Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-j824f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-10-30T14:41:28.980Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

10 - National systems of production, innovation, and competence building

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  22 September 2009

Bengt-åke Lundvall
Affiliation:
Professor of Economics in the Department of Business Studies Aalborg Uiversity
Björn Johnson
Affiliation:
Associate Professor and Reader in Economics and connected to the economic studies program Aalborg University, Aalborg Ost, Denmark
Esben S. Andersen
Affiliation:
Associate Professor Department of Business Studies, Aalborg University, Denmark
Bent Dalum
Affiliation:
Associate Professor in Economics Aalborg University
Karen R. Polenske
Affiliation:
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Get access

Summary

Introduction

What follows is a shortened, and slightly revised, version of a paper published in Research Policy (Lundvall et al., 2002). In this introduction, We provide a few brief reflections on the innovation system concept in the light of economic geography. We make no attempt to give full justice to the literature on economic geography that predates the literature on innovation systems, however.

While the idea of a national system of innovation (NSI) attempts to explain and understand innovation in economic terms, the concept may also be seen as a combination of different elements – some of which emanate from economic geography and from the development literature. Perroux (1969) and Brookfield (1975), for instance, are among the common references. The overlap of ideas also has to do with timing. The NSI idea was shaped in the first half of the 1980s, and this was also a period of renewal of Marshallian economic geography related to regional studies that referred to industrial districts and clusters (Scott 2000: 29).

It is therefore not so surprising that currently the most advanced and frequent “users” of the concept of NSIs are to be found among economic geographers rather than among economists. This can be documented, for instance, by using the search machine, Google Scholar. Another factor is that economic geographers, for historical and epistemological reasons, are much less inhibited in their use of heterodox ideas emanating from bordering disciplines.

Type
Chapter
Information
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2007

