Organizational Unit:
School of Public Policy

Permanent Link
https://hdl.handle.net/1853/70716
Research Organization Registry ID
Description
Previous Names
Parent Organization
Parent Organization
Includes Organization(s)
ArchiveSpace Name Record
https://finding-aids.library.gatech.edu/agents/corporate_entities/1033

Filters

2008 2
2
2
2
Reset filters

Settings
search.filters.applied.f.resourcesubtype: Proceedings × Author: Lundvall, Bengt-Åke × Author: Gu, Shulin ×

Publication Search Results

Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    China's system and vision of innovation: analysis of the national medium- and long-term science and technology development plan (2006-2020)
    (Georgia Institute of Technology, 2008-09) Gu, Shulin ; Liu, Ju ; Lundvall, Bengt-Åke ; Schwaag Serger, Sylvia
    China has been characterised by extremely high rates of economic growth for the last several decades. This growth originates from a transformation of the institutional set up giving more room for regional initiative, private ownership and use of market mechanisms. Regional political resources have been aligned to globally oriented market resources and this alignment has established a very specific and unique mechanism of capital accumulation resulting in extremely high savings and investment rates. The downside of this growth model is its intensive exploitation of human and natural resources. While the rate of capital accumulation is extremely high (40-50% of GNP takes the form of gross savings and investment) non reproducible natural and social capital are suffering in the process of growth. Social and regional inequality has reached critical levels and so have ecological imbalances. The central leadership of China are aware of these problems and recent policy documents put strong emphasis on ‘harmonious development’ and ‘independent innovation’ (Gu and Lundvall 2006). In China the transformation of the national innovation system is now regarded as a major step toward a necessary renewal of the growth model. This paper presents a general framework for the analysis of national innovation system, a historical overview over the development of China’s production and innovation system and ends up with a discussion of the National Medium- and Long-term Science and Technology Development Plan (2006-2020). We conclude that the plan represents steps forward in important respects. This is true for the emphasis on need driven innovation policy with focus on energy and environment, the stronger role for enterprises as hosts of R&D-efforts and innovation, a more active role for public procurement and a more realistic understanding of the limits of science as source of innovation. But the plan has some weaknesses and needs to be complemented with other initiatives. There is exaggerated technology optimism and the need for institutional and organisational change at the level of the enterprise is underestimated. In some cases the policy instruments and tools seem to be inadequate when related to the very ambitious targets set by the plan. Especially problematic is the absence of an explicit analysis of the regional dimension and the need to upgrade working life in terms of skills and organisation. The fact that a knowledge based strategy, if left to itself, leads to further social and regional polarisation is not taken into account. Finally how the idea of ‘indigenous innovation’ will be implemented is crucial both for the success of the plan and for China’s relationships with the rest of the world.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    China's Innovation System and the Move Towards Harmonious Growth and Endogenous Innovation
    (Georgia Institute of Technology, 2008) Gu, Shulin ; Lundvall, Bengt-Åke
    Observers around the world are impressed by the rapid growth of China’s economy, some with hope and others with fear. Some hope that China will offer the unique experience of successful economic growth and catch-up under the new WTO regime; some see the rise of China as a threat to the current world order and to the powers that currently dominate the world in terms of economy, technology and politics. While outside observers tend to focus on the success story of unprecedented growth policy documents and recent domestic debates in China have pointed to the need for a shift in the growth trajectory with stronger emphasis on ‘endogenous innovation’ and ‘harmonious development’. In this paper we make an attempt to capture the current characteristics of China’s production and innovation system; how they were shaped by history and what major challenges they raise for the future. In section 2 we present data on China’s post-war growth experience. We show how the shift in policy toward decentralization, privatization and openness around 1980 established an institutional setting that, together with other factors such as the presence of a wide ‘Chinese Diaspora’, has resulted in extremely high rates of capital accumulation especially in manufacturing. The section ends with pointing to some inherent contradictions in the current growth pattern. In section 3 we take a closer look at how the policy shift in the eighties affected the institutional framework shaping R&D activities in particular, and learning and innovation in general. The attempt to break down the barrier between the science and technology infrastructure on the one hand and the production sphere on the other was highly successful as compared to the development in the former Soviet Union. But the original intentions were not fully realized. Rather than establishing markets for science and technology, the reforms led knowledge producers to engage in mergers or forward vertical integration and they became to a large extent involved in production activities. Referring back to the analysis of the sustainability of the growth model and the unfinished reform of the innovation system Section 4 introduces the recent decision by China’s government to promote endogenous innovation and harmonious development. Applying the innovation system perspective we argue that these broadly defined objectives can be realized only through a strategic adjustment towards ‘innovation driven growth and learning based development’ and we discuss what important policy elements such a strategic adjustment needs to encompass. In section 5 we conclude that imperfections in the division of labour and in the interaction between users and producers of knowledge and innovation that was behind the reforms of the eighties remain central concerns. In order to raise the long-term efficiency of the massive accumulation of production capital it is necessary to promote the formation of social capital and to be more considerate when exploiting natural capital.