IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/respol/v48y2019i1p385-400.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Country-level technological disparities, market feedback, and scientists’ choice of technologies

Author

Listed:
  • Jin, Byungchae

Abstract

This study investigates whether country-level technological disparities influence individual scientists’ choice of research agenda and, if so, how the effect of country-level technological disparities on individuals’ research activities differs before and after technology commercialization. To address these research questions, we use research proceedings published from the International Electric Vehicle Symposium (EVS) from 1990 to 2009. We find that a country’s technological capabilities tend to prevent its scientists from studying electric vehicles (defined as a disruptive technology) but encourage them to study hybrid vehicles (defined as a sustaining technology) before electric and hybrid vehicles are launched in the automobile market. We also find that a country’s technological capabilities do not subsequently help its scientists shift their research activities to the technologies that have received positive initial feedback from automobile markets.

Suggested Citation

  • Jin, Byungchae, 2019. "Country-level technological disparities, market feedback, and scientists’ choice of technologies," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(1), pages 385-400.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:respol:v:48:y:2019:i:1:p:385-400
    DOI: 10.1016/j.respol.2018.09.007
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0048733318302282
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.respol.2018.09.007?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Chesbrough, Henry W, 1999. "The Organizational Impact of Technological Change: A Comparative Theory of National Institutional Factors," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 8(3), pages 447-485, September.
    2. Lee, Keun & Lim, Chaisung, 2001. "Technological regimes, catching-up and leapfrogging: findings from the Korean industries," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 30(3), pages 459-483, March.
    3. Thompson, Samuel B., 2011. "Simple formulas for standard errors that cluster by both firm and time," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 99(1), pages 1-10, January.
    4. Kogut, Bruce & Chang, Sea Jin, 1991. "Technological Capabilities and Japanese Foreign Direct Investment in the United States," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 73(3), pages 401-413, August.
    5. Arthur, W Brian, 1989. "Competing Technologies, Increasing Returns, and Lock-In by Historical Events," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 99(394), pages 116-131, March.
    6. Marc Rysman & Timothy Simcoe, 2008. "Patents and the Performance of Voluntary Standard-Setting Organizations," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 54(11), pages 1920-1934, November.
    7. Paul Almeida & Anupama Phene, 2004. "Subsidiaries and knowledge creation: the influence of the MNC and host country on innovation," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 25(8‐9), pages 847-864, August.
    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. Bakker, Sjoerd & van Lente, Harro & Meeus, Marius T.H., 2012. "Dominance in the prototyping phase—The case of hydrogen passenger cars," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(5), pages 871-883.
    10. Fai, Felicia & von Tunzelmann, Nicholas, 2001. "Industry-specific competencies and converging technological systems: evidence from patents," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 12(2), pages 141-170, July.
    11. Lee, Keun & Malerba, Franco, 2017. "Catch-up cycles and changes in industrial leadership:Windows of opportunity and responses of firms and countries in the evolution of sectoral systems," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(2), pages 338-351.
    12. Robert Salomon & Byungchae Jin, 2010. "Do leading or lagging firms learn more from exporting?," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 31(10), pages 1088-1113, October.
    13. Farrell, Joseph & Saloner, Garth, 1986. "Installed Base and Compatibility: Innovation, Product Preannouncements, and Predation," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 76(5), pages 940-955, December.
    14. John Cantwell & John H Dunning & Sarianna M Lundan, 2010. "An evolutionary approach to understanding international business activity: The co-evolution of MNEs and the institutional environment," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 41(4), pages 567-586, May.
    15. Phene, Anupama & Almeida, Paul, 2003. "How do firms evolve? The patterns of technological evolution of semiconductor subsidiaries," International Business Review, Elsevier, vol. 12(3), pages 349-367, June.
    16. Furman, Jeffrey L. & Hayes, Richard, 2004. "Catching up or standing still?: National innovative productivity among 'follower' countries, 1978-1999," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(9), pages 1329-1354, November.
    17. Eirik Gaard Kristiansen, 1998. "R&D in the Presence of Network Externalities: Timing and Compatibility," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 29(3), pages 531-547, Autumn.
    18. Jeffrey A. Roberts & Il-Horn Hann & Sandra A. Slaughter, 2006. "Understanding the Motivations, Participation, and Performance of Open Source Software Developers: A Longitudinal Study of the Apache Projects," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 52(7), pages 984-999, July.
    19. Glenn Hoetker, 2007. "The use of logit and probit models in strategic management research: Critical issues," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 28(4), pages 331-343, April.
    20. Jeffrey M Wooldridge, 2010. "Econometric Analysis of Cross Section and Panel Data," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 2, volume 1, number 0262232588, December.
    21. Christensen, Clayton M. & Rosenbloom, Richard S., 1995. "Explaining the attacker's advantage: Technological paradigms, organizational dynamics, and the value network," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 24(2), pages 233-257, March.
