DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Examining the Generative Artificial Intelligence Landscape: Current Status and Policy Strategies

  • 투고 : 2023.06.05
  • 심사 : 2023.10.16
  • 발행 : 2024.03.31

초록

This article proposes a framework to elucidate the structural dynamics of the generative AI ecosystem. It also outlines the practical application of this proposed framework through illustrative policies, with a specific emphasis on the development of the Korean generative AI ecosystem and its implications of platform strategies at AI platform-squared. We propose a comprehensive classification scheme within generative AI ecosystems, including app builders, technology partners, app stores, foundational AI models operating as operating systems, cloud services, and chip manufacturers. The market competitiveness for both app builders and technology partners will be highly contingent on their ability to effectively navigate the customer decision journey (CDJ) while offering localized services that fill the gaps left by foundational models. The strategically important platform of platforms in the generative AI ecosystem (i.e., AI platform-squared) is constituted by app stores, foundational AIs as operating systems, and cloud services. A few companies, primarily in the U.S. and China, are projected to dominate this AI platform squared, and consequently, they are likely to become the primary targets of non-market strategies by diverse governments and communities. Korea still has chances in AI platform-squared, but the window of opportunities is narrowing. A cautious approach is necessary when considering potential regulations for domestic large AI models and platforms. Hastily importing foreign regulatory frameworks and non-market strategies, such as those from Europe, could overlook the essential hierarchical structure that our framework underscores. Our study suggests a clear strategic pathway for Korea to emerge as a generative AI powerhouse. As one of the few countries boasting significant companies within the foundational AI models (which need to collaborate with each other) and chip manufacturing sectors, it is vital for Korea to leverage its unique position and strategically penetrate the platform-squared segment-app stores, operating systems, and cloud services. Given the potential network effects and winner-takes-all dynamics in AI platform-squared, this endeavor is of immediate urgency. To facilitate this transition, it is recommended that the government implement promotional policies that strategically nurture these AI platform-squared, rather than restrict them through regulations and stakeholder pressures.

키워드

과제정보

This work was partly supported by Institute of Information & Communications Technology Planning & Evaluation grant funded by the Ministry of Science and ICT (No.RS-2023-00215734).

