The development of technology infrastructure in Portugal and the need to pull innovation using proactive intermediation policies

Technovation

Volumn 29, Issue 1, 2009, Pages 23-34

  Laranja, Manuel ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF LISBON   (Portugal)

Author keywords

Innovation policy; Proactive intermediation policies; Technology infrastructure; Technology policy

Indexed keywords

TECHNOLOGICAL FORECASTING; TECHNOLOGY; TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER;

EUROPEANS; IN BUILDINGS; INNOVATION AND TECHNOLOGIES; INNOVATION POLICY; PORTUGAL; PROACTIVE INTERMEDIATION POLICIES; STRUCTURAL FUNDS; TECHNOLOGY INFRASTRUCTURE; TECHNOLOGY INFRASTRUCTURES; TECHNOLOGY POLICY;

INNOVATION;

EID: 57349163274     PISSN: 01664972     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.technovation.2008.07.010     Document Type: Article

References (48)

1. AdI, 2006. As Infraestruturas Tecnológicas no Sistema Nacional de Inovação. Report on Technology Infrastructures produced by the Innovation Agency-AdI, Lisbon.
2. Arnold, E., Bell, M., Bessant, J., Brimble, 2000. Enhancing policy and institutional support for industrial technology development in Thailand: the overall policy framework and the development of the industrial innovation system. Report to the National Science and Technology Development Agency of Thailand by Technopolis, SPRU, Centrim and Broker Group.
3. Arthur D. Little International, 2000. Getting more innovation from public research: good practice in technology transfer from large public research institutions. Study Commissioned by the EC Enterprise Directorate-General EUR 17026 to Arthur D. Little International.
4. Bell, M., 1993. Integrating R&D with industrial production and technical change: strengthening linkages and changing structures. Paper presented to the Workshop on Integration of Science and Technology in the Development Planning and Management Process, United Nations Economic and Social Council, Economic and Social Commission for Western Asia, 27-30 September, Amman-Jordon.
5. Bell M., and Pavitt K. Technological accumulation and industrial growth contrasts between developed and developing countries. Industrial and Corporate Change 2 2 (1993) 157-210
6. Boekholt, P., Giessel, J., 2004. Making innovation policy more user friendly for SMEs. Background Paper for the Trend-Chart Policy Workshop, 17-18 June, Brussels.
7. Caraça, J., 1999. A Prática de Políticas de Ciência e Tecnologia em Portugal. In: Godinho, M., Caraça, J. (Eds.), O Futuro Tecnológico: Perspectivas para a Inovação em Portugal. Celta, Oeiras.
8. Cohen W., and Levinthal D. Absorptive capacity: a new perspective on learning and innovation. Administrative Science Quarterly 35 1 (1990) 128-152
9. Cohendet P. Transfer of technology to small and medium enterprises (SMEs): conceptual changes and lessons from the two banks of the Rhine. In: Teubal M., Foray D., Justman M., and Zuscovitch E. (Eds). Technological Infrastructure Policy: An International Perspective (1996), The Jerusalem Institute for Israel Studies, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Netherlands
10. Coopers & Lybrand, 1992. Strategic assessment of Portuguese technology centres. Report Presented to the Ministry of Industry and Energy-1992, commissioned by Gabinete Gestor do PEDIP II, Lisboa.
11. CPA/MIT, 1983. Technological development in Portuguese industry. Unpublished study conducted by CPA at MIT in the preparation of the Portuguese Technological Plan. Centre for Policy Alternatives MIT CPA/83-01.
12. Dankbaar, B., 1993. Research and technology management in enterprises: issues for community policy: overall strategic review. SAST Project No. 8, Monitor, Brussels
13. Deloite & Touche, HP and Intersismet, 2000. Avaliação parcelar no domínio do reforço das infraestruturas de apoio à indústria do Programa Estratégico de Modernização da Indústria Portuguesa-PEDIP II, para o período 1994-1999. Evaluation Report on Infrastructures of Support to Industry, commissioned by Gabinete Gestor do PEDIP II, Lisboa.
14. EC, 2004a. Improving institutions for the transfer of technology from science to enterprises. Expert Group Report, BEST PROJECT ITTE 1.11/2002 European Commission, July 2004.
15. EC, 2004b. Innovation in Europe: results for the EU, Iceland and Norway. Report published by the Office of the Official Publications of the European Community, Luxembourg, ISBN:92-894-7262-6.
16. In: Edquist C. (Ed). Systems of Innovation: Technologies, Institutions and Organisation (1997), Cassel, London
17. Forbes N., and Wield D. Innovation dynamics in catch-up firms: process, product and proprietary capabilities for development. Industry & Innovation 15 1 February (2008) 69-92
18. Freeman C. Technology Policy and Economic Performance: Lessons from Japan (1987), Pinter, London
19. Giuliani E., and Bell M. The micro-determinants of meso-level learning and innovation: evidence from a Chilean wine cluster. Research Policy 34 1 (2005) 47-68
