Heraud(2000), By focusing in Europe as a whole, author is suggesting the policy that should be consider and taken to strengthen the regional technological development. Due to lack behind of technological economics by comparing with North America and Far East, as well as fall in the labor productivity in the region, Research and Technological Development (RTD) had been established. However, challenges of the region is to developed a policy where whole Europe will be able to develop together where territory equity will be achieve in the same time, therefore the gap between nation will be reduced.
Since there are a lot of player that involve in the Regional innovation system (private sector, bank, government and institution), policies created should be considered on how it will related to each other and what is the role of each player should do. Besides providing incentives to a firm to enhance innovation, clustering all the industry together is a better solution, by providing proper support such as public investment in infrastructure of S&T; we could enhance the knowledge creating process, sharing and diffusion among firm to create an innovation culture which leads to competitive advantage.
In designing the most suitable policy, understanding on the process of innovation is required. Vision of innovation had been divided into two categories, linear sequence between input and output and non linear sequence. Linear sequence is based on interaction among all the players in the NIS, such as firms, public institution and research center while non linear based stressed that all the a learning economy should be established to enable knowledge creation where those knowledge will be used in leverage every stages of the business activity.
One of the interesting point in the second section of the article, is about the Knowledge production function that formalized by Z. Griliches (1979), as we know Cobb Douglas production function only include land and capital, I found an article by Shapira, P., Youtie, J., Yogeesvaran, K. and Jaafar, Z. (2005), discussing on knowledge as an input and outputs of innovation, below is the summarize of the Knowledge production function.
1. Knowledge inputs
a. Knowledge stocks (enables)
· Human capabilities, K leadership, technology/infrastructure, K environment
b. Knowledge processes (flow or actions)
· K generation, info gathering, K sharing and K utilization
2. Outputs
a. Innovation
· New/improved product, new/improved process and organization.
b. Economic performance
· Improved productivity, enhanced profits
c. External factors
· Business climate, demand conditions, market and industry structure.
The second section also discussing on the use of Information communication and technologies in eliminating barriers of distance between nations. With the reduction of cost for communications, knowledge/information sharing, transferring and diffusion encourage knowledge creation process between boundaries.
Section three of the journal stressed that public institution playing an important role in supporting innovation. By taking example of French, where their government heavily invested on scientific, educational, technological infrastructure and incentive as a foundation for innovation to take place among the firms. Institutions of Technology Infrastructure (ITI) which are some sort of research organization are available in these countries. It will collaborate with the local firm in order to develop innovation products. However, newly entrance firm might not adapt to the fast pace of technological change. In order to survive in the knowledge economy, KIBS will serve as a consultancy where they will provide technological knowledge, managerial skill (such as how to obtain knowledge workers), ICT and how to protect their innovation through Intellectual property rights.
The last section of the journal discussed on the characteristic of firm’s competence for innovation. Author claimed that statistical testing is un-useable in order to revaluate innovative potential of the regions, Therefore, author suggested that qualitative information where is provided by INSEE and the ministry of industry to be used for revaluation. The result of the revaluation could be summarized and categorized into few categorize, it is noticeable that the characteristic of the firm’s competence for innovation are maximum of competence in R&D management, focus more on organizational dimension and rely strongly on the market information for their innovation. Different sector will have different level of competence to innovate and different scientific density required due to technological and tacit knowledge required. Three type of scientific density also had been explained by the author, high scientific density means huge amount of knowledge workers concentrated in one sector to enable diffusion and creating of new knowledge in R&D activities. Medium scientific density, where firm will be more rely on identify, capture and use the knowledge or idea generated by individual in leverage on their product or process. While Low level of scientific density will use of the market information, feedback by customer and what customer wants in order to value added their products.
