The nature of innovation has changed dramatically over the last few decades, increasing its role in society more than in previous centuries. It is now gradually becoming recognized that innovation represents the key mobilizer and decisive engine of change and economic growth of our societies.

Governments are now paying much more attention to innovation than ever before, realizing its full potential and overall impact on society. Looking at business, as well as at other societal activities, one cannot disregard that successful managers recognize that innovation determines the development and growth potential of each organization. Indeed, looking at all corporate investment, the share of resources devoted to innovation is ever higher and continues rising.

This important change is based on the new character of innovation, which is not any more following the rather predictable linear model (from academic research and individual inventors to organized innovation, connecting and even integrating various actors) but rather a new, modern innovation model, engaging all kinds of innovators, with the support of government policies and innovation-friendly legislation—creating a productive innovation ecosystem.

Countries are—as a consequence—becoming increasingly innovative, primarily as a result of public commitment and successful policies. This could perhaps be best illustrated by looking at the World Intellectual Property Organization's international innovation ranking for a group of less developed countries over the period 2013–2023. The average ranking of Iran, Morocco, the Philippines, Indonesia, Vietnam, India, and Turkey has improved in this decade from the 90th to the 61st position. At the same time, some of the more developed countries, like Slovenia, have come during this period from 30th to 35th global position (in outputs, even to the 38th). The conclusion is clear and simple: without decisive policy emphasis on innovation, no progress is to be expected. It is actually strange that only a minority of countries have so far fully understood this, and even fewer among them have adjusted accordingly.

At any rate, innovation is gradually becoming one of the most frequently invoked concepts in today’s public discourse. It is increasingly praised as the engine of economic growth, societal progress, and technological transformation. Yet, precisely because of its near-universal endorsement, innovation often escapes the standard critical scrutiny.

The prevailing narrative portrays innovation as a spontaneous, largely self-organizing process: emerging from creative individuals, thriving in flexible networks, and flourishing once accepted at the market. While this narrative has helped to overcome outdated linear models of innovation, it has also produced a new simplification. By celebrating "ecosystems," we often almost ignore the fact that innovation is neither neutral nor automatic but strongly shaped by government institutions, policies, and power relations.

We should be aware that innovation ecosystems do not simply exist. They are designed, regulated, financed, and governed. Their structure reflects strategic choices: what areas and types of knowledge are supported, which actors are recognized, which risks are socialized, and which benefits are privatized. In this sense, innovation ecosystems are not only economic arrangements but also equally important parts of countries’ political processes and institutional environments.

Despite decades of systematic research on national and regional innovation systems, the governance/management dimension of innovation still remains underexplored. Public debate frequently oscillates between two extremes: either excessive faith in markets and entrepreneurial dynamism or—on the other hand—overly centralized policy interventions that fail to mobilize societal capabilities. Both approaches overlook the central challenge of our time: how to govern complex innovation ecosystems—under conditions of uncertainty, societal complexity, rapid technological change, and mounting societal expectations.

The central premise of the performance of innovation ecosystems is simple but demanding: it depends less on isolated excellence and more on effective collaboration and the quality of innovation governance. This includes institutional design, policy coherence, regulatory capacity, and the ability to align innovation with long-term societal interests and goals.

The new Journal on Innovation Ecosystem should provide an international forum for rigorous and critical analysis at the intersection of innovation, public policy, and institutional governance. It is going to welcome contributions going beyond success stories and practical recommendations andcollaboration and instead examine how innovation ecosystems actually function—where they succeed, where they fail, and why.

In this framework, particular attention should be given to:

  • The role of public institutions as architects and stewards of modern innovation ecosystems.

  • The interaction between national strategies and global innovation dynamics.

  • The governance failures, policy lock-ins, and unintended consequences.

  • The comparative analyses illuminate structural differences between countries and regions.

While firmly rooted in scholarly research, the journal should be clearly oriented toward business and policy relevance. Innovation today is inseparable from major societal transitions: digitalization, decarbonization, demographic change, and geopolitical fragmentation. These transitions place unprecedented demands on innovation systems and expose the limits of incremental policy adjustment.

The journal will therefore encourage contributions addressing innovation as a strategic public concern, rather than a purely technical or managerial issue. The reason for that is that innovation should not merely be celebrated but should be fully understood, critically evaluated, and debated, and properly governed.

By fostering a dialogue among researchers, policymakers, and practitioners, the new Journal of Innovation Ecosystem is expected to contribute to a more reflective and responsible understanding of innovation—one that recognizes both its transformative potential as well as its institutional fragility and risks.

Evidently, the level and success of innovation depend on people—from direct innovators to business managers, as well as relevant politicians and senior administrators. At the same time, they are all substantially influenced by the regulations affecting the research and innovation processes and—last but not least—depending also on how innovation is actually treated by the members of society. In all innovative societies, the role of innovators is highly appreciated as actors and contributors to knowledge-based development and actors of positive societal change and progress. This approach is very important and should be followed by other societies.