مفهوم پردازی مرجعیت فناورانه از منظر فرارسی فناورانه؛ شاخص ها، الزامات و راهکارهای سیاستی

نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی

نویسنده

استادیار مدیریت فناوری، دانشگاه تهران (دانشکدگان فارابی)، دانشگاه تهران، قم، ایران

10.22034/rahyaft.2023.11416.1427

چکیده

مرجعیت فناوری سال ها است که به صورت صریح و ضمنی و با بیان های مختلف در قوانین و اسناد بالادستی علم و فناوری کشور مورد اشاره قرار می گیرد. با این حال، تاکنون تلاش نظری خاصی برای مفهوم پردازی و روشن ساختن ابعاد مختلف این مفهوم صورت نگرفته است. در همین راستا، در این پژوهش با بهره برداری از مبانی نظری و پیشینه پژوهش همپایی فناورانه به شناسایی شاخص ها و معیارها، الزامات و راهکارهای سیاستی تحقق مرجعیت فناورانه پرداخته شده است. یافته های این پژوهش نشان می دهد که ثبت اختراعات بین المللی، فروش فناوری و دانش فنی و تعداد شرکت های پیشرو در عرصه های فناوری در سطح بین المللی می توانند معیارها و شاخص های مناسبی برای سنجش تحقق مرجعیت فناورانه باشند. همچنین، توجه به الزامات تحقق مرجعیت فناورانه در عرصه های مختلف بویژه اقتصادی، اجتماعی، فرهنگی، نهادی و سیاسی با تمرکز بر ضرورت حضور در زنجیره های ارزش منطقه ای و جهانی، تقویت زیرساخت های قانونی و حقوقی، بهره گیری از پنجره های فرصت ضروری به نظر می رسند. بعلاوه، تدوین آمیخته سیاستی مناسب مشتمل بر اهداف و ابزارهای سیاستی هم افزا به منظور تحقق مرجعیت فناورانه با تاکید بر سیاست های توسعه سرمایه های انسانی، تامین مالی، بسترسازی اجتماعی، شبکه سازی و توسعه زیست بوم، تقویت تعاملات بین المللی، تحریک سمت تقاضا و تشویق بنگاه های بزرگ به نقش آفرینی پررنگ تر در توسعه فناوری و نوآوری می تواند تاثیرگذار باشد.
کلمات کلیدی: مرجعیت علمی، مرجعیت فناورانه، شاخص های مرجعیت فناورانه، سیاست های مرجعیت فناوری

کلیدواژه‌ها

موضوعات


عنوان مقاله [English]

Conceptualization of technological authority from technological catch-up perspective; Indicators, requirements and policy solutions

نویسنده [English]

  • Mostafa Safdari Ranjbar
Assistant Professor of Management of Technology, University of Tehran (College of Farabi)
چکیده [English]

Technology authority has been mentioned explicitly and implicitly and with different expressions in the laws and science and technology documents of the country for many years. However, so far, no special theoretical effort has been made to conceptualize and clarify the different dimensions of this concept. In this regard, in this research, the identification of indicators and criteria, requirements, and policy solutions for the realization of technological supremacy has been addressed by exploiting the theoretical foundations and background of technological catch-up. In other words, this article tries to shed light on the issue of technological authority by using the theoretical background of technological catch-up and taking advantage of the theoretical developments made in that field to advance the goals of this research. The reason for using the concept and theory of technological catch-up in this research is that reaching technological authority in itself is a kind of catch-up with leaders and leading players in the field of technology, getting close to them, reaching their place, and in some cases leaving them behind. The last case is referred to as the "catch-up cycle" or "transition to industry leadership".
The current research is applied research from the point of view of objective and qualitative research from the perspective of the approach, which was conducted to identify the indicators and criteria of technological authority and the requirements and solutions for its realization. From the point of view of the data collection method, the data of this research was obtained from two sources: First, the focus group with the presence of seven experts in the field of science and technology policy with the title of "Technological authority: from idea to practice". Second, the focus group with the presence of eight experts in the field of science and technology policy and industrial policy with the title of "Technology authority with the approach of economic complexity". Data analysis is also done by thematic analysis method. Thematic analysis is a method to determine, analyze, and express the patterns and themes hidden in the data and has been used by various experts in recent years to analyze policy and management issues.
The findings of this research show that international patent registration, sales of technology and technical know-how, and the number of leading companies in the field of technology at the international level can be suitable criteria and indicators for measuring the realization of technological supremacy. Also, paying attention to the requirements of realizing technological supremacy in various fields, especially economic, social, cultural, institutional, and political, focusing on the necessity of being present in regional and global value chains, strengthening legal infrastructures, and taking advantage of windows of opportunity is necessary. In addition, formulating a suitable policy mix including objective and synergistic policy tools to achieve technological supremacy with an emphasis on human capital development policies, financing, social foundation, networking, and ecosystem development, strengthening international interactions, stimulating the demand side, and encouraging large companies to play a stronger role in the development of technology and innovation can be effective.
As policy implications derived from the findings of this research, some policy recommendations are presented to policymakers, legislators, and activists in the field of governance of science, technology, and innovation:

