IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hig/wpaper/38sti2015.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Approaches to Statistical Measurement of Advanced Technologies: A Comparative Study

Author

Listed:
  • Alina R. Kadyrova

    (National Research University Higher School of Economics)

Abstract

The paper presents an analysis of advanced technology classifications development. Despite the variety of technology types – advanced, emerging, disruptive, enabling, best available – the focus of the study is made on the first type considering their precedent character, crucial role for manufacturing and overall economic development. Various approaches to define the term ‘advanced technology’ as well as gradual evolution of the definitions and classifications are demonstrated in the paper. It is argued that the initial understanding of advanced technologies was formed in early 1990s and characterized increase in efficiency, hardware and software usage, robotics, etc. Further rapid progress of science and technology in 1990-2010s led to the expansion of the concept by the means of technologies based on fast computing, primarily used for design, control and track of manufacturing activities as well as micro- and nanotechnologies. Moreover, indicators used for measurement of their development and use are compared

Suggested Citation

  • Alina R. Kadyrova, 2015. "Approaches to Statistical Measurement of Advanced Technologies: A Comparative Study," HSE Working papers WP BRP 38/STI/2015, National Research University Higher School of Economics.
    • Handle: RePEc:hig:wpaper:38sti2015
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.hse.ru/data/2015/05/25/1096966792/38STI2015.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Peine, Alexander, 2008. "Technological paradigms and complex technical systems--The case of Smart Homes," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(3), pages 508-529, April.
    2. Juha Laurila, 1997. "The Thin Line Between Advanced and Conventional New Technology: A Case Study on Paper Industry Management," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 34(2), pages 219-239, March.
    3. Rodríguez, Elsa Mirta M. & Lacaze, María Victoria & Lupín, Beatriz, 2007. "Willingness to pay for organic food in Argentina: evidence from a consumer survey," Nülan. Deposited Documents 1300, Universidad Nacional de Mar del Plata, Facultad de Ciencias Económicas y Sociales, Centro de Documentación.
    4. Godin, Benoit, 2003. "The emergence of S&T indicators: why did governments supplement statistics with indicators?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(4), pages 679-691, April.
    5. G.S. Dangayach & S.G. Deshmukh, 2004. "Advanced manufacturing technologies: evidences from Indian automobile companies," International Journal of Manufacturing Technology and Management, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 6(5), pages 426-433.
    6. Godin, Benoit, 2007. "Science, accounting and statistics: The input-output framework," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(9), pages 1388-1403, November.
    7. Dosi, Giovanni, 1993. "Technological paradigms and technological trajectories : A suggested interpretation of the determinants and directions of technical change," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 22(2), pages 102-103, April.
    8. Pyke, David & Farley, John & Robb, David, 2002. "Manufacturing Technology and Operations in China:: A Survey of State-owned Enterprises, Private Firms, Joint Ventures and Wholly-owned Foreign Subsidiaries," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 20(4), pages 356-375, August.
    9. N/A, 1962. "Research and Development : a Comparison Between British and American Industry," National Institute Economic Review, National Institute of Economic and Social Research, vol. 20(1), pages 21-32, May.
    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. Janger, Jürgen & Schubert, Torben & Andries, Petra & Rammer, Christian & Hoskens, Machteld, 2017. "The EU 2020 innovation indicator: A step forward in measuring innovation outputs and outcomes?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(1), pages 30-42.
    2. Tsao, J.Y. & Boyack, K.W. & Coltrin, M.E. & Turnley, J.G. & Gauster, W.B., 2008. "Galileo's stream: A framework for understanding knowledge production," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(2), pages 330-352, March.
    3. V. L. Tambovtsev, 2019. "Institutions-technologies interaction and economic growth," Journal of New Economy, Ural State University of Economics, vol. 20(2), pages 55-70, May.
    4. Fabian Muniesa & Dominique Linhardt, 2009. "At stake with implementation: trials of explicitness in the description of the state," Working Papers halshs-00362285, HAL.
