Artigo - Open Access.

Idioma principal

A complexidade do processo de inovação e o papel dos fornecedores de conhecimento especializado: análise de microdados da indústria argentina

Almeida, Mario Augusto Gouvêa de; Bittencourt, Pablo Felipe; Catela, Eva Yamila da Silva;

Artigo:

O objetivo destetrabalho é investigar o processo de escolha da firma entre fontes externas de informação,especificamente, entre universidades e consultoresprivados, utilizando para isto os microdados da ENDEI (Argentina). Osresultados encontrados nos permitem afirmar que as universidades e instituiçõespúblicas de C&T têm funções distintas dos consultores privados. Por umlado, a existência de motivos complexos, aqui chamados de “hard”, aumenta a probabilidade da ocorrência de vínculos entre aindústria e as universidades. Por outro lado, os motivos considerados menoscomplexos relacionados às inovações incrementais, “soft”, aumentam a probabilidade da ocorrência de vínculo comconsultores. Estes resultados estão em linha com grande parte da literaturarevistada e parece estar em sintonia com o contexto histórico-institucional doSNI da Argentina.

Artigo:

Palavras-chave: inovação aberta, universidades, consultores, microdados, indústria Argentina,

Palavras-chave: ,

DOI: 10.5151/enei2018-29

Referências bibliográficas
  • [1] Aguiar, D; Aristimuño, F., Magrini, N., 2015. El rol del Banco Interamericano de Desarrollo (BID) en la re-configuración de las instituciones y políticas de fomento a la ciencia, la tecnología y la innovación de la Argentina (1993-1999). Revista Iberoamericana de Ciencia, Tecnología y Sociedad, v. 10, n. 9, p. 11-40. Albuquerque, E. M., 1999. National Systems of Innovation and non OCDE countries: notes about a rudimentary and tentative typology. Brazil Journal of Political Economy, vol. 19, n.4 (76) October-December. Albuquerque, E., Suzigan, W., Kruss, G, Lee, K., 2015. Developing National Systems of Innovation: university–industry interactions in the Global South: Edward Elgar Publishing. Alvarez, I., Marin, R., Fonfría., A., 2009. The role of networking in the competitiveness of firms. Technological Forecasting & Social Change 76, 401-42 Belderbos, R., Carree, M., Diederen, B., Lokshin, B., Veugelers R., 2004. Heterogeneity in R&D co-operation strategies. International Journal of Industrial Organization 22, 1237–63 Bittencourt, P. F. e Cario, S., 2017. O Conceito de Sistema Nacional de Inovação: das raízes históricas à análise global contemporânea XXI ENCONTRO NACIONAL DE ECONOMIA POLÍTICA – A Economia Política da Recessão, São Bernardo do Campo: SP, 2016. Bittencourt, P. F., Signor, D., da Silva Catela, E. Y, Rapini, M.S., 2018. Mais do que relação universidade empresa: uma análise das fontes de conhecimento especializado para inovação na Argentina, a partir de microdados. Revista de Economia Contemporânea Biedenbach, T., Marell, A., Vanyushyn, V., 2018. ‘Industry-university collaboration and absorptive capacity: an empirical study in a Swedish context’, Int. J. Technology Management 76 (1/2), 81–103. Blalock, G., Gertler, P. J., 2004. Learning from exporting revisited in a less developed setting. Journal of Development Economics 75 (2), 397-416. Brundenius, C., Lundvall, B. e Sutz, J., 2009. The role of universities in innovation systems in developing countries: developmental university systems - empirical, analytical and normative perspectives. Handbook on Innovation Systems and developing Countries: Building Domestic Capabilities in a Global Setting. Edward Elgar Publishing. CEPAL, 2002, “Globalización y desarrollo”, Santiago de Chile. CEPAL-OCDE, 2011, “Perspectivas Económicas para América Latina 2012: transformación del Estado. para el desarrollo’’, Santiago de Chile. Cenamor, J., Parida, V., Oghazi, P., Pesämaa, O., Wincent, J., 2017 (in press). Addressing dual embeddedness: The roles of absorptive capacity and appropriability mechanisms in subsidiary performance. Industrial Marketing Management. Chaminade, C., Lundvall, B., Vang, Jan., Joseph., KJ., 