Foreign direct investment in industrial research and development: A study of German MNCs

This paper reports on the international research and development (R&D) investments of German multinational corporations (MNCs). Based on a detailed empirical survey of laboratory sites established by 49 German MNCs, we examine (i) the level and pace of R&D internationalization, (ii) the motivations and mandates of overseas R&D laboratories, as well as (iii) the strength of the laboratories’ internal and external ties. Participating firms account for about 46% of all German enterprises with international R&D activities and approximately 66% of the nation's privately funded R&D expenditures in 1999. The findings indicate that the timing and organization of German owned overseas R&D investments more closely resemble Japanese or French than US or Swedish firms. Furthermore, in line with prior studies, German MNCs increasingly invest in international R&D for resource as opposed to market-seeking motives. The paper also finds significant differences with regard to the laboratory's mission and its geographical location on one hand, and its internal and external embeddedness, on the other.     

US biopharmaceutical finance and the sustainability of the biotech business model

In the decade before the 2008 economic crisis, the US biotechnology industry was booming. In a 2006 book, Science Business: The Promise, the Reality, and the Future of Biotech, Gary Pisano implies that, given the 10-20 year time-frame for developing biotech products and the lack of profitability of the industry as a whole, the US biotech boom should not have happened. Yet the biotech industry has received substantial funding from venture-capital firms as well as from established companies through R&D alliances. Why would money from venture capitalists and big pharma flow into an industry in which profits are so hard to come by? The purpose of this article is to work toward a solution of what might be called the “Pisano puzzle”, and in the process to provide a basis for analyzing the industrial and institutional conditions under which the growth of the US biopharmaceutical (BP) industry is sustainable. One part of the answer has been the willingness of stock-market investors to absorb the initial public offerings (IPOs) of a BP venture that has not yet generated a commercial product, and indeed may never do so. The other part of the answer is that the knowledge base that BP companies can tap to develop products comes much more from government investments and spending than from business finance. Indeed, we show that, through stock buybacks and dividends, established corporations in the BP industry have been distributing substantial sums of cash to shareholders that may be at the expense of R&D. We use the framework that we have developed for analyzing the sustainability of the US BP business model to pose a number of key areas for future research and policy, with an emphasis on the implications of the financialization of this business model for the generation of safe and affordable BP drugs as well as the need for a theory of innovative enterprise.     

Three frames for innovation policy: R&D,systems of innovation and transformative change

Science, technology and innovation (STI) policy is shaped by persistent framings that arise from historical context. Two established frames are identified as co-existing and dominant in contemporary innovation policy discussions. The first frame is identified as beginning with a Post-World War II institutionalisation of government support for science and R&D with the presumption that this would contribute to growth and address market failure in private provision of new knowledge. The second frame emerged in the 1980s globalising world and its emphasis on competitiveness which is shaped by the national systems of innovation for knowledge creation and commercialisation. STI policy focuses on building links, clusters and networks, and on stimulating learning between elements in the systems, and enabling entrepreneurship. A third frame linked to contemporary social and environmental challenges such as the Sustainable Development Goals and calling for transformative change is identified and distinguished from the two earlier frames. Transformation refers to socio-technical system change as conceptualised in the sustainability transitions literature. The nature of this third framing is examined with the aim of identifying its key features and its potential for provoking a re-examination of the earlier two frames. One key feature is its focus on experimentation, and the argument that the Global South does not need to play catch-up to follow the transformation model of the Global North. It is argued that all three frames are relevant for policymaking, but exploring options for transformative innovation policy should be a priority.     

大学、企业研发与首都区域创新的局域空间计量分析

运用空间计量经济学的空间变系数回归模型--地理加权回归模型,在全国31个省级区域创新系统的大背景下,着重对首都区域创新及其影响因素进行了空间计量经济分析。全域估计结果发现:中国31个省域创新能力的贡献主要是由企业研发投入实现,大学研发对区域创新能力没有明显的贡献,大学研发与企业研发的结合也没有对区域创新表现出显著的作用。局域地理加权回归计量分析结果显示:首都地区的企业研发能力和人力资本对首都区域创新能力具有正向促进作用,首都强大的研发成果没能近距离扩散,对首都创新能力的形成没有提供应有的贡献。寻求建立大学研发与企业研发之间的技术转移渠道及相互作用机制是目前首都地区大学、企业研发与区域创新联动面临的一个关键问题。     

Post-Soviet science: Difficulties in the transformation of the R&D systems in Russia and Ukraine

