Considerations for governing open foundation models

Rishi Bommasani,Sayash Kapoor,Kevin Klyman,Shayne Longpre,Ashwin Ramaswami,Daniel Zhang,Marietje Schaake,Daniel E. Ho,Arvind Narayanan,Percy Liang

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1126/science.adp1848

IF: 56.9

2024-10-11

Science

Abstract:Different policy proposals may disproportionately affect the innovation ecosystem

multidisciplinary sciences

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

On the Societal Impact of Open Foundation Models

Sayash Kapoor,Rishi Bommasani,Kevin Klyman,Shayne Longpre,Ashwin Ramaswami,Peter Cihon,Aspen Hopkins,Kevin Bankston,Stella Biderman,Miranda Bogen,Rumman Chowdhury,Alex Engler,Peter Henderson,Yacine Jernite,Seth Lazar,Stefano Maffulli,Alondra Nelson,Joelle Pineau,Aviya Skowron,Dawn Song,Victor Storchan,Daniel Zhang,Daniel E. Ho,Percy Liang,Arvind Narayanan

2024-02-28

Abstract:Foundation models are powerful technologies: how they are released publicly directly shapes their societal impact. In this position paper, we focus on open foundation models, defined here as those with broadly available model weights (e.g. Llama 2, Stable Diffusion XL). We identify five distinctive properties (e.g. greater customizability, poor monitoring) of open foundation models that lead to both their benefits and risks. Open foundation models present significant benefits, with some caveats, that span innovation, competition, the distribution of decision-making power, and transparency. To understand their risks of misuse, we design a risk assessment framework for analyzing their marginal risk. Across several misuse vectors (e.g. cyberattacks, bioweapons), we find that current research is insufficient to effectively characterize the marginal risk of open foundation models relative to pre-existing technologies. The framework helps explain why the marginal risk is low in some cases, clarifies disagreements about misuse risks by revealing that past work has focused on different subsets of the framework with different assumptions, and articulates a way forward for more constructive debate. Overall, our work helps support a more grounded assessment of the societal impact of open foundation models by outlining what research is needed to empirically validate their theoretical benefits and risks.

Artificial Intelligence,Machine Learning
The Measurement of Open Innovation Performance: Theoretical Model and Its Empirical Verification

CAI Ning,YAN Chun

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3969/j.issn.1003-2053.2013.03.019

2013-01-01

Abstract:Innovation performance is not a singular dimension;it should include abundant content and measuring index.But extant studies of innovation performance evaluation focus only on the financial perspective,such as Return On Sales(ROS) of new products,quantity of patents,and so on.This kind of innovation performance evaluation does not sufficient to measure the comprehensive gains that enterprises get form open innovation.On the basis of systematic literal analysis,the article raises the concept of open innovation performance,discussed its dimension composing from two viewpoints – financial and strategic.Based on this two-dimensional categorization,sub-dimension of financial open innovation and strategic open innovation performance are also detailed analyzed.Theoretical analysis result indicates that the strategic open innovation performance contains five sub-dimensions,which are innovation potential,innovation management capacity,innovation culture atmosphere,management innovation,competition position.The outcome of theoretical analysis is a scale which can be used for questionnaire setting.After that,through collecting practical surveying data,the selection of dimension items and dimension re-definition are conducted via Exploratory Factor Analysis(EFA).Then construct a theoretical structural model for the assessment of latent variable setting.This step is carried out through Confirmatory Factor Analysis(CFA).The final conclusion shows,the evaluation of open innovation performance should be consider financial and strategic simultaneously.This research extends the appraisal of total gains enterprises get from open innovation from simple financial viewpoint to a more comprehensive degree;thereby provide a basic foundation for more dedicated exploration of relations between open innovation and its benefits.
PRISM: A Design Framework for Open-Source Foundation Model Safety