    22. Gene M. Grossman & Elhanan Helpman, 1994. "Endogenous Innovation in the Theory of Growth," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 8(1), pages 23-44, Winter.
    23. Gong, Guan & Keller, Wolfgang, 2003. "Convergence and polarization in global income levels: a review of recent results on the role of international technology diffusion," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(6), pages 1055-1079, June.
    24. Kenney, Martin & von Burg, Urs, 1999. "Technology, Entrepreneurship and Path Dependence: Industrial Clustering in Silicon Valley and Route 128," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 8(1), pages 67-103, March.
    25. James Wade, 1995. "Dynamics of organizational communities and technological bandwagons: An empirical investigation of community evolution in the microprocessor market," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 16(S1), pages 111-133.
    26. Fernando F. Suárez & James M. Utterback, 1995. "Dominant designs and the survival of firms," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 16(6), pages 415-430.
    27. Katz, Michael L & Shapiro, Carl, 1986. "Technology Adoption in the Presence of Network Externalities," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 94(4), pages 822-841, August.
    28. Robert M. Salomon & J. Myles Shaver, 2005. "Learning by Exporting: New Insights from Examining Firm Innovation," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 14(2), pages 431-460, June.
    29. Robert Salomon & Byungchae Jin, 2008. "Does knowledge spill to leaders or laggards? Exploring industry heterogeneity in learning by exporting," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 39(1), pages 132-150, January.
    30. Klochikhin, Evgeny A., 2012. "Russia's innovation policy: Stubborn path-dependencies and new approaches," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(9), pages 1620-1630.
    31. Patel, Pari & Pavitt, Keith, 1997. "The technological competencies of the world's largest firms: Complex and path-dependent, but not much variety," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 26(2), pages 141-156, May.
    32. Jongseok Lee & Jeho Lee & Habin Lee, 2003. "Exploration and Exploitation in the Presence of Network Externalities," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 49(4), pages 553-570, April.
    33. Eric von Hippel, 1998. "Economics of Product Development by Users: The Impact of "Sticky" Local Information," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 44(5), pages 629-644, May.
    34. Cantwell, John, 2000. "Technological lock-in of large firms since the interwar period," European Review of Economic History, Cambridge University Press, vol. 4(2), pages 147-174, August.
    35. Furman, Jeffrey L. & Porter, Michael E. & Stern, Scott, 2002. "The determinants of national innovative capacity," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 31(6), pages 899-933, August.
    36. Paul D. Allison, 1999. "Comparing Logit and Probit Coefficients Across Groups," Sociological Methods & Research, , vol. 28(2), pages 186-208, November.
    37. Katarina Blomkvist & Philip Kappen & Ivo Zander, 2010. "Quo vadis? The entry into new technologies in advanced foreign subsidiaries of the multinational enterprise," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 41(9), pages 1525-1549, December.
    38. Richard Williams, 2009. "Using Heterogeneous Choice Models to Compare Logit and Probit Coefficients Across Groups," Sociological Methods & Research, , vol. 37(4), pages 531-559, May.
    39. Cantwell, John & Vertova, Giovanna, 2004. "Historical evolution of technological diversification," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(3), pages 511-529, April.
    40. Benvignati, Anita M, 1990. "Industry Determinants and "Differences" in U.S. Intrafirm and Arms-Length Exports," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 72(3), pages 481-488, August.
    41. Rosenberg,Nathan, 1994. "Exploring the Black Box," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521459556, January.
    42. Arellano, M, 1987. "Computing Robust Standard Errors for Within-Groups Estimators," Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, Department of Economics, University of Oxford, vol. 49(4), pages 431-434, November.
    43. Kravis, Irving B & Lipsey, Robert E, 1992. "Sources of Competitiveness of the United States and of Its Multinational Firms," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 74(2), pages 193-201, May.
    44. Paola Criscuolo, 2006. "The 'home advantage' effect and patent families. A comparison of OECD triadic patents, the USPTO and the EPO," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 66(1), pages 23-41, January.
    45. Christoph H. Loch & Bernardo A. Huberman, 1999. "A Punctuated-Equilibrium Model of Technology Diffusion," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 45(2), pages 160-177, February.
    46. Joan Penner‐Hahn & J. Myles Shaver, 2005. "Does international research and development increase patent output? An analysis of Japanese pharmaceutical firms," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 26(2), pages 121-140, February.
    47. David M. Waguespack & Lee Fleming, 2009. "Scanning the Commons? Evidence on the Benefits to Startups Participating in Open Standards Development," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 55(2), pages 210-223, February.
    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. Willoughby, Kelvin W. & Mullina, Nadezhda, 2021. "Reverse innovation, international patenting and economic inertia: Constraints to appropriating the benefits of technological innovation," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 67(C).
    2. Wentian Shi & Quansheng Fu & Wenlong Yang & Fan Yang & Xiao Lin & Xueying Mu, 2022. "The spatial relationship between the mobility and scientific cooperation of Chinese scientists," Growth and Change, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 53(2), pages 951-971, June.

