IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/arx/papers/1909.05689.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

A new concept of technology with systemic-purposeful perpsective: theory, examples and empirical application

Author

Listed:
  • Mario Coccia

Abstract

Although definitions of technology exist to explain the patterns of technological innovations, there is no general definition that explain the role of technology for humans and other animal species in environment. The goal of this study is to suggest a new concept of technology with a systemic-purposeful perspective for technology analysis. Technology here is a complex system of artifact, made and_or used by living systems, that is composed of more than one entity or sub-system and a relationship that holds between each entity and at least one other entity in the system, selected considering practical, technical and_or economic characteristics to satisfy needs, achieve goals and_or solve problems of users for purposes of adaptation and_or survival in environment. Technology T changes current modes of cognition and action to enable makers and_or users to take advantage of important opportunities or to cope with consequential environmental threats. Technology, as a complex system, is formed by different elements given by incremental and radical innovations. Technological change generates the progress from a system T1 to T2, T3, etc. driven by changes of technological trajectories and technological paradigms. Several examples illustrate here these concepts and a simple model with a preliminary empirical analysis shows how to operationalize the suggested definition of technology. Overall, then, the role of adaptation (i.e. reproductive advantage) can be explained as a main driver of technology use for adopters to take advantage of important opportunities or to cope with environmental threats. This study begins the process of clarifying and generalizing, as far as possible, the concept of technology with a new perspective that it can lay a foundation for the development of more sophisticated concepts and theories to explain technological and economic change in environment.

Suggested Citation

  • Mario Coccia, 2019. "A new concept of technology with systemic-purposeful perpsective: theory, examples and empirical application," Papers 1909.05689, arXiv.org.
    • Handle: RePEc:arx:papers:1909.05689
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://arxiv.org/pdf/1909.05689
    File Function: Latest version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. La Shun L. Carroll, 2017. "A Comprehensive Definition of Technology from an Ethological Perspective," Social Sciences, MDPI, vol. 6(4), pages 1-20, October.
    2. Giovanni Dosi, 2000. "Sources, Procedures, and Microeconomic Effects of Innovation," Chapters, in: Innovation, Organization and Economic Dynamics, chapter 2, pages 63-114, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    3. Berg, S. & Wustmans, M. & Bröring, S., 2019. "Identifying first signals of emerging dominance in a technological innovation system: A novel approach based on patents," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 146(C), pages 706-722.
    4. Pistorius, C. W. I. & Utterback, J. M., 1997. "Multi-mode interaction among technologies," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 26(1), pages 67-84, March.
    5. Moehrle, Martin G. & Caferoglu, Hüseyin, 2019. "Technological speciation as a source for emerging technologies. Using semantic patent analysis for the case of camera technology," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 146(C), pages 776-784.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Lai, Kuei-Kuei & Chen, Yu-Long & Kumar, Vimal & Daim, Tugrul & Verma, Pratima & Kao, Fang-Chen & Liu, Ruirong, 2023. "Mapping technological trajectories and exploring knowledge sources: A case study of E-payment technologies," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 186(PB).
    2. Mario Coccia, 2019. "Killer Technologies: the destructive creation in the technical change," Papers 1907.12406, arXiv.org.
    3. Ad van den Oord & Arjen van Witteloostuijn, 2018. "A multi-level model of emerging technology: An empirical study of the evolution of biotechnology from 1976 to 2003," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(5), pages 1-27, May.
    4. Mario Coccia, 2019. "Technological Parasitism," Papers 1901.09073, arXiv.org.
    5. Waßenhoven, Anna & Rennings, Michael & Laibach, Natalie & Bröring, Stefanie, 2023. "What constitutes a “Key Enabling Technology” for transition processes: Insights from the bioeconomy's technological landscape," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 197(C).
    6. Coccia, Mario, 2019. "The theory of technological parasitism for the measurement of the evolution of technology and technological forecasting," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 141(C), pages 289-304.
    7. Chang-Yang Lee & Ji-Hwan Lee & Ajai S. Gaur, 2017. "Are large business groups conducive to industry innovation? The moderating role of technological appropriability," Asia Pacific Journal of Management, Springer, vol. 34(2), pages 313-337, June.
    8. Philip Cooke, 2002. "Biotechnology Clusters as Regional, Sectoral Innovation Systems," International Regional Science Review, , vol. 25(1), pages 8-37, January.
    9. Michael Peneder, 2003. "Industry Classifications: Aim, Scope and Techniques," Journal of Industry, Competition and Trade, Springer, vol. 3(1), pages 109-129, March.
    10. Lorenzo Ciapetti, 2011. "Technological Change, Knowledge Integration and Adaptive Processes: The Mechatronic Evolution of the Reggio Emilia District," Chapters, in: Paul L. Robertson & David Jacobson (ed.), Knowledge Transfer and Technology Diffusion, chapter 5, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    11. Kibaek Lee & Jaeheung Yoo & Munkee Choi & Hangjung Zo & Andrew P Ciganek, 2016. "Does External Knowledge Sourcing Enhance Market Performance? Evidence from the Korean Manufacturing Industry," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(12), pages 1-19, December.
    12. Francesco Bogliacino & Mario Pianta, 2016. "The Pavitt Taxonomy, revisited: patterns of innovation in manufacturing and services," Economia Politica: Journal of Analytical and Institutional Economics, Springer;Fondazione Edison, vol. 33(2), pages 153-180, August.
    13. Kuosmanen, Natalia & Valmari, Nelli, 2023. "Renewal of Companies Through Product Switching," ETLA Working Papers 104, The Research Institute of the Finnish Economy.
    14. Gurkov, Igor, 2013. "Why some Russian industrial companies innovate regularly: Determinants of firms’ decisions to innovate and associated routines," Journal of East European Management Studies, Nomos Verlagsgesellschaft mbH & Co. KG, vol. 18(1), pages 66-96.
    15. Febi Jensen & Hans Lööf & Andreas Stephan, 2020. "New ventures in Cleantech: Opportunities, capabilities and innovation outcomes," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(3), pages 902-917, March.
    16. Cimoli, Mario & Primi, Annalisa & Rovira, Sebastián, 2011. "National innovation surveys in latin America: empirical evidence and policy implications," Documentos de Proyectos 3897, Naciones Unidas Comisión Económica para América Latina y el Caribe (CEPAL).
    17. Coccia, Mario & Wang, Lili, 2015. "Path-breaking directions of nanotechnology-based chemotherapy and molecular cancer therapy," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 94(C), pages 155-169.
    18. Carolina Castaldi & Roberto Fontana & Alessandro Nuvolari, 2009. "‘Chariots of fire’: the evolution of tank technology, 1915–1945," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 19(4), pages 545-566, August.
    19. Luigi Orsenigo & Fabio Pammolli & Massimo Riccaboni & Andrea Bonaccorsi & Giuseppe Turchetti, 1997. "The Evolution of Knowledge and the Dynamics of an Industry Network," Journal of Management & Governance, Springer;Accademia Italiana di Economia Aziendale (AIDEA), vol. 1(2), pages 147-175, June.
    20. Francesco Vona & Francesco Nicolli & Lionel Nesta, 2012. "Determinants of renewable energy innovation: environmental policies vs. market regulation," Sciences Po publications 2012-05, Sciences Po.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:arx:papers:1909.05689. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: arXiv administrators (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://arxiv.org/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.