{"id":91445,"date":"2026-04-09T07:16:07","date_gmt":"2026-04-09T06:16:07","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.taxresearch.org.uk\/Blog\/?p=91445"},"modified":"2026-04-09T07:16:07","modified_gmt":"2026-04-09T06:16:07","slug":"economic-questions-the-mariana-mazzucato-question","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.taxresearch.org.uk\/Blog\/2026\/04\/09\/economic-questions-the-mariana-mazzucato-question\/","title":{"rendered":"Economic questions: the Mariana Mazzucato question"},"content":{"rendered":"

This is one of a series of posts that will ask what the most pertinent question raised by a prominent influencer of\u00a0political economy<\/a>\u00a0might have been, and what the relevance of that question might be today. There is a list of all posts in the series at the end of each entry. The\u00a0origin of this series is noted here.<\/a>\u00a0\u00a0<\/em><\/p>\n

This series has been produced using what I describe as directed AI searches to establish positions with which I agree, followed by final editing before publication.<\/em><\/p>\n

Why is\u00a0Mariana Mazzucato<\/span>\u00a0<\/a> in this series? That is because she has built a critique of the myth that markets alone create value. Her work has been influential precisely because it exposes something mainstream economics prefers to ignore: that the state has been deeply involved in shaping innovation, underwriting risk, and creating the conditions in which private enterprise operates.<\/em><\/p>\n

In books such as The Entrepreneurial State<\/a> and Mission Economy<\/a>, she argues that governments should reclaim a more active role, not just correcting market failures, but directing economic activity toward public goals. Her language is optimistic: her argument is that the state can be entrepreneurial, purposeful, and mission-driven.<\/em><\/p>\n

There is, however, a deeper question beneath this optimism. If the state has always been necessary to make capitalism work, and if the system continues to generate inequality, instability and ecological crisis, then perhaps the problem is not simply that the state has been too weak or passive. Perhaps the problem is the system itself.<\/em><\/p>\n

Hence, t<\/span>he Mariana Mazzucato Question: <\/b><\/b>If the state has always been central to creating markets and value, why is it now being asked to rescue a system whose underlying dynamics, such as inequality, extraction and ecological damage, it may not be able to fix?<\/strong><\/em><\/i><\/p>\n

\n

The state as creator \u2014 and enabler<\/b><\/p>\n

Mazzucato is right to insist that the state has been central to innovation. Public funding, infrastructure, research and risk-taking have underpinned many of the technologies that define modern life.<\/p>\n

But this raises an uncomfortable implication. If the state has always been present, then it has not only enabled innovation \u2014 it has also enabled the system that followed. The same structures that supported technological progress have also supported:<\/p>\n