The process of building innovation capabilities

The main objective of this PhD dissertation is to discuss the process of building innovation capabilities over time. To understand how to couple stability and change into an organized firm over time, it is necessary to understand how the firm is organized based on its internal innovation capabilities arrangement, what are the possible paths to build innovation capabilities and which paths are related to firm’s success and failure. Therefore, this PhD dissertation addresses these issues through three sequential papers written from 2017 to 2021 and based on the innovation capability model, proposed by Zawislak et al. (2012), encompassing four dimensions (development, operations, management, and transaction capability). The three papers analyze the innovation capabilities of the same sample of manufacturing firms in two different moments in time, 2014 and 2020, and enlighten the discussion on the process of building innovation capabilities. The first paper presents the different types of organization of the firm, the second paper suggests paths to be followed by these firms towards innovation, and finally the third paper presents the process of building innovation and discusses successful and failed paths based on panel data. This PhD dissertation concludes that the process of building innovation capabilities should be toward transaction and development capabilities to ensure competitive performance over time.O principal objetivo desta tese de doutorado é discutir o processo de construção de capacidades de inovação ao longo do tempo. Para entender como associar estabilidade e mudança em uma firma organizada ao longo do tempo, é necessário entender como a firma está organizada com base em seu arranjo interno de capacidades de inovação, quais são os caminhos possíveis para construir capacidades de inovação e quais caminhos estão relacionados com o sucesso e fracasso da firma. Esta tese aborda essas questões por meio de três artigos sequenciais escritos de 2017 a 2021 e embasados no modelo de capacidades de inovação proposto por Zawislak et al. (2012) que envolve quatro dimensões (desenvolvimento, operação, gestão e transação). Os três artigos analisam as capacidades de inovação da mesma amostra de firmas industriais em dois momentos diferentes, 2014 e 2020, e baseiam a discussão sobre o processo de construção de capacidades de inovação. O primeiro artigo apresenta os diferentes tipos de organização da firma, o segundo artigo sugere caminhos a serem seguidos por diferentes firmas rumo à inovação e, por fim, o terceiro artigo apresenta o processo de construção da inovação e discute caminhos de sucesso e fracasso com base em dados em painel. Esta tese conclui que o processo de construção de capacidades de inovação deve ser voltado para as capacidades de transação e desenvolvimento a fim de garantir um desempenho competitivo ao longo do tempo

The Challenges of Technology and Economic Catch-up in Emerging Economies

This book synthesizes and interprets existing knowledge on technology upgrading failures as well as lessons from successes and failures in order to better understand the challenges of technology upgrading in emerging economies. The objective is to bring together in one volume diverse evidence regarding three major dimensions of technology upgrading: paths of technology upgrading, structural changes in the nature of technology upgrading, and the issues of technology transfer and technology upgrading. The knowledge of these three dimensions is being synthesized at the firm, sector, and macro levels across different countries and world macro-regions. Compared to the old and new challenges and uncertainties facing emerging economies, our understanding of the technology upgrading is sparse, unsystematic, and scattered. While our understanding of these issues from the 1980s and 1990s is relatively more systematized, the changes that took place during the globalization and proliferation of GVCs, the effects of the post-2008 events, and the effects of the current COVID-19 and geopolitical struggles on technology upgrading have not been explored and compared synthetically. Moreover, the recent growth slowdown in many emerging economies, often known as a middle-income trap, has reinforced the importance of understanding the technology upgrading challenges of catching-up economies. We believe that the time is ripe for “taking stock of the area” in order to systematize and evaluate the existing knowledge on processes of technology upgrading of emerging economies at the firm, sector, and international levels and to make further inroads in research on this issue. This volume aims to significantly contribute towards this end

Sectoral system of innovation : foundations and critical elements for a new mesoeconomics

