INNOVATION IN THE USA: THE ROLE OF THE STATE IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF DIGITAL TECHNOLOGIES
Abstract
The purpose of this article is to provide a comprehensive analysis of the role of the state in the development of digital technologies in the United States, assess the effectiveness of government innovation support programs, and evaluate their impact on scientific and technological progress, economic growth, and global competitiveness. The study also aims to identify challenges and contradictions in contemporary innovation policy and offer recommendations for optimizing state stimulation of digital technologies. Research methodology. The research employs an integrated scientific approach, including: theoretical analysis of scientific sources and policy documents of the United States; systemic analysis of the effectiveness of government programs supporting startups, universities, and venture funds; comparative analysis of international experience in digital technology development; quantitative and qualitative methods to evaluate results, including patent activity, venture investments, technology commercialization, and job creation. Results. The study demonstrates that the integrated model of interaction among the state, universities, and business (Triple Helix model) is a key factor for the effective development of digital technologies in the U.S. Government support fosters increased patent activity, accelerates technology commercialization, boosts venture capital activity, and creates high-skilled jobs. At the same time, several challenges were identified, including unequal resource distribution, technology concentration in narrow sectors, and the need for continuous monitoring of program effectiveness. Practical significance of the study’s results. The findings can be used to develop new strategies for government stimulation of digital innovation, optimize grant programs, enhance the efficiency of technology commercialization, and support the formation of high-tech clusters. The conclusions are valuable for government agencies, universities, venture funds, and entrepreneurs in the digital technology sector.
References
Ліхота О. В. Інноваційна діяльність в США: роль держави у розвитку технологій. Науковий вісник Полтавського університету економіки і торгівлі. Серія «Економічні науки». 2025. Вип. 2 (116). С. 43–48. DOI: https://doi.org/10.37734/2409-6873-2025-2-6
Block F. L. Swimming against the current: The rise of a state-led innovation system in the United States. Politics & Society. 2008. Vol. 36, No. 2. P. 169–206. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0032329208318731
Chesbrough H. Open innovation: The new imperative for creating and profiting from technology. Boston : Harvard Business School Press, 2003. 272 p.
Digitalisation of science, technology and innovation: Key developments and policies. OECD Publishing, 2020. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1787/b9e4a2c0-en
Etzkowitz H., Leydesdorff L. The dynamics of innovation: From National Systems and “Mode 2” to a Triple Helix of university–industry–government relations. Research Policy. 2000. Vol. 29, No. 2. P. 109–123. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0048-7333(99)00055-4
Financing SMEs and entrepreneurs 2020: An OECD scoreboard. OECD Publishing, 2020. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1787/061fe03d-en
Freeman C. Systems of innovation: Selected essays in evolutionary economics of technology. London : Pinter, 1995. 268 p.
Gallo M. E. Small business research programs: SBIR and STTR : CRS Report No. R43695. Congressional Research Service, 2021. URL: https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/R43695.
Global innovation index 2022: What is the future of innovation-driven growth? World Intellectual Property Organization. Geneva : WIPO, 2022. URL: https://www.wipo.int/edocs/pubdocs/en/wipo-pub-2000-2022-en-main-report-global-innovation-index-2022-15th-edition.pdf
Mazzucato M. Mission-oriented innovation policy: Challenges and opportunities. Industrial and Corporate Change. 2018. Vol. 27, No. 5. P. 803–815. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/icc/dty034
Mazzucato M. The entrepreneurial state: Debunking public vs. private sector myths. London : Anthem Press, 2013. 266 p. URL:http://digamo.free.fr/mazzucato.pdf
Mowery D. C., Rosenberg N. Technology and the pursuit of economic growth. Cambridge : Cambridge University Press, 1989. 330 p.
NVCA 2022 yearbook. National Venture Capital Association, 2022. URL: https://nvca.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/03/NVCA-2022-Yearbook-Final.pdf.
OECD digital economy outlook 2020. OECD Publishing, 2020. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1787/bb167041-en
Performance and accountability report: Fiscal year 2022. U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, 2022. URL: https://www.uspto.gov/about-us/performance-and-planning/uspto-annual-reports
Rosenberg N. Inside the black box: Technology and economics. Cambridge : Cambridge University Press, 1982. 316 p.
