National Systems of Innovation and Entrepreneurship: In Search of a Missing Link

The literature on national systems of innovation (NIS) has neglected the issue of entrepreneurship because of several incompatibilities between the two notions. The Schumpeterian legacy, the current person-centric view of entrepreneurship, and methodological problems related to treating entrepreneurship at the macro-level, have made it difficult to integrate entrepreneurship into the NIS perspective. At national level it is more appropriate to treat entrepreneurship as a 'property' (dimension) of NIS. In order to link NIS and entrepreneurship we must establish a common conceptual basis. Our argument is that the functional view of NIS and entrepreneurship presents a common basis for such an approach. We develop criteria for the entrepreneurial NIS which we define as being those that can change balance between individual and cooperative entrepreneurship; that enhance both the opportunity and skill aspects of entrepreneurship; and that can balance generation of uncertainty with support to business models and other organisations which pool uncertainty. From the NIS perspective, we explain entrepreneurship as a systemic phenomenon driven by complementarities between technological, market and institutional opportunities. This framework builds on three research traditions in the entrepreneurship/NIS literature (Schumpeterian, Kirznerian and Listian) which jointly form a multi-level, multi-dimensional framework for understanding entrepreneurship from a NIS perspective. This framework could be useful as a heuristic for empirical research on entrepreneurship. Finally, we analyse policies for entrepreneurship and find that they are highly dependent on underlying and previously discussed conceptions of entrepreneurship

Defining systems of innovation: a methodological discussion

Current definitions of systems of innovation (SI) which define SI in institutional terms only, do not resolve difficulties encountered when conceptualizing this notion. This paper develops a conceptual framework for a more structured understanding of SI based on four building blocks: technological regime, institutional set-up, market, and pre-market selection environments. SI can then be defined as the co-evolution of technological regimes and institutional set-up molded by the mechanisms of market and pre-market selection. (C) 1998 Elsevier Science Ltd. Air rights reserved

Divergence or Convergence in Research and Development and Innovation Between ‘East’ and ‘West’?

Book description: Research suggests that innovation and technological change are crucial for the economic recovery of the former centrally planned countries in Central and Eastern Europe. This book analyses the development of innovation systems and technology policy in this region from various perspectives, demonstrating not only its importance but also its complexity

Research and Development and Competitiveness in South Eastern Europe: Asset or Liability for EU Integration?

This paper explores the relationship between research and development (R&D) and competitiveness of the SEE economies from the perspective of the EU integration and the EU as a knowledge based economy. Specifically, the paper addresses the question of whether SEE is a potential asset or a liability in this process. SEE countries are quite diverse in terms of levels of competitiveness, with visible effects on the role of R&D which is confirmed by analysis of the demand and supply factors of R&D. Although tentative, results show that innovation policy that takes account of the supply and demand side factors of R&D is essential to knowledge based growth in the SEE economies. This poses some limits to traditionally defined S&T policy as a sectoral activity and calls for new approaches, which are discussed in the paper

European integration and complementarities driven network alignment: the case of ABB in Central and Eastern Europe

The depth of industry integration between European ‘West’ and ‘East’ depends on the simultaneous existence of several factors, which, through mutual complementarities, align global and local networks. This paper takes the case of Asea Brown Bowery (ABB), one of the first large investors in central and eastern Europe (CEE), to show that the successful penetration of this company into CEE was the result of the simultaneous occurrence of several factors, which had mutually reinforcing complementarities. Changes in the strategy of ABB towards knowledge-based services may be weakening these complementarities and dis-aligning local and global networks in CEE. By integrating the insights of Milgrom and Roberts (1995) on complementarities the paper further develops the ‘network alignment’ perspective (Kim and von Tunzelmann, 1998) on growth

Pan-European industrial networks as factor of convergence or divergence within Europe

Book description: European integration can no longer be understood as a west European experiment mainly focused on functional and economic policy cooperation. The issues addressed include security and defence, as well as core concerns of European society. This volume explores three interlocking dimensions of integration; functional, territorial, and affiliational. Each dimension influences how countries across the continent engage with European integration. This first volume in the One Europe or Several? series identifies the agenda of a research programme, funded by the British Economic and Social Research Council

Growth, Integration and Spillovers in the Central and East European Software Industry

This paper explores growth and competitive advantage in CEE software firms; it looks at the role of strategic partnerships and industry (spillover) effects. The empirical analysis is based on survey data from 224 software firms from six CEE countries (Bulgaria, Czech R, Estonia, Serbia, Slovenia, Romania). The results of the descriptive analysis are interpreted from the perspective of the role of capabilities in industrial development. The analysis shows that the patterns of growth are a mix of sector, region and sub--region specific determinants and show important national differences. This suggests that the CEE software industry cannot be considered as a homogenous phenomenon. There is no general tendency towards an expansion in exports; based on our sample only Romania is developing an export oriented software industry. Research shows that the CEE software industry is populated by young, dedicated, domestic firms, which are independent, and privately owned and which are mainly oriented towards localisation of software. They are strongly dependent for trade and production on alliances and strategic partnerships with foreign partners and a small share of technology based partnerships. There is an extensive process of industry upgrading underway, involving country and sub-region specific changes. The spillover effects are significant, through links with clients and intensive intra-industry knowledge transfer through high employment turnover and potentially high knowledge transfer from foreign to local projects. Differences between central and eastern Europe are strong in terms of degree of diversification of software supply, industrial upgrading and quality of demand. The pattern of software development in CEE differs from that in other emerging markets in the sense that it is domestic market oriented, but with an emerging export market for services. Its further growth and upgrading will be strongly dependent on the acquisition of organisational capabilities by local firms

Policies for Promoting Technological Catch Up: Towards a Post-Washington Approach

This paper analyzes the evolution of policies for technology catch-up through three periods: the import substitution period, the (augmented) Washington Consensus period and the post-Washington period. We analyze the dominant policy models and practices in each of these periods as co-evolving with the dominant academic ideas, thereby changing the conditions for catching up. We develop several dimensions or building blocks that characterize the policies for technology catch-up. These dimensions are used to characterize each of the three policy periods with the objective of outlining the generic features of an emerging post-Washington approach to technology catch-up policies in relation to past approaches.(Please Puchase For Further Reading)technology, catch up, import-substitution, post-Washington consensus

Technology upgrading of middle income economies: A new approach and results

We explore issues of measurement for technology upgrading of the economies moving from middle to high-income status. In exploring this issue, we apply theoretically relevant and empirically grounded middle level conceptual and statistical framework based on three dimensions: (i) Intensity (ii) breadth of technological upgrading, and (iii) technology and knowledge exchange. As an outcome, we construct a three-pronged composite indicator of technology upgrading based on 35 indicators which reflect different drivers and patterns of technology upgrading of countries at different income levels. We show that technology upgrading of middle-income economies is distinctively different from that of low and high-income economies. Our results suggest the existence of middle-income trap in technology upgrading - i.e. countries' technology upgrading activities are not reflected in their income levels. Based on the simple statistical analysis we show that the middle-income trap is present in all three aspects of technology upgrading, but their importance varies across different aspects. A trap seems to be higher for 'breadth' of technology upgrading than for 'intensity' of technology upgrading and is by far the highest for the dimension of knowledge and technology interaction with the global economy. Finally, our research shows that technology upgrading is a multidimensional process and that it would be methodologically wrong to aim for an aggregate index