In the late 1980s, the Soviet Union was among the foremost leaders of world science, thanks in large part to its heavy involvement in military programmes. The USSR developed a large research infrastructure but it lacked effective mechanisms for the commercialization of research results. The main aim of the transformation of R&D systems in the post-Soviet states in the 1990s and early 2000s was the re-orientation of scientific activities away from military and towards civilian goals. Analysis of statistical data at the macro-level suggests that this attempt was not particularly successful. Indeed, most newly independent states could not even preserve a ‘critical mass’ of scientific activities in order to remain among the list of significant producers of research results. In the post-Soviet countries (and in this paper we focus on Russia and Ukraine as the largest states of the region), inputs from the R&D system have failed to generate wealth-creating outputs because of a systemic inability to use the resources for generating commercially viable results effectively. All post-Soviet countries, including Russia and Ukraine, urgently need not only a major transformation within the R&D system, but also important changes in the wider ‘environment’. It is important to stress that, in recent years, changes in R&D have been determined not only by the general economic situation itself but also by the general policy of the post-Soviet states. While Russia has expressed ambitions to regain its former influence as a great power and to use S&T to achieve this goal, Ukraine has no clearly determined objectives for the development of its national science system. However, both countries face certain common problems. The development of relevant institutes and the stimulation of demand for R&D results from the side of industry, broader involvement in the international division of scientific work, and the introduction of adequate legal protection for intellectual property rights are all of critical importance for S&T institutes and other research organizations in Russia and Ukraine. This paper shows that the reforms in the R&D sector have been relatively modest and rather unsystematic over the last one and a half decades. The key challenges, which relate to the inertia and the negative aspects of the previous period (for example, a extremely low level of replacement of aging manpower, largely outdated scientific equipment in research laboratories, and institutional mechanisms that are not relevant to the market economy), pose serious problems for the transformation of the R&D systems in both countries, despite new possibilities and a willingness to increase financial support for R&D.     

Institutional entrepreneurship in constructing alternative paths: A comparison of biotech hybrids

This paper investigates how firms adapt their innovation strategies to cope with constraints in national institutional environments. It is a comparative case study of Dutch and British dedicated biotechnology firms focusing on a particular type of strategy, the hybrid model. Patterns of skill accumulation and learning present in the Dutch hybrids are indications of how they use institutional advantages to focus on low-risk innovation and build deeper competences while also pursuing high-risk innovation strategies. The Dutch hybrid model offers insight into how firms comply with the dominant logic of the biotechnology field even when their institutional frameworks encourage the pursuit of low-risk innovation strategies.     

Global R&D activities of Japanese MNCs in the US: A triangulation approach

We examined 79 Japanese MNCs’ R&D subsidiaries in the US from the knowledge-based view. We found: (1) subsidiaries’ R&D strategies generally encouraged knowledge flows; (2) subsidiaries’ R&D alliances promoted knowledge flows; (3) R&D subsidiaries with process-oriented incentives promoted vertical knowledge flows; (3) autonomous R&D subsidiaries promoted knowledge flows from the local environments to the subsidiary; (4) R&D subsidiaries with a high level of knowledge flows accumulated a high level of knowledge; and (5) R&D subsidiaries with a high level of accumulated knowledge achieved high overall performance. Our interviews with 30 R&D subsidiaries and 10 parent companies supplement these findings.     

国家创新系统视角下的中印比较

中印两国经济快速增长的背后有着不同的发展模式和内涵,国家创新系统在知识经济时代构建了一国经济增长的有效框架。本文以国家创新系统的理论为背景,从创新环境子系统、创新运行子系统、宏观经济绩效三个方面来对中印两国创新体系进行分析。     

Contingency in innovation and the role of national systems: taxol and taxotère in the USA and France

A very rich collection of archival material is used to compare two anticancer drugs commercialised by multinationals collaborating with public sector research, one in the USA and one in France. The framework of national innovation systems is used to compare the innovative environments for each development (different institutional structures, research programmes, financing, industry-academic-government relationships, environmental concern, and intellectual property regimes). The empirical work was able to bring out the nuances and subtleties of each environment, the way in which innovation took place in practice, and some striking differences from what stereotypical accounts of innovation in each country would have suggested.     

