• Share
  • Email
  • Embed
  • Like
  • Save
  • Private Content


Flash Player 9 (or above) is needed to view presentations.
We have detected that you do not have it on your computer. To install it, go here.

Like this presentation? Why not share!

Science and Technology and U-I-G Relations in Asian Catch-up Countries






Total Views
Views on SlideShare
Embed Views



0 Embeds 0

No embeds



Upload Details

Uploaded via as Microsoft PowerPoint

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
Post Comment
Edit your comment

    Science and Technology and U-I-G Relations in Asian Catch-up Countries Science and Technology and U-I-G Relations in Asian Catch-up Countries Presentation Transcript

    • S&T and U-I-G relations in rapid Asian catch-up countries 27 th Aug. 2010 4S conference, Japan Kwon, Ki-Seok & So, Min-Ho
    • Contents Introduction Ⅰ S&T and U-I-G relations in Catch-up countries Ⅱ Korean Case Ⅲ Ongoing Research: comparing 4 countries IV Summary and Conclusion V
    • Ⅰ . Introduction
    • Background
      • Awareness of the importance of scientific knowledge for technological innovation is increasing both for policy practitioners and academics.
      • Despite some recent attention to the relationship between public science and industrial innovation in developing countries (Nelson, 2004; Mazzoleni, 2003; Albuquerque, 2001; Pavitt, 2001, 1998), the topic is still relatively unexplored.
      • In particular, the evolution of U-I-G relations has rarely been explored in the context of the catch-up countries’ national innovation system.
    • II. S&T and U-I-G relations in catch-up countries
    • S&T in developing countries
      • Science in developing countries
      • Weak linkages between public research organisations and industry (Crane, 1977; Waissbluth et al., 1988; Sutz, 2000; Intarakumnerd et al., 2002) . Isolated from local needs (e.g. Goontatilake, 1984; Shrum & Shenhav, 1995), and linked to ‘scientific core’ (Shrum & Shenhav, 1995)
      • Latin American universities have continued to focus on basic research which is not directly applicable to industrial innovation (Thomas, 1999)
      Due to insufficient provision of scientists and research environments as well as mismatched demand from industry, economic contribution of science in developing countries is quite limited
    • S&T in rapid catch-up countries
      • Scientific research and economic contribution in catch-up countries
      • Inverted model is proposed, but undervalues the role of scientific research in catch-up (Kim, 2000; Pack, 2000).
      • A certain level of scientific capacity (‘ Focusing device’) is a ‘precondition’ for industrial and technological development (Albuquerque, 2001)
      • Bernardes & Albuquerque (2003) propose interaction model in stead of inverted model. Close links between national science, national technology and national economy (Pavitt, 1998 & 2001) Lattimore and Ravesz (1996) categorize Korea, Taiwan, Singapore and India as ‘an industry-based country’ in terms of the patterns of comparative advantage in publications . Empirically, catch up countries such as Korea and Taiwan show simultaneous increase in both publishing and patenting, while Brazil shows increase only in publishing (Bernardes & Albuquerque, 2003)
    • S&T and U-I-G relations in rapid catch-up countries Source: Kwon(2010) partly based on Nelson (2004) Country Change in share of world publications Change in share of US patents Publications per million population 1993/1982 2006/1995 1993/1983 2006/1995 1980–1984 2002-2006 Taiwan 5.97 1.79 12.81 2.43 23.3 2745 Korea 5.45 3.46 29.79 2.96 8.0 1786 Singapore 3.53 2.32 3.20 13.5 71.6 5089 Hong Kong 2.37 - 2.42 - 45.9 - India 0.83 1.14 2.45 7.0 18.1 90
    • Two universities’ paths in developing countries Source: revised from Etzkowitz (2003), p.318. East Asia Latin America ?
      • Policy harmonization by the governments’ intervention
      •  Disciplinary coherence between the three actors (i.e. U,I &G)
    • Disciplinary Specialisation and Quality variance Degree of specialisation and quality variance of SCI publications in selected countries (1990-2001) Source: Yun and Ahn (2002), The characteristics of structure and science activity in Korea: an analysis by SCI Specialisation Quality Variance Korea China Taiwan Ireland Japan Netherlands Australia UK Finland Germany France Swiss Canada US US Canada Swiss France Germany Finland UK Australia Netherlands Japan Ireland China Korea Taiwan
    • Specialisation and Quality variance Degree of specialisation and quality variance of SCI publications in selected countries (2001-2005) Source: authors, based on ISI database
    • III. Korean Case
    • Three actors’ scientific activities across disciplines World shares of Korean SCI publications and their citations (2001-2005)
    • Change of scientific activities Change of world share of Korean universities’ publications by period
    • IV. Ongoing Research : 4 Countries’ Cases
    • Disciplinary change of technological activities Korea Taiwan Singapore Hong Kong
    • Disciplinary changes of scientific activities
    • V. Summary and Conclusion
    • Summary and Further Studies
      • Exploring the U-I-G relations through disciplinary match between
      • scientific research and technological activities in catch-up countries
      • Enhance indicators to measure the linkage between U, I & G
      • and between science and technology (e.g. patents citing papers)
      • Corroboration of quantitative results based on
      • qualitative investigation on U-I-G policy in difference countries
    • Thank you for attention !