IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v9y2017i5p786-d98024.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Cross-Strait Comparison of Innovation Policy under Industry 4.0 and Sustainability Development Transition

Author

Listed:
  • Kuan Chung Lin

    (Institute of Technology Management, National Chiao Tung University, No. 1001 Ta-Hsueh Road, Hsinchu 300, Taiwan)

  • Joseph Z. Shyu

    (Institute of Technology Management, National Chiao Tung University, No. 1001 Ta-Hsueh Road, Hsinchu 300, Taiwan
    School of Public Management and Law, Dalian University of Technology, No. 2 Linggong Road, Ganjingzi District, Dalian 116024, Liaoning, China)

  • Kun Ding

    (School of Public Management and Law, Dalian University of Technology, No. 2 Linggong Road, Ganjingzi District, Dalian 116024, Liaoning, China)

Abstract

While the advent of Industry 4.0 is emblematic of national strategy for industrial revitalization, the proliferation of technology has drastically changed the landscape of many major sectors of global industries. Industry 4.0 encompasses multi-dimensional concepts—including computerization, digitization, and intelligentization—of business operations based on cyber-physical-systems (CPS) and the Internet-of-Things (IoTs). The vision of Industry 4.0 will bring about improvements in industrial processes, ranging from engineering, material usage, supply chains, and product lifecycle management, to the horizontal value chain. This research project adopts a descriptive analysis with descriptive statistics under the innovation policy framework proposed by Rothwell and Zegveld. This report also informs a comparative policy analysis across China and Taiwan. From the perspectives of industry coalition and competition, this cross-strait comparison lends itself to being a policy-making reference. Results reveal that China, in terms of policy-making, concentrates on ‘political’ and ‘legal/regulatory’ aspects of environmental policy, as well as the theme of ‘public service’ of the demand-side policy. Taiwan also emphasizes the ‘environmental-side’ policy like China, whereas Taiwan focuses more on ‘education/training’ of the supply-side policy.

