Veblen’s Predator and the Great Crisis

With this inquiry we attribute cause for the current and “Great Crisis” to Veblen’s predator. After summarizing origins and manifestations of this crisis we juxtapose Veblen’s emphasis upon the predator to other potential causes for crisis and crises. Noted to have emerged when our stock of human knowledge provided for the creation of surplus, Veblen’s predator is presented as capable of metamorphosis and also driving evolution of our capitalistic system: whether this means emerging as the businessman in the “era of the machine,” or the investment banker promoting a financial metaphysics in the current “era of finance.

Analysis Based on Patent Data

This report explores patterns of technology upgrading as a three-dimensional process which consists of (i) intensity of technology upgrading, (ii) structural change, and (iii) interaction with the global economy. The specificity of our report is that we depict patterns of technology upgrading by relying entirely on patent data. We derive patent indicators to capture the three dimensions. Patent indicators for intensity of technology upgrading trace technological capabilities at the technology frontier (transnational patents) and behind the technology frontier (domestic/resident direct applications to national offices). Structural change in technological knowledge is depicted by the share of transnational patent applications in high technology fields and knowledge-intensive activities and by calculating a technological diversification index. To capture interaction with global economy in the upgrading process indicators measure technological knowledge sourcing across countries and interactions between foreign and indigenous actors. Based on 7 patent indicators covering the three upgrading dimensions the comparative analysis focuses on EU27 and its subregions and on the BRICS countries. According to the results, in 2011 CEECs were quite homogenous in their upgrading paths. A typical CEE economy in 2011 is well behind EU12 in terms of frontier technology intensity, domestic technology intensity, share of high tech patents and technology sourcing abroad. Moreover, its organizational capabilities are often less advanced. The CEE profile is much less coherent in terms of technology diversification/specialization and share of joint inventions. However, differences among CEECs are not significant. Still there are some notable national features. Poland, Romania and Slovenia have above average domestic technological intensity which reflects partly their sizes (Romania and Poland) and specific model of innovation system reliant on domestic R&D intensive firms (Slovenia). Latvia and Lithuania are specific in terms of high share of HTKI patents. CEE technology upgrading as depicted by patents is within the BRIC pattern (with exception of China which in terms of technology upgrading has de facto delinked from BRICS). In the BRIC context, the CEE characterize very open innovation system with a high share of coinventions and foreign actors exploiting local inventions. This reveals weak organizational capabilities to commercialize its own inventions. According to the results CEE grew during 1990s/2008 based on production, not technological capability. Their future growth will increasingly depend on building technological capabilities at world frontier level. Our analysis shows that the basis for such growth exists only to a limited extent and that speed of upgrading towards world frontier activities is well beyond required for catching up. Equally, our analysis shows that solutions for improved technology upgrading will need to be found with their existing innovation model of small open economies integrated into the EU

Technology and Institutions in neo-Schumpeterian and Original Institutional Thinking