The disaggregated technology production function: A new model of university and corporate research

Technology and the process that produces it, research and development (R&D), are typically characterized as homogeneous entities. In reality, the typical industrial technology is composed of three elements: a generic technology base, supporting infratechnologies, and proprietary market applications (innovations). The first two have public good characteristics, and therefore, explicitly modeling them is essential for public policy purposes. The fundamental relationships among these elements require a technology production function that captures the supporting roles of the public good elements in creating proprietary applied technology. These critical quasi-public technology goods are supplied to a significant extent by exogenous (external) sources: central corporate research labs, government labs, and increasingly, universities. The expanding university role beyond basic research complicates the structure and functioning of the national R&D establishment and increases the need for a more accurate model of technological change to better inform R&D policy.Moreover, in assessing the resulting applied technology's impact on economic growth, both the general and partial equilibrium literatures enter the technology variable into a production function with the common “production” assets (physical capital and labor). Such models obscure an important distinction between technology and these production assets—namely, the fact that technology is primarily a “demand-shifting” asset. As such, its role is correctly specified only when combined with the other major demand-shifting asset, marketing. Allocations to these two assets vary across competing firms implying a spatial model of competition, while still providing traceability to the exogenous sources of public good technology elements, such as universities.     

The effects of owner identity and external governance systems on R&D investments: A study of Western European firms

This paper builds on agency and institutional theory to extend the analysis of the effects of ownership and control on R&D investments by considering the influence of different types of ownership and of institutional corporate governance systems. Our empirical analysis is based on a unique dataset of 1000 firms publicly-traded in six European countries (France, Germany, Italy, Norway, Sweden and the UK). Controlling for industry- and firm-level effects, our findings show that higher shareholding by families is negatively associated with R&D investment. Moreover, widely-held firms invest less in R&D in the United Kingdom than in Continental European countries, thus suggesting the existence of a greater pressure towards the reduction of R&D in market-based governance systems. The results are robust against possible sample selection biases due to firms’ discretional R&D disclosure.     

From closed to open: Job role changes,individual predispositions,and the adoption of commercial open source software development

When trying to attain the benefits of open source software (OSS), proprietary closed source software (PCSS) firms are struggling to adopt this radically different practice of software development. We approach these adoption challenges as a problem of gaining support for organizational innovation. Through a mixed-method research design consisting of qualitative interviews and a survey of employees of a large telecommunications firm, we find that the organizational innovation to commercially engage in OSS has different impacts on technical and administrative dimensions of different job roles. Accordingly, individuals enacting different job roles are—on average—more or less well aligned with the OSS practice and OSS processes per se. We find that individual-level attributes can counterbalance the job role changes that weaken support for adopting OSS, while perceived organizational commitment has no effect. Suggestions for PCSS firms are presented and implications for innovation literature are discussed.     

我国大学生创业创新事业的发展对策——基于国内外举措的比较研究

高校创业创新人才的培育迎合了如今激烈竞争的国际社会和知识经济时代的需要,推动大学生创业创新有助于建设创新型国家、建立创业型经济以及解决就业问题。但是我国大学生创业往往失败多、成功少。通过分析我国大学生创业创新推进的瓶颈所在,并结合国内外社会各方机构在推进大学生创业创新事业方面的举措比较,提出有利于我国大学生创业创新事业发展的几点对策建议。     

Role of public research institutes in national innovation systems in industrialized countries: The cases of Fraunhofer,NIST, CSIRO,AIST, and ITRI

Public Research Institutes (PRIs) were established for many reasons, such as to promote defence related research and health related research. Helping domestic industries remains one of the important missions for public research institutes even when the countries have industrialized and firms’ technological capabilities are high. PRIs aim to upgrade existing industries, especially SMEs, as well as spearheading new ones. They can conduct research to solve today’s problems of existing industries and those of next generation technologies which might lead to creation of new industries. Moreover, relationship between PRIs and firms and non-firm actors like universities became more intense, open, horizontal, international, and longer term. To reduce risk and uncertainty inherent in research mentioned above, intermediary roles of PRIs are increasingly important. The emphasis and the ways PRIs help industry change over time and vary across countries as they are integral part of national innovation systems. This makes generalization difficult, but the experiences of five leading PRIs in Germany, Taiwan, Japan, Australia, and the US shows that, the balances between contract research vs. longer term research with own initiative, mobility of researchers vs. retaining core researchers, and competitive grants and funds from industry vs. block grants from government are important to keep PRIs relevant to industry needs and maintain research standards. The governance of PRIs is of particular importance to maintain proper balances.     

