Publication:
Comparative Analysis for Science, Technology and Innovation Policy; Lessons Learned from Some Selected Countries (Brazil, India, China, South Korea and South Africa) for Other LdCs Like Iran

Simple item page
dc.contributor.authorSalami, Reza
dc.contributor.authorSoltanzadeh, Javad
dc.date.accessioned2016-05-17T03:40:56Z
dc.date.available2016-05-17T03:40:56Z
dc.date.created2012-03-13
dc.date.embargoEndinfo:eu-repo/date/embargoEnd/2024-01-31es_CO
dc.description"Having recognized the importance of designing Science, Technology and Innovation policies (STIP), many Less Developed Countries (LDCs) such as Iran have nowadays attempt to reshape their STI policies. The policy makers of LDCs like Iran can adopt and design suitable strategies learning from the successful experiences of prosperous nations. This paper performs a comparative analysis of STI policies of some successful countries in managing their technological change. This is mostly due to the fact that the other LDCs can draw valuable lessons from these success stories which in turn can also contribute to success in their own short and long term development. Firstly, the empirical experiences of some successful nations namely (Brazil, India, China, South Africa and South Korea) will be studied. The empirical experience in STI policymaking will be surveyed. The most critical success factors contributed mostly to their management of STI policies will also be compared. Finally, a general framework of STI policymaking drawing from the experiences of these countries will be proposed for other LDCs like Iran."es_CO
dc.description.sponsorshipJournal of Technology Management & Innovationes_CO
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdfes_CO
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/11146/514
dc.language.isoenges_CO
dc.publisher.editorJournal of Technology Management & Innovation; 2012, Volume 7, Issue 1es_CO
dc.rights.accesRightsinfo:eu-repo/semantic/openAccesses_CO
dc.source.bibliographicCitationAMMAN, E., & Baer, W. (2002). The Development of Brazil’sTechnology Capabilities in the post war period. Latin American Business Review , 3 (1), 1-29.es_CO
dc.source.bibliographicCitationBARNES, J., Bessant, J., Dunne, N., & Mor, M. (2001). Developing manufacturing competitiveness within South African industry: the role of middle management. Technovation , 21 (5), 293-309.es_CO
dc.source.bibliographicCitationBARTzOKAS, A. (2008). Monitoring and analysis of policies and public financing instruments conducive to higher levels of R&D investments The “POLICY MIX” Project Country Review Korea. Maastricht, The Netherlands: United Nations University.es_CO
dc.source.bibliographicCitationBRANSCOMB, L. (1993). U.S. SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY POLICY: ISSUES FOR THE 1990s. Cambridge: Harvard University.es_CO
dc.source.bibliographicCitationCHAKRABORTY, C., & Nunnenkamp, P. (2008). Economic Reforms, FDI, and Economic Growth in India: A Sector Level Analysis. World development , 36 (7), 1192-1212.es_CO
dc.source.bibliographicCitationCHOW, G. (2002). China’s Economic Transformation . Oxford : Blackwell Publishing, 2002.es_CO
dc.source.bibliographicCitationCHUNG, S. (2003). Innovation in Korea. In L. V. Shavinina, The International Handbook on Innovation (pp. 890- 903). Oxford: Pergamones_CO
dc.source.bibliographicCitationDAYASINDHU, N., & Chandrashekar, S. (2005). Indian remote sensing program: A national system of innovation. Technological Forecasting and Social Change , 72 (3), 287-299es_CO
dc.source.bibliographicCitationFAGERBERG, J., Srholec, M., & Knell, M. (2007). The Competitiveness of Nations: Why Some Countries Prosper While Others Fall Behind. World Dvelopment , 35 (10), 1595–1620.es_CO
dc.source.bibliographicCitationFAN, P., & Watanabe, C. (2006). Promoting industrial development through technology policy: Lessons from Japan and China. Technology in Society , 28 (3), 303-320es_CO
dc.source.bibliographicCitationGORE, C. (2000). The Rise and Fall of the Washington Consensus as a Paradigm for Developing Countries. World Development , 28 (5), 789-804.es_CO
dc.source.bibliographicCitationHAK EUN, J., Lee, K., & Wu, G. (2006). Explaining the “University-run enterprises” in China: A theoretical framework for university–industry relationship in developing countries and its application to China. Research Policy , 1329–1346.es_CO
dc.source.bibliographicCitationHIPKIN, I., & Bennett, D. (2003). Managerial perceptions of factors influencing technology management in South Africa. Technovation , 23 (9), 719-735.es_CO
dc.source.bibliographicCitationKIM, L., & Dahlman, C. J. (1992). Technology policy for industrialization: An integrative framework and Korea’s experience. Research Policy , 21 (5), 437-452.es_CO
dc.source.bibliographicCitationKRISHNAN, R. T. (2003). The Evolution of a Developing Country Innovation System During Economic Liberalization:The Case of India. The First Globelics Conferencees_CO
dc.source.bibliographicCitationLALL, S. (1995). The Creation Of Comaprative Advantage: Role of Industrial Policy. In I. Haque, Trade, Technology and industrial Competitivness (pp. 103-134). New York: World Bankes_CO
