This is followed by two sections providing an overview of relevant concepts and approaches drawn from innovation studies and Science & Technology Studies, which provide a complementary set of concepts for investigating innovation-governance processes.
There were five key players in the CDO innovation and governance process: securities firms, CDO managers, rating agencies, financial guarantors, and investors (Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission, 2011).
As such, there is a need to fill this gap since a better understanding of financial innovation and governance processes can help steer financial innovation toward positive ends (Asante et al., 2014).
Thus, understanding innovation and governance processes within that financial service sub-sector can help to discover ways to promote responsible financial innovation.
Concepts of the inter-linked, co-producing ecology of innovation and governance processes emphasise the permeability of state boundaries and the multidimensional, multi-sited, multi-scalar nature of innovation-governance in global biomedicine.
The findings from both case studies also support the involvement of multiple stakeholders in the innovation and governance processes identified in the literature (Llewellyn, 1992; White, 1997; Tufano, 2003; Mishra, 2008; Sánchez, 2010; Delimatsis, 2011; Gubler, 2011; Lerner and Tufano, 2011).
The combination of the 'triangle of tensions' with multiple levels of governance leads to an initial framework for a structural and process analysis of innovation governance, which is outlined in our Conclusion, below.
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) (2005) suggests four types of innovations: product innovations, process innovations, organisational innovations and marketing innovations.
Moreover, there is a need for processes of knowledge exchange and mutual learning regarding innovation governance across stakeholders in the sector as a whole.
