology Transfer in the innovation system.

We then explore theories of innovation and how the concept of linear flow where inputs are the focus rather than outcomes or impact has been the dominant paradigm. John reflects on how EU ecosystems have evolved but not translated to our local system concluding that while we like simple solutions, innovation is complex and exists in complex adaptive systems, however systems theory is bringing new insights. We then reflect on domestic industry policy settings, looking back to Senator John Button in the 1990’s and how industry policy did not appear to connect to or evolve with innovation policy.

John then gave a working example of the Danish windfarm ecosystem and the policy and systems, where we explore the complementary concepts of value pools and supply chains and the need to coordinate 'across silos' to get outcomes, otherwise you get a lot of inputs. I suggested that the currency of announceables may in part be driving part of the malaise in innovation system coordination. John broadened that challenge across federal, state and local government administrations, approaching similar problems with different strategies with limited alignment around implementation – an area that he and Mark Dodgson have frequently commented upon.

We briefly explored the concept of risk in the domestic innovation system. John pointed to the growth in integrity agencies over recent years in the public and private sectors. While we have previously touched in risk in the podcast, for example with Anne Marie Perret, Jane O’Dwyer (and hopefully with Greg Harper in the coming months), John brought a broader lens to this issue as we concluded that the 'threat of consequence will naturally drive risk appetite down'.

We close out the discussion discussing a range of examples that evidence that innovation ecosystems and technology transfer are working in Australia, despite some of the headlines that may be around. We reflect on the emergence of medical innovation ecosystem in Melbourne, the rural development corporations across Australian agroforestry industries and reflect on the benefits of stable policy, funding and bipartisan multi-government support. In reflecting on these successful examples, we touched on the importance of new methods and approaches and the importance of timing, and the challenges of being too early with innovations.

This was a conversation reviewing the policy and political foundations of the innovation ecosystem and tied together a lot of themes that we have been exploring over the journey around risk, value pools and how to celebrate our successes.