Tag Archives: innovation

Innovation Through Crowdsourcing: Access to Finance, Access to People

harassmap

Within the last five years, crowdsourcing has risen as new phenomena both in the business world and in international development. Coined by Jeff Howe in WIRED magazine, the term crowdsourcing traditionally refers to using free or low-cost information or labor from a “crowd” to accomplish a task.

The innovative potential of this tool is impressive. Around the world crowdsourcing technologies have facilitated new ways to connect services with clients, track protests, fund businesses, map disasters, and more.

CONTINUE READING

Attention Young Entrepreneurs!

Photo: muftah.org

Entrepreneurs start their own businesses for variety of reasons. Some may have stumbled upon a great idea and had the right opportunity to sell a viable product. Others might have started their own business because they were frustrated with the lack of formal jobs offered in their communities. Whatever the reason may be, they all have one thing in common: entrepreneurs are all highly-motivated and creative innovators. CIPE wants to hear stories and experiences from such individuals.

CIPE invites entrepreneurs between the ages of 18 – 30 years old to share their stories about entrepreneurship in the following categories for CIPE’s International Youth Essay Competition: Entrepreneurship and Innovation: Beyond technology; Inclusive Growth: The entrepreneurial environment for scaling up business; and Social transformations: The role of entrepreneurs in building democratic societies.

In celebration of Global Entrepreneurship Week, the deadline for the competition has been extended to Sunday, November 18, 2012.

Tell us your story. Inspire others to become entrepreneurs.

A New Equation for Entrepreneurship in Developing Countries

People start their own businesses for a variety of reasons — not only to make a living, but also to be their own boss, address a social problem, or fulfill a lifelong dream. No matter one’s motivation, the initial step to earning that first dollar is developing and evaluating a business idea. Then comes figuring out the business’ legal structure, choosing a name, registering, preparing founding documents…the list goes on.

Imagine doing all of this in New York City. Hard work, right? Now imagine going through the same process in Tegucigalpa, where the cost of registering a business is nearly half the average annual income, or in Cairo, where it takes 193 days to purchase and register property.

Entrepreneurs in developing countries face myriad obstacles in bringing a concept from idea to the marketplace — crossing what is known in the start-up community as the valley of death. In countries with weak democratic institutions, starting a business can be exorbitantly expensive, or even impossible, without the right political connections. The entrepreneur’s list of concerns can include not only acquiring capital and creating a sustainable business plan, but also dealing with corrupt government officials, a lack of educated workers, and unreliable access to basic necessities such as water and electricity.

CONTINUE READING

Frontiers in Development

Panelists at the Frontiers in Development conference. (Photo: Flickr/ONE.org)

For years, growing private capital flows to developing countries, technological change, demographic pressures, and the spread of democracy have been reshaping the development landscape, as Steven Radelet recently noted. On June 11-13, the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) hosted the Frontiers in Development conference at Georgetown University to explore innovative ways of addressing the challenges and opportunities these changes have created.

CONTINUE READING

Institutions for innovation

Photo via http://www.thebenche.com

As the world reflects on the legacy of Steve Jobs, “genius” and “innovation” appear to be towards the top of the list of words that defined his life. Yet, the success story of Steve Jobs – and the success story of Apple and Disney – is as much about his intellectual ability and vision as it is about the system that provided the opportunities for his skills not to go to waste.

Simply put, innovation is not just a product of human capital; it is also a product of the institutional environment within which it takes place. Although the developing world is increasingly a stronger player  in the global innovation movement, institutional barriers prevent many developing country innovators from becoming major players globally.

One limitation to innovation in many of the emerging markets is the dominance of monopolies (or, alternatively, a lack of true market competition). So while some major firms can be effective in adopting technology or making improvements at the margins, many of the developing countries are still far behind their potential in creating new markets and products through “disruptive innovation.” Apple didn’t improve upon existing products - it created new ones.

Apple thrived because it had to compete with others and its market position wasn’t granted to the company by government regulations or special relationships with decision-makers. For the company to survive, Steve Jobs pushed the boundaries of what was imaginable. Yet it is not uncommon to see domestic firms in many of the emerging markets take a different approach, seeking government protection against competition as a means of survival or a way of improving their market position (think car manufacturers in Russia or high speed rail network suppliers in China).

There are many different institutional barriers that undermine innovation. Weak intellectual property rights protection creates disincentives to innovation. Corruption undermines the creation of new firms and technological advances by squandering resources and cementing the status quo. Poor bankruptcy procedures (not just a lack of start up capital) prevent would-be entrepreneurs from trying to open businesses. Dysfunctional court systems make contracting in business transactions unpredictable. Red tape diverts investments.

The bottom line is that much of the commentary on innovation often neglects the importance of a strong institutional environment. We hear about creating a culture of innovation within companies, utilizing the newest technologies, questioning and rejecting what’s considered “normal,” taking risks and failing, etc. But we do not hear enough about the environment within which all this happens.