Besides scientific density that correlated with innovations, Knowledge intensive business services (KIBS) also playing an important role in encouraging innovation. This is because they might able to supply tacit knowledge which is highly conceptualized in order for scientific activities to be carried out. Therefore, most of the firms now are paying serious attention in acquiring knowledge workers and knowledge management where tacit knowledge of the workers could be store and shared among workers.
As a conclusion, each country has their own different environment, external resources and adaptation capabilities. Some country might outperform compare to other country, therefore, to develop a regional policy that have the aim to achieve regional equity seems quite impossible, imagine that if ASEAN would like to create a regional policy where together we build up an innovative network to compete with developed countries. However, due to different background of the educational level and infrastructure provided in the countries, Could we achieve both objective of regional equity and convergence?
So what is your understanding and doubt on this article? lets share and learn together!
Shapira, P., Youtie, J., Yogeesvaran, K. and Jaafar, Z. (2005), Knowledge economy measurement: methods, results and insights from the Malaysian knoweldge content study. Paper prepared for the Truple Helis 5 conference on New indicatios for the knoweldge economy.
12 comments:
Sorry for accidently deleted my comment. Sai Hong, is there any others way to interpret the list of the Knowledge production function part? Because I did not understand the list of the Knowledge production function, thank you.
Classical production function is where Q=f(K,L) where we only accounted for capital and labor, however, in the new economy, we have been always stressed that knowledge and technology playing important role in the economy. Robert Solow had come out a new model, where Q=f(K,L,A) where technological and knowledge will be contribute to the economic growth, I think what they are trying to said is that they develop a model where output(q) could be proxy by innovation, Economic performance and external factors. Follow by we using knowledge as a input. Example, Q=f[K,L, Knowledge stocks (enables),Knowledge processes (flow or actions)]
Thank you for your explanation because I confuse those "if !supportLists endif"
I think if the government enable to provide equilibrium education level, technology level and infostracture then the individuals' attitude play an important role toward knowledge networking.
From the ideas of the articles, could you form the knowledge network model.
the idea come from my mind is something like this picture
www.freeimagehosting.net/uploads/cacde55868.jpg
anyone would like to share their knowledge network model that come across to your mind after reading the journal?
What is Triple Helix?How Triple Helix could be applied in this context?
Triple helix consist of Government, Private sector and University. government is responsible in making S&T policies, incentive and infrastructure for the university and private sector so they could follow the policies and involve in R&D.
University could link with ITI (research organization), together involve in joint research and understanding what is the problem facing by private sector.
Private firm, will provide feedback on what is the weakness of their product, or what is the problem they are facing. Besides that, pass the external information that they acquire and what they think it could be improved on to University, ITI and KIBS. Together they create new knowledge.
In my research, i found that in europe, The European Commission has launched the Lead Markets Initiative for Europe (LMI) to unlock market potential for innovative goods and services by lifting obstacles hindering innovation in a first batch of six important markets: eHealth, protective textiles, sustainable construction, recycling, bio-based products and renewable energies.
In Innovation policy analysis and learning, there's the PRO INNO Europe, which initiative aims to become the focal point for innovation policy analysis, learning and development in Europe, with the view to learning from the best and contributing to the development of new and better innovation. It combines analysis and benchmarking of national and regional innovation policy performance with support for cooperation of national and regional innovation programmes to facilitate transnational policy learning, and incentives for innovation agencies and other innovation stakeholders to implement joint actions.
And there's also Europe INNOVA, responsible for innovation policy initiative constituting a pan-European platform for innovation professionals to develop, discuss, exchange and test good practices, ideas, tools and policy recommendations leading to a better understanding of the innovation patterns in different industrial sectors.
We can see that in europe, they are well organized and prepared in making Innovation policy framework.
I wonder how about Malaysia...hurm..
what is the different between knowledge stock and knowledge management?
knowledge stock means intangible asset where it contains knowledge, it will not subject to diminishing rate of return like tangible asset.
While knowledge management is a concept on capturing, identify and storing the knowledge to a database, harddisk and etc.
Post a Comment