• Journal of Technology Innovation
• /
• v.31 no.3
• /
• pp.75-110
• /
• 2023

This paper aims at discussing the evolution of innovation theory from the beginning of the last century to present. Innovation theory has begun by Joseph Schumpeter in the beginning of the last century and his theory had not attained much attention compared to the mainstream economic theory. In the 1960s, some neo-classical economists analyzed the effect of technological change on economic growth and emphasized the role of demand in innovation process. However, in the beginning of the 1970s, Schumpeter's innovation theory, which emphasized the role of innovation and entrepreneurship in economic and social development, attained enormous attention by many liberal economists. They were called neo-Schumpeterians as they followed the theories and ideas of Schumpeter. In the middle of the 1980s, neo-Schumpeterians identified the concept of national innovation system(NIS), which is the total mobilization system of innovation resources for generating, appropriating and diffusing technological innovations. Soon this theory diffused very quickly at regional and sectoral level. As a result, there have been very active empirical studies on innovation systems in the world. Since the beginning of the 2000s the transition study have been actively carried out mainly in European countries. This study emphasizes the transition of existing innovation systems into more sustainable ones. In Korea we need to activate transition study, because there have been only few studies in this new theory.

• Journal of Technology Innovation
• /
• v.12 no.3
• /
• pp.97-109
• /
• 2004

According to "structure-conduct-performance" paradigm in IO, market structure (concentration) determines conduct (R&D investments), and conduct yields market performance (ratio of price to marginal cost). Previous empirical studies on Schumpeter Mark I, II assumed that the explanatory variable (market structure) and the disturbance are uncorrelated in the R&D equation. In this situation, Ordinary Least Squares (OLS) estimates of the structural parameters are inconsistent, because the endogeneous variables (R&D and market structure) can be determined simultaneously. So, in this study, full information (or system methods) estimation is used to test Schumpeter hypothesis since joint estimation can as well bring efficiency gains in the seemingly uncorrelated regressions (SUR) setting.

• Journal of Technology Innovation
• /
• v.11 no.2
• /
• pp.1-25
• /
• 2003

Korean technological innovation is characterized by large firm-leading and characterized sector such as electricity and electronics. We examine the relationship between two elements. Using patent data registered at USPTO by Korean firms, We examine the relationship between patterns of innovative activities and sectoral specialization. As a result, Korean technological innovation is characterized by relatively high asymmetry, big share of large firms, high stability of ranking of innovators and diminishing role of newcomer, therefore as close as Schumpeter Mark II. But technological specialization is associated positively with the big share of large firms, negatively with low stability of ranking of innovators. It means that Korean technological innovation is led by large firms, but quantitative growth and technological specialization is achieved through competition between them.

• Korean Business Review
• /
• v.21 no.1
• /
• pp.91-117
• /
• 2008

Since the late 20th century, due to the globalization of markets and the rapid developments of information and communication technologies, the world has entered into the age of fierce competition. With their abundant low-cost labor, former communist countries such as China, Russia and East Europe and former low-developed countries such as India and Brazil have received foreign investments from major industrial companies. Thus, there are no other alternatives remained for Korea and OECD countries other than moving the industrial economies to the knowledge based innovation systems. In the knowledge based innovation systems, economic developments and employments of regions and nations depend solely on companies situated in their territories. In this article, after reviewing the current state of technological based innovation small firms in korea, we provide a theoretical framework to promote the level of technology based innovation and entrepreneurship. The theoretical framework for analysis and policy suggestions is based on the Schumpeter's value system model that consist of supply factors, demand factors, and supporting institutions. In order to create more innovative small businesses, we insist on the followings. First, more R&D and innovation activities related with promising new technologies should be performed. Second, more R&D funds for technological innovation small companies should be provided from governments. Third, more M&A transactions and technology transactions should be marketed freely and competitively. Fourth, more business incubating services and venture capital services should be provided. Fifth, entrepreneurship and innovation culture should be popular and institutionized among people.

• Korean Business Review
• /
• v.23 no.1
• /
• pp.17-44
• /
• 2010

Even though it is generally recognized that entrepreneurship is complex socio-economic phenomena and entrepreneurial opportunities can be created from economic, social, technological, political and legal forces, entrepreneurship has been discussed in very narrow economic terms and focusing on narrow economic relationships such as consumers, suppliers, owners and employee. However, recently, a lot of researchers talk about social entrepreneurship. How can we explain social entrepreneurs? In our paper, employing stakeholder theory, we try to offer more realistic model to understand entrepreneurial opportunities. We claim that entrepreneurial exploitations can be successful only when entrepreneurs can identify ex post stakeholder inefficiencies. Thus, our efforts focus on the question of where, when, and how stakeholder inefficiencies occur?

• Journal of Technology Innovation
• /
• v.13 no.1
• /
• pp.213-246
• /
• 2005

Despite of the impressive progress made in the Evolutionary techno-economics during the last two decades, there have been very little, if not at all, theoretical advancement in explaining an endogenous mechanism of transforming a technological paradigm within self-perpetuatingstructural dynamics. The question poorly attempted was raised by Schumpeter a century ago in his effort to overcome the well-known 'Walras' trap'. Although there have been increasing number of researchers recently tackling the issue quite seriously from within the Evolutionary school, I see it that radical reconstruction of the basic principle of Evolutionary research framework is urgently needed to solve the century long fundamental question, from evolutionary approach to transformational approach. In the paper, I will show the theoretical feasibility of explaining an endogenous mechanism of paradigm transformation, relying upon the concept of localized dynamics and the concept of morphogenetic structuration. It should be emphasized that there must be aendogenous process of deepening structural Instability generated in the process of economic coordination to secure efficient circular flow. The concept of development bottleneck initiated by the Baumol's cost disease could be regarded as one of the important source of such mechanism. Unfortunately, however, it is a brief conceptual description presented in the paper rather than a comprehensive analytical model, due to the space limitation imposed.

