The author is more of an economist than a historian, so the book probably won't take a satisfying angle in answering your questions, except the non-temporal par

The author is more of an economist than a historian, so the book probably won't take a satisfying angle in answering your questions, except the non-temporal part of #2 and perhaps #4. Some of her previous work that she cites in the book has looked at the relationship between industries, countries, sizes/stages of companies and R&D, and different kinds of state funding structures, both in terms of what factors seem to influence money being put into R&D, and whether there's empirical evidence of growth coming out of it. The main thrust of the book seems to be to defend some current thinking in economics to business and public-policy people (most of the book's points are summaries of existing studies, some by the author and some by others). For example she has a section summarizing a set of views on why the U.S. outpaces Europe in innovation, and criticizing what she sees as some incorrect popular views on that question. The book is less aimed at first-principles questions and more at questions like, "does public-private technology transfer work differently in the U.S. and Europe?" and "how are R&D risks currently distributed among different funders in the U.S.?" To the extent there's a headline thesis it's that the public-sector role in modern innovation provides some critical features that are deeply enmeshed into successful networks of innovation. note: This is based on browsing some of the author's papers and skimming through the book, not a deep read.