Although, throughout history, some public policies can be considered "mission-oriented", the fact is that only recently initiatives of this nature have been intentionally and deliberately adopted by many countries around the world. This makes mission-oriented strategies an institutional innovation to address major contemporary social challenges.

Like everything new, there are doubts about their design, their capacity to mobilize private agents and their effectiveness in the face of the objectives established. In this sense, a recent OECD study, which is the topic of this Letter IEDI, brings one of the first assessments on the adoption of mission-oriented policies by a relevant group of countries. 

The report is part of the latest edition of the OECD Science, Technology and Innovation Outlook and, for this reason, delimits its scope of analysis to mission-oriented innovation policies, which, as the IEDI has emphasized, constitute the backbone of the new industrial strategies adopted around the world. In addition, the study analyzes only actions aimed at zeroing net greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions.

Despite its somewhat narrow focus, the OECD overview with 30 policies containing 83 net-zero missions and implemented in 20 member countries indicates the complexity of this type of approach, its challenges and pitfalls. The study also helps to put into perspective Brazil's recently released industrial strategy, which is also mission-oriented.

For the OECD, mission-oriented actions bring a new and promising perspective for tackling complex problems, since the policies adopted in recent decades to address specific market failures have resulted in a fragmented and inadequate governance scenario to bring about the systemic changes necessary to ensure the transition to a low-carbon society. 

Mission-oriented innovation policies (MOIPs) are defined by the OECD as a "a coordinated package of policy and regulatory measures aimed at mobilizing actors in science, technology and innovation to address well-defined objectives related to a societal challenge within a defined timeframe." 

Ideally, compared to traditional innovation policies, net-zero missions can contribute in the following ways:

 • Stronger orientation, with clearer and more consensual objectives, establishing bases for a directed and coordinated collective action, avoiding decisions that are top-down only.

 • Broader coordination of the different actors, with institutional arrangements at different levels of governance, strategic and operational, as well as at the level of systemic or mission-specific initiative.

 •  Greater integration of various existing instruments to support innovation, across its different stages. 

Among OECD member countries, innovation policies covering a broad spectrum have multiplied, ranging from exploratory research to the introduction of new goods and services to the market, according to the study. This shows a greater synergy between innovation policy and industrial policy today. 

The OECD identifies that in 54% of the net-zero missions analyzed there are economic objectives, such as job creation and increasing the competitiveness of the national economy. Achieving these goals implies industrial skills —in addition to science, technology and innovation capacities— that introduce and disseminate net-zero scientific and technological development to consumption habits and forms of production. Moreover, the OECD notes that 60% of the missions analyzed have broad environmental objectives, in addition to reducing GHG emissions.

The ambition of net-zero innovation measures and the fact that mission-oriented policies make them more visible, along with the fiscal costs involved, put strong political pressure to deliver results, although the policies are at an early stage and generally have targets for 2030 or 2050. The OECD considers, then, that the first step is to evaluate the mission-oriented approach itself.

In this sense, the study finds in the mission-oriented net-zero policy experiences a clearer definition of objectives than in traditional science, technology and innovation programs. Despite this, only 46% of them have specific, measurable, achievable, relevant and time-bound (SMART) goals. In some cases, goals and objectives are combined into a short, inspiring and ambitious “mission statement” for a precise timeframe.

In several cases, precise objectives and goals are a first result of the mission itself, which most often incorporate them into a strategic agenda or roadmap. Although governments still play an important role in its definition, it is almost always the stakeholders who develop the strategic agenda, mapping the different pathways to achieve the objectives.

According to the OECD, it is important that strategic agendas are a “living document”, which evolves regularly to adapt to new internal and external conditions to the policy itself.

As for coordination, the study finds that virtually all net-zero missions have a significantly greater scope of coordination vis-à-vis traditional innovation policies. They bring together not only the public authorities responsible for RD&I, but also several relevant ministries and sectoral agencies. 

Specific governance bodies perform the functions of coordinating, advising, decision-making or monitoring. In the case of broader missions, these coordination groups are replicated at different levels: political, strategic and operational.

Mission governance involves a series of meetings and discussions with a wide range of actors and, according to the OECD, must strike a “sustainable” balance between the benefits of coordination and the transaction costs involved. Coordination is one of the main contributions of the missions, but also one of their main practical challenges. There are already cases of adjustments in this regard, as in the Netherlands. 

The study also found that, in almost all cases, missions do not create new policy instruments, but integrate existing ones into a set that is coherent with their objectives. Grants to RD&I continue to be one of the main instruments, combined with others, with the benefit of providing continuous support in the different phases of the innovation route until its introduction to the market, as France and Norway are doing.

The OECD also found that there is a widespread perception that new methodologies and processes for evaluating mission-oriented innovation policies are needed. Very few evaluations have been undertaken to date and, in general, they use traditional methods. The study, however, makes some assessments as to the scope of the missions, their funding and their systemic character.

Scope. For the OECD, there is a paradox in net-zero missions. If they are very specific and well delimited, they can exclude potential solutions and stop being technologically neutral. If they are too “open,” they can harm the alignment with national priorities, include actions that are too dispersed to generate synergies, and become disconnected from available financial resources. Cases of open net-zero missions are now evolving towards a more strategic definition, such as in Sweden and Ireland. Having flexibility is proving to be more appropriate.

Funding. The budgets of net-zero missions come mainly from the STI authorities, financial innovation in leveraging public resources is limited, and there is insufficient information on the resources contributed by the private sector. Despite this, public funding of missions has longer terms than traditional RD&I support. In 61% of cases the average term of funding is more than 4 years and in 38% of them more than 6 years. Missions that also support the market deployment of innovation have much larger budgets, such as the “clean hydrogen” and “industry decarbonization” acceleration strategies in France.

Systemic nature. Vis-à-vis traditional STI policies, net-zero missions show greater concern with the demands to be addressed, which, according to the study, is one of the aspects most highlighted as a novelty in innovation policy. For the OECD, proactive portfolio management practices are necessary to reap the systemic benefits of missions but require significant resources, new competencies and new rules and procedures in ministries and agencies.

The OECD study argues that the success of net-zero missions will depend on their ability to expand beyond STI programes and budgets and move from co-developed strategic agendas to joined-up and coordinated actions. The study points out, however, that recent initiatives have already generated important learning and are beginning to move away from the traps.

The full text is available in Portuguese.