The future of innovation has been exploited through countless scenarios, almost all of these systematically superseded by reality. Ruptures are not visible, but they comprise what has shaped our history. Forecasting is, certainly, a high-risk activity.
Certain models have been suggested, aiming at its construction, among which that of the articulation of three players: the government, the enterprise, and the academy. Among these, the entrepreneurial market, whether fulfilling or not its role in this society, has displayed a more striking presence. Thus, we shall concentrate ourselves on the roles of the other two players, under the aspects, which we deem most critical.
We assume that the future of innovation is constrained, in its extremes, between how we encourage its emergence, through basic research and how we steer it, through the social project we seek.
It is unnecessary to demonstrate that basic research, and product development bears an imbricate relationship. This productive chain target has promoted economic wealth. And if it were possible to tally up all investments accrued in this chain, the greatest contributions for the reach of high return rates would have provided for basic research.
The pertinent basic research supply provides innovation with its main prime material; without this supply, the limits of innovation will be reached, promoting growing production costs and economic stagnation.
We may assume that the supply of knowledge has not yet been widely depreciated, but the fact that the investments in basic research have shown themselves in a decreasing trend is ascertainable and may signal supply asynchronies in this chain target.
Reviewed under an entrepreneurial focus, its inherent risks to the intrinsic result definition and long maturity times are no more tolerable by the high return rate and short-term policy environment the financial system has imposed upon the world order. The enterprise is shrinking in motivation.
It is our understanding and first conclusion, that such context places Governments as bearing the responsibility of supporting basic research, thus considered as an essential and strategic public infrastructure.
On the other extreme, whom will this innovation suit? Under this aspect, the future of innovation is a recurring issue to the nature of the future of the species itself and, thus, to its survival instinct. Under extreme survival conditions, the act of innovating would be consequent, instinctive, and we would not need greater incentives for the competitive innovation environments to establish themselves and keep themselves, even though man is one of his own predators.
However, nature and his own nature having been conquered, the point of balance having been reached between his natures which repeat themselves and those which rupture it, among his neurotic psychotic manifestations, what will lead man to contact innovating? Will competition and cooperation find a common denominator? These issues seem to be found in a still very faraway horizon, and I do not relieve that we currently find answers to these.
Currently, if on the one hand, the citizen's aspirations may find in political representation the mechanisms of convergence for the reach of common good construction models, on the other, the speed with which innovation puts forth singular offers does not allow for negative consequences and decide, in full consciousness the paths and strategies to follow. It is necessary that all this knowledge of the state of the art be articulated to a system and prospective vision of impact scenarios, so that one may objectively establish a convergence of expectations and consensus.
This mission may be carried forth by an institution which not directly involved, which is removed from focal interests or from direct client pressure. I understand that the ideal of the university in the proper locus so that this process be establish, but, to such aim, not only its growing departmentalization but also its institutional corporate nature should make room for the conscience of its assigned role in the history of humanity.
Innovation, thus supported by the responsibility for sustenance of its own existence and of its destinies may continue to support man in his endless path, through the entrepreneurship of its citizens and of its institutions.