The aim of this inquiry is to deepen our understanding of the interactions between knowledge, technologies and institutions in socio-economic process by considering the affinities and divergences of Original Institutional Economics (OIE) and neo-Schumpeterian economics (NSE). Both strands of evolutionary economic thought recognize the importance of knowledge for human progress and the role of institutions in molding this process. OIE and NSE share a common perspective in what concerns (i) the role of knowledge for socio-economic change, (ii) the behavioral dimension of technology molded by institutions, and (iii) the role of purposeful evaluation in processes of institutional and technological change. Considering these commonalities, both strands of thinking could benefit from “joining forces”. Firstly, the conceptualization of how knowledge and technologies drive human progress from a neo-Schumpeterian perspective could very much benefit from the consideration of the value system and the power structure sustaining it as put forward by OIE. Values and power appear as key determinants channeling (or retaining) knowledge towards human progress. Moreover, the role of the value system as suggested by OIE could be operationalized and further developed to explain paths of socio-economic development drawing on the conceptualization of “selection mechanisms” as put forward by neo-Schumpeterian models.Ziel dieses Beitrags ist es, die Wechselwirkungen zwischen Technologie und Institutionen in sozioökonomischen Prozessen aus Sicht der Original Institutional Economics (OIE) und der neo-Schumpeterianischen Ökonomik (NSE) zu analysieren. Insbesondere werden Affinitäten und Divergenzen beider ökonomischen Denkschulen identifiziert, um Impulse für deren Zusammenarbeit zu setzen. Beide Theoriestränge heben die Bedeutung von Wissen und Institutionen für die wirtschaftliche Entwicklung hervor. Ganz konkret lassen sich die Gemeinsamkeiten beider Denkschulen in drei Bereichen erkennen: (i) in der Bedeutung von Wissen für die sozioökonomische Entwicklung, (ii) in dem handlungsbezogenen Charakter der Technologie, die von Institutionen geprägt wird, und (iii) in der Handlungsfähigkeit von Akteuren im technologischen Wandel. In Anbetracht der Gemeinsamkeiten könnten beide Denkrichtungen von Synergien profitieren. Die neo-Schumpeterianische Konzeptualisierung der wirtschaftlichen Entwicklung könnte um die Berücksichtigung des Wertesystems und der Machtstruktur erweitert werden. Werte und Macht spielen aus Sicht der OIE eine Schlüsselrolle für die Verbreitung (bzw. Beibehaltung) von Wissen und Technologie. Beide Aspekte werden von OIE operationalisiert und können der Weiterentwicklung der Modellierung von Selektionsmechanismen in neo-Schumpeterianischen Ansätzen dienen, um die Pfade der wirtschaftlichen Entwicklung zu erklären

Veblen’s Predator and the Great Crisis

With this inquiry we attribute cause for the current and “Great Crisis” to Veblen’s predator. After summarizing origins and manifestations of this crisis we juxtapose Veblen’s emphasis upon the predator to other potential causes for crisis and crises. Noted to have emerged when our stock of human knowledge provided for the creation of surplus, Veblen’s predator is presented as capable of metamorphosis and also driving evolution of our capitalistic system: whether this means emerging as the businessman in the “era of the machine,” or the investment banker promoting a financial metaphysics in the current “era of finance.

Drifting towards innovation: The co-evolution of patent networks, policy, and institutions in China’s solar photovoltaics industry

Since 2008, China has become the dominant force in solar cell production in the world. But what about technological development and innovation? This paper contributes to a better understanding of the accumulation process of indigenous innovation capabilities in emerging economies. It empirically analyses the case of photovoltaic (PV) technologies in China between 1988 and 2014 using patent indicators with a comprehensive definition of the entire system value chain. The contribution tracks the technological catching-up trajectory of the PV innovators in China and their collaboration networks against institutional milestones of industrial policy. Theoretically, the research draws on the concepts of innovation capabilities and technological systems. Methodologically, the paper uses patent indicators and network analysis to study patent co-application activities. The analysis shows a gap between China’s share in the global PV market and its modest share of transnational patents. However, it gives evidence for a gradual technological catching-up in the 1G cell technologies, solar panels, and electronics. This catching-up is being driven by an increasing population of Chinese patent applicants clustered in isolated communities. The role of foreign actors in the co-patenting activities is surprisingly low and decreasing

Trends and gaps in Biotechnology policies in European member States since 1994.

Most European national policy systems have gradually intensified their efforts in supporting the development of the biotechnology knowledge base and its industrial application. Aim of the paper is to increase understanding of the national approaches to promote biotechnology in Europe, to explore heterogeneity and general trends in the design and implementation of policy instruments, and finally to identify the gaps of national innovation policies since 1994 in Europe. The paper analysis policy intervention in the 4 main networks of the biotechnology innovation system: the knowledge base, the industry, the financial system and the market