To play a bit of devils advocate I would point to Google's 'Solve For X' campaign, where they are collecting new ideas and technology to solve the
big problems of our time.
Perhaps Google is not a state in the traditional nation sense, however it would be foolish to dismiss them as an organization without the drive to
innovate, the money to fund that innovation and the people who will do so.
So, I do not disagree with your article, I just think that there is some competition arising to the challenge of the state being the only one with
enough resources to explore innovation without requiring a profit margin established beforehand.
I did not come with only one link, I'd like to point out one example of State-Based innovation gone rotten. The MacAdam Shield Shovel was a piece of
equipment handed to Canadian Infantry troops to be an advantage, not only because it seemed like a good idea, but because Sam Hughes (minister for the
Department of Militia and Defence in 1913) had a secretary named Ena MacAdam who suggested it.
A secretary who suggested a piece of military equipment, developed by a Minister of Parliament. Cronyism, perhaps. But negligence as well.
Preliminary tests, however, revealed the unfortunate conclusion that the shovel’s blade was incapable of stopping the penetration of gunfire
even from the smallest of enemy calibre arms. Its value as a digging tool was also questioned as soldiers commented against the shovel’s weight, its
inability to be easily carried, and the fact that the blade was poor for shovelling loose soil as it contained a large sight-hole. With such a
reputation, several high ranking Canadian and British military officials refused to press the instrument into service. With these developments, an
executive order was eventually issued for the shovels to be reduced to scrap. A total sum of $1,400 was recovered in the salvage; a figure far less
than the original contract price, which tagged each MacAdam shield-shovel at $1.35.
en.wikipedia.org...
State-Based innovation can be a double-edged sword, great in theory but no battle plan survives the enemy. Sam Hughes was also one of the champions of
The Ross Rifle, which didn't work as well in the trenches as it was a marksmans rifle instead of a infantrymans rifle. "Made in Canada" was not a
reason to use it, the British had a superior weapon already in place, the Lee-Eenfield.
