Microsoft Word bal paper with addendum doc

I.4 NSI - a strange combination with great rhetorical power 

The combination of elements forming the NSI-concept makes it highly ‘dialectical’. Some have 

found this very disturbing and argue that it is a contradiction in terms. Innovation signals 

discontinuity while ‘system’ is associated with a stable structure. In a sense one might see this 

tension as akin to the one built into Anthony Giddens’ ‘structuration theory’ where it is assumed 

that agents shape social structure while social structure shapes the actions of the agents. 

It might also be seen as ‘Schumpeter Mark III’ (not designed by Schumpeter though). While Mark I 

referred to individual entrepreneurs, Mark II referred to big corporations as major drivers of 

innovation and growth. The innovation system perspective brings in a broader set of actors and 

institutions as shaping the innovation process. It takes collective entrepreneurship one step further 

by bringing networking among firms and knowledge institutions into the picture. 

Adding the adjective ‘national’ does not make the combination of innovation and system less 

controversial. Modern social science has, for different reasons, had surprisingly little to say about 

nation states. Liberal philosophy sees the nation state as a barrier to the free market while Marxists 

see it as diverting the attention from the class struggle. Historically, nationalism has resulted in anti-

scientific ideologies. So the unwillingness to give legitimacy to nation states is understandable. But 

while social science has said little about the nation state it has operated mainly at the national level 

and this includes economic analysis where there has been a strong focus on comparing the 

economic growth and the wealth of nations. I believe that in this situation it is actually demystifying 

                                                 

5

 The concepts STI-mode and DUI-mode of innovation will be discussed below. 

---

 

8

to use ‘national’ explicitly in the NSI-term and as we shall argue below it may be especially useful 

in the current context where ‘globalisation’ is seen as a major new trend. 

Perhaps the concept has been so widely spread because of its dialectical character. It provokes 

traditional ways of thinking that are based either on models of stable reproduction, incremental 

change or radical ‘saltationist’ change and it brings the national level into the picture in a period 

where the nation states are exposed to a dramatic transformation pressure. This may explain why it 

got what Miettinen refers to as great rhetorical power.