20. Higgins, T., 1994. Promoting innovation and development in Europe's weaker regions: the achievements and lessons of recent investment programmes for research and technological development. In: Gonda, K., Sakauchi, F., Higgins, T. (Eds.), Regionalisation of Science and Technology Resources in the Context of Globalisation. Proceedings of the NISTEP Workshop, Industrial Research Centre, Tokyo, Japan.
21. Hobday M. Innovation in East Asia (1995), Edward Elgar, Aldershot
22. INETI, 1996. 10 Encontro Nacional de Infraestruturas Tecnológicas. Report on the First National Seminar of Portuguese Technology Infrastructures, INETI, Ministry of Economy, Lisbon.
23. Justman M., and Teubal M. Technology infrastructure policy (TIP): creating capabilities and building markets. Research Policy 24 (1995) 259-281
24. Kandel, N., 1994. RTO infrastructures in Europe: analytical survey. In: The Future of Research and Technology Organisations in Europe. European Commission, EUR 15458 EN.
25. Lall S. Building Industrial Competitiveness in Developing Countries (1990), OECD Development Center, Paris
26. Lipsey R., and Carlaw K. Technology policies in neo-classical and structuralist-evolutionary models. OECD STI Review 22 (1998) 31-73
27. LISTART, 1999. LISTART demand side analysis. LISTART Project Report by FhG to the Innovation Agency in Portugal-AdI, Lisboa.
28. In: Lundval B. (Ed). National Systems of Innovation: Towards a Theory of Innovation and Interactive Learning (1992), Pinter, London
29. MPAT, 1994. Preparar Portugal para o século XXI. Quadro Comunitário de Apoio, PDR 1994-1999. DGDR Fevereiro 1994, Lisboa.
30. Nauwelaers C., and Wintjes R. Innovating SMEs and regions: the need for policy intelligence and interactive policies. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management 14 2 (2002) 201-215
31. Nelson R. A retrospective. In: Nelson R. (Ed). National Innovation Systems: A Comparative Analysis (1993), Oxford University Press, New York, Oxford
32. Nelson R., and Winter S. An Evolutionary Theory of Economic Change (1982), Harvard University Press, Cambridge
33. Nooteboom B., Coehoorn C., and Van der Zwaan A. The purpose and effectiveness of technology transfer to small businesses by government-sponsored innovation centres. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management 4 2 (1992) 149-166
34. OCDE, 1986. Reviews of national science and technology policy: Portugal, DSTI/STP December 1986. Paris.
35. OCDE, 1993. Reviews of national science and technology policy: Portugal, DSTI/STP December 1993. Paris.
36. Oliveira, T., 2003. A interacção das infra-estruturas científicas e tecnológicas com o sector produtivo: contributos e limites para a emergência de um sistema nacional de inovação. Unpublished Ph.D. Thesis, ISCTE, Lisboa.
37. Poti B., and Emanuela R. Convergence and differentiation in institutional change among European public research systems: the decreasing role of public research institutes. Science and Public Policy 27 6 (2000) 421-432
38. Prest et al., 2002. A comparative analysis of public, semi-public and recently privatised research centres. Final Project Report CBSTII contract ERBHPV2-CT-200-01. Prepared by PREST on behalf of the project consortium, PREST. University of Manchester, UK; Centre de sociologie de l'innovation, Ecole des Mines, France; Swedish Institute for Studies in Education and Research, Sweden; CSIC, Unidad de Políticas Comparadas: SPRITTE, Spain.
39. Rhisiart, M., Roberts, G., Thomas, M., 2000. Technology clinics. Report produced by the EC project Innoregio: Dissemination of Innovation and Knowledge Management Techniques, January. Observatory of Innovation & Business Development, Cardiff Business School.
40. Rush H., Hobday M., Bessant J., and Arnold E. Strategies for best practice in research and technology institutes: an overview of a benchmarking exercise. R&D Management 25 1 (1997) 17-31
41. Rush H., Hobday M., Bessant J., Arnold E., and Murray R. Technology Institutes: Strategies for Best Practice (1999), Routledge, London
42. Rush H., Bessant J., and Lees S. Assessing the effectiveness of technology policy-a long term view. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management 16 3 (2004) 327-342
43. SECT. Ciência e Tecnologia 1993/1994, Secretaria de Estado da Ciência e Tecnologia (1995), Ministério do Planeamento e da Administração do Território, Lisboa
44. Segal, Quince & Wicksteed, 1994. Evaluating, auditing and strategic development of research and technology organisations. In: Proceedings of the Workshop held in Luxembourg, October 12-13, EIMS Project No. 93/79. The Innovation Programme, EC DG XIII.
45. Selada, C., 1996. As Infraestruturas Tecnológicas do Sistema de Inovação em Portugal. Unpublished Master Thesis, ISEG, Lisboa.
46. Smits R., and Kulhman S. The rise of systemic instruments in innovation policy. International Journal of Foresight and Innovation Policy 1 1/2 (2004)
47. Teubal M. Policies for promoting enterprise restructuring in national systems of innovation: triggering cumulative learning and generating systems effects. OECD STI Review 22 (1998) 137-170
48. Vernon, R., 1988. Key factors in the application of industrial technology in developing countries. EDI Working Paper. The Economic Development Institute of the World Bank, Washington, June 1988.