Terrence Neumann,Bryan Jones

2024-06-15

Abstract:The rapid advancement of open-source foundation models has brought transparency and accessibility to this groundbreaking technology. However, this openness has also enabled the development of highly-capable, unsafe models, as exemplified by recent instances such as WormGPT and FraudGPT, which are specifically designed to facilitate criminal activity. As the capabilities of open foundation models continue to grow, potentially outpacing those of closed-source models, the risk of misuse by bad actors poses an increasingly serious threat to society. This paper addresses the critical question of how open foundation model developers should approach model safety in light of these challenges. Our analysis reveals that open-source foundation model companies often provide less restrictive acceptable use policies (AUPs) compared to their closed-source counterparts, likely due to the inherent difficulties in enforcing such policies once the models are released. To tackle this issue, we introduce PRISM, a design framework for open-source foundation model safety that emphasizes Private, Robust, Independent Safety measures, at Minimal marginal cost of compute. The PRISM framework proposes the use of modular functions that moderate prompts and outputs independently of the core language model, offering a more adaptable and resilient approach to safety compared to the brittle reinforcement learning methods currently used for value alignment. By focusing on identifying AUP violations and engaging the developer community in establishing consensus around safety design decisions, PRISM aims to create a safer open-source ecosystem that maximizes the potential of these powerful technologies while minimizing the risks to individuals and society as a whole.

Computers and Society,Artificial Intelligence,Software Engineering
Defense Priorities in the Open-Source AI Debate: A Preliminary Assessment

Masao Dahlgren

2024-08-19

Abstract:A spirited debate is taking place over the regulation of open foundation models: artificial intelligence models whose underlying architectures and parameters are made public and can be inspected, modified, and run by end users. Proposed limits on releasing open foundation models may have significant defense industrial impacts. If model training is a form of defense production, these impacts deserve further scrutiny. Preliminary evidence suggests that an open foundation model ecosystem could benefit the U.S. Department of Defense's supplier diversity, sustainment, cybersecurity, and innovation priorities. Follow-on analyses should quantify impacts on acquisition cost and supply chain security.

Computers and Society
Creating a Cooperative AI Policymaking Platform through Open Source Collaboration

Aiden Lewington,Alekhya Vittalam,Anshumaan Singh,Anuja Uppuluri,Arjun Ashok,Ashrith Mandayam Athmaram,Austin Milt,Benjamin Smith,Charlie Weinberger,Chatanya Sarin,Christoph Bergmeir,Cliff Chang,Daivik Patel,Daniel Li,David Bell,Defu Cao,Donghwa Shin,Edward Kang,Edwin Zhang,Enhui Li,Felix Chen,Gabe Smithline,Haipeng Chen,Henry Gasztowtt,Hoon Shin,Jiayun Zhang,Joshua Gray,Khai Hern Low,Kishan Patel,Lauren Hannah Cooke,Marco Burstein,Maya Kalapatapu,Mitali Mittal,Raymond Chen,Rosie Zhao,Sameen Majid,Samya Potlapalli,Shang Wang,Shrenik Patel,Shuheng Li,Siva Komaragiri,Song Lu,Sorawit Siangjaeo,Sunghoo Jung,Tianyu Zhang,Valery Mao,Vikram Krishnakumar,Vincent Zhu,Wesley Kam,Xingzhe Li,Yumeng Liu

2024-12-10

Abstract:Advances in artificial intelligence (AI) present significant risks and opportunities, requiring improved governance to mitigate societal harms and promote equitable benefits. Current incentive structures and regulatory delays may hinder responsible AI development and deployment, particularly in light of the transformative potential of large language models (LLMs). To address these challenges, we propose developing the following three contributions: (1) a large multimodal text and economic-timeseries foundation model that integrates economic and natural language policy data for enhanced forecasting and decision-making, (2) algorithmic mechanisms for eliciting diverse and representative perspectives, enabling the creation of data-driven public policy recommendations, and (3) an AI-driven web platform for supporting transparent, inclusive, and data-driven policymaking.

Computers and Society,Artificial Intelligence,Machine Learning
Open innovation: current status and research opportunities

Joel West,Marcel Bogers

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/14479338.2016.1258995

2016-11-30

Innovation

Abstract:Interest in open innovation (OI) as a field of research has grown exponentially since the phrase was coined by Chesbrough in his 2003 book, with numerous articles, special issues, books, and conference sessions. Various reviews of the literature have summarized prior work, offered new frameworks, and identified opportunities for future research. Here we summarize these opportunities, which include more research on outbound OI, the role of open innovation in services, and network forms of collaboration such as consortia, communities, ecosystems, and platforms. Research should also examine the use of OI by small, new, and not-for-profit organizations, as well as the linkage of individual actions and motivations to open innovation. Other opportunities include better measuring the costs, benefits, antecedents, mediators and moderators of the effects of OI on performance, and understanding why and how OI is rejected, abandoned, or fails. Finally, we consider how OI can be better linked to prior theoretical research, including topics such as absorptive capacity, user innovation, resources, dynamic capabilities, business models, and the definition of the firm.
Open-source Hardware: Opportunities and Challenges

