to the humanities. It requires the adaptation of knowledge to local conditions and the improvement of these conditions in the economy as a whole. It is through lack of a “learning culture” that innovation capacities are limited and the institutional framework is not well equipped to promote the necessary learning. In other words, valuing learning in all its forms is key to understanding how firms learn.
6.4. Capacities, innovation system and competency building
While innovative capacity has proved the most common expression in the jargon of current authors in the field of innovation economics, the term “skills construction” has appeared in parallel in the economic literature to take advantage of the diversity of forms of learning, and also their uses for productive purposes. Thus the expression “System of Innovation and Competence Construction” (S.I.C.C.) was first presented by the Globelics group in 2002 at an international conference on innovation systems at the University of Aalborg. Lundvall (2013) recently recalled its importance in developing economies by highlighting the importance of formal training, learning by interacting apprenticeships and also of informal activities, influenced by the use of information technologies and communication.
In addition, the geographic setting in which capacity is developed is important. As the concept of the “national innovation system” reminds us, capacities are built and identified at the national level, but are not closed to and from outside. The participation of innovative foreign firms, the links between external innovation networks and the effectiveness of innovation systems in adapting to changes in the global environment are the main measures of the opening up of these national capacities. This openness is also linked to the acquisition of foreign knowledge, to the mobility of human capital or to global value chains (Chaminade et al. 2018). As for the presence of foreign innovators, they contribute to reinforcing the heterogeneity of capacities while playing different roles in the host country’s innovation. As a result, innovation capacities maintain increasingly complex collaborative links across national boundaries. They are more adaptive and scalable. Like “open” or “globalized” innovation systems (Binz and Truffer 2017), some research points to the role of multinational firms, their activities and their means, which enable SMEs to exchange knowledge and technology through partnerships, and to then absorb and strengthen innovation capacities (Watkins et al. 2015). Other studies (Fu et al. 2011) characterize the learning processes in which entire local firms and industries connect to global value chains led by multinationals. These local firms can not only learn about globalized market needs, standards or practices, but also about new technological and organizational skills.
Finally, it remains important to position the capacity for innovation in a perspective of economic development, beyond purely quantitative growth objectives or benchmarks related to Science and Technology. Inclusive innovation shows how the development of technologies, coupled with social policies aimed at reducing inequalities, are important levers. Inclusion can be “passive” or “active” depending on the degree to which individuals and communities can play an “active” role in economic development. The capacity for innovation is therefore oriented towards inclusive innovation, to the extent that formal or informal learning processes are allocated qualitative functions around well-being, improving quality of life or reducing poverty. This may be the case when looking at the role of universities in the systemic dynamics of innovation. In some transition and developing countries, the demand for highly qualified personnel is low. This low demand for graduates reflects cultural and social barriers that restrict their hiring. The low demand for knowledge can create stagnation in terms of technical and organizational change. This leads to an unoptimistic logic in which capacities will not have influenced the dynamics of innovation and economic development, which are essential for building an innovation system and making it sustainable in the long term.
6.5. Conclusion
In conclusion, we have understood that capacities are based on learning mechanisms, resulting from the connectivity between those who benefit from new ideas and seek to expand their possible applications, and those who use them and have continually evolving needs. The National Innovation Capacity, through the learning processes it initiates and sustains, plays a major role in the issue of systemic innovation. Not only does its development increase the growth potential of States through the processes of technological absorption and diffusion that it generates, but above all it gives priority to the local knowledge of communities through issues of poverty or inequalities that it can now raise.
6.6. References
Binz, C. and Truffer, B. (2017). Global innovation systems – A conceptual framework for innovation dynamics in transnational contexts. Research Policy, 46, 1284–1298.
Casadella, V. and Uzunidis, D. (2018). Les capacités d’innovation comme préalable à la formation d’un système national d’innovation. Technologie et innovation, 7(2), 1–15.
Casadella, V., Uzunidis, D., Liu, Z. (2015). Innovation Capabilities and Economic Development in Open Economies. ISTE Ltd, London, and John Wiley & Sons, New York.
Chaminade, C., Lundvall, B.A., Haneef, S. (2018). Advanced Introduction to National Innovation Systems. Edward Elgar Publishing, Cheltenham.
Fu, X., Pietrobelli, C., Soete, L. (2011). The role of foreign technology and indigenous innovation in the emerging economies: Technological change and catching-up. World Development, 39(7), 1204–1212.
Gregersen, B. and Johnson, B. (1997). Learning economies, innovation systems and European integration. Regional Studies, 31(5), 479–490.
Johnson, B.H., Lundvall, B-Å., Edquist, C. (2003). Economic development and the national system of innovation approach. The First International Globelics Conference: Innovation Systems and Development Strategies for the Third Millenium, Rio de Janeiro, November 2–6.
Lundvall, B.Å. and Borras, S. (1999). The Globalizing Learning Economy: Implications for Innovation Policy. European Commission, Brussels.
Lundvall, B.Å. and Johnson, B. (1994). The learning economy. Journal of Industry Studies, 1(2), 23–43.
Watkins, A., Papaioannou, T., Mugwawa, J., Kale, D. (2015). National innovation systems and the intermediary role of industry associations in building institutional capacities for innovation in developing countries: A critical review of the literature. Research Policy, 1407–1418.
Chapter written by Vanessa CASADELLA.
Конец ознакомительного фрагмента.
Текст предоставлен ООО «ЛитРес».
Прочитайте эту книгу целиком, купив полную легальную версию на ЛитРес.
Безопасно оплатить книгу можно банковской картой Visa, MasterCard, Maestro, со счета мобильного телефона, с платежного терминала, в салоне МТС или Связной, через PayPal, WebMoney, Яндекс.Деньги, QIWI Кошелек, бонусными картами или другим удобным Вам способом.