    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. Narayanan, V.K. & Chen, Tianxu, 2012. "Research on technology standards: Accomplishment and challenges," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(8), pages 1375-1406.
    2. van de Kaa, Geerten & de Vries, Henk J., 2015. "Factors for winning format battles: A comparative case study," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 91(C), pages 222-235.
    3. René Belderbos & Boris Lokshin & Federico Michiel, 2021. "R&D and Foreign Subsidiary Performance at or Below the Technology Frontier," Management International Review, Springer, vol. 61(6), pages 745-767, December.
    4. García, Francisco & Jin, Byungchae & Salomon, Robert, 2013. "Does inward foreign direct investment improve the innovative performance of local firms?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(1), pages 231-244.
    5. Suarez, Fernando F., 2004. "Battles for technological dominance: an integrative framework," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(2), pages 271-286, March.
    6. Valle, Sandra & García, Francisco & Avella, Lucía, 2015. "Offshoring Intermediate Manufacturing: Boost or Hindrance to Firm Innovation?," Journal of International Management, Elsevier, vol. 21(2), pages 117-134.
    7. Wen, Wen & Forman, Chris & Jarvenpaa, Sirkka L, 2022. "The effects of technology standards on complementor innovations: Evidence from the IETF," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(6).
    8. 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.
    9. Papachristos, George, 2017. "Diversity in technology competition: The link between platforms and sociotechnical transitions," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 291-306.
    10. García, Francisco & Avella, Lucía & Fernández, Esteban, 2012. "Learning from exporting: The moderating effect of technological capabilities," International Business Review, Elsevier, vol. 21(6), pages 1099-1111.
    11. Sillanpää, Antti & Laamanen, Tomi, 2009. "Positive and negative feedback effects in competition for dominance of network business systems," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(5), pages 871-884, June.
    12. Ewald Scherm & Christian Maaß, 2006. "Zum Stellenwert der Netzwerkökonomik in der Strategie-/Marketingforschung —Eine Analyse empirischer Untersuchungen," Metrika: International Journal for Theoretical and Applied Statistics, Springer, vol. 17(1), pages 27-46, March.
    13. Peeters, T.J.G., 2013. "External knowledge search and use in new product development," Other publications TiSEM 300ebb34-b090-4210-b95e-f, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    14. Beomjin Choi & T. S. Raghu & Ajay Vinzé & Kevin J. Dooley, 2019. "Effectiveness of standards consortia: Social network perspectives," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 21(2), pages 405-416, April.
    15. Zhang, Feng & Jiang, Guohua & Cantwell, John A., 2015. "Subsidiary exploration and the innovative performance of large multinational corporations," International Business Review, Elsevier, vol. 24(2), pages 224-234.
    16. Cecere, Grazia & Corrocher, Nicoletta & Battaglia, Riccardo David, 2015. "Innovation and competition in the smartphone industry: Is there a dominant design?," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(3), pages 162-175.
    17. Vialle, Pierre & Song, Junjie & Zhang, Jian, 2012. "Competing with dominant global standards in a catching-up context. The case of mobile standards in China," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(10), pages 832-846.
    18. Blomkvist, Katarina & Kappen, Philip & Zander, Ivo, 2014. "Superstar inventors—Towards a people-centric perspective on the geography of technological renewal in the multinational corporation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(4), pages 669-682.
    19. Justus Baron & Daniel F. Spulber, 2018. "Technology Standards and Standard Setting Organizations: Introduction to the Searle Center Database," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 27(3), pages 462-503, September.
    20. Murmann, Johann Peter & Frenken, Koen, 2006. "Toward a systematic framework for research on dominant designs, technological innovations, and industrial change," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(7), pages 925-952, September.

    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:eee:respol:v:48:y:2019:i:1:p:385-400. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/respol .

    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.