First, the definition of specific, quantitative, transparent, and measurable indicators and criteria for monitoring the realization of technological authority with an emphasis on international patent registration, sale, and export of technology and technical know-how, the number of leading companies in the field of technology at the international level, the number of technology standards compiled by the country's companies and research institutes and the country's ranking in global indices such as the Global Innovation Index (GII) and the Technology Complexity Index.
Second, paying attention to the requirements and duties of realizing technological authority in various fields, especially economic, social, cultural, institutional, and political, focusing on the necessity of presence in regional and global value chains, international interactions, and cooperation in the field of development and commercialization. of technology, strengthening the legal infrastructure, taking advantage of the windows of opportunity, providing financial resources to support research and technology, paying attention to the necessity of forming and developing technological and innovation ecosystems, suitable and favorable political, social, and cultural context, national and international vision, coherence and integration in the national system of innovation and correct logic in prioritizing and targeting the fields of technology.
Third, developing a suitable policy mix that includes synergistic policy goals and tools to achieve technological authority with an emphasis on education policies, preservation and development of human capital, financing policies and investment in research and technology, policies for improvement of legal infrastructure improvement, selective policies and technology prioritization, policies to promote social capital and increase social participation, networking policies and development of innovation ecosystems, policies to strengthen international interactions, policies to stimulate the demand side and policies to encourage large companies to play a stronger role in the development of technology and innovation.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Scientific Authority
  • Technological
  • Authority
  • Indicators
  • Technological Authority
  • Requirements
  • Technology Authority Policies
Abramovitz, M. (1986). Catching up, forging ahead, and falling behind. The Journal of Economic History, 46 (2), 385-406. DOI: 10.1017/S0022050700046209
Azadi Ahmad Abadi, Gh. (2022). Extraction and prioritization of strategies for achieving scientific leadership in Iran with an interpretive structural modeling approach. Journal of Strategic Studies of Public Policy, 11 (41), 240-65. (Persian)
Azadi Ahmad Abadi, Gh. (In press). Leadership roadmap in science, technology and innovation based on Iran policy. Journal of Popularization of Science. (Persian)
Bell, M., & Pavitt, K. (1993). Technological accumulation and industrial growth: contrasts between developed and developing countries. Industrial and Corporate Change, 2 (2), 157-210.
Ben-David, J. (1970). The rise and decline of France as a scientific center. Minerva, 160-79.
Boyatzis, E. R. (1998). Thematic Analysis and Qualitative Information Transforming. Sage: CA.
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative research in psychology, 3 (2), 77-101. DOI: 10.1191/1478088706qp063oa
Fagerberg, J. and Godinho, M. M. (2005). Innovation and catching-up, The Oxford Handbook of Innovation. New York: Oxford University Press.
Farazkish, M., & Nasri, S. (2022). Analysis of the realization of the quantitative goals of research and technology in the sixth five-year program of economic, social, and cultural development. Strategic Studies of Public Policy, 12 (44), 214-36. (Persian)
Gerschenkron, A. (1962). Economic backwardness in historical perspective: A book of essays. Cambridge: Press of Harvard University Press.
Hamidi, M., Hajari, M., Nasrini, M., Pak Niyat, M. (2021). Content Analysis of upstream documents: Previous rules and development plans (Research, technology and innovation in the 7th development plan: studies, analysis and suggestions). Tehran: National Research Institute for Science Policy Press. (Persian)
Hobday, M. (1994). Export-led technology development in the four dragons: The case of electronics. Development and Change, 25 (2), 333-61.
Iranian Research Institute for Information Science and Technology. (2022). Iran’s ranking in Global Innovation Index 2022. Tehran: Iranian Research Institute for Information Science and Technology. (Persian)
ISC. (2022). The Scientific Rank of Iran in International Level. Tehran: Islamic World Science and Technology Monitoring and Citation Institute. (Persian)
