• STI Policy Review
• /
• v.6 no.2
• /
• pp.54-86
• /
• 2015

The study examines the U.S. Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) program, with a focus on the recent Reauthorization, and compares, in the political context, the U.S. and East Asian countries-Japan, Korea and Taiwan-that adopted the U.S. SBIR program. For the systematic analysis and cross-country comparison, the study employs Kingdon (2003)'s framework-his political theory and Garbage Can Model-to identify political participants and processes underlying the SBIR Reauthorization and to analyze the differences in problem, policy, and politics streams between the U.S. and East Asian countries. For the cross-country comparison, specifically, the study uses various data sources such as OECD, Global Entrepreneurship Monitor, Hofstede's Cultural Dimensions, and World Value Survey. Based on the analysis outcomes, implications of U.S. practices on East Asian countries are extracted as follows. East Asian countries tend to: Have higher entrepreneurial aspiration while lower entrepreneurial activity and attitude than the U.S.; bear higher long term orientation and uncertainty avoidance while lower individualism than the U.S.; and have greater expectations of technology development and higher confidence in political parties while participating less in political action than the U.S. Drawing on the differences, the following policy recommendations are suggested. East Asian countries should: Improve entrepreneurs' access to resources (in particular, financial resource) in order to link their high entrepreneurial aspiration to actual entrepreneurial activities; cultivate failure-tolerating culture and risk-taking entrepreneurs, for instance, by providing a second chance to SBIR-participating businesses that failed to materialize their innovative ideas; and leverage their high expectations of new technology in order to take bold actions regarding their SBIR programs, and update the programs by drawing out constructive dialogues between SBIR stakeholders.

• Convergence Security Journal
• /
• v.17 no.3
• /
• pp.83-93
• /
• 2017

The U.S.-China Relations could be analyzed two perspectives and their basis under major international p olitics theory-power transition with conditions: (1) North Korean's nuclear puzzle, (2) THAAD in the Kor ean Peninsula and (3) the U.S.-ROK Alliance. One perspective is the global order dominates the regional order, and then stable regional order comes out. The other is the regional order dominates the global ord er, and China wages a regional hegemonic conflict against the United States. Consequently, America's o verwhelming leadership in North Korean's nuclear, THAAD and U.S.-ROK Alliance as national power is expected to endure. But China also has expected empowerment and cooperation for the peace and stabilit y on the Korean Peninsula military problems. In this perspective, South Korea needs to pay attention to the changing power distribution and competition between the U.S. and China and needs to strengthen a balancing and harmonious diplomatic strategy, so called 'see-saw diplomacy'.