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Amable, B., Barré, R., and Boyer, R., 1997. Les systèmes d'innovation a l'ère de la globalization, Paris: EconomicaGoogle Scholar
Andersen, E. S., 1992. “Approaching National Innovation Systems,” in Lundvall, B.-Å. (ed.), National Innovation Systems, London: Pinter: 68–92Google Scholar
Andersen, E. S., Brændgaard, A., Johnson, B., and Lundvall, B.-Å., 1979. Industriel udvikling og international konkurrenceevne, Serie om industriel udvikling, 6, Aalborg: Aalborg University PressGoogle Scholar
, Andersen E. S., Dalum, B., and Villumsen, G., 1981a. International Specialisation and the Home Market: An Empirical Analysis, Aalborg: Aalborg University PressGoogle Scholar
1981b. “The Importance of the Home Market for Technological Development and the Export Specialization of Manufacturing Industry,” in Freeman, C. (ed.), Technical Innovation and National Economic Performance, Aalborg: Aalborg University Press: 49–102Google Scholar
Andersen, E. S., Johnson, B., and Lundvall, B.-Å., 1978. Industriel udvikling og industrikrise, Serie om industriel udvikling, 4, Aalborg: Aalborg University PressGoogle Scholar
Andersen, E. S. and B.-Å. Lundvall, 1988. “Small National Innovation Systems Facing Technological Revolutions: An Analytical Framework,” in Freeman, C. and Lundvall, B.-Å. (eds.), Small Countries Facing the Technological Revolution, London: Pinter: 9–37Google Scholar
Archibugi, D. and Lundvall, B.-Å. (eds.), 2001. Europe in the Globalising Learning Economy, Oxford:Oxford University PressGoogle Scholar
Arrow, K. J., 1962, “The Economic Implications of Learning by Doing,” Review of Economic Studies, 29(80): 155–173CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Breschi, S. and F. Malerba, 1997. “Sectoral Innovation Systems,” in Edquist, C. (ed.), Systems of Innovation: Technologies, Institutions, and Organizations, London: Pinter: 130–152Google Scholar
Brookfield, H., 1975. Interdependent Development, London: MethuenGoogle Scholar
Carlsson, B. and S. Jacobsson, 1997. “Diversity Creation and Technological Systems: A Technology Policy Perspective,” in Edquist, C. (ed.), Systems of Innovation: Technologies, Institutions and Organizations, London: Pinter: 266–290Google Scholar
Christensen, J. L. and Lundvall, B.-Å. (eds.), 2004. Product Innovation, Interactive Learning, and Economic Performance, Amsterdam: ElsevierGoogle Scholar
, Coleman J., 1990. Foundations of Social Theory, London: Harvard University PressGoogle Scholar
Cooke, P., 1992. “Regional Innovation Systems: Competitive Regulation in Europe,” Geoforum, 23: 365–382
Dahmén, E., 1970. Entrepreneurial Activity and the Development of Swedish Industry 1919–1939, Homewood, IL: American Economic Association Translation SeriesGoogle Scholar
Dalum, B., Gregersen, M., Schmidt, J., and Villumsen, G., 1981. Økonomiers langsigtede udvikling: en struktur og teknologidiskussion, Aalborg: Aalborg UniversityGoogle Scholar
Dalum, B., Laursen, K., and Villumsen, G., 1998. “Structural Change in Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development Specialisation Patterns: Specialisation and ‘Stickiness’,” International Review of Applied Economics, 12(3): 421–443CrossRefGoogle Scholar
DeBresson, C. (ed.), 1996. Economic Interdependence and Innovative Activity: An Input-Output Analysis, Aldershot: Edward ElgarGoogle Scholar
Dore, R., 1986. Flexible Rigidities: Industrial Policy and Structural Adjustment in the Japanese Economy 1970–1980, London: Athlone PressGoogle Scholar
Dosi, G., Freeman, C., Nelson, R. R., Silverberg, G., and Soete, L. (eds.), 1988. Technological Change and Economic Theory, London: PinterGoogle Scholar
Drejer, I., 1999. “Technological Change and Interindustrial Linkages: Introducing Knowledge Flows in Input-Output Studies,” Aalborg: Aalborg University, PhD thesis
Edquist, C. and B.-Å. Lundvall, 1993. “Comparing the Danish and Swedish Systems of Innovation,” in Nelson, R. R. (ed.), National Innovation Systems: A Comparative Analysis, Oxford: Oxford University Press: 265–298Google Scholar
Foray, D., 2000. The Economics of Knowledge, Cambridge, MA, Massachusetts Institute of Technology PressGoogle Scholar
Freeman, C., 1987. Technology Policy and Economic Performance: Lessons from Japan: London: PinterGoogle Scholar
1995a. “The National Innovation Systems in Historical Perspective,” Cambridge Journal of Economics, 19(1): 5–24
1995b. “History, Co-Evolution, and Economic Growth,” IIASA Working Paper, Laxenburg: 95–76
1997. “Innovation Systems: City-State, National, Continental, and Sub-National,” Paper presented at the Montevideo conference, University of Sussex, Science Policy Research Unit, Mimeo
Freeman, C. and C. Perez, 1988. “Structural Crises of Adjustment, Business Cycles, and Investment Behaviour,” in Dosi, G., Freeman, C., Nelson, R., Silverberg, G., and Soete, L. (eds.), Technical Change and Economic Theory, London, Pinter: 38–67Google Scholar
Fukuyama, F., 1995. Trust: The Social Virtues and the Creation of Prosperity, New York: Simon & SchusterGoogle Scholar
Georgescu-Roegen, N., 1971. The Entropy Law and the Economic Process, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Habermas, J., 1984. The Theory of Communicative Action, I, Boston: Beacon PressGoogle Scholar
Hirschman, A. O., 1958. The Strategy of Economic Development, Clinton, MA: Yale University PressGoogle Scholar
Jensen, M. B., B. Johnson, E. Lorenz, and B.-Å. Lundvall, 2004. “Absorptive Capacity, Forms of Knowledge and Economic Development,” Paper presented at the the Second Globelics Conference in Beijing, October 16–20
Jessop, B., 1999. “The State and the Contradictions of the Knowledge-Driven Economy,” Development Research Working Papers, Department for Development and Planning
Johnson, B., 1988. “An Institutional Approach to the Small Country Problem,” in Freeman, C. and Lundvall, B.-Å. (eds.), Small Countries Facing the Technological Revolution, London: Pinter: 279–298Google Scholar
