نهادها و تأثیر آنها بر توسعه علم و فناوری

نوع مقاله: مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

استادیار پژوهشکده مطالعات بنیادین علم و فناوری، دانشگاه شهید بهشتی، تهران

چکیده

هدف این مقاله، معرفی و بررسی نهادهای مؤثر بر توسعه علم و فناوری و سیاست‌گذاری در خصوص شکست‌های نهادی است. مقاله حاضر ضمن بررسی مفهوم نهاد در حوزه اقتصاد و مطالعات نوآوری، نهاد را مجموعه‌ای از قیود انسانی و سازمانی شکل‌دهنده تعاملات، رفتار و عملکرد بازیگران مختلف جامعه تعریف و نهادها را ذیل سه دسته نهادهای فیزیکی (شامل سازمان‌های فعال نظام علم، فناوری و نوآوری نظیر دانشگاه، بنگاه و دولت)، نهادهای سخت (مانند قوانین، سیاست‌ها و استانداردها) و نهادهای نرم (مانند تعاملات، روال‌ها و هنجارها) دسته‌بندی نموده است. به علاوه وابستگی نهادها به بافتار اقتصادی، سیاسی و اجتماعی (چه به صورت عام و چه نهادهای مؤثر بر توسعه علم و فناوری) که در آن واقع شده‌اند از ملاحظاتی است که در خصوص بررسی نهادها مورد تأکید قرار گرفته است. از دیگر جنبه‌های تأثیرگذاری نهادها، تأثیر آنها بر عملکرد سطوح مختلف تحلیلی از جمله بنگاه، بخش‌های صنعتی و همچنین توسعه علم، فناوری و نوآوری است. مطابق یافته‌های این مقاله، نهادهای مالکیت فکری، آموزش، روال‌های یادگیری و تحقیق‌وتوسعه و نهایتاً تعاملات و اعتماد بین بازیگران از مهم‌ترین نهادهای مؤثر بر توسعه علم و فناوری محسوب می‌شوند. شکست‌های نهادی که از ضعف در عملکرد نهادهای موجود و یا خلاء نهادی حاصل می‌شود و لزوم مداخلات سیاستی در خصوص شکست نهادهای مؤثر بر توسعه علم و فناوری نیز از دیگر موضوعات دارای اهمیت در تحلیل‌ نهاد محسوب می‌شود که دلالت‌های سیاستی متنوعی را برای سیاست‌گذاران و تصمیم‌گیران به همراه دارد.
 

کلیدواژه‌ها


عنوان مقاله [English]

Institutions and their Influnence on Science and Technology Development

نویسندگان [English]

  • Kiarash Fartash
  • Ali Asghar Sadabadai
Assistant Professor, Institute for Science and Technology Studies, Shahid Beheshti University, Tehran, Iran
چکیده [English]

The purpose of this paper is to introduce and examine institutions that influence science and technology (S&T) development and policy considerations regarfing institutional failures. On this basis, present paper investigates the concept of the institution in economics and innovation studies, and categorizes institutions under physical institutions, including active organizations in STI development (such as universities, firms, government), hard institutions (such as laws, policies and standards) and soft institutions (such as interactions, routines, and norms), and defines institutions as a set of human made constraints and organizations that shape the interactions, behaviors, and performance of different actors in society. In addition, dependency of the institutions, either generally or those influence S&T development, to the economic, political and social context in which they exist is a consideration that have been emphasized. Among other aspects of institutions effects, their impact on the performance of various analytical levels, including firms, industrial sectors and the development, and on the development of STI is examined. Our findings suggest, intellectual property, education, learning and R&D routines, interactions and trust among actors are the key institutions that influence S&T development. Institutional failures that emerge from weaknesses in the functioning of existing institutions or lack of required institutions, and the need for policy interventions on this basis for promoting S&T development are also issues of importance in institutional analysis, which offer a variety of policy implication aimed at policy and decision makers.
 
 

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Institution
  • Hard Institution
  • Soft Institution
  • Institutions and S&T Development
  • S&T Development
  • Institutions and Technological Changes
[1] Lee, K., & Kim, B. Y. (2009). Both institutions and policies matter but differently for different income groups of countries: determinants of long-run economic growth revisited. World Development, 37(3), 533-549.

[2] North, D. C. (1991). Institutions. Journal of economic perspectives, 5(1), 97-112.

[3] Fukuyama, F. (2014). Political order and political decay: From the industrial revolution to the globalization of democracy. Farrar, Straus and Giroux.

[4] Perez, C. (2010). Technological revolutions and techno-economic paradigms. Cambridge journal of economics, 34(1), 185-202.

[5] Niosi, J. (2002). National systems of innovations are "x-efficient" (and x-effective): Why some are slow learners. Research policy, 31(2), 291-302.

[6] Taylor, M. Z. (2016). The politics of innovation: Why some countries are better than others at science and technology. Oxford University Press.

