Scientific publications, patents and technological capabilities in late-industrializing countries

Technology Analysis and Strategic Management

Volumn 9, Issue 3, 1997, Pages 343-360

  Amsden, Alice H ^a   Mourshed, Mona ^a  

^a MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH; TECHNOLOGICAL CAPABILITY;

EID: 0031426932     PISSN: 09537325     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/09537329708524289     Document Type: Article

References (24)

1. The core countries we examine include Argentina, Brazil, Chile, India, Indonesia, South Korea (hereafter Korea), Malaysia, Mexico, Singapore, Taiwan, Thailand, Turkey and, where data are available, Hong Kong and China.
2. Pioneering studies in the field of technology indicators and technological capabilities in latecomer countries include M. Bell & K. Pavitt, 'Technological Accumulation and Industrial Growth: Contrasts between Developed and Developing Countries', Industrial and Corporate Change, 2, 1993, pp. 157-210; C. Dahlman & L. Westphal, 'The Meaning of Technological Mastery in Relation to Transfer of Technology', Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 458, 1981, pp. 12-26; R. Evenson & G. Ranis (Eds), Science and Technology: Lessons for Development Policy (Boulder, CO, Westview, 1990); S. Lall, Building Industrial Competitiveness in Developing Countries (Paris, OECD, 1990); H. Morita-Lou (Ed.), Science and Technology Indicators for Development, United Nations Science and Technology for Development Series (Boulder, CO, Westview, 1985).
3. Pioneering studies in the field of technology indicators and technological capabilities in latecomer countries include M. Bell & K. Pavitt, 'Technological Accumulation and Industrial Growth: Contrasts between Developed and Developing Countries', Industrial and Corporate Change, 2, 1993, pp. 157-210; C. Dahlman & L. Westphal, 'The Meaning of Technological Mastery in Relation to Transfer of Technology', Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 458, 1981, pp. 12-26; R. Evenson & G. Ranis (Eds), Science and Technology: Lessons for Development Policy (Boulder, CO, Westview, 1990); S. Lall, Building Industrial Competitiveness in Developing Countries (Paris, OECD, 1990); H. Morita-Lou (Ed.), Science and Technology Indicators for Development, United Nations Science and Technology for Development Series (Boulder, CO, Westview, 1985).
4. Pioneering studies in the field of technology indicators and technological capabilities in latecomer countries include M. Bell & K. Pavitt, 'Technological Accumulation and Industrial Growth: Contrasts between Developed and Developing Countries', Industrial and Corporate Change, 2, 1993, pp. 157-210; C. Dahlman & L. Westphal, 'The Meaning of Technological Mastery in Relation to Transfer of Technology', Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 458, 1981, pp. 12-26; R. Evenson & G. Ranis (Eds), Science and Technology: Lessons for Development Policy (Boulder, CO, Westview, 1990); S. Lall, Building Industrial Competitiveness in Developing Countries (Paris, OECD, 1990); H. Morita-Lou (Ed.), Science and Technology Indicators for Development, United Nations Science and Technology for Development Series (Boulder, CO, Westview, 1985).
5. Pioneering studies in the field of technology indicators and technological capabilities in latecomer countries include M. Bell & K. Pavitt, 'Technological Accumulation and Industrial Growth: Contrasts between Developed and Developing Countries', Industrial and Corporate Change, 2, 1993, pp. 157-210; C. Dahlman & L. Westphal, 'The Meaning of Technological Mastery in Relation to Transfer of Technology', Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 458, 1981, pp. 12-26; R. Evenson & G. Ranis (Eds), Science and Technology: Lessons for Development Policy (Boulder, CO, Westview, 1990); S. Lall, Building Industrial Competitiveness in Developing Countries (Paris, OECD, 1990); H. Morita-Lou (Ed.), Science and Technology Indicators for Development, United Nations Science and Technology for Development Series (Boulder, CO, Westview, 1985).
6. Pioneering studies in the field of technology indicators and technological capabilities in latecomer countries include M. Bell & K. Pavitt, 'Technological Accumulation and Industrial Growth: Contrasts between Developed and Developing Countries', Industrial and Corporate Change, 2, 1993, pp. 157-210; C. Dahlman & L. Westphal, 'The Meaning of Technological Mastery in Relation to Transfer of Technology', Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 458, 1981, pp. 12-26; R. Evenson & G. Ranis (Eds), Science and Technology: Lessons for Development Policy (Boulder, CO, Westview, 1990); S. Lall, Building Industrial Competitiveness in Developing Countries (Paris, OECD, 1990); H. Morita-Lou (Ed.), Science and Technology Indicators for Development, United Nations Science and Technology for Development Series (Boulder, CO, Westview, 1985).
7. Our methodology is similar to that of M. Pianta, 'Technology and Growth in OECD Countries, 1970-1990' Cambridge Journal of Economics, 19, 1995, pp. 175-187. In his study of science and technology in the OECD, Pianta states: "No attempt is made here to identify causation or to build a general model of the link between technology and growth. Rather, the aim is to test the stability and limits of simple relationships, their consistency and variations across countries and over time" (pp. 177-178).
