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

Knowledge-based entrepreneurship in Central and Eastern Europe: myth and reality

This paper summarises results of a survey of 304 knowledge based firms in six central and east European (CEE) countries. Knowledge-based entrepreneurs in CEE are not ‘gazelles’ (i.e., fast growing new technology based firms which have the potential to reshape the industrial landscape). They consist of distinct types of companies, of which new technology based firms (NTBFs) are only one. The key factor in KBE firms’ growth is most often firm specific capabilities which do not always involve R&D. Based on factor analysis we develop several taxonomies of KBEs which all point to a specific nature of knowledge based entrepreneurship in CEE. The networks of KBEs are broader and more frequently involve innovation system actors, including professional networks. For different types of KBEs different networks are important

FDI Subsidiaries and Industrial Integration of Central Europe: Conceptual and Empirical Results

productivity gap, transition economies, foreign direct investment, firm-organisation technology transfer, economic catch-up development

Public research funding systems in central and eastern Europe: between excellence and relevance: introduction to special section

Transformation of public research funding systems in central and eastern Europe (CEE) represent a natural experiment whereby different funding systems have developed from relatively common heritage of the socialist system. In this introduction that builds on the three papers of this thematic issue we argue that in medium and long-term the key challenge of CEE countries' research funding systems is to achieve balance between scientific excellence (static allocative efficiency) and socio-economic relevance (dynamic efficiency). The achievement of this trade-off is an institutional issue par excellence; it does not represent optimum but contextual fit, and is determined through interaction of macro funding rules and market structure of the research system. In order to evaluate this fit we should approach research funding as a multifaceted process composed of functional, path-dependent and political as well as learning dimension

Science – industry links in CEE AND CIS: Conventional policy wisdoms facing reality

Presented at the GLOBELICS 6th International Conference 2008 22-24 September, Mexico City, Mexico.This paper analyzes factors behind a widespread policy failure to support science – industry linkages in Central and Eastern Europe (CEE) and Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS). We explain this failure as being largely due to uncritical application of conventional policy wisdoms into the context of ‘catching up’ and ‘laggard’ economies. The argument is based on evidence of knowledge intensive enterprises in CEE and CIS countries and on analysis of innovation policies of these two regions. Our conclusion is that support to science – industry linkages for the CEE/CIS should be balanced with support to strengthening ‘actors’ (existing large and small firms; universities and public research organisations) and support to other linkages in national innovation systems, especially knowledge links between domestic and foreign firm

Internationalising smart specialisation: assessment and issues in the case of EU New Member States

Smart specialisation is currently probably the largest innovation policy experiment in the world. Its aim is to move the EU less developed countries and regions on path of R&D based growth. This transformation requires not only endogenous knowledge and technology accumulation building but also coupling with international knowledge and production networks. Yet, internationalization does not seem to be a crucial component in the design and development of Research and Innovation Strategies for Smart Specialisation (RIS3), which is at odds with the strong dependence of the EU New Member States (EU-13) on FDI and global value chains. Our analysis is grounded in the key ’stylized facts’ related to EU-13 R&D&I activities, and the complex link between innovation and internationalization. Innovation systems in the EU-13 are fragmented and based on largely public R&D systems and on predominantly production oriented foreign direct investment (FDI). This structural weakness calls for stronger support for innovation oriented activities and for the integration of global value chains (GVCs) and FDI into local innovation systems. We explore the main obstacles to the internationalization of smart specialisation and discuss ways to overcome them. We highlight the policy action areas related to providing support for technology upgrading in relation to the internationalization of smart specialisation.JRC.J.2-Knowledge for Growt