    5. Muscio, Alessandro & Nardone, Gianluca & Stasi, Antonio, 2012. "Perceived Technological Regimes: An Empirical Analysis of the Apulian Wine Industry," 2012 International European Forum, February 13-17, 2012, Innsbruck-Igls, Austria 144969, International European Forum on System Dynamics and Innovation in Food Networks.
    6. Andrey V. Misyura, 2019. "High-tech industrial company: A normative and a positive approach to the definition," Journal of New Economy, Ural State University of Economics, vol. 20(4), pages 88-107, September.
    7. Cerulli, Giovanni, 2014. "The Impact of Technological Capabilities on Invention: An Investigation Based on Country Responsiveness Scores," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 147-165.
    8. Fabian Muniesa & Dominique Linhardt, 2009. "At stake with implementation: trials of explicitness in the description of the state," CSI Working Papers Series 015, Centre de Sociologie de l'Innovation (CSI), Mines ParisTech.
    9. Narayanan, V.K. & Chen, Tianxu, 2012. "Research on technology standards: Accomplishment and challenges," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(8), pages 1375-1406.
    10. Muniesa, Fabian & Linhardt, Dominique, 2011. "Trials of explicitness in the implementation of public management reform," CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTING, Elsevier, vol. 22(6), pages 550-566.
    11. Alexander Peine, 2008. "Challenging incommensurability – What we can learn from Ludwik Fleck for the analysis of complex technical systems," Innovation Studies Utrecht (ISU) working paper series 08-21, Utrecht University, Department of Innovation Studies, revised Oct 2008.
    12. Gil, Nuno & Miozzo, Marcela & Massini, Silvia, 2012. "The innovation potential of new infrastructure development: An empirical study of Heathrow airport's T5 project," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(2), pages 452-466.
    13. Arman Avadikyan & Gilles Lambert & Christophe Lerch, 2016. "A Multi-Level Perspective on Ambidexterity: The Case of a Synchrotron Research Facility," Working Papers of BETA 2016-44, Bureau d'Economie Théorique et Appliquée, UDS, Strasbourg.
    14. 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.
    15. Brautzsch, Hans-Ulrich & Günther, Jutta & Loose, Brigitte & Ludwig, Udo & Nulsch, Nicole, 2015. "Can R&D subsidies counteract the economic crisis? – Macroeconomic effects in Germany," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(3), pages 623-633.
    16. Balland, Pierre-Alexandre & Boschma, Ron, 2022. "Do scientific capabilities in specific domains matter for technological diversification in European regions?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(10).
    17. Grillitsch, Markus & Asheim, Björn & Fünfschilling, Lea & Kelmenson, Sophie & Lowe, Nichola & Lundquist, Karl Johan & Mahmoud, Yahia & Martynovich, Mikhail & Mattson, Pauline & Miörner, Johan & Nilsso, 2023. "Rescaling: An Analytical Lense to Study Economic and Industrial Shifts," Papers in Innovation Studies 2023/11, Lund University, CIRCLE - Centre for Innovation Research.
    18. Oliver Falck & Anita Dietrich & Tobias Lohse & Friederike Welter & Heike Belitz & Cedric von der Hellen & Carsten Dreher & Carsten Schwäbe & Dietmar Harhoff & Monika Schnitzer & Uschi Backes-Gellner &, 2019. "Steuerliche Forschungsförderung: Wichtiger Impuls für FuE-Aktivitäten oder zu wenig zielgerichtet?," ifo Schnelldienst, ifo Institute - Leibniz Institute for Economic Research at the University of Munich, vol. 72(09), pages 03-25, May.
    19. Silverberg, Gerald & Verspagen, Bart, 2002. "A Percolation Model of Innovation in Complex Technology," Research Memorandum 032, Maastricht University, Maastricht Economic Research Institute on Innovation and Technology (MERIT).
    20. 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.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    advanced technology; technological development; technology classification;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • O14 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Economic Development - - - Industrialization; Manufacturing and Service Industries; Choice of Technology
    • O31 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Innovation and Invention: Processes and Incentives
    • O33 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Technological Change: Choices and Consequences; Diffusion Processes

    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:hig:wpaper:38sti2015. 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: Shamil Abdulaev or Shamil Abdulaev (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/hsecoru.html .

    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.