Integrating structural tensions into technological innovation systems analysis: Application to the case of transmission interconnections and renewable electricity in Nova Scotia,Canada

This paper augments the technological innovation systems (TIS) framework to provide policy guidance on how to manage interactions between a core technology and its larger sectoral context. A TIS development cycle is presented that combines the TIS framework’s ability to clearly illuminate policy gaps with Erik Dahmén’s idea that technological diffusion creates structural tensions that introduce transformation pressure. This pressure can result in stagnation and unrealized development potential or spur sectoral complementarities and the evolution of a TIS into a larger “development block” of interlinked technological systems. Integrating structural tensions into TIS analysis highlights how the evolution of a focal technology induces technological complementarities and creates a need to continuously re-design policies. This underscores the continued benefit of a technology system perspective, even as a technology matures.The revised TIS framework is applied to a case study of the Canadian province of Nova Scotia that explores how variable renewable electricity diffusion introduces structural tensions with existing electricity grids, requiring the use of complementary technologies that add storage and flexibility. Nova Scotia aggressively developed wind energy and built a high-voltage direct-current transmission line to import hydroelectricity that could back-up variable renewable energy sources like wind.     

The state and technological competition in France or colbertism in the 20th century

As in many western industrialized countries, the French State began to support technological research heavily after 1945. Public funds were mainly invested in high technologies (Nuclear, Aerospace, Computers) but as soon as awareness of technological backwardness of French industry made progress in the sixties, the French government decided to extend its financial support to other industrial sectors. A survey of the policies which have been worked out reveals that the French State has played the role of a bright entrepreneur without a technological and idustrial strategy, which explains why some of these policies are now at a dead end.     

产业特征对技术创新激励政策效应的交互影响

   有关技术创新激励政策效应的研究对产业特征的关注还不充分,影响了对激励政策产业层面效应的深入理解。本文认为更为系统地重审技术创新激励政策的效应,有必要将产业市场竞争度与产业技术吸收能力同步纳入研究模型,因为它们分别影响产业创新主体的技术创新动机和技术创新能力。当产业市场竞争度与产业技术吸收能力都处于高水平时,技术创新激励政策对产业技术创新的正向效应最为明显。实证数据来自和五类使能技术的应用密切相关的16个制造业的2013—2017年的数据,包括R&D资本存量、全时人员当量、发明专利申请数、新产品开发项目数、新产品销售收入数据,和以DEA视窗方法计算得到的产业技术创新绩效数据,分析结果表明：产业技术吸收能力放大了税收优惠政策对技术创新绩效的正向作用;但是R&D补贴政策对于技术吸收能力低的产业有更高的正向效应;当技术市场竞争度高时,技术吸收力对税收优惠与R&D补贴的正向促进作用最高。本研究深化了对技术创新激励政策的作用机理的理解,并提示政策制定者需要充分重视产业的市场竞争度。     

高端装备制造业创新政策评估实证研究

高端装备制造业是我国的七大战略性新兴产业之一，国家出台了一系列创新政策支持其发展。本文收集了2006-2017年间高端装备制造业的67项创新政策以及专利数量、新产品销售收入等数据，通过量化评估政策文本、构建结构方程模型等方法研究创新政策对专利数量、新产品销售收入等创新产出的影响，结果发现，第一，技术创新规划、研究开发活动、产业化活动等对专利产出、新产品销售收入等具有不同程度的推动作用；第二，我国高端装备制造业创新政策已经走出宏观勾画轮廓的初级阶段，趋向于专业化和精细化；第三，创新政策存在着对科技成果转化重视不足、核心部门联合颁发的政策较少、力度不强等问题。     

Technological innovations and sectoral change: Transformative capacity, adaptability, patterns of change: An analytical framework