Gagan Gupta,Tony Nowatzki,Vinay Gangadhar,Karthikeyan Sankaralingam

DOI: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1606.01980

2016-06-07

Hardware Architecture

Abstract:Innovation in hardware is slowing due to rising costs of chip design and diminishing benefits from Moore's law and Dennard scaling. Software innovation, on the other hand, is flourishing, helped in good measure by a thriving open-source ecosystem. We believe that open source can similarly help hardware innovation, but has not yet due to several reasons. We identify these reasons and how the industry, academia, and the hardware community at large can come together to address them.
Acceptable Use Policies for Foundation Models

Kevin Klyman

2024-08-29

Abstract:As foundation models have accumulated hundreds of millions of users, developers have begun to take steps to prevent harmful types of uses. One salient intervention that foundation model developers adopt is acceptable use policies: legally binding policies that prohibit users from using a model for specific purposes. This paper identifies acceptable use policies from 30 foundation model developers, analyzes the use restrictions they contain, and argues that acceptable use policies are an important lens for understanding the regulation of foundation models. Taken together, developers' acceptable use policies include 127 distinct use restrictions; the wide variety in the number and type of use restrictions may create fragmentation across the AI supply chain. Developers also employ acceptable use policies to prevent competitors or specific industries from making use of their models. Developers alone decide what constitutes acceptable use, and rarely provide transparency about how they enforce their policies. In practice, acceptable use policies are difficult to enforce, and scrupulous enforcement can act as a barrier to researcher access and limit beneficial uses of foundation models. Nevertheless, acceptable use policies for foundation models are an early example of self-regulation that have a significant impact on the market for foundation models and the overall AI ecosystem.

Computers and Society,Artificial Intelligence,Computation and Language
Market Concentration Implications of Foundation Models

Jai Vipra,Anton Korinek

2023-11-03

Abstract:We analyze the structure of the market for foundation models, i.e., large AI models such as those that power ChatGPT and that are adaptable to downstream uses, and we examine the implications for competition policy and regulation. We observe that the most capable models will have a tendency towards natural monopoly and may have potentially vast markets. This calls for a two-pronged regulatory response: (i) Antitrust authorities need to ensure the contestability of the market by tackling strategic behavior, in particular by ensuring that monopolies do not propagate vertically to downstream uses, and (ii) given the diminished potential for market discipline, there is a role for regulators to ensure that the most capable models meet sufficient quality standards (including safety, privacy, non-discrimination, reliability and interoperability standards) to maximally contribute to social welfare. Regulators should also ensure a level regulatory playing field between AI and non-AI applications in all sectors of the economy. For models that are behind the frontier, we expect competition to be quite intense, implying a more limited role for competition policy, although a role for regulation remains.

Artificial Intelligence,General Economics
Open Collaboration for Innovation: Principles and Performance

Sheen Levine,Michael Prietula

DOI: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1406.7541

2014-06-30

Abstract:The principles of open collaboration for innovation (and production), once distinctive to open source software, are now found in many other ventures. Some of these ventures are internet-based: Wikipedia, online forums and communities. Others are off-line: in medicine, science, and everyday life. Such ventures have been affecting traditional firms, and may represent a new organizational form. Despite the impact of such ventures, questions remain about their operating principles and performance. Here we define open collaboration (OC), the underlying set of principles, and propose that it is a robust engine for innovation and production. First, we review multiple OC ventures and identify four defining principles. In all instances, participants create goods and services of economic value, they exchange and reuse each other's work, they labor purposefully with just loose coordination, and they permit anyone to contribute and consume. These principles distinguish OC from other organizational forms, such as firms or cooperatives. Next, we turn to performance. To understand the performance of OC, we develop a computational model, combining innovation theory with recent evidence on human cooperation. We identify and investigate three elements that affect performance: the cooperativeness of participants, the diversity of their needs, and the degree to which the goods are rival (subtractable). Through computational experiments, we find that OC performs well even in seemingly harsh environments: when cooperators are a minority, free riders are present, diversity is lacking, or goods are rival. We conclude that OC is viable and likely to expand into new domains. The findings also inform the discussion on new organizational forms, collaborative and communal.

