China's (Not So Hidden) Developmental State: Becoming a Leading Nanotechnology Innovator in the 21st Century
Author(s)
Appelbaum, Richard
Cao, Cong
Gereffi, Gerry
Parker, Rachel
Advisor(s)
Editor(s)
Collections
Supplementary to:
Permanent Link
Abstract
The United States, Germany, Japan, and some 40 other countries, notably including some of world's fastest growing economies (Brazil, Russia, India, China) are betting that nanotechnology, among other high-tech approaches, will provide the key to a 2.6 trillion market by 2014 sufficient to confer global economic leadership on the country that attains first mover advantage through innovation. (Holman et al 2007: iii). It is estimated that $11.8 billion was invested globally in nanotechnology R&D and commercialization in 2006 - $5.8 billion of which came directly from national governments. The public sector worldwide is clearly driving nanotechnology during its early stages, while private sector and venture capital support remains limited. Like many countries involved in catch-up development, China is convinced that manufacturing prowess alone is insufficient to becoming a leading economic power in the 21st century. China's overarching goal is to become an "innovation-oriented" society by the year 2020 (OECD 2007: 17). Innovation is difficult to define, and even harder to operationalize. The Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) defines innovation as "new products, business processes and organic changes that create wealth or social welfare," while Richard Lyons, Dean of UC Berkeley's Hass School of Business, offers an even more succinct formulation: "fresh thinking that creates value" (The Economist 2007: 2). The US has been pursuing nanotechnology in an effort to boost competitiveness. How to become (and remain) innovative in the contemporary global economy, and why it matters, has generated a plethora of ideas, concepts, and hypotheses. Our particular concern here is how the debate over the importance of innovation is reflected in China's approach to national development - as compared with that of the US - with a particular application to nanotechnology. Because in China, as in the US, nanotechnology is being funded largely through government sources, this paper compares the role played by both US and Chinese Government policies in fostering advances in nanotechnology, looking at the promises and pitfalls of state-led development economic development. We conclude that while both countries (China and the US) have made significant strides on such indicators as scientific publications and some commercial sectors, the long-term returns to this effort remain uncertain. While the combination of international collaboration and increased public investment in nanotechnology holds promise for advancing nanoscience, most commercial returns still appear to be a long way off. This analysis is based off of an examination of Chinese government publications (in Chinese and English), as well as field interviews conducted during two research visits, spanning five weeks of in which research was carried out during the summers of 2006 and 2007. To date we have conducted over 60 interviews: in China (Beijing, Tianjin, Shanghai, Hangzhou, Suzhou, and Dalian), Hong Kong, Taiwan, and in the United States. This material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation under Grant No. SES 0531184. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation. It was conducted under the auspices of the UCSB's Center for Nanotechnology in Society (www.cns.ucsb.edu).
References: Holman, Michael Jyllian Kemsley, Matthew Nordan, Ted Sullivan, Vah Mamikunian, Caaba Nagy, David Lackner, Mark Bnger, Tomasz Biegala, Benjamin Jabbawy, Ryan Yoo, Upal Kusari, and Melissa Dobbins 2007.
The Nanotech Report: 5th Edition. NY: Lux Research, Inc.
The Economist. 2007. "Something New Under the Sun: A Special Report on Innovation." October 13th, 16 pp.
OECD (Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development). 2007. OECD Reviews of Innovation Policy: China: Synthesis Report. August
Sponsor
This material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation under Grant No. SES 0531184.
Date
2009-10-02
Extent
Resource Type
Text
Resource Subtype
Proceedings