IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/teinso/v30y2008i3p423-428.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Autonomy, security, and inequality: China, India, the United States, and the globalization of science and technology

Author

Listed:
  • Segal, Adam

Abstract

Perhaps no three countries have benefited from the globalization of science and technology (S&T) more than India, China, and the United States. All three have leveraged the growing internationalization of innovation to offset weaknesses in their own national innovation systems. Still, globalization raises critical questions of autonomy, security, and equality, and in turn the political struggle over these three issues shapes the pace and scope of the globalization of S&T. Significant deterioration on any one of these criterion could lead to substantially less support among policy makers and the public for the globally networked system of innovation that appears to be emerging.

Suggested Citation

  • Segal, Adam, 2008. "Autonomy, security, and inequality: China, India, the United States, and the globalization of science and technology," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 30(3), pages 423-428.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:teinso:v:30:y:2008:i:3:p:423-428
    DOI: 10.1016/j.techsoc.2008.04.008
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160791X08000195
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.techsoc.2008.04.008?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. Montek S. Ahluwalia, 2002. "Economic Reforms in India Since 1991: Has Gradualism Worked?," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 16(3), pages 67-88, Summer.
    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. Olukayode Emmanuel Maku & Olorunfemi Yasiru Alimi & Fidelis Obioma Ogwumike, 2021. "Transmission Mechanism of Globalization and Its Impact on Human Welfare Development in Sub-Saharan African Countries," Business & Management Compass, University of Economics Varna, issue 1, pages 45-64.
    2. Arnaldi, Simone & Quaglio, GianLuca & Ladikas, Miltos & O'Kane, Hannah & Karapiperis, Theodoros & Srinivas, Krishna Ravi & Zhao, Yandong, 2015. "Responsible governance in science and technology policy: Reflections from Europe, China and India," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 81-92.
    3. Ping Lv & Monica Plechero & Rakesh Basant, 2013. "International competitive strategy choices: comparing firms in China and India," Asia Pacific Business Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 19(4), pages 542-558, October.

    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. Michele Peruzzi & Alessio Terzi, 2018. "Growth Accelerations Strategies," CID Working Papers 91a, Center for International Development at Harvard University.
    2. Bhatta, Bibek & Marshall, Andrew P. & Neupane-Joshi, Suman & Thapa, Chandra, 2021. "Foreign Ownership and the Enforcement of Corporate Governance Reforms," QBS Working Paper Series 2021/02, Queen's University Belfast, Queen's Business School.
    3. Karthigai Prakasam Chellaswamy & Natchimuthu N & Muhammadriyaj Faniband, 2021. "Stock Market Reforms and Stock Market Performance," International Journal of Financial Research, International Journal of Financial Research, Sciedu Press, vol. 12(2), pages 202-209, April.
    4. Chari, Murali D.R. & Banalieva, Elitsa R., 2015. "How do pro-market reforms impact firm profitability? The case of India under reform," Journal of World Business, Elsevier, vol. 50(2), pages 357-367.
    5. Sushanta Mallick & Helena Marques, 2008. "Passthrough of Exchange Rate and Tariffs into Import Prices of India: Currency Depreciation versus Import Liberalization," Review of International Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 16(4), pages 765-782, September.
    6. Choorikkad Veermani, 2004. "Trade liberalisation, multinational involvement, and intra-industry trade in manufacturing," Indian Council for Research on International Economic Relations, New Delhi Working Papers 143, Indian Council for Research on International Economic Relations, New Delhi, India.
    7. Dani Rodrik & Arvind Subramanian, 2005. "From "Hindu Growth" to Productivity Surge: The Mystery of the Indian Growth Transition," IMF Staff Papers, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 52(2), pages 193-228, September.
    8. repec:kqi:journl:2018-2-1-2 is not listed on IDEAS
    9. Siddiqur Osmani, 2009. "Explaining Growth in South Asia," Chapters, in: Gary McMahon & Hadi Salehi Esfahani & Lyn Squire (ed.), Diversity in Economic Growth, chapter 3, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    10. Bhattacharya, Mita & Okafor, Luke Emeka & Pradeep, V., 2021. "International firm activities, R&D, and productivity: Evidence from Indian manufacturing firms," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 97(C), pages 1-13.
    11. Hideki ESHO, 2008. "Comment on “The Political Economy of India's Economic Reforms”," Asian Economic Policy Review, Japan Center for Economic Research, vol. 3(2), pages 334-335, December.
    12. Landes, Rip & Gulati, Ashok, 2003. "Policy Reform and Farm Sector Adjustment in India," Policy Reform and Adjustment Workshop, October 23-25, 2003, Imperial College London, Wye Campus 15735, International Agricultural Policy Reform and Adjustment Project (IAPRAP).
    13. Andrea Szabo & Gergely Ujhelyi, 2014. "Can Information Reduce Nonpayment for Public Utilities? Experimental Evidence from South Africa," Working Papers 2014-114-31, Department of Economics, University of Houston.
    14. Beverlley Madzikanda & Cai Li & Francis Tang Dabuo, 2021. "What Determines the Geography of Entrepreneurship? A Comparative Study Between Sub-Saharan Africa and South-East Asia," Journal of Entrepreneurship and Innovation in Emerging Economies, Entrepreneurship Development Institute of India, vol. 7(2), pages 246-262, July.
    15. Monteagudo, Josefina & Rojas, Laura & Stabilito, Augusto & Watanuki, Masakazu, 2004. "The New Challenges of the Regional Trade Agenda for the Andean Countries," Conference papers 331234, Purdue University, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Global Trade Analysis Project.
    16. Arjun Jayadev & J.W. Mason & Enno Schröder, 2018. "The Political Economy of Financialization in the United States, Europe and India," Development and Change, International Institute of Social Studies, vol. 49(2), pages 353-374, March.
    17. Turhan, Ibrahim M., 2008. "Why did it work this time: a comparative analysis of transformation of Turkish economy after 2002," MPRA Paper 31158, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    18. Reddy, K.S. & Xie, En & Huang, Yuanyuan, 2016. "Cross-border acquisitions by state-owned and private enterprises: A perspective from emerging economies," Journal of Policy Modeling, Elsevier, vol. 38(6), pages 1147-1170.
    19. Ramesh Chandra & Rajiv Kumar, 2010. "South Asian Integration: Prospects and Lessons from East Asia," Chapters, in: Masahiro Kawai & Jong-Wha Lee & Peter A. Petri & Giovanni Capanelli (ed.), Asian Regionalism in the World Economy, chapter 12, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    20. Soumyadip Chattopadhyay, 2018. "Social Sector Expenditure in India in the 2000s: Trends and Implications," Journal of Development Policy and Practice, , vol. 3(1), pages 16-40, January.
    21. Raghbendra JHA, 2008. "Economic Reforms and Human Development Indicators in India," Asian Economic Policy Review, Japan Center for Economic Research, vol. 3(2), pages 290-310, December.

    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:teinso:v:30:y:2008:i:3:p:423-428. 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: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/technology-in-society .

    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.