Computers and Society
Open innovation : researching a new paradigm

J. West,W. Vanhaverbeke,H. Chesbrough

Abstract:1. Open Innovation: A New Paradigm for Understanding Industrial Innovation SECTION I: FIRMS IMPLEMENTING OPEN INNOVATION 2. New Puzzles and New Findings 3. Whither Core Competency for the Large Corporation in an Open Innovation World? 4. Open, Radical Innovation: Toward an Integrated Model in Large Established Firms 5. Patterns of Open Innovation in Open Source Software SECTION II: INSTITUTIONS GOVERNING OPEN INNOVATION 6. Does Appropriability Enable or Retard Open Innovation? 7. The Use of University Research in Firm Innovation 8. Open Standards and Intellectual Property Rights 9. The Use of Intellectual Property in Software: Implications for Open Innovation SECTION III: NETWORKS SHAPING OPEN INNOVATION 10. The Inter-organizational Context of Open Innovation 11. Knowledge Networks and the Geographic Locus of Innovation 12. Open Innovation in Systemic Innovation Contexts 13. Open Innovation in Value Networks SECTION IV: CONCLUSIONS 14. Open Innovation: A Research Agenda

Computer Science,Economics,Business,Law
Foundation Model Transparency Reports

Rishi Bommasani,Kevin Klyman,Shayne Longpre,Betty Xiong,Sayash Kapoor,Nestor Maslej,Arvind Narayanan,Percy Liang

2024-02-26

Abstract:Foundation models are critical digital technologies with sweeping societal impact that necessitates transparency. To codify how foundation model developers should provide transparency about the development and deployment of their models, we propose Foundation Model Transparency Reports, drawing upon the transparency reporting practices in social media. While external documentation of societal harms prompted social media transparency reports, our objective is to institutionalize transparency reporting for foundation models while the industry is still nascent. To design our reports, we identify 6 design principles given the successes and shortcomings of social media transparency reporting. To further schematize our reports, we draw upon the 100 transparency indicators from the Foundation Model Transparency Index. Given these indicators, we measure the extent to which they overlap with the transparency requirements included in six prominent government policies (e.g., the EU AI Act, the US Executive Order on Safe, Secure, and Trustworthy AI). Well-designed transparency reports could reduce compliance costs, in part due to overlapping regulatory requirements across different jurisdictions. We encourage foundation model developers to regularly publish transparency reports, building upon recommendations from the G7 and the White House.

Machine Learning,Computers and Society,Artificial Intelligence
What Affects Innovation More: Policy or Policy Uncertainty?

Utpal Bhattacharya,Po‐Hsuan Hsu,Xuan Tian,Xu Yan

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2368587

2013-01-01

SSRN Electronic Journal

Abstract:Download This Paper Open PDF in Browser Add Paper to My Library Share: Permalink Using these links will ensure access to this page indefinitely Copy URL Copy DOI
Effect of Non-Practicing Entities on Innovation Society and Policy: An Agent Based Model and Simulation

Seokbeom Kwon,Kazuyuki Motohashi

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2606678

2014-01-01

SSRN Electronic Journal

Abstract:Effect of Non-practicing entities (NPE) on innovation society has been a controversial issue owing to their having both positive and negative impacts. However, measuring the net effect as well as finding ways to reduce the probable negative effects of the NPEs has been a challenge. In this paper, we propose an agent-based model of the patent market to address the issue. We conduct a simulation to test whether NPEs produce more harm than good. Further, a simulation evaluates the efficacy of possible legislative options to control NPEs’ undesirable effects, which are being discussed in the U.S congress. Our result concludes that the negative effects of NPEs are likely to outweigh their potential benefits. In addition, it provides a first look at the effectiveness of each policy in relieving the NPE’s negative effect. We provide a quantitative ground for policy makers to discuss policy options regarding the NPE issue and a guideline for implementation of such policies.

