Survey
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
ΤΑΣΕΙΣ ΚΑΙ ΠΡΟΟΠΤΙΚΕΣ ΣΤΗΝ ΕΠΟΧΗ ΤΗΣ ΠΑΓΚΟΣΜΙΟΠΟΙΗΣΗΣ Νίκος Βονόρτας Center for International Science and Technology Policy & Department of Economics The George Washington University Συνέδριο ΤΕΕ «Ελληνική Βιομηχανία: Προς την Οικονομία της Γνώσης» Αθήνα, 3-5 Ιουλίου 2006 Globalization Globalization can be understood as a process of increasing interdependence of national/regional economies and of the productive and other organizations based in them. In the economic realm, globalization brings more intense and widespread competition, consequently faster rates of change, and radical rethinking of company strategy and public policy. Buzzwords currently directly linked to the global economy: • Knowledge-based economy • Innovation • Entrepreneurship • International division of labour (investment, outsourcing) CENTER FOR INTERNATIONAL SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY POLICY The George Washington University Hellas: At the Edge of Europe Population: EU25 – 456 Million Greece – 11 Million USA – 297 Million Penn. – 12.3 Million Mass. – 6.4 Million CENTER FOR INTERNATIONAL SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY POLICY The George Washington University Globalization 1870-1914 1945-1970 1980-2005 Is the World flat? CENTER FOR INTERNATIONAL SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY POLICY The George Washington University Global Growth Economically and Technologically CENTER FOR INTERNATIONAL SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY POLICY The George Washington University Global Growth 1990-2005 12 11 Average Annual GDP Growth, in Percent World USA EU Japan Asia China India CIS Latin America 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 1990-2000 -1 -2 -3 -4 -5 -6 2001-2005 Africa A ’Spiky’ World In Population, Welfare, Production and Innovation How Do Spikes Emerge? How Do We Generate Spikes? Richard Florida, The Atlantic Monthly Oct 2005 Globalization: A Hellenic Perspective • Globalization decreases importance of borders – For Goods and Services – Business Logic – For Technology and Competence – Innovation Logic • National Borders Remain Important for Welfare – Most people cannot and will not emmigrate to find jobs – Country borders important – Political Logics • Globalization increases Job Competition – ’Offshoring’ of Manufacturing Jobs & Increasingly Service Jobs • Markets and World Growth are Increasing – Business and Country Opportunities – Business and Country Challenges – Competitiveness! • Fear for Staying Out of the loop – In modern times, the country has not been a hotbed of R&D and Innovation – Lurking fear that it is not catching up and that R&D and Innovation Activities Concentrate Elsewhere – But is the Link of R&D and Innovation the Correct Way to Think about the New Era? CENTER FOR INTERNATIONAL SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY POLICY The George Washington University National Competitiveness: Innovation Imperative • Globalization is: – Generally Good for Business – On Average Good for the World – Generating Winners and Losers • Competitiveness is: – Essential for Firms that Would like to be Winners – Also Essential for Countries that Do not Want to be Marginalized – Increasing Importance of Innovation for Firms and Countries • Innovation Central to Competiveness: – Generates New Business Models and Strategies – Stimulates New National Innovation and Growth Strategies – Changes the European and Member State Policy Agenda CENTER FOR INTERNATIONAL SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY POLICY The George Washington University Knowledge-Based Economy Trade Investment CENTER FOR INTERNATIONAL SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY POLICY The George Washington University The “Old” New Era It has become commonplace to argue that technological advance is the most important source of long term economic growth. Economists and policy analysts have paid increasing attention to high technology activities, associating them with higher value added output and higher incomes. The traditional perception of high technology has been research and development (R&D) intensive manufacturing industries. The importance of technology-based economic activities has been associated with the share of high technology manufacturing industries in the gross domestic product (GDP) of a country. CENTER FOR INTERNATIONAL SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY POLICY The George Washington University The “New” New Era The penetration of “infrastructural” technologies (ICTs, biotech, advanced materials, nano) throughout the economy has, however, dramatically altered the basic meaning of high technology during the past decade. Rather than referring to the output of R&D-intensive industries, high tech now refers to a style of work applicable to just about any business. Several policy and business analysts have gone on to claim that there are no longer high and low tech industries there are high and low tech firms. CENTER FOR INTERNATIONAL SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY POLICY The George Washington University Many now argue that advanced OECD economies have entered an era of knowledge-based development and growth Materials technologies revolution Communications revolution Biotech revolution KnowledgeBased Economy Infotech revolution Globalization international trade finance investment CENTER FOR INTERNATIONAL SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY POLICY The George Washington University Knowledge-Based Economy • The term “knowledge-based economy” reflects an increasing recognition of the role of knowledge in economic growth. “A knowledge-driven economy is one in which the generation and exploitation of knowledge play the predominant part in the creation of wealth”. CENTER FOR INTERNATIONAL SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY POLICY The George Washington University Knowledge-based Economy • Embodied in humans and in technology, knowledge has always been central to economic development. • The role of knowledge, however, as compared to natural resources, physical capital, and low-skilled labor has taken on greater importance. • OECD economies are