Kamali, Y. (2018). Methodology of Thematic Analysis and its application in public policy studies. Iranian Journal of Public Policy, 4 (2), 189-208. (Persian)
Katrak, H. (1997). Developing countries imports of technology, in house technological capabilities and efforts: An analysis of the Indian experience. Journal of Development Economy, 53 (1), 67-83. DOI: 10.1016/S0304-3878(97)00011-4
Kim, L. (1997). Imitation to innovation: The dynamics of Korea’s technological learning. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.
Latifi, M., Tahmaseby, B. R., Javadi, M., & Mirzaee, H. M. H. (2018). Extracting and prioritizing strategies for achieving scientific authority an Importance-Performance Analysis (IPA).The Scientific Journal of Strategy, 27 (1), 5-26. (Persian)
Lee, K. (2013). Schumpeterian analysis of economic catch-up: Knowledge, path-creation and the middle-income trap. London: Cambridge University Press.
Lee, K. and Ki, J. h. (2017). Rise of latecomers and catch-up cycles in the world steel industry. Research Policy, 46 (2), 365-75. DOI: 10.1016/j.respol.2016.09.010
Top of Form
Lee, K. and Lim, C. (2001). Technological regimes, catching-up and leapfrogging: Findings from the Korean industries. Research Policy, 30 (3), 459-83. DOI: 10.1016/S0048-7333(00)00088-3
Lee, K., & Malerba, F. (2017). Catch-up cycles and changes in industrial leadership: Windows of opportunity and responses of firms and countries in the evolution of sectoral systems. Research Policy, 46 (2), 338-51. DOI: 10.1016/j.respol.2016.09.006
Lin, Y., & Rasiah, R. (2014). Human capital flows in Taiwan’s technological catch-up in integrated circuit manufacturing. Journal of Contemporary Asia, 44 (1), 64-83. DOI: 10.1080/00472336.2013.801167
Malerba, F., Mani, S. and Adams, P. (2017). The rise to market leadership: New leading firms from emerging countries. Broadheath, United Kingdom: Edward Elgar.
Malerba, F., & Nelson, R. (2011). Learning and catching up in different sectoral systems: Evidence from six industries. Industrial and Corporate Change, 20 (6), 1645-75. DOI: 3/icc/dtr062
Mathews, J.A. (2006). Dragon Multinationals: New players in 21st century globalization. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 23, 5-27.
Nelson, R., Mazzoleni, R., Cantwell, J., Juma, C., von Tunzelmann, N., Metcalfe, S., ... & Odagiri, H. (2005). A program of study of the processes involved in technological and economic catch-up. Unpublished paper, Catchup Network.
Odagiri, H., Goto, A., Sunami, A., & Nelson, R. R. (2010). Intellectual Property Rights, Development and Catch up: An International Comparative Study. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Pack, H., & Saggi, K. (1997). Inflows of foreign technology and indigenous technological development. Review of development economics, 1 (1), 81-98.
Park, T., & Ji, I. (2020). Evidence of latecomers’ catch-up in CoPS industries: A systematic review. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 32 (8), 968-83. DOI: 10.1080/09537325.2020.1732339
Roshandel Arbatani, T., Razi, H., & Labafi, S. (2012). Pathological study of the policy making process in the Islamic Republic of Iran Broadcasting (IRIB). Journal of Public Administration, 4 (10), 79-100. (Persian)
Ruhde, E. (2016). E-government for development: A thematic analysis of Zimbabwe’s information and communication technology policy documents. Electronic Journal of Information Systems in Developing Countries, 73 (7), 1-15. DOI: 10.1002/j.1681-4835.2016.tb00532.x
Safdari Ranjbar, M. (2023). Policy programs to support scientific and technological supremacy. Journal of Strategic Studies of Public Policy, 13 (47), 180-203. (Persian)
Safdari Ranjbar, M., Park, T. Y., Ghazinoori, S., & Manteghi, M. (2019). Multi-level drivers of catching up in complex product systems: An Iranian gas turbine producer. Journal of Science and Technology Policy Management, 11 (1), 85-106.
Seyed Javadin, R., Hasangholipour, T., Rahnavard, F., Tab, M. (2012). Conceptualization of scientific authority in high education system. Journal of Research in Educational Systems, 6 (16), 1-27. (Persian)
Teddlie, C., & Tashakkori, A. (2009). Foundations of mixed methods research: Integrating quantitative and qualitative approaches in the Social and Behavioral Sciences. New York: Sage Publications.
WIPO (2022). Global Innovation Index 2022: What is the future of innovation-driven growth? Geneva: World Intellectual Property Organization.
Yazdani, Sh., Haji Ahmadi, M., Hoseini Abardeh, M., & Shahriari, A. (2019). scientific authority (Concepts and Definitions). Tehran: National center for strategic Research in medical education. (Persian).