Following up on recent debates about sectoral systems of innovation and production, the paper introduces a heuristic framework for analyzing and explaining distinct patterns of technology-based sectoral change. The concept is based on two interrelated influencing factors. The first is the sectoral-specific transformative capacity of new technologies themselves, that is, their substantial or incremental impact on socioeconomic and institutional change in a given sectoral system. The second is the sectoral adaptability of socioeconomic structures, institutions, and actors confronted with the opportunities presented by new technologies. The first factor—the sectoral transformative capacity of new technologies—enables us to identify the technology-based pressure to change and adjust the structural, institutional, and organizational architectures of the sectoral system. The second, complementary factor—sectoral adaptability—helps us to discern the distinct social patterns of anticipating and adopting this technology-based pressure. The specific interplay between the two influencing factors creates distinguishable modes of sectoral transformation, ranging from anticipative and smooth adjustments to reactive and crisis-ridden patterns of change. Even processes of radical sectoral change continue over longer periods of mismatch and are characterized by numerous and mostly gradual organizational, structural and institutional transformations.     

Technological innovation in a corporatist state: The case of biotechnology in the Federal Republic of Germany

This article examines a decade of federal support for biotechnology in the Federal Republic of Germany in order to determine the impact of liberal corporatist patterns of decision-making on industrial policy. For this purpose, industrial policy is taken to include both public initiatives aimed at promoting the new technology and those designed to control its risks.Two distinct forms of corporatism are discernible in this case study. In the first, the principal actors are large businesses, the state, and to a lesser extent, the academic reserch community. These actors have been most influential in defining the scope and specific objectives of the federally funced R&D program in biotechnology. A more traditional form of corporatism, including organized labor, has been engaged in the debate on regulatory policies.In the case of biotechnology, these patterns of corporatism have created the consensus necessary for the adoption of a comprehensive R&D program, but have perpetuated certain barriers to technological innovation. In particular, the reliance on established peak organizations to formulate policy has discouraged structural changes that could have enhanced Germany's early competitiveness in biotechnology. Incrementalism has produced more favorable results in the context of regulatory policy, by permitting control strategies to develop in step with technological progress.     

Inter-industry knowledge flows and sectoral networks in the economy of Malaysia

This research probes the configuration of technological systems in terms of inter-sectoral knowledge and intermediate goods exchanges based on a case study of 21 industry sectors in the economy of Malaysia. The case study draws on a network analysis of sectoral knowledge flows survey data and input–output exchange statistics. The results show that knowledge acquisition and dissemination networks are relatively more intra-sector, denser, and centralized than goods exchange networks, which can affect how innovations spread through the economy. Knowledge networks, however, are more likely to form sub-networks with potentially diverse capabilities and influence on the technological system. This adds new information and value for knowledge-based sectoral investment strategies.     

政策引导创新模式下的专利集成失败问题研究

政策是驱动技术创新的一种新动因。在促进技术创新的同时,政策也可能诱发专利竞赛,增加专利丛林密度,甚至阻碍创新成果推广与扩散。为了探索我国科技资助政策是否能够解决专利集成问题,运用案例研究的方法,对“科学仪器重点专项”专利政策进行深入分析。研究发现该专利政策虽然注意到专利集成问题并努力解决,但是忽视了背景专利的集成问题,存在着专利集成失败的风险。为了发挥政策引导创新的作用,建议我国政策制定者事前解决专利集成失败风险。     

新型研发机构中产学研深度融合——体制机制创新的密码

党的十九大提出要建立以企业为主体、市场为导向、产学研深度融合的技术创新体系。然而,新型研发机构如何促进产学研深度融合是当今重要而又缺乏探究的新课题。本文以新型研发机构的典范江苏省产业技术研究院为研究对象,运用探索式案例深入探讨了新型研发机构如何通过体制机制创新促进产学研深度融合的过程,剖析了体制机制创新的关键密码,并提出了相应的理论命题。本文开启了新型研发机构体制机制创新的探索,拓展了产学研融合的理论和实证研究。     

技术创新与制度创新的匹配机制研究──一个理论框架和两个案例分析

传统的经济增长理论不是只强调技术创新就是只强调制度创新的重要性，而本文认为经济增长必须通过技术创新与制度创新的匹配才能实现。为了阐明这个观点，本文首先对索洛１９５７年和诺斯１９６８年的论文进行了重新解释，批评了早先从这两篇论文中得出的技术决定论和制度决定论观点；然后在综合前人工作的基本上提出了一个关于技术创新与制度创新匹配机制的一般性理论框架；最后运用这个理论框架分析了两个案例。     