more dependent on the production, distribution and use of knowledge. They experience faster expansion of output and employment in high-tech industry segments of both manufacturing and services. However, the picture varies a lot across countries. CENTER FOR INTERNATIONAL SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY POLICY The George Washington University Key Sectors in Labour Productivity Growth Knowledge-intensive Industries Patterns of Economic Growth • OECD economies are increasingly based on knowledge. They also are increasingly integrated into the world economy, through international flows of goods and services, investment, people and ideas. • Over the past decade, the high-technology share of OECD manufacturing production and exports has more than doubled to reach 20-25%. • While still lower, trade in high-tech services among OECD member nations is increasing fast. CENTER FOR INTERNATIONAL SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY POLICY The George Washington University International Trade OECD MNE (Intra-firm) Trade Foreign Direct Investment International Trade Exports by Technological Intensity Manufacturing Trade Balance Service Value Added in Manufacturing Patterns of Investment • The promise of faster expansion of output has been increasingly pulling investment into high-tech goods and services. • ICTs (both hardware and software) have been at the investment forefront. • The importance of investment in R&D, education, and labor training in sustaining and raising living standards has also been rising. CENTER FOR INTERNATIONAL SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY POLICY The George Washington University Investment in Knowledge R&D Internationalizing Manufacturing R&D Stages of Technology Development: What is Internationalized? SMEs Venture Capital Strategy Implications CENTER FOR INTERNATIONAL SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY POLICY The George Washington University Strategy Implications Such developments have profound implications for both policy and strategy. • The ability to create, distribute and exploit knowledge and information seems ever more important and is often regarded the single most important factor underlying economic growth and improvements in the quality of life. • The competitiveness of firms depends crucially on how efficiently they use their intangible assets (skills, creativity, etc.) and their success in accessing external assets by cooperating with other for-profit and nonprofit organizations. CENTER FOR INTERNATIONAL SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY POLICY The George Washington University Strategy Implications • In this environment, innovation has become: - more market-driven; - more rapid and intense; - more closely linked to scientific progress; - more widely spread throughout the economy. • The ways in which organizations interact in an economy have been affected, with networking, cooperation, and the fluid flow of knowledge within and across national borders gaining in importance. CENTER FOR INTERNATIONAL SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY POLICY The George Washington University Strategy Implications • In reaction to (i) increasing costs and risks of innovation and (ii) intensifying international competition, many firms have opted for more focus and specialization. • At the same time, as the range of technologies required for innovation in many industries has expanded and technologies have become more complex, companies can no longer cover all relevant disciplines and the required wide range of scientific and commercial knowledge. • The need for cooperation has thus become greater than ever before. The number of strategic partnerships has exploded the last couple of decades. CENTER FOR INTERNATIONAL SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY POLICY The George Washington University Strategy Implications Moreover, the penetration of ICTs has gradually shifted the locus of high tech production from exclusively manufacturing to a combination of manufacturing and services. Technology is transforming the nature of the products of both sectors. 1) Manufacturing is becoming more like services: • customer service is becoming more important; • products are increasingly being tailored to the needs of individual customers. It is estimated that over three quarters of the value of a typical manufactured product is already contributed by service activities such as design, sales, and advertising. CENTER FOR INTERNATIONAL SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY POLICY The George Washington University Strategy Implications (2) Technology is also changing production and consumption patterns in some of the most valuable and fastest growing service sectors (e.g. business services). The codification of knowledge in such services makes direct contact between producer and consumer unnecessary allowing such services to be held as inventories and be traded internationally (e.g., expert computer systems). The introduction of ICT is making services more capital intensive and more productive. This process will also make services more susceptible to competition and to the economic cycle - like manufacturing goods. CENTER FOR INTERNATIONAL SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY POLICY The George Washington University Strategy Implications The convergence of high tech manufacturing and services has • Exposed the under-appreciated role of the latter as consumers of high technology products. • Unleashed strong innovative forces in service sectors. Service sectors are rapidly increasing their direct participation in the R&D efforts of advanced economies. This is done both independent of and in association with manufacturing. CENTER FOR INTERNATIONAL SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY POLICY The George Washington University An Unmistakable Sign of the Times Firms must thus learn to link changes in their intellectual capital and the worth of their business and balance sheets. This is not really new. A firm’s intellectual capital (intangible assets) - including both the stock of knowledge and the ability to enhance it - has always been a source of competitive advantage. What is new is mounting