Saxenian A. Regional advantage: Culture and competition in Silicon Valley and Route 128. Cambridge : Harvard University Press, 1994. 240 p.
SBIR/STTR program overview: FY2021 annual report. U.S. Small Business Administration, 2022. URL: https://www.sbir.gov/sites/default/files/documents/SBA_SBIR_STTR_FY21_Annual_Report.pdf
Science and engineering indicators 2022 : report. National Science Board. National Science Foundation, 2022.
Tax policy reforms 2020: OECD and selected partner economies. OECD Publishing, 2020. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1787/7af51916-en
Likhota, O. V. (2025). Innovatsiina diialnist v SSHA: rol derzhavy u rozvytku tekhnolohii [Innovation activity in the USA: the role of the state in technology development]. Naukovyi visnyk Poltavskoho universytetu ekonomiky i torhivli. Seriia “Ekonomichni nauky”, no. 2(116), pp. 43–48. DOI: https://doi.org/10.37734/2409-6873-2025-2-6 [in Ukrainian].
Block, F. L. (2008). Swimming against the current: The rise of a state-led innovation system in the United States. Politics & Society, no. 36(2), pp. 169–206. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0032329208318731
Chesbrough, H. (2003). Open innovation: The new imperative for creating and profiting from technology. Harvard Business School Press.
OECD. (2020a). Digitalisation of science, technology and innovation: Key developments and policies. OECD Publishing. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1787/b9e4a2c0-en
Etzkowitz, H., & Leydesdorff, L. (2000). The dynamics of innovation: From National Systems and “Mode 2” to a Triple Helix of university–industry–government relations. Research Policy, no. 29(2), pp. 109–123. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0048-7333(99)00055-4
OECD. (2020b). Financing SMEs and entrepreneurs 2020: An OECD scoreboard. OECD Publishing. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1787/061fe03d-en
Freeman, C. (1995). Systems of innovation: Selected essays in evolutionary economics of technology. Pinter.
Gallo, M. E. (2021). Small business research programs: SBIR and STTR (CRS Report No. R43695). Congressional Research Service. Available at: https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/R43695
WIPO. (2022). Global innovation index 2022: What is the future of innovation-driven growth? World Intellectual Property Organization. Available at: https://www.wipo.int/edocs/pubdocs/en/wipo-pub-2000-2022-en-main-report-global-innovation-index-2022-15th-edition.pdf
Mazzucato, M. (2013). The entrepreneurial state: Debunking public vs. private sector myths. Anthem Press. Available at: http://digamo.free.fr/mazzucato.pdf
Mazzucato, M. (2018). Mission-oriented innovation policy: Challenges and opportunities. Industrial and Corporate Change, no. 27(5), pp. 803–815. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/icc/dty034
Mowery, D. C., & Rosenberg, N. (1989). Technology and the pursuit of economic growth. Cambridge University Press.
National Venture Capital Association. (2022). NVCA 2022 yearbook. Available at: https://nvca.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/03/NVCA-2022-Yearbook-Final.pdf
OECD. (2020c). OECD digital economy outlook 2020. OECD Publishing. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1787/bb167041-en
U.S. Patent and Trademark Office. (2022). Performance and accountability report: Fiscal year 2022. Available at: https://www.uspto.gov/about-us/performance-and-planning/uspto-annual-reports
Rosenberg, N. (1982). Inside the black box: Technology and economics. Cambridge University Press.
Saxenian, A. (1994). Regional advantage: Culture and competition in Silicon Valley and Route 128. Harvard University Press.
U.S. Small Business Administration. (2022). SBIR/STTR program overview: FY2021 annual report. Available at: https://www.sbir.gov/sites/default/files/documents/SBA_SBIR_STTR_FY21_Annual_Report.pdf
National Science Board. (2022). Science and engineering indicators 2022. National Science Foundation.
OECD. (2020d). Tax policy reforms 2020: OECD and selected partner economies. OECD Publishing. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1787/7af51916-en
Copyright (c) 2026 В.А. Шипоша
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
