A pro-innovation agenda begins instead by recognizing that markets are far more likely to resolve market failures than regulators, and to do so at a lower cost. This is not because markets are perfect, or appropriate subjects of uncritical reverence, but simply because markets react more quickly than do governments to the negative but usually short-term side effects of disruptive innovation. The next generation of technology is far more likely to remedy consumer harms than regulatory intervention can, and with considerably less economic friction.
They come from Larry Downes.
This would depend on the source and type of failure and what one considers a market solution.
The source is held to be disruptive innovation. The market solution is to minimize political interventions such as union privileges, price interference or fixing, artificial barriers to entry such as licensing or onerous disclosure requirements, or any sort of predetermined, presumptuous, enforced market structures like the TLC in New York or the 3 tier distribution system for alcohol in the USA.