Search

Nanoscience and nanotechnology--involving the engineering of materials, devices, and systems at very small scales--have emerged as important priorities not only for science but also for economic development. In this article, we propose an analytical framework that considers the socioeconomic effects of nanotechnology in six key areas: institutional development, knowledge flows, and network efficiency; research and education capabilities; industrial and enterprise development; regional spread; cluster and network development; and product innovation. We apply this framework to assess the early impacts of the evolving domain of nanotechnology for development, with a focus on China and its transitioning economy, where nanotechnology is assuming an important role in breaking existing innovation system lock-ins and historical path dependencies. We suggest that the analytical framework adds value in assessing the developmental impacts of new technologies and could be used to probe such impacts in other countries and locations. KEY WORDS: nanoscience, nanotechnology, innovation, development, economic impacts, institutions, clusters, developing countries, transition economy, emerging markets, catch-up growth, China, Introduction Nanoscience and nanotechnology (hereafter denoted as nanotechnology) focuses on the understanding and design of matter at molecular levels. By engineering at these very small scales, novel properties and functions [...]

China and Russia—two giants in the group of emerging markets—continue to attract wide attention as emerging science and technological superpowers. Both countries demonstrate mixed success in innovation development and are struggling to overcome the legacies of the former state planning system and accelerate their transition to effective national innovation systems. This study evaluates the existing path dependencies and compares the achievements of China and Russia. It is suggested that there are a number of policy complementarities and opportunities for mutual learning between the two nations especially in the areas of: university reform, cluster development, and increasing productivity of state-owned enterprises. The case of nanotechnology policies offers an interesting and somewhat contrasting view. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Recently, there has been a popular trend in academic research for paying more attention to 'pro-poor' policies and theoretical studies. This tradition has emerged from a broader understanding of development that includes not only economic but also social and political dimensions. Meanwhile, innovation researchers are still considering development as mere economic growth without much focus on the social impacts of technological change. This article recognizes that, despite these fundamental differences, the concepts of innovation and development have much in common and are, in fact, positively connected and mutually beneficial. This assumption has some important implications for the innovation and development of policy-making process. The article concludes by arguing that the new cross-disciplinary approach is required in order to answer the questions posed here in a more meticulous way.Un courant populaire s'est récemment développé dans la recherche universitaire et plaide pour que davantage d'attention soit portée aux politiques et études théoriques 'pro-pauvres'. Ce mouvement provient d'une perspective nouvelle et plus large sur le développement, prenant en compte les dimensions non seulement économiques mais aussi sociales et politiques. Dans le même temps, les chercheurs en innovation semblent continuer à ne voir dans le développement que la croissance économique, sans s'intéresser aux impacts sociaux du changement technologique. Cet article reconnaît que malgré ces différences fondamentales les concepts d'innovation et de développement ont beaucoup en commun et sont en fait positivement corrélés et complémentaires. Cette supposition comporte quelques implications importantes pour le processus d'élaboration de politiques d'innovation et de développement. L'article conclut en soutenant que la nouvelle approche inter-disciplinaire est peut être nécessaire pour pouvoir répondre de manière plus détaillée aux questions soulevées ici. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]