IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/unm/unumer/2019038.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Regulation and innovation under Industry 4.0: Case of medical/healthcare robot, HAL by Cyberdyne

Author

Listed:
  • Iizuka, Michiko

    (National Graduate Research Institute on Policy Studies (GRIPS), Tokyo, Japan)

  • Ikeda, Yoko

    (Research Institute of Economy, Trade and Industry (RIETI), Tokyo, Japan)

Abstract

Innovations using emerging technologies (artificial intelligence, robotics, the internet of things), are said to improve productivity and quality of life. On the other hand, the diffusion of such innovation involves risks and uncertainties regarding safety. Generally, these risks are managed by government by means of regulation. Yet it increasingly falls short on governing emerging technology due to innovations' global connectivity, commercialization and heightened risk & uncertainty. These pose challenges to firms for commercialization because emerging innovations often do not come under the existing product categories nor corresponding regulations. This study answers how product based on emerging technology commercialize, overcoming existing regulatory barriers on safety, using firm strategies and role of standards played, through an examination of the case of Cyberdyne, a successful medical/healthcare robotics company in Japan. Cyberdyne developed and commercialized the world's first product using cybernics in wearable medical/healthcare device. The case illustrates the increasing complexity of safety regulations and role of standards for firms to innovate applying emerging technologies. It concludes with an exploration of policy considerations regarding the regulation in dealing with emerging technologies under Industry 4.0.

Suggested Citation

  • Iizuka, Michiko & Ikeda, Yoko, 2019. "Regulation and innovation under Industry 4.0: Case of medical/healthcare robot, HAL by Cyberdyne," MERIT Working Papers 2019-038, United Nations University - Maastricht Economic and Social Research Institute on Innovation and Technology (MERIT).
    • Handle: RePEc:unm:unumer:2019038
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.merit.unu.edu/publications/wppdf/2019/wp2019-038.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Edler, Jakob & Georghiou, Luke, 2007. "Public procurement and innovation--Resurrecting the demand side," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(7), pages 949-963, September.
    2. Anonymous, 1962. "Economic and Social Council," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 16(1), pages 195-216, January.
    3. Kenneth Arrow, 1962. "Economic Welfare and the Allocation of Resources for Invention," NBER Chapters, in: The Rate and Direction of Inventive Activity: Economic and Social Factors, pages 609-626, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    4. den Hartigh, Erik & Ortt, J. Roland & van de Kaa, Geerten & Stolwijk, Claire C.M., 2016. "Platform control during battles for market dominance: The case of Apple versus IBM in the early personal computer industry," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 48, pages 4-12.
    5. Margaret Sharp & Keith Pavitt, 1993. "Technology Policy in the 1990s: Old Trends and New Realities," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 31(2), pages 129-152, June.
    6. Narayanan, V.K. & Chen, Tianxu, 2012. "Research on technology standards: Accomplishment and challenges," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(8), pages 1375-1406.
    7. Knut Blind & Stephan Gauch, 2009. "Research and standardisation in nanotechnology: evidence from Germany," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 34(3), pages 320-342, June.
    8. Utterback, James M & Abernathy, William J, 1975. "A dynamic model of process and product innovation," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 3(6), pages 639-656, December.
    9. Wiegmann, Paul Moritz & de Vries, Henk J. & Blind, Knut, 2017. "Multi-mode standardisation: A critical review and a research agenda," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(8), pages 1370-1386.
    10. Michael A Witt & Arie Y Lewin, 2007. "Outward foreign direct investment as escape response to home country institutional constraints," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 38(4), pages 579-594, July.
    11. Michiko Iizuka, 2009. "Standards as a platform for innovation and learning in the global economy: a case study of the Chilean salmon farming industry," International Journal of Technological Learning, Innovation and Development, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 2(4), pages 274-293.
    12. Suarez, Fernando F., 2004. "Battles for technological dominance: an integrative framework," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(2), pages 271-286, March.
    13. Gregory Tassey, 2017. "Standards and expansion paths in high-tech industries," Chapters, in: Richard Hawkins & Knut Blind & Robert Page (ed.), Handbook of Innovation and Standards, chapter 7, pages 135-161, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    14. Richard R. Nelson, 1959. "The Simple Economics of Basic Scientific Research," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 67(3), pages 297-297.
    15. Klepper, Steven, 1997. "Industry Life Cycles," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 6(1), pages 145-181.
    16. Jain, Sanjay, 2012. "Pragmatic agency in technology standards setting: The case of Ethernet," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(9), pages 1643-1654.
    17. Nelson, Richard R. & Sampat, Bhaven N., 2001. "Making sense of institutions as a factor shaping economic performance," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 44(1), pages 31-54, January.
    18. Anonymous, 1962. "Economic and Social Council," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 16(4), pages 835-844, October.
    19. Anonymous, 1962. "Economic and Social Council," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 16(3), pages 587-596, July.
    20. Nemet, Gregory F., 2009. "Demand-pull, technology-push, and government-led incentives for non-incremental technical change," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(5), pages 700-709, June.
    21. Ruud E. Smits & Stefan Kuhlmann & Phillip Shapira (ed.), 2010. "The Theory and Practice of Innovation Policy," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 4181.
    22. Eads, George C, 1980. "Regulation and Technical Change: Some Largely Unexplored Influences," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 70(2), pages 50-54, May.
    23. Edwin Mansfield & John Rapoport & Jerome Schnee & Samuel Wagner & Michael Hamburger, 1971. "Research and Innovation in the Modern Corporation," Palgrave Macmillan Books, Palgrave Macmillan, number 978-1-349-01639-6.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Iizuka, Michiko & Ikeda, Yoko, 2021. "Regulation and innovation under the 4th industrial revolution: The case of a healthcare robot, HAL by Cyberdyne," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 108(C).