日本软件产业发展的战略与制度研究

概述日本软件产业从20世纪60年代以来的发展历程,分析该产业落后的原因。揭示该产业结构与战略形成的机制以及逐步陷入难以自拔的政策与制度根源。     

Hand in hand to Nowhereland? How the resource dependence of research institutes influences their co-evolution with industry

The linkages between science and industry have long been of interest to scholars studying technological change. Recent studies demonstrate that resource exchange between science and industry may lead to patterns of co-evolution, with major implications for the rate and direction of innovation. However, we currently know very little about how the dynamics of co-evolution between research institutes and industry are influenced by organizational characteristics. To address this shortcoming, in this paper we draw on a comparative case study of the world's two largest research institutes for solar photovoltaic power and study how differences in their financial resource dependence influence patterns of co-evolution. We demonstrate that when a research institute is heavily reliant on industry funding, it leads to close co-evolution of science and industry, thereby raising the risk of a mutual lock-in into specific technologies. A heavy reliance on public funding, on the other hand, contributes to the decoupling of science and industry evolution, which entails the risk of research having limited impact on practice. By developing a framework that shows how co-evolution between science and industry is affected by resource dependence, our study contributes to the literature on science-industry collaboration, co-evolution, and technological paradigms. Moreover, our study bears important implications for policy makers and managers of research institutes interested in spurring technological change.     

产学研合作模式的制度创新：综合创新体

摘要：在自主创新过程中,人们往往对技术创新给予很高关注,而忽视制度创新的极端重要性。本文认为,产学研合作只有在有效的制度创新基础上才可能实现更大的技术跨越。本文深入研究了深圳清华大学研究院产学研合作模式的制度创新,提出了“综合创新体”模型。该模型在科技型企业家的推动下,建立了均衡协调发展的支撑、技术、孵化和资本体系,产生了技术创新和产业化成果。期望本研究能为我国产学研合作实践提供有益参考。     

Research and technology policies in innovation systems: zero tillage in Brazil

The increasing complexity of technology development and adoption is rapidly changing the effectiveness of scientific and technological policies. Complex technologies are developed and disseminated by networks of agents. The impact of these networks depends on the assets they command, their learning routines, the socio-economic environment in which they operate and their history. In this new environment, scientific and technology policies should: (1) foster interactions among agents (whether public or private), (2) increase the effectiveness of public research, extension and funding institutions, (3) give sufficient freedom to researchers to set their research programs, and (4) monitor the quality of research (rather of research outputs). The evolution of innovation networks is analyzed looking at the development and diffusion of zero tillage (ZT) in Brazil.     

Technological collaboration in product innovation: The role of market competition and sectoral technological intensity

Drawing on the strategic alliances and innovation literature, this study proposes that the impact of technological collaboration on product innovation is contingent on market competition and sectoral technology characteristics. Specifically, it argues that the generally observed positive effect of technological collaboration on product innovation may be diluted in highly competitive markets, and the interactive effect of technological collaboration and market competition on product innovation will be further moderated by sectoral technological intensity. Data on the product innovation and technological collaboration of 944 Chinese firms across five manufacturing sectors provide robust support for the contingent effects of technological collaboration on product innovation.     

破坏性创新技术体制与产业演化

破坏性创新是驱动产业发展的重要创新类型,从技术专有性和技术机会两个方面对破坏性创新技术体制进行分析,并通过构建多主体的计算机仿真模型,研究不同技术体制在破坏性创新驱动产业演化中的作用。研究发现,随着技术机会不断增加、专有性不断下降,破坏性创新企业对在位企业的颠覆速度更快、颠覆程度更高,企业平均年龄不断下降,在位企业存活数目及市场份额不断下降。本文为企业根据不同技术体制下破坏性创新导致产业演化机理合理配置资源提供理论依据,为政府制定创新驱动产业发展的相关政策提供理论参考。     

