IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/wpa/wuwpio/0501003.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Nanotechnology and business opportunities: scenarios as awareness instrument

Author

Listed:
  • Erik Knol

    (Qeam)

Abstract

For a few years now, nanotechnology has been recognised as a promising new growth innovator. This leads to a shift from the exploration of nanotechnology knowledge towards a phase of exploitation. The coming years this commercialisation of nanotechnology will be extended. Nanotechnology is a disruptive technology phenomenon, which leads to more difficulties in overseeing business opportunities. Additionally, the fact that high-tech small firms, especially those dealing with nanotechnology, are highly interested in developments in science and technology, begs the question how to stimulate the awareness for (new) business opportunities in nanotechnology within these firms. A promising strategy to stimulate learning and awareness of business opportunities in nanotechnology is the use of scenarios. These projections focused on uncertainty stretch the mental model of entrepreneurs and/or managers and have the ability to activate learning processes. This paper presents the (theoretical) fundaments of scenario usage in relation to the recognition of business opportunities in nanotechnology.

Suggested Citation

  • Erik Knol, 2005. "Nanotechnology and business opportunities: scenarios as awareness instrument," Industrial Organization 0501003, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    • Handle: RePEc:wpa:wuwpio:0501003
    Note: Type of Document - pdf; pages: 12
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://econwpa.ub.uni-muenchen.de/econ-wp/io/papers/0501/0501003.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. van Gelderen, Marco & Frese, Michael & Thurik, Roy, 2000. "Strategies, Uncertainty and Performance of Small Business Startups," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 15(3), pages 165-181.
    2. Berry, Maureen M. J. & Taggart, James H., 1998. "Combining technology and corporate strategy in small high tech firms," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 26(7-8), pages 883-895, April.
    3. Stephan, Paula E., 2010. "The Economics of Science," Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, in: Bronwyn H. Hall & Nathan Rosenberg (ed.), Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 0, pages 217-273, Elsevier.
    4. Giovanni Dosi & Keith Pavitt & Luc Soete, 1990. "The Economics of Technical Change and International Trade," LEM Book Series, Laboratory of Economics and Management (LEM), Sant'Anna School of Advanced Studies, Pisa, Italy, number dosietal-1990, March.
    5. Audretsch, David B. & Bozeman, Barry & Combs, Kathryn L. & Feldman, Maryann & Link, Albert N. & Siegel, Donald S. & Stephan, Paula, 2002. "The Economics of Science and Technology," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 27(2), pages 155-203, April.
    6. Angela Hullmann & Martin Meyer, 2003. "Publications and patents in nanotechnology," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 58(3), pages 507-527, November.
    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. Knol, Erik, 2004. "Nanotechnology and business opportunities: scenarios as awareness instrument," MPRA Paper 31362, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    2. WHC Knol, 2005. "Nanotechnology and business opportunities: scenarios as awareness instrument," Development and Comp Systems 0501003, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    3. Ejermo, Olof & Karlsson, Charlie, 2004. "Spatial Inventor Networks As Studied by Patent Coinventorship," Working Paper Series in Economics and Institutions of Innovation 17, Royal Institute of Technology, CESIS - Centre of Excellence for Science and Innovation Studies.
    4. Rajeev K. Goel & Devrim Göktepe-Hultén, 2021. "Innovation by foreign researchers: relative influences of internal versus external human capital," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 46(1), pages 258-276, February.
    5. Isabel Maria Medalho Pereira, 2007. "Business-Science Research Collaboration under Moral Hazard," UFAE and IAE Working Papers 721.07, Unitat de Fonaments de l'Anàlisi Econòmica (UAB) and Institut d'Anàlisi Econòmica (CSIC).
    6. Francisco Moris & John Jankowski & Pierre Perrolle, 2008. "Advancing measures of innovation in the United States," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 33(2), pages 123-130, April.
    7. Liu Li & Chaoying Tang, 2020. "How Does Inter-Organizational Cooperation Impact Organizations’ Scientific Knowledge Generation? Evidence from the Biomass Energy Field," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(1), pages 1-18, December.
    8. Julia Melkers & Fang Xiao, 2012. "Boundary-spanning in emerging technology research: determinants of funding success for academic scientists," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 37(3), pages 251-270, June.
    9. Acosta, Manuel & Coronado, Daniel & Toribio, Mª Rosario, 2011. "The use of scientific knowledge by Spanish agrifood firms," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(4), pages 507-516, August.
    10. Valentina Tartari & Francesco Di Lorenzo & Benjamin A. Campbell, 2020. "“Another roof, another proof”: the impact of mobility on individual productivity in science," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 45(1), pages 276-303, February.
    11. Rajeev Goel & Christoph Grimpe, 2013. "Active versus passive academic networking: evidence from micro-level data," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 38(2), pages 116-134, April.
    12. Zucker, Lynne G. & Darby, Michael R. & Furner, Jonathan & Liu, Robert C. & Ma, Hongyan, 2007. "Minerva unbound: Knowledge stocks, knowledge flows and new knowledge production," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(6), pages 850-863, July.
    13. Christopher Palmberg, 2008. "The transfer and commercialisation of nanotechnology: a comparative analysis of university and company researchers," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 33(6), pages 631-652, December.
    14. Wolfgang Becker, 2003. "Evaluation of the Role of Universities in the Innovation Process," Discussion Paper Series 241, Universitaet Augsburg, Institute for Economics.
    15. Moses Acquaah & Tailan Chi, 2007. "A longitudinal analysis of the impact of firm resources and industry characteristics on firm-specific profitability," Journal of Management & Governance, Springer;Accademia Italiana di Economia Aziendale (AIDEA), vol. 11(3), pages 179-213, September.
    16. Tânia Pinto & Aurora A. C. Teixeira, 2020. "The impact of research output on economic growth by fields of science: a dynamic panel data analysis, 1980–2016," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 123(2), pages 945-978, May.
    17. Palmberg, Christopher, 2007. "Modes, Challenges and Outcomes of Nanotechnology Transfer - A Comparative Analysis University and Company Researchers," Discussion Papers 1086, The Research Institute of the Finnish Economy.
    18. Qingjun Zhao & Jiancheng Guan, 2013. "Love dynamics between science and technology: some evidences in nanoscience and nanotechnology," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 94(1), pages 113-132, January.
    19. Rajeev K. Goel & Devrim Göktepe-Hultén, 2020. "Drivers of innovation productivity of academic researchers through career advancement," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 45(2), pages 414-429, April.
    20. Mark Tomlinson, 2000. "Innovation surveys: A researcher's perspective," DRUID Working Papers 00-9, DRUID, Copenhagen Business School, Department of Industrial Economics and Strategy/Aalborg University, Department of Business Studies.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • L - Industrial Organization

    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:wpa:wuwpio:0501003. 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: EconWPA (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://econwpa.ub.uni-muenchen.de .

    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.