Orientador: Maria Beatriz Machado BonacelliDissertação (mestrado) - Universidade Estadual de Campinas, Instituto de GeociênciasResumo: A dissertação analisa criticamente o arcabouço conceitual do Sistema Setorial de Inovação (SSI). A literatura de economia industrial já utiliza a indústria como instrumento analítico para o estudo das transformações mesoeconômicas há tempos. Por que lançar outra perspectiva no mesmo nível? Investiga-se se o SSI é um instrumento analítico mesoeconômico dinâmico. Em outros termos, a dissertação pretende responder se, ao lançar mão do SSI, um pesquisador dedicado às transformações no nível mesoeconômico terá feito a escolha certa. O objetivo da pesquisa é comparar os padrões de utilização do SSI na literatura de estudos da inovação com os propósitos implícitos e explícitos deste arcabouço conceitual. As justificativas para o estudo são a importância da compreensão da dinâmica mesoeconômica para a proposição de políticas de tecnologia e inovação, a dificuldade metodológica e conceitual de se compatibilizar uma perspectiva gradualista e uma perspectiva descontínua do progresso técnico e a ausência de referências metodológicas que sirvam como guia para estudos setoriais. Categoriza-se a produção científica de Franco Malerba ¿ responsável pela formalização do SSI ¿ dos anos de 1983 a 2017 e apuram-se evidências bibliométricas com respeito à utilização do SSI. As três fases identificadas (historiador industrial, pattern-modeler e sistêmico) conjugadas aos resultados bibliométricos explicitam (i) a dificuldade de se analisar a dinâmica meso sem recorrer a outros níveis de análise (micro ou macro); (ii) a explicação parcial da co-evolução da base técnica e institucional devido a integração parcial das instituições no esquema mesodinâmico; (iii) a pouca atenção dada as redes e (iv) a dificuldade de se elaborar políticas de inovação a partir do SSI (embora o SSI tenha sido usado como base para políticas tecnológicas). Não obstante, as contribuições do SSI também emergem, como a consolidação de metodologias setoriais (histórico-analítica e history-friendly models), dividendos teóricos para os campos de sistemas de inovação, economia evolucionária e economia industrial e, finalmente, uma profícua agenda de pesquisa que vem lançando as bases para uma nova mesoeconomiaAbstract: This dissertation critically analyzes the conceptual framework of the Sectoral System of Innovation (SSI) approach. Industrial economics literature has already used industry as an analytical tool for the study of mesoeconomic transformations for some time. Why develop another perspective on the same level? We investigate if the SSI could be considered as a dynamic mesoeconomic analytical tool. In other words, this dissertation intends to answer if, by using the SSI, a researcher dedicated to the study of the transformations at the mesoeconomic level would have made the right choice. The objective of this research is to compare the patterns in the use of the SSI approach by the literature on innovation studies with the implicit and explicit purpose of its conceptual framework. This dissertation find its justification in at least three elements: First, the importance of the understanding of the mesoeconomic dynamics for the proposal of technology and innovation policies. Second, the methodological and conceptual difficulties for reconciling gradualist and discontinuous perspectives on technical change. Third, the absence of methodological references that would serve as guide for sectoral studies. We categorize the scientific production of Franco Malerba ¿ responsible for the formalization of the SSI ¿ from the years 1983 to 2017 and provide bibliometric evidence regarding the use of the SSI. As a result, the three phases were identified (industrial historian, pattern-modeler and systemic), which combined with bibliometric findings explain: (i) the difficulty for analyzing the meso dynamics without resorting to other levels (micro or macro); (ii) the partial explanation of the co-evolution of the technical and institutional bases, mainly due to the partial integration of the institutions in the meso-dynamic scheme; (iii) the lack of attention that has been given to networks and (iv) the difficulty to develop innovation policies based on SSI analysis (although the SSI has been used as a basis for technological policies). Nonetheless, SSI contributions also emerge, being some of them the consolidation of sectoral methodologies (historical-analytical and history-friendly models); theoretical dividends for innovation systems, evolutionary economics, and industrial economics studies; and finally a fruitful agenda of research that is laying the foundations for a new mesoeconomicsMestradoPolitica Cientifica e TecnologicaMestre em Política Científica e Tecnológica132313/2016-2CNP

The Challenges of Technology and Economic Catch-up in Emerging Economies

This book synthesizes and interprets existing knowledge on technology upgrading failures as well as lessons from successes and failures in order to better understand the challenges of technology upgrading in emerging economies. The objective is to bring together in one volume diverse evidence regarding three major dimensions of technology upgrading: paths of technology upgrading, structural changes in the nature of technology upgrading, and the issues of technology transfer and technology upgrading. The knowledge of these three dimensions is being synthesized at the firm, sector, and macro levels across different countries and world macro-regions. Compared to the old and new challenges and uncertainties facing emerging economies, our understanding of the technology upgrading is sparse, unsystematic, and scattered. While our understanding of these issues from the 1980s and 1990s is relatively more systematized, the changes that took place during the globalization and proliferation of GVCs, the effects of the post-2008 events, and the effects of the current COVID-19 and geopolitical struggles on technology upgrading have not been explored and compared synthetically. Moreover, the recent growth slowdown in many emerging economies, often known as a middle-income trap, has reinforced the importance of understanding the technology upgrading challenges of catching-up economies. We believe that the time is ripe for “taking stock of the area” in order to systematize and evaluate the existing knowledge on processes of technology upgrading of emerging economies at the firm, sector, and international levels and to make further inroads in research on this issue. This volume aims to significantly contribute towards this end

Reflexive Stimulation or Disjointed Incrementalism?