1992. “Institutional Learning,” in Lundvall, B.-Å. (ed.), National Innovation Systems: Towards a Theory of Innovation and Interactive Learning, London: Pinter: 23–44Google Scholar
1998. “Institutional Learning and Clean Growth,” in Tylecote, A. and Straaten, J. (eds.), Environment, Technology and Economic Growth, Cheltenham: Edward Elgar: 93–111Google Scholar
Kline, S. J. and N. Rosenberg, 1986. “An Overview of Innovation,” in Landau, R. and Rosenberg, N. (eds.), The Positive Sum Game, Washington, DC: National Academy Press: 275–305Google Scholar
Linder, S. B., 1961. An Essay on Trade and Transformation, New York: WileyGoogle Scholar
List, F., 1841. Das Nationale System der Politischen Ökonomie, Basel: Kyklos; trans. and pub. under the title, The National System of Political Economy, London: Longmans, Green & Co. (1841)Google Scholar
Lundvall, B.-Å., 1985. Product Innovation and User–producer Interaction, Aalborg: Aalborg University PressGoogle Scholar
1988. “Innovation as an Interactive Process: From User–Producer Interaction to the National Innovation Systems,” in Dosi, G., Freeman, C., Nelson, R. R., Silverberg, G., and Soete, L. (eds.), Technical Change and Economic Theory, London: Pinter: 349–370Google Scholar
1999a. “National Business Systems and National Innovation Systems,” International Studies of Management and Organization, 29(2): 60–77CrossRef
1999b. “Spatial Division of Labour and Interactive Learning,” Revued'Economie Régionale et Urbaine, 3: 469–488
2001. Innovation, Growth and Social Cohesion: The Danish Model, London: Edward Elgar
2004, “Introduction to ‘Technological Infrastructure and International Competitiveness,’ by Christopher Freeman,” Industrial and Corporate Change, 13(3): 531–539CrossRef
Lundvall, B.-Å. and Borras, S., 1998. The Globalising Learning Economy: Implications for Innovation Policy, Brussels: DG Ⅻ-TSER, European CommissionGoogle Scholar
Lundvall, B.-Å. and Johnson, B., 1994. “The Learning Economy,” Journal of Industry Studies, 1(2): 23–42CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lundvall, B.-Å., Johnson, B., Andersen, E. S., and Dalum, B., 2002. “National Systems of Production, Innovation, and Competence Building,” Research Policy, 31: 213–231CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maskell, P. and Malmberg, A., 1997. “Towards an Explanation of Regional Specialization and Industry Agglomeration,” European Planning Studies, 5(1): 25–41Google Scholar
Nelson, R. R. and Winter, S. G., 1982. An Evolutionary Theory of Economic Change, Cambridge, MA: The Belknap Press of Harvard University PressGoogle Scholar
Nielsen, K. and S. Kvale, 1999. “Mesterlære som aktuel læringsform,” in Nielsen, K. and Kvale, S. (eds.), Mesterlære, Læring som Social Praksis, Copenhagen: Hans Reitzels Forlag: 9–53Google Scholar
Organization for Economic Co-Operation and Development (Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development), 1982. “Technological Infrastructure and International Competitiveness,” Paris: OECD, unpublished paper; see Lundvall (2004)
2000. Knowledge Management in the Learning Economy, Paris: OECD
2001. The Well-Being of Nations: The Role of Human and Social Capital, Paris: Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development
Pavitt, K., 1984. “Sectoral Patterns of Technical Change: Towards a Taxonomy and a Theory,” Research Policy, 13: 343–373CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Perroux, F., 1969, L'Economie du XXe siècle, 3rd edn., Paris: Presses Universitaires de FranceGoogle Scholar
Porter, M., 1990. The Competitive Advantage of Nations, London: MacmillanCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Posner, M. V., 1961. “International Trade and Technical Change,” Oxford Economic Papers, 13(3): 323–341CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rosenberg, N., 1982. Inside the Black Box: Technology and Economics, Cambridge: Cambridge University PressGoogle Scholar
Rothwell, R., 1977. “The Characteristics of Successful Innovators and Technically Progressive Firms,” R&D Management, 7(3): 191–206Google Scholar
Sako, M., 1990. “Buyer–Supplier Relationships and Economic Performance: Evidence from Britain and Japan,” University of London, PhD thesis
Schumpeter, J. A. and Opie, R., 1934. The Theory of Economic Development: An Inquiry into Profits, Capital, Credit, Interest, and the Business Cycle, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University PressGoogle Scholar
Scott, A. J., 2000. “Economic Geography: The Great Half-Century,” in Clark, G. L., Feldman, M. P., and Gertler, M. S. (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Economic Geography, Oxford: Oxford University Press: 18–44Google Scholar
Segura-Bonilla, O., 1999. Sustainable Systems of Innovation: The Forest Sector in Central America, SUDESCA Research Papers, 24, Department of Business Studies, Aalborg University, PhD dissertationGoogle Scholar
Smith, A., 1776/1957. An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations, London: J. M. Dent & SonsGoogle Scholar
Stewart, F., 1977. Technology and Underdevelopment, London: MacmillanCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tomlinson, M., 2001. “A New Role for Business Services in Economic Growth,” in Archibugi, D., and Lundvall, B.-Å. (eds.), Europe in the Globalising Learning Economy, Oxford: Oxford University Press: 97–107Google Scholar
Vernon, R., 1966. “International Investment and International Trade in the Product Cycle,” Quarterly Journal of Economics, 80(1): 190–207CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Whitley, R., 1994. Business Systems in East Asia: Firms, Markets and Societies, London: SageGoogle Scholar
Williamson, D. F., 1975. Markets and Hierarchies: Analysis and Antitrust Implications, London: MacmillanGoogle Scholar
Woolcock, M., 1998. “Social Capital and Economic Development: Toward a Theoretical Synthesis and Policy Framework,” Theory and Society, 27(2): 151–207CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×