科技创新政策、创新能力与企业创新

摘要：将科技创新政策归纳为六种类型,建立三阶段通径模型,以上海市为案例进行实证分析,研究了科技创新政策对企业不同创新阶段能力及企业创新的影响。研究结果表明,六类创新政策对于企业创新产业化实现的路径影响存在异质性,财政政策、外部规范性政策只对创新基础投入能力产生直接正向影响,金融政策对创新基础投入能力及创新中间转化能力产生直接正向影响;知识产权政策对创新基础投入能力及创新产业化实现能力产生直接正向影响;税收政策、人才政策对创新成果产业化三个阶段均产生直接正向影响。且六类创新政策对于促进企业创新成果产业化的政策效应大小依次是创新投入能力、创新中间转化能力、创新产业化实现能力。     

Bridging distant technological domains: A longitudinal study of the determinants of breadth of innovation diffusion

The diffusion of innovations is identified as an important aspect of technological and social change. Innovations diffuse through segmented networks of knowledge that limit the flow of knowledge from any one technological domain to any other. Despite this segmentation, some organizations are capable of developing pieces of knowledge that overcome these limitations. Within this context, we develop four hypotheses regarding specific R&D strategies that affect a firm’s ability to develop inventions that diffuse beyond the firm’s technological boundaries. Specifically, we examine how a firm's scientific intensity, technological collaborations, technological diversity, and internal focus impact breadth of innovation diffusion. We use two of the main determinants of innovation diffusion, namely, the relative advantage and the observability, as theoretical mechanisms to build our arguments. We empirically test our hypotheses on longitudinal data from the industries of pharmaceuticals, biotechnology, and chemicals. Our findings show that the extent to which the knowledge embedded in a firm’s inventions diffuses in distant technological areas is positively related to the firm’s scientific intensity and to its extent of collaboration, but it is negatively related to its technological diversity.     

