Globelics Academy

Series

Globelics Academy

Permanent Link

https://hdl.handle.net/1853/70889

Series Type

Event Series

Associated Organization(s)

Organizational Unit

School of Public Policy

Organizational Unit

Ivan Allen College of Liberal Arts

Full item page

Publication Search Results

Now showing 1 - 10 of 10

Innovation System Research: Where it came from and where it might go

(Georgia Institute of Technology, 2008) Lundvall, Bengt-Åke

When the first edition of Lundvall (1992) and of Nelson (1993), the concept ‘national innovation system’ was known only by a handful of scholars and policy makers. Over a period of 15 years there has been a rapid and wide diffusion of the concept. Giving ‘Google’ the text strings ‘national innovation system(s)’ and ‘national system(s) of innovation’ you end up with almost 1.000.000 references. Going through the references you find that most of them are recent and that many of them are related to innovation policy efforts at the national level while others refer to new contributions in social science. Using Google Scholar (May 2007) we find that more than 2000 scientific publications have referred respectively to the different editions of Lundvall (2002) and Nelson (1993). Economists, business economists, economic historians, sociologists, political scientists and especially economic geographers have utilized the concept to explain and understand phenomena related to innovation and competence building.1 In this paper we argue that during the process of diffusion there has been a distortion of the concept as compared to the original versions as developed by Christopher Freeman and the IKE-group in Aalborg. Often policy makers and scholars have applied a narrow understanding of the concept and this has gives rise to so-called ‘innovation paradoxes’ which leave significant elements of innovation-based economic performance unexplained. Such a bias is reflected in studies of innovation that focus on science-based innovation and on the formal technological infrastructure and in policies aiming almost exclusively at stimulating R&D efforts in high-technology sectors.
From Economics of Knowledge to the Learning Economy

(Georgia Institute of Technology, 2008) Lundvall, Bengt-Åke

This chapter is about the production, diffusion and use of knowledge seen in an economic perspective. Fundamental distinctions between tacit and explicit knowledge and between knowhow, know-why, know-what and know-who are related to distinctions between public/private and local/global knowledge. It is argued that the idea of the economy as being knowledge based in its current stage is misleading and that it is more enlightening to assume that we have moved into a learning economy where interactive learning is a key to economic performance of firms, regions and nations. This is one reason why a narrow economics perspective is insufficient. The most serious weakness of standard economics is that it abstracts from the fact that agents are more or less competent and that learning processes enhancing competence are fundamental for the economic performance of organisations and regions. When it comes to understand industrial dynamics in the learning economy it is necessary to bring in other disciplines than economics in the analysis.
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.
Forms of Knowledge, Modes of Innovation and Innovation Systems

(Georgia Institute of Technology, 2008) Berg Jensen, Morten ; Johnson, Björn ; Lorenz, Edward ; Lundvall, Bengt-Åke

Inspired by the concepts tacit and codified knowledge introduced by Polanyi, this paper makes a distinction between two modes of innovation. On the one hand there are innovation strategies (Science, Technology, and Innovation, STI-mode) that give main emphasis to promoting R&D and creating access to explicit codified knowledge. On the other hand there are innovation strategies (Doing, Using, and Interacting, DUImode) mainly based on learning by doing, using and interacting. We show that firms using mixed strategies that combine a strong version of the STI-mode with a strong version of the DUI-mode excel in product innovation. The distinctions made and the results obtained have important implications for innovation policy and for the analysis of innovation systems. They help to avoid biased approaches exaggerating the role of science-based innovation while also indicating limits for experience-based innovation strategies.
Modes of Innovation, Innovation Systems and Economic Development

(Georgia Institute of Technology, 2005) Lundvall, Bengt-Åke
The Socio-Economics of Knowledge and the Learning Economy

(Georgia Institute of Technology, 2004) Lundvall, Bengt-Åke
Economic Development and the National System of Innovation Approach

(Georgia Institute of Technology, 2004) Johnson, Björn ; Edquist, Charles ; Lundvall, Bengt-Åke

“One major academic aim of the conference is to enrich and enhance the quality of innovation research by applying some of its fundamental concepts such as 'innovation systems', 'competence building' and 'interactive learning' to issues at the core of economic development. It is well known that applying a theoretical framework outside the arena where it was first developed may bring fundamental new theoretical insights.” In this paper we will try to substantiate what is referred to in the above text taken from the conference web-site for the first Globelics conference. We will try to demonstrate that the application of the innovation system concept on economic development makes more visible some general weaknesses of the concept and gives strong incentives to develop it further. In the development context it becomes clear that we need to understand better the formation of as well as the openness of national systems and the role of power relationships as well as the broader institutional context supporting competence building.
National innovation systems – theoretical foundations and implications for economic development

(Georgia Institute of Technology, 2004) Lundvall, Bengt-Åke
The Economics of Knowledge and Learning

(Georgia Institute of Technology, 2004) Lundvall, Bengt-Åke

The focus in this book is on product innovation, learning and economic performance. A central theme is the understanding of learning and knowledge in connection with processes of technical and organisational change. In this chapter we present a conceptual framework to analyse knowledge and learning from an economic perspective. The starting point is the assumption that we are in a knowledge-based economy and we end by proposing that it is more adequate to characterize the current era as ‘a learning economy’. Crucial questions to be analysed here have to do with distinctions private/public, local/global and tacit/codified knowledge. While appearing as somewhat ‘academic’ at first sight they have important implications both for innovation policy and for the management of innovation and knowledge at the level of the firm. It has become commonplace among policy-makers to refer to the current period as characterised by a knowledge based economy and increasingly it is emphasised that the most promising strategy for economic growth is one aiming at strengthening the knowledge base of the economy1. This discourse raises a number of unresolved analytical issues. What constitutes the knowledge base? At what level can we locate and define a knowledge base? What are the specificities of local and sector specific knowledge bases? How stable is the knowledge base? In order to approach an answer to these questions three different themes are introduced: first, basic concepts related to knowledge and learning; second, the contribution of economic analysis to the understanding of the production, mediation and use of knowledge; and third, new economic trends and the formation of a “learning economy.”
The University and the Learning Economy

(Georgia Institute of Technology, 2004) Lundvall, Bengt-Åke