AN ECONOMIC ANALYSIS OF STATE REGULATION OF INNOVATION (USING THE US AS AN EXAMPLE)
Abstract
This article presents an economic analysis of government regulation of innovation using the United States as a case study. The aim of the study is to conduct a comprehensive assessment of the mechanisms of government regulation of innovation in the United States, determine their economic effectiveness, and identify opportunities for adapting this experience in other countries. The research methodology is based on a systemic approach that views innovation as a complex interaction between the government, business, and scientific institutions. The study employs general scientific and specialized methods, including analysis and synthesis to generalize theoretical approaches to government regulation of innovation; a comparative method to study various models of state support; statistical analysis to assess key indicators of innovation activity (such as patent activity, investment volumes, and technology commercialization); and an institutional approach to evaluate the role of government agencies and programs in shaping the innovation ecosystem. The study’s findings show that government regulation of innovation in the United States is comprehensive and includes financial, organizational, and regulatory instruments. It has been established that key mechanisms include grant programs to support innovation, tax incentives for businesses, the development of venture capital, and active collaboration between universities, business, and government. The study demonstrates that this model ensures a high level of innovation, facilitates the commercialization of scientific developments, stimulates the creation of startups, and fosters a favorable environment for the development of digital technologies. At the same time, a number of challenges were identified, including the uneven distribution of resources, the concentration of innovation in technology clusters, and the need for continuous improvement of public policy in response to the evolution of the digital economy. The practical value of this article lies in the application of the findings to improve government policy in the field of innovation and to adapt the US experience to the circumstances of other countries.
References
Ліхота О. В. Еволюція державного регулювання інноваційної діяльності у США. Науковий економічний журнал «Інтелект ХХІ» №2, 2025. С. 5-8. DOI: https://doi.org/10.32782/2415-8801/2025-2.1
Поляков М., Ханін І., Шевченко Г., Білозубенко В., Корнєєв М. Системні особливості розвитку інновацій у США. Фінансово-кредитна діяльність: проблеми теорії та практики. 2024. Т. 1, № 54. С. 348–363. DOI: https://doi.org/10.55643/fcaptp.1.54.2024.4247
Atkinson R. D. The case for a national industrial strategy to counter China's technological rise. Information Technology and Innovation Foundation, 2020. https://itif.org/publications/2020/04/13/case-national-industrial-strategy-counter-chinas-technological-rise/
Bayh-Dole Act : Public Law 96-517, 35 U.S.C. §§ 200–212. U.S. Congress, 1980. https://www.unemed.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/35-U.S.C.-200-212-Bayh-Dole-Act.pdf
Bonvillian W. B. Industrial Innovation Policy in the United States. Annals of Science and Technology Policy. 2022. Vol. 6, no. 4. P. 315–411. https://doi.org/10.1561/110.00000026
CHIPS and Science Act of 2022 : Public Law No. 117-167. U.S. Congress, 2022. https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-bill/4346/text
DARPA FY 2024 Agency Financial Report. Arlington, VA : Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, 2024. 85 p. https://www.darpa.mil/sites/default/files/attachment/2024-11/darpa-2024-afr-final.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. http://digamo.free.fr/mazzucato.pdf
NASA Spinoff 2024. Washington, DC : National Aeronautics and Space Administration, 2024 https://spinoff.nasa.gov/sites/default/files/2024-01/NASA.Spinoff_2024_508.pdf
Ne’matova S. E., Rahimov I., Umaraliyev F., Maxmudov D. State regulation of innovative activities. Новини освіти: дослідження у XXI столітті. 2025. Т. 3, № 32. С. 705-707. URL: https://nauchnyimpuls.org/index.php/obrazovaniya/article/view/1149
Nelson R. R., Winter S. G. An Evolutionary Theory of Economic Change. Cambridge, MA : Harvard University Press, 1982. 437 p. https://www.inctpped.org/spiderweb/pdf_2/Dosi_1_An_evolutionary-theory-of_economic_change..pdf
NSF Strategic Plan for Fiscal Years 2022–2026. Alexandria, VA : National Science Foundation, 2022. https://www.nsf.gov/news/special_reports/strategic_plan/
Performance and accountability report: Fiscal year 2022. U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, 2022. uspto.gov/annualreports
Likhota, O. V. (2025) Evoliutsiia derzhavnoho rehuliuvannia innovatsiinoi diialnosti u SShA [Evolution of state regulation of innovation in the USA]. Naukovyi ekonomichnyi zhurnal «Intelekt ХХІ», (2), 5-8. DOI: https://doi.org/10.32782/2415-8801/2025-2.1 [in Ukrainian].
Poliakov, M., Khanin, I., Shevchenko, H., Bilozubenko, V., & Kornieiev, M. (2024). Systemni osoblyvosti rozvytku innovatsii u SSHA [Systemic features of innovation development in the USA]. Financial and Credit Activity Problems of Theory and Practice, 1(54), 348–363. https://doi.org/10.55643/fcaptp.1.54.2024.4247 [in Ukrainian].
Atkinson, R. D. (2020). The case for a national industrial strategy to counter China's technological rise. Information Technology and Innovation Foundation https://itif.org/publications/2020/04/13/case-national-industrial-strategy-counter-chinas-technological-rise/
Bayh-Dole Act of 1980, 35 U.S.C. §§ 200–212 (1980) https://www.unemed.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/35-U.S.C.-200-212-Bayh-Dole-Act.pdf
Bonvillian, W. B. (2022). Industrial innovation policy in the United States. Annals of Science and Technology Policy, 6(4), 315–411. https://doi.org/10.1561/110.00000026
CHIPS and Science Act of 2022, Pub. L. No. 117-167, 136 Stat. 1366 (2022) https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-bill/4346/text
Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency. (2024). DARPA FY 2024 agency financial report. https://www.darpa.mil/sites/default/files/attachment/2024-11/darpa-2024-afr-final.pdf
Mazzucato, M. (2018). Mission-oriented innovation policy: Challenges and opportunities. Industrial and Corporate Change, 27(5), 803–815. https://doi.org/10.1093/icc/dty034
Mazzucato, M. (2013). The entrepreneurial state: Debunking public vs. private sector myths. Anthem Press. http://digamo.free.fr/mazzucato.pdf
National Aeronautics and Space Administration. (2024). NASA spinoff 2024. https://spinoff.nasa.gov/sites/default/files/2024-01/NASA.Spinoff_2024_508.pdf
Ne’matova, S. E., Rahimov, I., Umaraliyev, F., & Maxmudov, D. (2025). State regulation of innovative activities [Education: Research in the 21st Century]. Novyny osvity: doslidzhennia u XXI stolitti. 3(32), 705–707. https://nauchnyimpuls.org/index.php/obrazovaniya/article/view/1149
Nelson, R. R., & Winter, S. G. (1982). An evolutionary theory of economic change. Harvard University Press. https://www.inctpped.org/spiderweb/pdf_2/Dosi_1_An_evolutionary-theory-of_economic_change..pdf
National Science Foundation. (2022). NSF strategic plan for fiscal years 2022–2026. https://www.nsf.gov/news/special_reports/strategic_plan/
U.S. Patent and Trademark Office. (2022). Performance and accountability report: Fiscal year 2022. uspto.gov/annualreports
Copyright (c) 2026 Володимир Мухін

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