2009. Designing innovation policies for development: towards a systemic experimentation-based approach. Handbook on Innovation Systems and developing Countries: Building Domestic Capabilities in a Global Setting. Edward Elgar Publishing. Chesbrough, H. W., 2003. Open Innovation: The New Imperative for Creating and Profiting from Technology[M]. Boston: Harvard Business School Press. Cimoli, M., Dosi, G., Nelson, R., Stiglitz, J., 2007. Instituições e políticas moldando o desenvolvimento industrial: uma nota introdutória. Revista brasileira de inovação, v. 6, n. 1, p. 55-85, 2007. Clausen, T. H., 2013. External knowledge sourcing from innovation cooperation and the role of absorptive capacity: empirical evidence from Norway and Sweden. Technology Analysis and Strategic Management 25 (1), 57-70. Cohen, W., Levinthal, D., 1989. Innovation and learning—the two faces of R&D. Economic Journal 99 (397), 569–596. Cohen, W. M.; Levinthal, D. A., 1990. Absorptive capacity: a new perspective on learning and innovation. Administrative Science Quarterly, 35(1), 128–152. Dosi, G., e Nelson, R.R., 1994. An introduction to evolutionary theories in economics. Journal of evolutionary economics 4.3, 153-172. Ebers, M., Maurer, I., 2014. Connections count: how relational embeddedness and relational empowerment foster absorptive capacity. Res. Policy 43, 318 –332. Escribano, A., Fosfuri, A., Tribób J., 2009. Managing external knowledge flows: The moderating role of absorptive capacity. Research Policy 38 (2009) 96–105. Fernandes, A. M., Isgut, A. E., 2015. Learning-by-exporting effects: are they for real? Emerging Markets Finance and Trade 51 (1), 65-89. Freeman, C., 1982. The Economics of Industrial Innovation, London: F. Pinter. Gonçalves, E., Lemos, M.B., e Negri, J. Condicionantes de La innovación tecnológica en Argentina y Brasil. Revista de La Cepal, abril, 2008, 75-99. Greene, W. H., Hensher, D. A., 2010. Modeling ordered choices: a primer. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press. Guinet, J., Backer, K., 2008. The internationalization of business R&D: evidence, impact and implications. Organization for Economic, OECD. Hertog Den P., 2000. Knowledge-intensive business services as co-producers of innovation. International Journal of Innovation Management 4 (4), 491-528. Hsieh, W.L., Ganotakis, P., Kafouros, M., e Wang, C., 2017. Foreign and Domestic Collaboration, Product Innovation Novelty, and Firm Growth. Journal of Product Innovation Management. DOI: 10.1111/jpim.12435. Ince, H., Imamoglu, S. Z., Turkcana, H.,2016. The effect of technological innovation capabilities and absorptive capacity on firm innovativeness: a conceptual framework. Social and Behavioral Sciences 235, 764-770. Jensen, M.B., Johnson, B., Lorenz, E., Lundvall, B.Å., 2007. Forms of knowledge and modes of innovation. Res. Policy 36 (5), 680 – 693. Kafouros, M. I., Forsans, N., 2012. The role of open innovation in emerging economies: Do companies profit from the scientific knowledge of others? Journal of World Business 47, 362–370. Kautonen, T. 2008. Understanding the older entrepreneur: Comparing third age and prime age entrepreneurs in Finland, International Journal of Business Science and Applied Management, 3 (3), 3-13. Klevorick, A., Levin, R., Nelson, R., Winter, S., 1995. On the sources and significance of interindustry differences in technological opportunities. Research Policy 24 (2), 185-205. Laursen, K., Salter, A., 2004. Searching high and low: what types of firms use universities as a source of innovation? Research policy 33 (8), 1201-1215. Laursen, K., Salter, A. J., 2013. The paradox of openness: appropriability, external search and collaboration. Research Policy 43 (5), 867-878. Leiponen, A. (2001). Knowledge services in the innovation system. Helsinki: ETLA, Elinkeinoelämän Tutkimuslaitos, The Research Institute of the Finnish Economy and Sitra, The Finnish National Fund for Research and Development, 2001, 120 s. (ETLA