[7] North, D. (1990). Institutions, Institutional Change, and Economic Performance. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

[8] Nelson, R. R. (2008). What enables rapid economic progress: What are the needed institutions?, Research Policy, 37(1), 1-11.

[9] Momeni, F. (2009). Achilles heel of development. Economy and Society, 6(19-20), 257-292. {In Persian}.

[10] Wieczorek, A. J., and Hekkert, M. P. (2012). Systemic instruments for systemic innovation problems: A framework for policy makers and innovation scholars. Science and Public Policy, 39(1), 74-87.

[11] Fartash, K. (2016). Policy Learning in Technology and Innovation Policies of I. R. Iran (Case Study of Three Selected Acts). Ph.D dissertation, Allameh Tabataba’i University, Tehran, Iran. {In Persian}.

[12] Williamson, O. (1975). Markets and Hierarchies: Analysis and Antitrust Implications. New York: Free Press, 197.

[13] Edquist, C. (2011). Design of innovation policy through diagnostic analysis: identification of systemic problems (or failures). Industrial and corporate change, 20(6), 1725-1753.

[14] Malerba, F. (2004). Sectoral systems: How and why innovation differs across sectors, Chapter 14 (p380-406), Oxford Handbook of Innovation. Oxford University Press.

[15] Rodríguez-Pose, A. (2013). Do institutions matter for regional development?. Regional Studies, 47(7), 1034-1047.

[16] Perez, C. (2002). Technological revolutions and financial capital. Edward Elgar Publishing.

[17] Glaeser, E., Porta, R. L., Lopez-de-Silanes, F., & Shleifer, A. (2004). Do institutions cause growth?. Journal of Economic Growth, 9, 271-303.

[18] Acemoglu, D., & Robinson, J. A. (2012). Why nations fail: The origins of power, prosperity, and poverty. Crown Books.

[19] Souzanchi, E. (2018). Thought on creation, development and adoption of national innovation system concept. Science and Technology Policy Letters, 8(2), 5-16. {In Persian}.

[20] Freeman, C., & Louca, F. (2001). As Time Goes by: From the Industrial Revolution to the Information Revolution. Oxford University Press, Oxford.

[21] Freeman, C., & Perez, C. (1988). Structural crises of adjustment, business cycles, and investment behavior. In: Dosi, G., Freeman, C., Nelson, R., Silverberg, G., & Soete, L. (Eds.). Technical Change and Economic Theory. Pinter Publishers, London.

[22] Lundvall, B. Å., Joseph, K. J., Chaminade, C., & Vang, J. (Eds.). (2009). Handbook of innovation systems and developing countries: building domestic capabilities in a global setting. Edward Elgar Publishing.

[23] Freeman, C., & Soete, L. (1997). The Economics of Industrial Innovation. MIT Press Books.

[24] Chaminade, C., Lundvall, B. Å., & Haneef, S. (2018). Advanced introduction to national innovation systems. Edward Elgar Publishing.

[25] Nilforoushan, H., & Arasti, M. (2014). The Weak Failure Process of Engineered Innovation Networks in the Initiation Phase: The Case Study of Gas Industry in Iran. Journal of Science & Technology Policy, 6(4), 77-92. {In Persian}.

[26] Capron, H., Cincera, M., & Dumont, M. (2000). The institutional profile. In The national innovation system of Belgium (pp. 43-69). Springer Science & Business Media.

[27] Meeus, M., & Oerlemans, L. (2005). National innovation systems. In Innovation and Institutions: A Multidisciplinary Review of the Study of Innovation Systems, 51.

[28] Howells, J. (2006). Intermediation and the role of intermediaries in innovation. Research policy, 35(5), 715-728.

[29] Woolthuis, R. K., Lankhuizen, M., & Gilsing, V. (2005). A system failure framework for innovation policy design. Technovation, 25(6), 609-619.

[30] Rizvandi, M. A., Sahabi, B., Yavari, K., & Momeni, F. (2017). A Critical Assessment of Neoclassical Economics in the Problem of Transition to the Knowledge-based Economy: An Institutional Approach. Journal of Science & Technology Policy, 9(1), 17-30. {In Persian}.

[31] Bleda, M., & Del Rio, P. (2013). The market failure and the systemic failure rationales in technological innovation systems. Research policy, 42(5), 1039-1052.

[32] Smith, K. (2000). Innovation as a systemic phenomenon: Rethinking the role of policy. Enterprise and Innovation Management Studies, 1, 73-102.

[33] UNCTAD. (2016). Science, Technology and Innovation Policy Review of the Islamic Republic of Iran. Published in December 2016 (Accessible at: http://unctad.org/en/pages/PublicationWebflyer.aspx?publicationid=1679).

[34] UNCTAD. (2005). Science, Technology and Innovation Policy Review of the Islamic Republic of Iran. Published in January 2005 (Accessible at :http://unctad.org/en/Docs/iteipc20057_en.pdf).