evidence that for an increasing number of firms in high technology manufacturing and service sectors the intangible component of value far outweighs the value of their tangible assets. CENTER FOR INTERNATIONAL SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY POLICY The George Washington University Policy Implications CENTER FOR INTERNATIONAL SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY POLICY The George Washington University A New Era for Policy • With more opportunities, but also under intense competition, the competitive strategy places a premium on product differentiation. • Knowledge becomes key, but knowledge is of many different kinds and only partly resembles the traditional notion of significant technological advance. • Any remaining thought that government policies should exclusively concentrate on manufacturing because it creates “real” wealth and “proper” jobs is inadequate. Such policies would inappropriately focus government attention to only a part of the supply-side of the market of highCENTER FOR INTERNATIONAL SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY POLICY technology goods. The George Washington University A New Era for Policy Policy should move towards less direct policy instruments to maintain and enhance a nation’s knowledge infrastructure. • Distributed knowledge, skill, and entrepreneurship, together with new forms of partnering between firms, universities and government are important buzzwords. • In the future, the economies that perform the best will not be those whose governments only help particular industries but those that develop and manage their knowledge assets most effectively for innovation. CENTER FOR INTERNATIONAL SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY POLICY The George Washington University A New Era for Policy • Effective policy for competitiveness must, thus, focus on the broader notion of innovation than just technology. Innovation policy, which has traditionally been considered as an extension of R&D policy, is now starting to be seen as a generic policy area in which governments can promote an innovative, flexible adaptation of their economies. CENTER FOR INTERNATIONAL SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY POLICY The George Washington University A New Era for Policy • Innovation policy will, by definition, be more usercentered and demand-based than technology policy. • As such, innovation policy must also be better integrated with: - General economic policies that affect incentives to innovate; - Policies that shape the regulatory and institutional environment in which innovation takes place; and, - Policies providing safety nets for parts of the population that fail to follow the ever increasing pace of change. CENTER FOR INTERNATIONAL SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY POLICY The George Washington University Globalization, Knowledge-based Economy and the Innovation Imperative CENTER FOR INTERNATIONAL SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY POLICY The George Washington University In Conclusion • Exclusive focus on science and technology (R&D) is insufficient. Policy attention must turn on how to stimulate the creative capacity of whole populations, not just a few distinct R&D-intensive organizations. This message was not lost by the High level Panel that undertook the latest 5-Year evaluation of the European Framework Research Programmes.* *Five-Year Assessment of the Community Research Framework Programme 1999-2003, Final Report of the High-Level Panel to Evaluate the European Union’s Framework Programme for RTD, European Commission, DG Research, February 2005. CENTER FOR INTERNATIONAL SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY POLICY The George Washington University In Conclusion The Panel had a surprisingly clear perspective of what needs to be done and how the Research Framework Programme fits in it. What needs to be done was proposed to be much broader than the scope of the Framework Programme. The Panel identified four key challenges for Europe that must be addressed through coordinated actions by both the European Union and the Member States: • Attract and reward the best talent • Create a high-potential environment for business and industrial RTD • Mobilise resources for innovation and sustainable growth • Build trust in science and technology in European society CENTER FOR INTERNATIONAL SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY POLICY The George Washington University In Conclusion RTD is only one of these four challenges. And the FP accounts for only a small portion of the overall European RTD expenditures. Still, its importance in the European RTD landscape is much larger than the resources would indicate, as it plays a central role in forming and polishing those immobile resources mentioned in the introductory section. A disproportionately important piece, for sure, but a small piece nonetheless. According to the Panel, the challenges for European research and innovation policy can only be addressed by a systemic approach. RTD policy should be coordinated with other socio-economic policies that affect the European innovation environment. These include competitiveness, intellectual property protection, competition, state aids, human resources, education, gender, and ethics. Demand-side policies, especially public procurement of RTD and innovative goods and regulation, also have a critical role in promoting innovation and the emergence of lead markets. CENTER FOR INTERNATIONAL SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY POLICY The George Washington University In Conclusion • Similar suggestions arise from several other studies in Europe and elsewhere such as the Aho Report.* * Creating an Innovative Europe, Report of the Independent Expert Group on R&D and Innovation Appointed following the Hampton Court Summit, European Commission, January 2006. CENTER FOR INTERNATIONAL SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY POLICY The George Washington University Core Message Think beyond just RTD Nurture a cutting-edge knowledge-based economy Promote Innovation CENTER FOR INTERNATIONAL SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY POLICY The George Washington University