(Georgia Institute of Technology, 2011-09-15)
Dutrénit, Gabriela; Corona, Juan Manuel; Ramos, Carlos; Rivera, René; Sampedro, José Luis; Capdevielle, Mario
The discovery that some Japanese firms could compete successfully with their United States counterparts, and later Korean firms and from other newly industrializing countries, contributed to focus the attention of scholars and policy makers on the conditions of a successful catching up process. Hobday (1995), Kim (1997) and Lundvall et al (2006) show that most of these processes were driven by an extremely acute accumulation of innovation capabilities, which were fundamentally driven by learning from experience, imitation and adaptation, instead of by science or R&D activities. The Chinese case reinforces these findings. As these countries approach the technological frontier, scientific and technological knowledge become an essential ingredient of this process (Kodama, 2007). Literature on NSI claims that the fundamental resource of the modern economy is knowledge, and suggests that knowledge and learning are more important in the current phase of economic development than in previous historical periods. Hence, even though R&D activities are crucial when countries are approaching the frontier, other innovation activities and also important when countries are still at early stages of this process.
(Georgia Institute of Technology, 2011-09-15)
Capdevielle, Mario; Corona, Juan Manuel; Dutrénit, Gabriela; Rivera, René; Hernández, Carlos; Sanchez, Marina
Based on recent findings of an empirical study (Dutrénit, et al, 2011) funded by the Mexican Ministry of Economy, this paper examines the nature of innovation in developing countries (emphasizing the case of México) and the role of public goods in promoting private innovation. On the side of Science, Technology and Innovation Policy (STPI), this paper discusses the efficiency of the policymaking process when policymakers take decision on supporting innovation under a fuzzy and narrow concept of innovation activities and when the role of innovation in public goods is not well defined. The paper argues that for a better understanding of the nature of innovation and its economic and social impacts, the concept of innovation should be widened in order to include innovations in public goods and those innovations unrelated with R&D, innovations that can be very incremental but with significant effects in local terms.