Current SFI favors invention over innovation: The authors argue the system is rigged for invensjon—technical solutions—rather than innovasjon, which requires economic value creation and market adaptation, limiting the translation of research into usable products. [1]
SFI remains Norway’s strongest research‑driven innovation tool: Despite its flaws, SFI provides long‑term partnerships between academia and industry, making it the logical starting point for boosting innovation outcomes. [1]
NTNU and Sintef dominate SFI centre hosting: Review of SFI I–V grants shows these institutions host roughly 40 % of centres and partner in about half of the remainder, reflecting Norway’s robust research capacity. [1]
Transition from research to commercialization is the bottleneck: Value only materialises when solutions are adopted, scaled, become profitable, or deliver documented productivity gains, not merely at the pilot stage. [1]
AI funding concentrates on invention, not market uptake: Large AI initiatives primarily target idea generation, leaving commercialization under‑invested, which the authors say prevents new knowledge from selling itself. [1]
Proposed three‑point SFI reform: Introduce distinct invention and innovation tracks; evaluate innovation by scaling metrics such as export markets and standards; require partners to commit resources and expertise for real implementation and industrialisation. [1]