The economic justification for government support for science and technology has been commonly based on the concept of market failure. The general theoretical argument is that governments should intervene in cases where the free market fails to achieve an efficient allocation of resources. In this paper, the inadequacies of the concepts of market failure as they apply to policy are outlined. Its use in the political process, given these restrictive shortcomings, is also considered. Examples are drawn from Australian experience in science and technology policy over the past few years to support the claim that the concept is neither a sufficient basis nor an adequate guide for government intervention. Rather it has been used to justify politically determined decisions. Special reference is made to the Australian Industrial Research and Development Incentives Scheme.

PAGES
138 – 155
DOI
All content is freely available without charge to users or their institutions. Users are allowed to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to the full texts of the articles in this journal without asking prior permission of the publisher or the author. Articles published in the journal are distributed under a http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
Issues
Also in this issue:
-
Agnes Horvath, Magic and the Will to Science: A Political Anthropology of Liminal Technicality
-
Gibson Burrell, Ronald Hartz, David Harvie, Geoff Lightfoot, Simon Lilley and Friends, Shaping for Mediocrity: The Cancellation of Critical Thinking at our Universities
-
Bas de Boer, How Scientific Instruments Speak: Postphenomenology and Technological Mediations in Neuroscientific Practice
-
Bjørn Lomborg, False Alarm
-
How does innovation arise in the bicycle sector? The users’ role and their betrayal in the case of the ‘gravel bike’
MARKET FAILURE AND GOVERNMENT SUPPORT FOR SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY: ECONOMIC THEORY VERSUS POLITICAL PRACTICE
Original Articles