Government policies towards industrial innovation: a review

Existing economic theories show that continuing innovation, diffusion, and technical and managerial improvement are necessary for economic growth and international competitiveness in the industrially advanced countries. But knowledge of why, where and how governments should intervene in the processes of industrial innovations stems more from trial and error than from systematic empirical information of the nature and extent of the hindrances to economically and socially desirable innovations, and of the effectiveness of alternative government policies to remove them. Nonetheless, past empirical studies do offer some clues.Differences amongst industrial sectors. The sources of new technology vary widely amongst inustrial sectors: in the costs of innovation, in the relative importance of outside suppliers of equipment and materials, of large and small firms, and of full-time R & D departments as compared to part-time innovative activities (sect. 7, 8). Similarly, the conditions for successful innovation vary amongst sectors (sect.6). Thus, government policies designed to influence innovation are likely to act with different intensities in different industries.The management of innovation. Nonetheless, there are some features common to innovation in different industries. Considerable costs beyond R & D are often necessary before the innovations reach commercial use (sect.4). And the following managerial characteristics are in general associated with successful innovation: a deliberate policy of seeking innovations; close and careful attention to customer requirements; good personal communications both within the firm and with outside sources of relevant knowledge; a style of management that is ‘organic’ and ‘participatory’ rather than ‘hierarchical’ and ‘authoritarian’; strong project leadership; and a strong engineering capability (sect. 6).R & D managers are still unable to predict the outcome of R & D projects to a useful degree of accuracy and, in the literature on methods of project selection, very little attention is paid to market uncertainties. Furthermore, a greater use of conventional investment appraisal criteria in deciding on R & D projects may re-inforce the already observed tendency in industry towards short-term, low-risk projects, to the neglect of longer-term, high-risk projects (sect. 5).Governments should therefore examine whether the benefits of policies towards education and management advisory services for innovation might outweigh their costs. They may also have a significant role to play in financing longer-term research that is basic to the development of industrial technology (subsect. 12.5).The nature of market and production demands. The direction of industrial innovation is often very sensitive to market and production demands (sect. 3). This fact, together with the high degree of market uncertainty facing innovating firms (sect. 5), suggest that governments can potentially influence both the pace and the direction of industrial innovation through their influence on the scale of industrial, consumer and public service demands. However, this potential influence will become real only if users of innovations are able to specify the innovations that they need, or to evaluate those that they get. This is generally the case for industrial demand, but not in consumer and public service markets, where fashion, insensitivity to users' needs and lack of technical competence often prevail. Government-funded technological institutes and laboratories are ideally placed to provide such technical competence (sub-sect. 12.3).Economic incentives and rewards for innovation. A whole range of economic factors are said to influence the resources, the incentives and the rewards for innovation: for example, the degree of monopoly or the degree of competition, the patent system, the level of profits, the level of taxation, and the level of demand. The empirical evidence on the effects of most of these factors on industrial innovation is either inconclusive or non-existent. However, in the USA a close relationship has been observed between growth of industry sales and growth of industry-financed R & D activities (sect. 10). The rate of growth of demand is also one of the key factors influencing the rate of diffusion of innovations amongst their potential population of users (sects. 11, 12.2).The government-financed scientific and technological infrastructure. Scientific and technological knowledge from outside of innovating firms is often crucial to the completion of successful innovations, and three UK studies show that a significant proportion of this outside knowledge comes from government-financed technological institutes and laboratories, and from the universities (sect. 3). If the same is true in other countries, it should be an essential feature of any government policy towards industrial innovation to know how effectively government-funded laboratories and universities provide supportive knowledge to industry, and how government laboratories should be organised and financed (subsect. 12.4).Direct government-financing of innovative activities in industry. Governments specifically finance R & D activities in industrial firms, although these expenditures are less than those for general industrial development (sect. 13). These R & D activities in industry are relatively more important in France and UK, than in F.R. Germany and the Netherlands.In the four countries, more than 70% of all civilian government R & D activities related to industry are spent on aircraft, space, nuclear energy and electronics (subsect. 14.4). In all these high technologies, governments attempted in the 1960's to implement ‘policies for innovation’, involving government procurement, industrial mergers and attempts at European co-operation, in addition to the financing of R & D (subsect. 14.5). Government expenditures on civilian R & D related to other industrial sectors are very much smaller in all four countries (subsect 14.4).Where should governments intervene? A, number of attempts have been made to develop a formal framework of criteria to assist governments in deciding where they should intervene in industrial innovation. They all run into the following difficulties: dealing with multiple policy objectives; assessing national costs and benefits; comparing with alternative policies, choosing appropriate policy instruments (sect. 17).How should governments intervene? Very little information is available on the effectiveness of various policy instruments that have been used by governments in order to promote innovation in industry. Although it is often possible to measure the inputs into such policies, the measurement of their outputs (or results) is more difficult. Nonetheless, detailed studies would enable some such measurements to be made, and internationally comparable studies would increase the range of experiences and the number of cases that could be examined (sect. 18).Why should governments intervene? A full appreciation of the nature and scale of hindrances to industrial innovation, on which governments should act to remove, requires direct information on what innovations are (or are not) being introduced by industry, and why they are (or are not) being inyroduced. This information can best be obtained from analyses of the behaviour of industrial firms. They would differ from most existing innovation studies that concentrate on asking how firms must behave in order to make successful innovation, by asking what innovations are attempted, and why firms are stimulated to attempt them (sect. 19).     

金融扭曲对技术创新的影响研究

中国各地区的金融扭曲如何影响技术创新？本文在重新构造并测算金融扭曲指数的基础上,运用多种固定效应计量分析方法,实证考察金融扭曲对技术创新的影响效应。结果显示：金融扭曲显著抑制了地区技术创新,且该抑制效应在东、中、西部三大区域逐渐增强。进一步研究发现：金融扭曲的技术创新抑制作用在空间分布上具有明显溢出效应。考虑不同模型可能的内生稳健性后,结论依然成立。提升金融资源配置效率、助推技术产业升级和促进区际资源互补与共享,皆是规避金融扭曲抑制作用的有效途径。本文为深化金融体制改革,实施创新驱动发展战略提供了有益参考。