Those trying to replicate Steve Jobs’ story in their own countries will be the first ones to tell you that they encounter many obstacles on their path to success. And while some obstacles will always be there, innovation can benefit greatly from simple improvements in the business climate. An entrepreneur’s time can be better spent on creating new products and business models than dealing with conflicting regulations, corrupt courts, an unpredictable macroeconomic environment, or vested interests that seek to protect the status quo.

Steve Jobs was an exceptional individual that most say was one of a kind. But I wonder how many more Steve Jobs do not get a chance to succeed in countries where political and economic structures protect vested interests and create disincentives to innovation and creativity – and how many of them leave their countries in search of a better business climate that will reward their skills and ideas.

Whatever happened to the Russia of tomorrow?

Did Russian innovation reach its peak 50 years ago? (Picture: Smithsonian Institute)

Fifty years ago, Yuri Gagarin became the first human being to leave the comfort of Earth’s atmosphere and enter outer space. While his voyage to the cosmos was a solo trip, it did not represent an individual effort. Hundreds of scientists and engineers from throughout the Soviet Union contributed to the mission’s success. Gagarin’s historic flight became a symbol of the Soviet Union’s new role as one of the world’s leading innovators. Soviet leaders claimed that they would soon surpass the capitalist Western nations, including the United States, and become the world’s most technologically developed country.

Five decades later, the Soviet Union is no more. But surely its successor, the Russian Federation, is still able to draw upon the intellectual might that was first to send a man to space, right?

According to data from the World Intellectual Property Organization, Russians submitted just fewer than 30,000 patent applications in 2010. Not too bad for a mid-sized European country like Switzerland or the Netherlands, but unimpressive in comparison with today’s leaders in innovation, countries such as South Korea (172,000 patents), the US (400,000), and current leader Japan (500,000). Nor can this year be considered an aberration: in terms of total number of patents in force, Russia has slipped to 11th place in the world, behind Hong Kong and Spain.

So what has happened in the last 50 years? It’s not that Russians don’t have good ideas – it’s that the ones who do are fleeing west and setting up shop in the UK, Germany, even Serbia. They’re leaving because the business environment in Russia is so smothering to potential entrepreneurs that it often makes more financial sense simply to pack up and leave the country than to deal with the endless parade of auditors, tax inspectors, and police making demands of business owners, often with vague – if any – grounding in actual law. This article by a CIPE consultant details how established elites often conspire with authorities to force business owners to sell their firms at prices far below market rates, or to steal it outright. What’s worse, the better, and thus more profitable, an idea is, the greater the chance that it will catch the attention of a well-connected rival.

Russia’s leaders have acknowledged that this “innovation gap” has created an over-reliance on exports of oil and primary goods, while creating too little wealth for its citizens. President Medvedev has called for the creation of an innovation center at Skolkovo near Moscow – Russia’s “silicon valley.” But the original Silicon Valley was not created by government fiat. Instead the area developed over time like a garden – the seeds of innovation were planted in the rich soil of academia and nurtured by free-flowing venture capital in the sunlight of supportive government policies. If Medvedev and his team take a similar approach, Russia may again one day be the first to cross new technological frontiers. Until then, they will have to settle for memories of better days.

The secret of economic growth

The search for the ultimate secret of economic growth consumes many great minds and reformers. Theories abound from endogenous to exogenous economic growth models.

One of the latest trends, at least in the development community, is to look more closely at the role of technology in spurring economic growth. For instance, USAID has recently set up the Development Innovation Ventures program and there is a new initiative that seeks to empower women through mobile technologies. There are successful examples – take, for instance, mobile banking, which has transformed Africa.

Yet, as Bill Clinton reminded us earlier this week – technology alone is not enough. It is a necessary component of development, yet without focus on institutions – the success will be limited:

“Do we need technology? Yes,” he said. “But it needs to be in the service of building functioning institutions. The big problem in poor countries is they don’t have the institutions we take for granted.”

Moreover,

Clinton cautioned that while technology holds much promise to help bring progress, technology in itself isn’t sufficient to elevate the condition of the world’s poor, and in some cases (particularly in developed countries), technology is often part of the problem.

One of the founders of the modern institutional economics field, Nobel Prize Laureate Douglass North, has a similar take on new technologies. He argues that institutional and organizational restructuring are key if one is to take advantage of new technologies.

In other words, what allows market economies to succeed is their flexibility and the resulting ability to adapt and adjust to new challenges. Further, North concludes that it is indeed “the economic and political institutions in a society (together with the technology employed) that determine the efficiency of markets.”

One way to look at this debate is from the point of view of innovations rather than new technologies alone. Development is not only about countries being able to import new technologies, it is also about countries’ ability to innovate, create, and embed new technologies in formal and informal practices.

As long as that innovation is restricted by poor rule of law, weak contract enforcement, lacking investment, and insufficient real and intellectual property rights, successes with the use of new technology to alleviate poverty and drive growth will be an exception rather than the norm. Just ask the UN.