Suggested Citation

  • Kuan Chung Lin & Joseph Z. Shyu & Kun Ding, 2017. "A Cross-Strait Comparison of Innovation Policy under Industry 4.0 and Sustainability Development Transition," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(5), pages 1-17, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:9:y:2017:i:5:p:786-:d:98024
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/9/5/786/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/9/5/786/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Burns, John Edward & Kang, Jin-Su, 2012. "Comparative economic analysis of supporting policies for residential solar PV in the United States: Solar Renewable Energy Credit (SREC) potential," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(C), pages 217-225.
    2. Laird, Frank N. & Stefes, Christoph, 2009. "The diverging paths of German and United States policies for renewable energy: Sources of difference," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(7), pages 2619-2629, July.
    3. Lin, Chen-Chun & Yang, Chia-Han & Shyua, Joseph Z., 2013. "A comparison of innovation policy in the smart grid industry across the pacific: China and the USA," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 57(C), pages 119-132.
    4. Kim, Tai-Yoo & Kim, Seung-Rae, 1993. "An integrated energy policy for Korea: The case of an energy importing country," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 21(10), pages 1001-1010, October.
    5. Lau, Lee Chung & Tan, Kok Tat & Lee, Keat Teong & Mohamed, Abdul Rahman, 2009. "A comparative study on the energy policies in Japan and Malaysia in fulfilling their nations' obligations towards the Kyoto Protocol," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(11), pages 4771-4778, November.
    6. Roy Rothwell & Walter Zegveld, 1984. "An Assessment Of Government Innovation Policies," Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 3(3‐4), pages 436-444, May.
    7. Simona O. Negro & Marko P. Hekkert, 2008. "Explaining the success of emerging technologies by innovation system functioning: the case of biomass digestion in Germany," Innovation Studies Utrecht (ISU) working paper series 08-08, Utrecht University, Department of Innovation Studies, revised Feb 2008.
    8. Loiter, Jeffrey M. & Norberg-Bohm, Vicki, 1999. "Technology policy and renewable energy: public roles in the development of new energy technologies," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 27(2), pages 85-97, February.
    9. Kissel, Johannes M. & Krauter, Stefan C.W., 2006. "Adaptations of renewable energy policies to unstable macroeconomic situations--Case study: Wind power in Brazil," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(18), pages 3591-3598, December.
    10. Connie L. McNeely & Jong-on Hahm, 2014. "The Big (Data) Bang: Policy, Prospects, and Challenges," Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 31(4), pages 304-310, July.
    11. Dodgson, Mark & Hughes, Alan & Foster, John & Metcalfe, Stan, 2011. "Systems thinking, market failure, and the development of innovation policy: The case of Australia," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(9), pages 1145-1156.
    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. Lin, Chen-Chun & Yang, Chia-Han & Shyua, Joseph Z., 2013. "A comparison of innovation policy in the smart grid industry across the pacific: China and the USA," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 57(C), pages 119-132.
    2. Lee, Amy H.I. & Chen, Hsing Hung & Chen, Jack, 2017. "Building smart grid to power the next century in Taiwan," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 68(P1), pages 126-135.
    3. Solangi, K.H. & Islam, M.R. & Saidur, R. & Rahim, N.A. & Fayaz, H., 2011. "A review on global solar energy policy," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 15(4), pages 2149-2163, May.
    4. Guiwen Liu & Zhiyong Yi & Xiaoling Zhang & Asheem Shrestha & Igor Martek & Lizhen Wei, 2017. "An Evaluation of Urban Renewal Policies of Shenzhen, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(6), pages 1-17, June.
    5. Stokes, Leah C., 2013. "The politics of renewable energy policies: The case of feed-in tariffs in Ontario, Canada," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 56(C), pages 490-500.
    6. Oliver O. Apeh & Edson L. Meyer & Ochuko K. Overen, 2022. "Contributions of Solar Photovoltaic Systems to Environmental and Socioeconomic Aspects of National Development—A Review," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(16), pages 1-28, August.
    7. Pereira da Silva, Patrícia & Dantas, Guilherme & Pereira, Guillermo Ivan & Câmara, Lorrane & De Castro, Nivalde J., 2019. "Photovoltaic distributed generation – An international review on diffusion, support policies, and electricity sector regulatory adaptation," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 103(C), pages 30-39.
    8. Eid, Cherrelle & Codani, Paul & Perez, Yannick & Reneses, Javier & Hakvoort, Rudi, 2016. "Managing electric flexibility from Distributed Energy Resources: A review of incentives for market design," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 64(C), pages 237-247.
    9. -, 2023. "Foreign Direct Investment in Latin America and the Caribbean 2023," La Inversión Extranjera Directa en América Latina y el Caribe, Naciones Unidas Comisión Económica para América Latina y el Caribe (CEPAL), number 48979 edited by Eclac.
    10. Lee, Keun & Juma, Calestous & Mathews, John, 2014. "Innovation capabilities for sustainable development in Africa," WIDER Working Paper Series 062, World Institute for Development Economic Research (UNU-WIDER).
    11. Harborne, Paul & Hendry, Chris, 2009. "Pathways to commercial wind power in the US, Europe and Japan: The role of demonstration projects and field trials in the innovation process," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(9), pages 3580-3595, September.
    12. Liu, Shen & Colson, Gregory & Hao, Na & Wetzstein, Michael, 2018. "Toward an optimal household solar subsidy: A social-technical approach," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 147(C), pages 377-387.
    13. Briguglio, Marie & Formosa, Glenn, 2017. "When households go solar: Determinants of uptake of a Photovoltaic Scheme and policy insights," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 108(C), pages 154-162.
    14. L. Mundaca & H. Moncreiff, 2021. "New Perspectives on Green Energy Defaults," Journal of Consumer Policy, Springer, vol. 44(3), pages 357-383, September.
    15. Fragkandreas, Thanos, 2025. "Case study research on innovation systems: Paradox, dialectical analysis and resolution," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 54(1).
    16. Dodgson, Mark & Hughes, Alan & Foster, John & Metcalfe, Stan, 2011. "Systems thinking, market failure, and the development of innovation policy: The case of Australia," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(9), pages 1145-1156.
    17. Milad Zeraatpisheh & Reza Arababadi & Mohsen Saffari Pour, 2018. "Economic Analysis for Residential Solar PV Systems Based on Different Demand Charge Tariffs," Energies, MDPI, vol. 11(12), pages 1-19, November.
    18. Nam C. Nguyen & Ockie J. H. Bosch, 2014. "The Art of Interconnected Thinking: Starting with the Young," Challenges, MDPI, vol. 5(2), pages 1-21, August.
    19. repec:hal:spmain:info:hdl:2441/f6h8764enu2lskk9p4oq2cqb0 is not listed on IDEAS
    20. Dusonchet, L. & Telaretti, E., 2015. "Comparative economic analysis of support policies for solar PV in the most representative EU countries," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 986-998.
    21. Gesine Bökenkamp & Wan-Jung Chou & Olav Hohmeyer & Wouter Nijs & Alistair Hunt & Anil Markandya, 2010. "Policy Instruments," Chapters, in: Anil Markandya & Andrea Bigano & Roberto Porchia (ed.), The Social Cost of Electricity, chapter 6, Edward Elgar Publishing.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    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:gam:jsusta:v:9:y:2017:i:5:p:786-:d:98024. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.