English Else
Open R&D and open innovation: exploring the phenomenon

Ellen Enkel,Oliver Gassmann,Henry Chesbrough

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9310.2009.00570.x

2009-09-01

R and D Management

Abstract:There is currently a broad awareness of open innovation and its relevance to corporate R&D. The implications and trends that underpin open innovation are actively discussed in terms of strategic, organizational, behavioral, knowledge, legal and business perspectives, and its economic implications. This special issue aims to advance the R&D, innovation, and technology management perspective by building on past and present studies in the field and providing future directions. Recent research, including the papers in this special issue, demonstrates an increasing range of situations where the concept is regarded as applicable. Most research to date has followed the outside‐in process of open innovation, while the inside‐out process remains less explored. A third coupled process of open innovation is also attracting significant research attention. These different processes show why it is necessary to have a full understanding of how and where open innovation can add value in knowledge‐intensive processes. There may be a need for a creative interpretation and adaptation of the value propositions, or business models, in each situation. In other words, there are important implications for new and emerging methods of R&D management.
Mapping the individual, social, and biospheric impacts of Foundation Models

Andrés Domínguez Hernández,Shyam Krishna,Antonella Maia Perini,Michael Katell,SJ Bennett,Ann Borda,Youmna Hashem,Semeli Hadjiloizou,Sabeehah Mahomed,Smera Jayadeva,Mhairi Aitken,David Leslie

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1145/3630106.3658939

2024-07-24

Abstract:Responding to the rapid roll-out and large-scale commercialization of foundation models, large language models, and generative AI, an emerging body of work is shedding light on the myriad impacts these technologies are having across society. Such research is expansive, ranging from the production of discriminatory, fake and toxic outputs, and privacy and copyright violations, to the unjust extraction of labor and natural resources. The same has not been the case in some of the most prominent AI governance initiatives in the global north like the UK's AI Safety Summit and the G7's Hiroshima process, which have influenced much of the international dialogue around AI governance. Despite the wealth of cautionary tales and evidence of algorithmic harm, there has been an ongoing over-emphasis within the AI governance discourse on technical matters of safety and global catastrophic or existential risks. This narrowed focus has tended to draw attention away from very pressing social and ethical challenges posed by the current brute-force industrialization of AI applications. To address such a visibility gap between real-world consequences and speculative risks, this paper offers a critical framework to account for the social, political, and environmental dimensions of foundation models and generative AI. We identify 14 categories of risks and harms and map them according to their individual, social, and biospheric impacts. We argue that this novel typology offers an integrative perspective to address the most urgent negative impacts of foundation models and their downstream applications. We conclude with recommendations on how this typology could be used to inform technical and normative interventions to advance responsible AI.

Computers and Society
The Foundation Model Transparency Index

Rishi Bommasani,Kevin Klyman,Shayne Longpre,Sayash Kapoor,Nestor Maslej,Betty Xiong,Daniel Zhang,Percy Liang

2023-10-20

Abstract:Foundation models have rapidly permeated society, catalyzing a wave of generative AI applications spanning enterprise and consumer-facing contexts. While the societal impact of foundation models is growing, transparency is on the decline, mirroring the opacity that has plagued past digital technologies (e.g. social media). Reversing this trend is essential: transparency is a vital precondition for public accountability, scientific innovation, and effective governance. To assess the transparency of the foundation model ecosystem and help improve transparency over time, we introduce the Foundation Model Transparency Index. The Foundation Model Transparency Index specifies 100 fine-grained indicators that comprehensively codify transparency for foundation models, spanning the upstream resources used to build a foundation model (e.g data, labor, compute), details about the model itself (e.g. size, capabilities, risks), and the downstream use (e.g. distribution channels, usage policies, affected geographies). We score 10 major foundation model developers (e.g. OpenAI, Google, Meta) against the 100 indicators to assess their transparency. To facilitate and standardize assessment, we score developers in relation to their practices for their flagship foundation model (e.g. GPT-4 for OpenAI, PaLM 2 for Google, Llama 2 for Meta). We present 10 top-level findings about the foundation model ecosystem: for example, no developer currently discloses significant information about the downstream impact of its flagship model, such as the number of users, affected market sectors, or how users can seek redress for harm. Overall, the Foundation Model Transparency Index establishes the level of transparency today to drive progress on foundation model governance via industry standards and regulatory intervention.