8. According to Z. Griliches, 'Patent Statistics as Economic Indicators: A Survey', Journal of Economic Literature, 28, 1990, pp. 1661-1707: "Patent statistics remain a unique source for the analysis of the process of technical change. Nothing else even comes close in the quality of available data, accessibility, and the potential industrial, organizational, and technological detail." As for scientific publications, D. Archibugi and M. Pianta, The Technological Specialization of Advanced Countries (Boston, Kluwer, 1992) observe: "Count of scientific papers provides the most general output indicator of scientific activity. Simple aggregations of data by country and by scientific field or subfield allow an overview of the structure of scientific activity and how it changes over time" (p. 34). Nevertheless, neither patent nor publication statistics may necessarily be a good indicators of technical change in latecomer countries.
9. According to Z. Griliches, 'Patent Statistics as Economic Indicators: A Survey', Journal of Economic Literature, 28, 1990, pp. 1661-1707: "Patent statistics remain a unique source for the analysis of the process of technical change. Nothing else even comes close in the quality of available data, accessibility, and the potential industrial, organizational, and technological detail." As for scientific publications, D. Archibugi and M. Pianta, The Technological Specialization of Advanced Countries (Boston, Kluwer, 1992) observe: "Count of scientific papers provides the most general output indicator of scientific activity. Simple aggregations of data by country and by scientific field or subfield allow an overview of the structure of scientific activity and how it changes over time" (p. 34). Nevertheless, neither patent nor publication statistics may necessarily be a good indicators of technical change in latecomer countries.
10. Academia, rather than government or business, accounts for the overwhelming share of scientific publications in latecomer countries (with the exception of Singapore, where academe's share was Only' around 90%).
11. There seems to be almost no correlation between GNP per capita (1980 and 1995) and either the growth rate of patents or the growth rate of publications. Thus the level of GNP per capita does not seem to have a significant bearing on the rate of expansion of either output.
12. We do not explore the relationship between growth of scientific publications and tertiary education (level or growth rate) because consistent data for tertiary education are available for too few of the countries whose scientific publications we are analyzing.
13. The correlation when R&D is measured for the period 1980-85 is also positive and high.
14. When we correlated the growth rates of patents and publications with R&D expenditures (in constant 1982 US dollars for various years, 1985-88), the coefficients (0.48 and 0.38) were much weaker than for the share of R&D expenditures in GNP.
15. For Japan, see H. Odagiri & A. Goto, Technology and Industrial Development in Japan: Building Capabilities by Learning, innovation, and Public Policy (Oxford, Clarendon Press, 1996); T. Ozawa, Japan's Technological Challenge Io the West, 1950-1974 (Cambridge, MA, MIT Press, 1974).
16. For Japan, see H. Odagiri & A. Goto, Technology and Industrial Development in Japan: Building Capabilities by Learning, innovation, and Public Policy (Oxford, Clarendon Press, 1996); T. Ozawa, Japan's Technological Challenge Io the West, 1950-1974 (Cambridge, MA, MIT Press, 1974).
17. D. Hicks 'Published Papers, Tacit Competitiveness, and Corporate Management of the Public/ Private Character of Knowledge', Industrial and Corporate Change, 4, 1995, pp. 401-432. Hicks argues that firms publish scientific papers so as to build interactive relationships and a credible reputation with the international scientific community.
18. When we correlated growth rates of patents and publications with annual average FDI inflows (millions of dollars, 1983-94), the coefficient was again small and negative (we excluded China from our equations because, owing to its extremely large inflows of FDI, China is an outlier).
19. For the technological capabilities of advanced countries, see Archibugi & Pianta, op. cit., Ref. 4; P. Patel & K. Pavitt, 'Uneven and Divergent Technological Accumulation among Advanced Countries: Evidence and a Framework of Explanation', Industrial and Corporate Change, 3, 1994, pp. 3759-3787.
20. For the technological capabilities of advanced countries, see Archibugi & Pianta, op. cit., Ref. 4; P. Patel & K. Pavitt, 'Uneven and Divergent Technological Accumulation among Advanced Countries: Evidence and a Framework of Explanation', Industrial and Corporate Change, 3, 1994, pp. 3759-3787.
21. Archibugi & Pianta, op. cit., Ref. 4.
22. See Refs 6, 9 and 11 for correlations of patent growth and GNP per capita, FDI inflows and R&D expenditure levels.
23. G. Dosi, C. Freeman et al., 'The Process of Economic Development: Introducing Some Stylized Facts and Theories on Technologies, Firms, and Institutions', Industrial and Corporate Change, 3, 1994, pp. 1-45; T. Hikino & A. H. Amsden, 'Staying Behind, Stumbling Back, Sneaking Up, Soaring Ahead: Late Industrialization in Historical Perspective', in: W. Baumol, R. Nelson & E. Wolff(Eds), Convergence of Productivity (New York, Oxford University Press, 1994).
24. G. Dosi, C. Freeman et al., 'The Process of Economic Development: Introducing Some Stylized Facts and Theories on Technologies, Firms, and Institutions', Industrial and Corporate Change, 3, 1994, pp. 1-45; T. Hikino & A. H. Amsden, 'Staying Behind, Stumbling Back, Sneaking Up, Soaring Ahead: Late Industrialization in Historical Perspective', in: W. Baumol, R. Nelson & E. Wolff(Eds), Convergence of Productivity (New York, Oxford University Press, 1994).