    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. Iizuka, Michiko & Ikeda, Yoko, 2021. "Regulation and innovation under the 4th industrial revolution: The case of a healthcare robot, HAL by Cyberdyne," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 108(C).
    2. Paraskevopoulou, Evita, 2012. "Non-technological regulatory effects: Implications for innovation and innovation policy," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(6), pages 1058-1071.
    3. Hu, Yefei & Liu, Dayong, 2022. "Government as a non-financial participant in innovation: How standardization led by government promotes regional innovation performance in China," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 114(C).
    4. Cozzarin, Brian P., 2008. "Data and the measurement of R&D program impacts," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 31(3), pages 284-298, August.
    5. Hana Ayala, 2020. "Transnational Resort: a Transformative Investment in the Global Knowledge Economy," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 11(4), pages 1573-1595, December.
    6. Hana Ayala, 2017. "The Economic Might of Earth’s Evolution: The Epic Promise of Knowledge," SAGE Open, , vol. 7(2), pages 21582440177, April.
    7. Jürgen Janger & Agnes Kügler & Andreas Reinstaller & Peter Reschenhofer & Fabian Unterlass, 2017. "Austria 2025 – A New Strategic Innovation Policy Framework. Addressing Structural Change and Upgrading," WIFO Studies, WIFO, number 59290, February.
    8. Becker, Lasse & Bizer, Kilian, 2015. "Federalism and innovation support for small and medium-sized enterprises: Empirical evidence in Europe," University of Göttingen Working Papers in Economics 245, University of Goettingen, Department of Economics.
    9. Beom Cheol Cin & Young Jun Kim & Nicholas S. Vonortas, 2017. "The impact of public R&D subsidy on small firm productivity: evidence from Korean SMEs," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 48(2), pages 345-360, February.
    10. Clément Bonnet, 2016. "Revisiting the optimal patent policy tradeoff for environmental technologies," EconomiX Working Papers 2016-34, University of Paris Nanterre, EconomiX.
    11. Anabela Santos & Michele Cincera & Paulo Neto & Maria Manuel Serrano, 2019. "How internationalization and competitiveness contribute to get public support to innovation? The Portuguese case," GEE Papers 0121, Gabinete de Estratégia e Estudos, Ministério da Economia, revised May 2019.
    12. Anders Gustafsson & Andreas Stephan & Alice Hallman & Nils Karlsson, 2016. "The “sugar rush” from innovation subsidies: a robust political economy perspective," Empirica, Springer;Austrian Institute for Economic Research;Austrian Economic Association, vol. 43(4), pages 729-756, November.
    13. Li, Qing & Zhang, Huaige & Hong, Xianpei, 2020. "Knowledge structure of technology licensing based on co-keywords network: A review and future directions," International Review of Economics & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 66(C), pages 154-165.
    14. Marc Baudry & Adrien Hervouet, 2017. "The private value of plant variety protection and the impact of exemption rules," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 26(3), pages 202-226, April.
    15. Jean-Marc Fournier, 2016. "The Positive Effect of Public Investment on Potential Growth," OECD Economics Department Working Papers 1347, OECD Publishing.
    16. Wiegmann, Paul Moritz & de Vries, Henk J. & Blind, Knut, 2017. "Multi-mode standardisation: A critical review and a research agenda," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(8), pages 1370-1386.
    17. Andrew T. Ching & Hyunwoo Lim, 2020. "A Structural Model of Correlated Learning and Late-Mover Advantages: The Case of Statins," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 66(3), pages 1095-1123, March.
    18. Hervouet, Adrien & Langinier, Corinne, 2018. "Plant Breeders’ Rights, Patents, and Incentives to Innovate," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 43(1), January.
    19. Philippe Aghion & Stefan Bechtold & Lea Cassar & Holger Herz, 2018. "The Causal Effects of Competition on Innovation: Experimental Evidence," The Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 34(2), pages 162-195.
    20. Fengqing Zhang & Erjia Yan & Xin Niu & Yongjun Zhu, 2018. "Joint modeling of the association between NIH funding and its three primary outcomes: patents, publications, and citation impact," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 117(1), pages 591-602, October.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Regulation; standards; Industry 4.0; emerging technology; robotics; institutional arbitration; governance; Japan;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • O33 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Technological Change: Choices and Consequences; Diffusion Processes
    • F23 - International Economics - - International Factor Movements and International Business - - - Multinational Firms; International Business
    • I18 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Health - - - Government Policy; Regulation; Public Health
    • L15 - Industrial Organization - - Market Structure, Firm Strategy, and Market Performance - - - Information and Product Quality

    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:unm:unumer:2019038. 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: Ad Notten (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/meritnl.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.