참고문헌

  1. Almeida, H. V., and Wolfenzon, D. (2006). A theory of pyramidal ownership and family business groups. The Journal of Finance, 61(6), 2637-2680. 
  2. Barney, J. B. (2001). Resource-based theories of competitive advantage: A ten-year retrospective on the resource-based view. Journal of Management, 27(6), 643-650. https://doi.org/10.1177/014920630102700602 
  3. Baron, D. P. (1995). Integrated strategy: Market and nonmarket components. California Management Review, 37(2), 47-65. https://doi.org/10.2307/41165788 
  4. Baron, D. P. (1997). Integrated strategy, trade policy, and global competition. California Management Review, 39(2), 145-169. https://doi.org/10.2307/41165891 
  5. Batra, G., Jacobson, Z., Madhav, S., Queirolo, A., and Santhanam, N. (2019). Artificial-intelligence hardware: New opportunities for semiconductor companies. McKinsey and Company, January, 2. 
  6. Carney, M., Gedajlovic, E. R., Heugens, P. P., Van Essen, M., and Van Oosterhout, J. (2011). Business group affiliation, performance, context, and strategy: A meta-analysis. Academy of Management Journal, 54(3), 437-460. https://doi.org/10.5465/AMJ.2011.61967812 
  7. Etzkowitz, H., and Zhou, C. (2017). The Triple Helix: University-industry Government Innovation and Entrepreneurship. Routledge. 
  8. Ferr'as-Hern'andez, X., Nylund, P. A., and Brem, A. (2023). The emergence of dominant designs in artificial intelligence. California Management Review, 65(3), 73-91. https://doi.org/10.1177/00081256231164362 
  9. Gertner, R. H., Scharfstein, D. S., and Stein, J. C. (1994). Internal versus external capital markets. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 109(4), 1211-1230. https://doi.org/10.2307/2118361 
  10. Hoshi, T., Kashyap, A., and Scharfstein, D. (1991). Corporate structure, liquidity, and investment: Evidence from Japanese industrial groups. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 106(1), 33-60. https://doi.org/10.2307/2937905 
  11. Jun, H., Woo, W., and Kang, H.-g. (2013). Hynix semiconductor: Global pioneer. Asian Case Research Journal, 17(01), 145-160. https://doi.org/10.1142/S0218927513500065 
  12. Kang, H. G., and Jeon, S. (2023). A study on the economic effects of big tech companies: Focusing on the google revenue and tax issues. Asia-Pacific Journal of Business Venturing and Entrepreneurship, 18(1), 1-11. https://doi.org/10.16972/apjbve.18.1.202302.1 
  13. Kang, H. G., Kang, C. M., and Jeon, S. M. (2022). An innovative framework to classify online platforms. The Journal of Information Systems, 31(1), 59-90. https://doi.org/10.1002/sres.2544 
  14. Khanna, T., and Yafeh, Y. (2007). Business groups in emerging markets: Paragons or parasites? Journal of Economic Literature, 45(2), 331-372. https://doi.org/10.1257/jel.45.2.331 
  15. Mahoney, J. T., and Pandian, J. R. (1992). The resource-based view within the conversation of strategic management. Strategic Management Journal, 13(5), 363-380. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.4250130505 
  16. Makhzani, A., Shlens, J., Jaitly, N., Goodfellow, I., and Frey, B. (2015). Adversarial autoencoders. arXiv preprint arXiv:1511.05644. 
  17. Mazzucato, M. (2011). The entrepreneurial state. Soundings, 49(49), 131-142. 
  18. Mellahi, K., Frynas, J. G., Sun, P., and Siegel, D. (2016). A review of the nonmarket strategy literature: Toward a multi-theoretical integration. Journal of Management, 42(1), 143-173. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206315617241 
  19. Miller, C. (2022). Chip War: The Fight for The World'S Most Critical Technology. Simon: Schuster. 
  20. Mingardi, A. (2015). A critique of mazzucato's entrepreneurial state. Cato J., 35, 603. 
  21. Peteraf, M. A. (1993). The cornerstones of competitive advantage: A resource-based view. Strategic Management Journal, 14(3), 179-191. 
  22. Roth, A. E. (2008). What have we learned from market design? The Economic Journal, 118(527), 285-310. 
  23. Russell, A. L. (2013). The internet that wasn't. IEEE Spectrum, 50(8), 39-43. https://doi.org/10.1109/MSPEC.2013.6565559 
  24. Stein, J. C. (1997). Internal capital markets and the competition for corporate resources. The Journal of Finance, 52(1), 111-133. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6261.1997.tb03810.x 
  25. Teece, D., and Pisano, G. (2003). The Dynamic Capabilities of Firms. Springer. 
  26. Teece, D. J., Pisano, G., and Shuen, A. (1997). Dynamic capabilities and strategic management. Strategic Management Journal, 18(7), 509-533. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1097-0266(199708)18:7<509::AID-SMJ882>3.0.CO;2-Z 
  27. Van Bommel, E., Edelman, D., and Ungerman, K. (2014). Digitizing the consumer decision journey. McKinsey Quarterly, Retrieved from https://www.mckinsey.com/capabilities/growth-marketing-and-sales/our-insights/digitizing-the-consumer-decision-journey 
  28. Wernerfelt, B. (1984). A resource-based view of the firm. Strategic Management Journal, 5(2), 171-180. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.4250050207 
  29. Winter, S. G. (2003). Understanding dynamic capabilities. Strategic Management Journal, 24(10), 991-995. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.318 
  30. Zhao, W. X., Zhou, K., Li, J., Tang, T., Wang, X., Hou, Y., ... and Wen, J. R. (2023). A survey of large language models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2303.18223