Lewis, J. M., & Mikolajczak, G. (2023). Policy on innovation in Australia: Divergence in definitions, problems, and solutions. Australian Journal of Public Administration, 82, 26–45. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8500.12575

1. Historical Context: Innovation has long been associated with the private sector, but the role of governments, including in Australia, has evolved to become more central in fostering innovation.
2. Changing Definitions of Innovation: The concept of innovation has expanded from Schumpeter’s original definition centered on new goods or services to include broader socio-economic challenges. The Australian government’s approach to innovation has fluctuated, reflecting these changing definitions.
3. Political Influence: The definition of innovation in policy documents and the perceived problems and solutions in innovation seem to shift depending on which political party is in power.
4. Public Sector’s Role: There’s a growing recognition of the public sector’s integral role in innovation, necessitating a systemic approach that includes coordination and interaction between public and private entities.
5. Evolution Over Decades: The approach to innovation in Australia has seen distinct shifts under different governments:
   1. 1976 Coalition: Emphasized innovation in the public service, focusing on responsiveness, efficiency, and community participation. Innovativeness was seen as an answer to social change.
   2. 1984–1996 Labor: Introduced the Public Service Reform Act 1984, aiming to improve the public service’s responsiveness to government priorities. The focus shifted towards efficiency and cost-cutting during the global financial instability of the 1980s, with less emphasis on innovation.
   3. 1996–2007 Coalition: Prioritized cutting red tape and promoting agility in the public service. Innovation was increasingly associated with technology, particularly digital services delivery, representing a shift towards a ‘science-push’ approach.
   4. 2007–2013 Labor: Placed innovation as a central government-wide issue, with the Cutler report emphasizing the need for a cultural change to boost innovation capacity. The focus was on creating an innovative culture within the public service.
   5. 2013–2019 Coalition: Returned to a science-push approach, focusing on digital transformation and technological solutions to drive public service efficiency.
6. Recent Trends and Implications: The recent trends under different governments show a clear pattern:
   1. Coalition Governments: Tend to focus on innovation as technology, promoting digital transformation, and efficiency in public service. The approach is more about supporting private firms and technological advancements.
   2. Labor Governments: More inclined to see innovation as a cultural shift within the public sector. The emphasis is on changing organizational culture, upskilling individuals, and making bureaucracy more innovative.
   3. Commonalities: Despite these differences, both approaches recognize the importance of innovation in government. Each government’s policy reflects its broader ideological stance towards public administration and economic development.
7. Implications for Policy and Innovation Studies: The study underscores the importance of a balanced approach to innovation, integrating both technological advancements and cultural shifts within the public sector. The fluctuating definitions of innovation in policy documents, aligned with political changes, suggest a lack of long-term coherence in Australia’s innovation strategy.
8. Conclusion: The paper argues that the Australian government’s approach to innovation has been inconsistent, shifting between a focus on technology and a broader cultural approach depending on the ruling political party. This inconsistency potentially hinders Australia’s long-term innovation capacity and effectiveness. The recent change in government might signal a return to emphasizing cultural aspects of innovation, especially within policymaking organizations.