• Journal of architectural history
• /
• v.25 no.2
• /
• pp.21-30
• /
• 2016

Autonomia movement that emerged in Italy in the 1960s from workerist (operaismo) communism gives historical and discursive context to Manfredo Tafuri's famous criticism of ideology. His thesis on the death of architecture was a radical criticism of Keynesian intervention which was a strategy to cope with the Great Depression. For him, this capitalist development had taken away ideological prefiguration from architecture. At least Tafuri's this early intellectual phase was formed in the wake of magazine Contrapiano and Antonio Negri's influence. Tafuri almost entirely adapted Negri's thought on the importance of capitalist innovation that was uncovered by Keynes, Schumpeter, and Manheim and the periodization in modern history. When we read Tafuri's text with this concrete context, we can avoid being plunged into his abstruseness. On the other hand, 1980's Korea cannot understand Tafuri comprehensibly. 1980's situation to struggle to acquire democracy prescribed only one mode of reception of Tafuri's historiography in Korea. Tafuri's so-called pessimist view point could not satisfy student activists. They want to take intellectual means to sustain student movement and to secure political dynamics of protest. But at the same time they have anxiety to understand tafuri's thesis that they consider ad a critical theory for Korean Architecture. Double contexts of Tafuri's criticism of ideology bring to light to historicize both Tafuri's historiography itself and reception of his text in Korea.

• World Technopolis Review
• /
• v.3 no.1
• /
• pp.17-29
• /
• 2014

The importance of science and technology as the root of exceptional regional economic development has been extolled since the time of Schumpeter. Today emerging technologies are signaling the start of a new economic cycle where regions that are effective in technology translation will gain advantage. The will of policymakers to translate technology into regional job and wealth creation seems to be at an all-time high. Yet an improved process for translating technical development into regional prosperity has proved elusive. If there are no processes other than applying techniques that have worked in the past for other regions to a new region then there is cause for concern. Here the authors seek to add to this field of knowledge by applying elements of the varied cluster theories to provide a basis for policy for regional economic development by turning science and technology into commercial innovation. We provide a review of current cluster theories and discuss the positive and negative issues associated with each. We propose a model that allows interested professionals to utilize aspects of each cluster perspective geared to the realities of their specific area.

• Journal of Korean Society of Industrial and Systems Engineering
• /
• v.24 no.69
• /
• pp.23-35
• /
• 2001

This paper attempts to identify the relationship between the business model and its financial performance through the construct of business paradigm, fit which may be defined as the congruence between the customer needs (the demand side) and the firm competence( supply side) to meet them, Each business model\`s business paradigm fit reflects how well the technology that business model has taken is interconnected with market. Basically, the business paradigm fit consists of two parts, product fit dealing with the product(s) to meet the customer needs well and process fit focusing on producing and/or providing that product(s) at the lowest costs. For empirical tasting the business paradigm fit matrix and the measures for them were developed and the data about 73 companies as sample were collects with questionnaires. The findings are: First business paradigm fit can be used as a strong empirical indicator for the firm performance, Second. balance fit in product or process gives to the most desirable outcomes and no fit brings about the worst ones. Third the over fit(the case of doing more excessive innovative efforts than to be needed) shows much better outcomes than the under fit(the case of doing less innovative efforts) Fourth, this paper shows where, in what situation, and what type of innovation has to be taken for firm success at firm level, whereas Schumpeter(1934) already indicated the importance of innovation for economic growth at the economy /industry level. However, further study should be done later with more refined measures and expanded sample data.

• Journal of Technology Innovation
• /
• v.31 no.1
• /
• pp.105-148
• /
• 2023

This paper provides a new method of measuring the degree of technological progress which contributes to real economic growth based on Schumpeter's Trilogy. Using Microdata of Statistics Korea, the results of measuring and comparing the actual growth contribution of technological progress during the period 2003-2018 by the total factor productivity growth rate(growth accounting method), the R&D investment contribution rate, and the Schumpeterian innovation growth rate, respectively are as follows. First, the measurement of the real growth contribution of technological progress by the growth rate of total factor productivity and the growth rate of Schumpeterian innovation shows contradictory results. Second, when the growth rate of production is in a decreasing trend, the difference between the growth rate of production and the growth rate of total factor productivity increases compared to when it is in an increasing trend. Conversely, when there is an increasing trend, the difference between the growth rate of production and the growth rate of total factor productivity becomes smaller compared to when it is in a decreasing trend.. Third, the technological opportunity that affects the innovation growth rate, i.e., the contribution of R&D incentives to innovative growth is only 3.3%. The reason why this result is different from the existing perception of the contribution of technological progress to growth is that different entities are being measured while measuring the same term of technological progress. Therefore, the growth rate of total factor productivity should be used to measure macroeconomic efficiency, R&D investment should be used to measure the effectiveness of new technology supply, and the Schumpeterian innovation rate should be used to measure the economic impact of technological progress. The policy implications of the research results of this thesis are as follows: ① Transition from a policy of one-sided technology supply to a policy of convergence of technology supply and new technology demand support, ② Mission-oriented R&D policy and R&D policy that links national R&D with private R&D, ③ Reclassification of capital goods reflecting the degree of new knowledge.