dc.source.bibliographicCitationLUNDVALL,B.-Å., & Borrás, S. (2004). Science, Technology and Innovation Policy. In D. C. J. Fagerberg, The Oxford Hand Book Of Innovation (pp. 599-631). London: Oxford Press.es_CO
dc.source.bibliographicCitationMETCALFE, J. (2005). science, technology and innovation policy. In G. Wignaraja, Competitiveness strategy in developing countries (pp. 95-130). New York: Routledge pub.LTDes_CO
dc.source.bibliographicCitationMICHELSON, E. S. (2008). Globalization at the nano frontier: The future of nanotechnology policy in the United States, China, and India. Technology in Societ , 30 (3-4), 405-410.es_CO
dc.source.bibliographicCitationNELSON, R., & Rosenborg, N. (1993). Technologyical in novation and National Systems. In R. Nelson, National Innovation Systems. A Comparative Analysis (pp. 3-22). New York/Oxford: Oxford University Press.es_CO
dc.source.bibliographicCitationOECD. (2005). Innovation Policy And Performance A Cross-Country Comparison. Paris: Oecd.es_CO
dc.source.bibliographicCitationOECD. (2006). OECD Science, Technology and Industy Outlook. Paris: Organization For Economic Co-Opera tion And Development.es_CO
dc.source.bibliographicCitationPARKA, H. W., & Leydesdorff, L. (2010). Longitudinal trends in networks of university–industry–government relations in South Korea: The role of programmatic in centives. ScienceDirect , 39, 640–649.es_CO
dc.source.bibliographicCitationPEREIRA, Jose Matias et al.. (2006). Brazilian New Patterns of an Industrial, Technological and Foreign Trade Policy, Journal of Technology Management & Innovation,vol.1 issue 3.17-28.es_CO
dc.source.bibliographicCitationRATCHFORD, J. T., & Blanpied, W. A. (2008). Paths to the future for science and technology in China, India and the United States. Technology in Society , 30 (3-4), 211-233.es_CO
dc.source.bibliographicCitationRONGPING, M., & Wan, Q. (2008). The development of science and technology in China: A comparison with India and the United States. Technology in Society , 30 (3-4).es_CO
dc.source.bibliographicCitationSALAMI, R. (2008). Reshaping and Reforming National Innovation System toward Knowledge Based economic. SLPTMD Conference.es_CO
dc.source.bibliographicCitationSONG, J. (2008). Awakening: Evolution of China’s science and technology policies. Technology in Society , 30 (3-4), 235-241.es_CO
dc.source.bibliographicCitationTHROPE, C. (2007). Political Theory in Science and Technology Studies. In E. J. Hackett, O. Amsterdamska, M. Lynch, & J. Wajcman, The Handbook Of Science & Technology Studies. London, England: MIT Press.es_CO
dc.source.bibliographicCitationUNCTAD. (2005). Science, Technology and Innovation Policy Review The Islamic Republic of Iran. Geneva: United Nations Conference on Trade and Developmentes_CO
dc.source.bibliographicCitationVERSPAGEN. (1991). A new empirical approach to catching up or falling behind. 2 (2).es_CO
dc.source.bibliographicCitationVIOTTI, E. B. (2002). National Learning Systems: A new approach on technological change in late industrializing economies and evidences from the cases of Brazil and South Korea. Technological Forecasting and Social Change , 653-680.es_CO
dc.source.bibliographicCitationWALCOTT, S. M. (2002). Chinese Industrial and Science Parks: Bridging the Gap. The Professional Geographer , 54 (3), 349-364.es_CO
dc.source.bibliographicCitationWEF. (2010). World Competitiveness Report. Geneva: World Economic Forum.es_CO
dc.source.bibliographicCitationWORLD BANK. (2009). Annual Report 2009. New York: World Bankes_CO
dc.source.bibliographicCitationWORLD BANK. (2010). Brazil Data. Retrieved from world bank: www.worldbank.orges_CO
dc.source.bibliographicCitationXIWEI, Z., & Xiangdong, Y. (2007). Science and technology policy reform and its impact on China ’ s national innovation system. Technology in Society , 317-325.es_CO
dc.subjectCiencia, Tecnología e Innovaciónes_CO
dc.subjectPolítica Científica y Tecnológicaes_CO
dc.subjectAnálisis comparativoes_CO
dc.subjectIránes_CO
dc.subject.otherScience & Technologyes_CO
dc.subject.otherScience and statees_CO
dc.subject.otherTechnology and innovation policyes_CO
dc.subject.otherComparative analysises_CO
dc.titleComparative Analysis for Science, Technology and Innovation Policy; Lessons Learned from Some Selected Countries (Brazil, India, China, South Korea and South Africa) for Other LdCs Like Iranes_CO
dc.typeArtículo de revistaes_CO
dc.type.driverinfo:eu-repo/semantics/articlees_CO
dc.type.hasversioninfo:eu-repo/repo/semantics/publishedVersiones_CO
dspace.entity.typePublication

Files

Original bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Thumbnail Image
Name:
1131-Comparative analysis Lessons from selected countries.pdf
Size:
682.78 KB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Description:
Download
License bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
No Thumbnail Available
Name:
license.txt
Size:
1.87 KB
Format:
Item-specific license agreed upon to submission
Description:
Download

Collections

Políticas de Ciencia, Tecnología e Innovación