B, ISSN 0356-7443; No. 185). ISBN 951-628-353-5 (Sitra ISSN 0785-8388, No. 244). Lundvall, B. Å. (Ed.), 1992. National Systems of Innovation: Towards the Theory of Innovation and Interactive Learning. London: Pinter Publishers. Lundvall, B. Å., Johnson, B., Andersen, E. S., & Dalum, B. (2002). National systems of production, innovation and competence building. Research policy, 31(2), 213-23 Malerba e Orsenigo, Technological Regimes and Sectorial Patterns of Innovative Activities; Oxford Journal, vol. 6, N° 1, 83-117 (1997). Mangematin, V., Nesta, L., 1999. What kind of knowledge can a firm absorb? International Journal of Technology Management 18(3–4), 149–172. Mention, A. L., 201 Co-operation and co-opetition as open innovation practices in the service sector: Which influence on innovation novelty? Technovation 31 (1), 44–53. MINCyT, 2013. “Argentina Innovadora 2020. Plan Nacional de Ciencia, Tecnología e Innovación. Lineamientos Estratégicos 2012-2015”, [en línea] http://www.mincyt.gob.ar/adjuntos/archivos/000/022/0000022576.pdf. Moldovan, P., Gordon, A., Exequiel, D.M., 201 Estructura Científica y Perfil Tecnoproductiva de la Argentina. Investigación Científica y Innovación Teconológica en Argentina – Impacto de los Fondos de la Agencia Nacional de Promoción Científica y Tecnológica. Universidade Nacional de Quilmes Editorial. Mondal S., Pant M., 2018. Firm Capabilities and Productivity Spillovers from FDI: Evidence from Indian Manufacturing Firms. In: Siddharthan N., Narayanan K. (eds) Globalisation of Technology. India Studies in Business and Economics. Singapore: Springer. Muller, E., e Zenker, A. (2001). Business services as actors of knowledge transformation: the role of KIBS in regional and national innovation systems. Research policy, 30(9), 1501-1516. Narula R., Pineli A., 2017. Multinational Enterprises and Economic Development in Host Countries: What We Know and What We Don’t Know. In: Giorgioni G. (eds) Development Finance. Palgrave Studies in Impact Finance. London: Palgrave Macmillan. Nelson, R. R., 1993. National Innovation Systems: The Comparative Analysis[M]. New York: Oxford University Press. Qiu, S., Liu, X., Gao, T., 2017. Do emerging countries prefer local knowledge or distant knowledge? Spillover effect of university collaborations on local firms. Research Policy 46 (Issue 7), 1299-131 Rivas et al., 2014 Reformas a la institucionalidad de apoyo a la innovación en América Latina: antecedentes y lecciones de estudios de caso. Nuevas instituciones para la innovación: Prácticas y experiencias en América Latina. Cepal. Smedlund, A., e Toivonen, M. (2007). The role of KIBS in the IC development of regional clusters. Journal of intellectual capital, 8(1), 159-170. Tether, B. S., Tajar, A., 2008. Beyond industry–university links: Sourcing knowledge for innovation from consultants, private research organizations and the public science-base. Research Policy 37 (6), 1079-1095. Un, C. A., and K. Asakawa. 2015. Types of R&D collaborations and process innovation: The benefit of collaborating upstream in the knowledge chain. Journal of Product Innovation Management 32 (1), 138–53. UNCTAD/ITE/IIA. Globalization of R&D and developing countries - Part IV. United Nations, New York/Geneva, Mimeo, 2006. Williamson J., 1989. “What Washington Means by Policy Reform", Institute for International Economics, Washington. Wirsich, A., A. Kock, C. Strumann, and C. Schultz. 2016. Effects of university–industry collaboration on technological newness of firms. Journal of Product Innovation Management 33 (issue 6), 708-725.
Como citar:

Almeida, Mario Augusto Gouvêa de; Bittencourt, Pablo Felipe; Catela, Eva Yamila da Silva; "A complexidade do processo de inovação e o papel dos fornecedores de conhecimento especializado: análise de microdados da indústria argentina", p. 511-525 . In: . São Paulo: Blucher, 2018.
ISSN 2357-7592, DOI 10.5151/enei2018-29

últimos 30 dias | último ano | desde a publicação


downloads


visualizações


indexações