Machine Learning,Artificial Intelligence
Social Preferences and Open Source Software Development.

Xianjun Geng,Lihui Lin,Gang Peng

2014-01-01

Abstract:Open source software (OSS), and open innovation in general, has received increasing attention from both researchers and practitioners. Based on recent literature on social preference from behavior economics, we propose a finite-horizon dynamic model to study the interactions between OSS developers who are either purely self-interested or conditional cooperators. We find that selfinterested developers who are predicted to free ride under conventional analysis may contribute to a public good, and the existence of purely these developers may, under certain conditions, even benefit the provision of a public good. We further analyze how code architecture affects OSS development outcome and propose that a higher level of code modularity leads to more code contributions overall, due to the strategic behavior of self-interested developers. However, a right mix of the two types of developers plays a critical role for modular design to make an impact. The findings bear important theoretical as well as practical implications and provide guidelines for OSS development and the collective innovation in general.
The Impact of Board Capital on Open Innovation with the Moderating Effect of Executive Equity Incentives

Liping Li,Qisheng Chen,Jing Li,Jin Chen,Ximeng Jia

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ribaf.2024.102520

IF: 6.5

2024-01-01

Research in International Business and Finance

Abstract:As a predominant global innovation paradigm, open innovation constitutes a pivotal means of enhancing firms’ innovation performance. Scholars and practitioners are increasingly concerned about strategies to strengthen open innovation, but previous research has overlooked corporate governance factors. This study empirically investigates the impact of board capital on corporate open innovation using data from Chinese listed firms (1999-2009) within the resource dependence and upper echelons theory framework, employing the fixed effects model for panel data and the hierarchical regression method. Findings reveal that the breadth and depth of board capital positively affect the breadth of open innovation, though not significantly the depth. Additionally, executive equity incentives enhance the relationship between board capital and open innovation breadth. Robustness checks support these findings. Notably, board capital’s impact is more pronounced in large enterprises and high-technology industries. This study offers practical insights for firms to prioritize board capital considerations in fostering open innovation initiatives.
Economic theory and government technology policy

David C. Mowery

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/bf00138466

IF: 5.3

1983-09-01

Policy Sciences

Abstract:Recent federal proposals and program experiments aimed at improving the innovative performance of American industry have been based on an inappropriate analytic framework. The neoclassical microeconomic analysis upon which these proposals are based emphasizes the undersupply of R & D. However, a more crucial problem in this context is the utilization of complex research results by firms and industries with low levels of in-house research expertise. This problem is a central concern of an alternative approach to the analysis of innovation, termed the information processing framework. This analytic approach, which receives empirical support from an examination of previous cooperative research programs in the United States and Great Britain and an analysis of independent consulting firms' operations, suggests that cooperative or extramural research does not function effectively as a substitute for in-house research. Public policies to encourage innovation should be attentive to the distribution, as well as the supply, of R & D.

public administration,social sciences, interdisciplinary

Considerations for governing open foundation models

On the Societal Impact of Open Foundation Models

The Measurement of Open Innovation Performance: Theoretical Model and Its Empirical Verification

PRISM: A Design Framework for Open-Source Foundation Model Safety

Defense Priorities in the Open-Source AI Debate: A Preliminary Assessment

Creating a Cooperative AI Policymaking Platform through Open Source Collaboration

Open innovation: current status and research opportunities

Open-source Hardware: Opportunities and Challenges

Acceptable Use Policies for Foundation Models

Market Concentration Implications of Foundation Models

Open Collaboration for Innovation: Principles and Performance

Open innovation : researching a new paradigm

Foundation Model Transparency Reports

What Affects Innovation More: Policy or Policy Uncertainty?

Effect of Non-Practicing Entities on Innovation Society and Policy: An Agent Based Model and Simulation

Open R&D and open innovation: exploring the phenomenon

Mapping the individual, social, and biospheric impacts of Foundation Models

The Foundation Model Transparency Index

Social Preferences and Open Source Software Development.

The Impact of Board Capital on Open Innovation with the Moderating Effect of Executive Equity Incentives

Economic theory and government technology policy