Are national technology and innovation policies becoming obsolete under the conditions of an increasing internationalization of science, technologies and industry? The paper supports the argument that despite globalization and Europeanization, national technology and innovation policies remain the most important and effective level of governance in this area of policy. The argument will be elaborated in four steps: firstly, the paper presents a brief overview of the discussions and controversy concerning the future governance of technology and innovation policies. Secondly, the effects of changing general conditions on national policies are discussed, especially the policy implications of the development of new technologies, of the internationalization of industry and of the growing importance of public discourses. Thirdly, the relations between the national and the European level of governance are analyzed and an answer is given to the question why there has not been a significant shift of competencies and resources from the national to the European level until now. Against this background and with a special view regarding the German case, the paper finally analyses strategic reorientations, new elements and instruments of the national technology and innovation policy and discusses their impact on science, industry, and society

Open innovation and the formation of university–industry links in the food manufacturing and technology sector: evidence from the UK

Purpose Despite typically being regarded as ‘low-tech,’ the Food Manufacturing and Technology Sector is increasingly turning to open innovation practices involving collaboration with universities in order to innovate. Given the broad range of activities undertaken by this sector and the fact that it utilises analytical, synthetic, and symbolic knowledge for innovation, it makes an interesting case study on the factors that influence the formation of University-Industry links. Design/methodology/approach Using data from 249 collaborative projects that occurred between UK universities and food manufacturing and technology firms, the analysis utilises a logistic regression model based on a ‘synthetic counterfactual approach’ to modelling the probability a collaborative link will be established with one university and not others. Findings The results suggest that organisational proximity, conceptualised through the presence of prior ties between actors, have the largest influence on the formation of U-I links. In addition, spatial and technological proximity between actors also have a positive influence on link formation. This result suggests that the specificity of knowledge to the food sector is important in the formation of these U-I links. Research limitations/implications 2 The results suggest that the open innovation practices of food manufacturing and technology firms are like other sectors, even though their innovation practices are considered to be different. However, the limitations of the paper mean that these findings may be specific to firms in the food manufacturing and technology sector in the UK. Originality/value The food sector is under-represented in empirical studies on university collaboration; this paper addresses this and provides new insights into the formation of these links

The evolution of R&D networks

This paper models the formation of R&D networks in an oligopolistic industry. In particular, it focuses on the coevolutionary process involving firms’ technological capabilities, market structure and the network of interfirm technological agreements.The main result of the paper is that the R&D network can work as a strong selection mechanism in the industry, creating ex post asymmetries among ex ante similar firms. This is due to a self-reinforcing, path-dependent process, in which events in the early stages of the industry affect firms’ survival in the long run. In this framework, both market and technological externalities created by the formation of cooperative agreements play a crucial roe. Although the R&D network creates profound differences at the beginning, which are reflected by an unequal distribution of links, it tends to eliminate them as it becomes denser and denser. The nature of the technological environment affects the speed of the transition and some of the characteristics of the industry in the long run.industrial organization ;

Il finanziamento pubblico alla ricerca spiazza l’investimento privato in ricerca? Analisi ed implicazioni per la crescita economica dei paesi

The purpose of this paper is to analyze the relationship between public and private funding for research. Data from Eurostat are used. The methodology applies descriptive statistics, correlation, regression and cluster analyses. The main results are: public funding for research crowds out business funding one; moreover private rather than public funding for research is the cause of economic growth of countries. The best economic performance has been achieved by the USA, followed by Europe and Japan. Italy instead has higher public funds of research than private one and the result is low rate of economic growth over time.Research Funding, Economic Growth, Comparative Study, Research Policy, Crowding-out

Refusal to License Intellectual Property Rights under Aticle 82 EC in light of Standardization Context

Peer reviewe