The French defence industry in the knowledge management era: A historical overview and evidence from empirical data

In the defence industry the recent development of a ‘market for technology’, the creation of new European high-technology companies as well as transformations in government agencies have driven firms to reposition their technological and organizational skills. Our objective is to show that the transformations that have occurred in the past 10 years have not only redefined skills and the organization of production, but also have given a more strategic place to knowledge management (KM) practices. We provide a contextual and historical overview based on qualitative interviews, in order to better understand the relation between KM and innovative behaviour in this industry. We build an original industrial and technological database comprising various samples that provides quantitative information concerning KM and innovative practices. The results of the statistical analysis reveal the specificity of firms in this industry. Taking account of the size of these firms and their technological intensity, we show that the behaviour of defence industry firms in terms of KM practices, differs from that of other firms. This is evident from their technological performance, and innovation and patenting intensity. This structural tendency is explained as an innovative behaviour in the French national innovation system rather than merely a ‘trend’.     

The impact on innovation performance of different sources of knowledge: Evidence from the UK Community Innovation Survey

This paper considers two main categories of knowledge sources and their impact on the innovation performance of enterprises: own-generation through R&D versus knowledge transfers via bought-in resources for innovation purposes, external collaborations on R&D, and internal sources within the company. The national and international dimensions of both internal networks and external collaborative agreements are explored, as is the interaction between R&D and other sources. Data from two UK Community Innovation Surveys allow for the lagging of relevant variables. Our results suggest that, while intra-company knowledge sources, own-generation, and bought-in R&D matter in innovation performance, the benefits of joint innovation efforts in the form of cooperation are less clear. The international dimension of internal networks is highly relevant, and interactions between the own-generation of knowledge and external sources increase the innovation potential of enterprises.     

Convergence of national science and technology policies: the case of Finland

It is a commonly held view that differences in national histories, cultures, political contexts, and the timing of a country’s entry into the industrialization process are reflected as diversity among countries in their goals, priorities, boundaries, directions, ranges, instruments and also in the performance of science and technology policy. This article, which examines development processes of Finnish science and technology policy, concludes that instead of divergence there is such startling convergence of organizational forms and practices. Finland has largely adopted its policy doctrines and instruments from the countries, which from the Finnish perspective, have been considered legitimate and successful.     

国家重点研发计划执行管理实践探析--以我国林业资源高效利用领域项目为例

介绍和分析国家重点研发计划“林业资源培育及高效利用技术创新”专项立项情况，研究我国林业资源高效利用领域重点研发计划项目的执行和管理全过程。结合国家重点研发计划项目管理和考核办法新的政策要求，从项目组织管理、实施成效、监督检查等方面提出有效落实法人单位责任制管理的系列措施，以及进一步促进国家重点研发计划项目科研产出的建议，以期为国家重点研发计划项目的科技人员和参加单位提供参考，提升国家重点研发计划项目的实施质量，促进国家重点研发计划项目科研产出。     

When ‘national innovation system’ meet ‘varieties of capitalism’ arguments on labour qualifications: On the skill types and scientific knowledge needed for radical and incremental product innovations

The literatures on ‘varieties of capitalism’ (VoC) and ‘national innovation systems’ (NIS) propose very similar arguments about how firms require different types of labour qualifications to pursue strategies of radical product innovation (RPI), incremental product innovation (IPI), and product imitation (PI) respectively. Despite their similar lines of reasoning, however, the VoC scholars are concerned with the skill profiles of a firm's entire workforce, whereas the NIS proponents focus on the knowledge base of scientists. Given that both literatures have developed without explicitly taking the arguments of the neighbouring discipline into account, it is thus unclear whether they explain the same, or different, phenomena. Furthermore, both literatures propose firm level arguments but test them on the basis of macro- rather than micro-level indicators. This paper therefore asks: first, does micro-level evidence support the VoC and NIS arguments that particular types of employee skills and knowledge backgrounds of scientists are needed for different competitive strategies? And, if so, do RPI, IPI, and PI firms need to employ scientists in combination with a workforce having the respective qualifications, or is it sufficient if scientists or employees alone are adequately qualified. Quantitative analyses indicate that a particular mix of scientific knowledge combined with employee skills facilitate RPI, IPI, and PI strategies. The article thus concludes that - despite their similar reasoning - the VoC and the NIS literatures indeed describe different phenomena, without being aware of the synergies created whenever adequate employee and scientific qualifications are hired together.     

How large is the Swedish ‘academic’ sector really?: A critical analysis of the use of science and technology indicators

Sweden is perceived to be top ranking, and a ‘role model’, in terms of its volume of academic R&D. This perception is based on analyses using two standard indicators. We assess the validity of these and argue that institutional features skew the result in favour of a high ranking. Swedish academic R&D is more appropriately characterised as average, or below average, in terms of input and above average in terms of output. Science policy makers need to acknowledge this and devise policies that strengthen, rather than threaten the functioning of an efficient system.