IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/respol/v38y2009i3p548-558.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The integration of old and new technological paradigms in low- and medium-tech sectors: The case of mechatronics

Author

Listed:
  • Freddi, Daniela

Abstract

This article addresses the internal transformation of low- and medium-tech (LMT) sectors from a technological perspective, analysing the absorption of radical new technologies by low- and medium-technology (LMT) firms and their integration into frameworks dominated by older technologies. Through an empirical analysis of a cluster of mechatronic companies, the paper highlights some of the main features of the integration process and provides a preliminary assessment of whether the phenomenon is more likely to occur within or between companies, that is through the absorption of new technologies by each firm individually or by means of linkages between specialised mono-technology companies.

Suggested Citation

  • Freddi, Daniela, 2009. "The integration of old and new technological paradigms in low- and medium-tech sectors: The case of mechatronics," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(3), pages 548-558, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:respol:v:38:y:2009:i:3:p:548-558
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0048-7333(08)00229-1
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    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. Bresnahan, Timothy F. & Trajtenberg, M., 1995. "General purpose technologies 'Engines of growth'?," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 65(1), pages 83-108, January.
    2. Herbert A. Simon, 1996. "The Sciences of the Artificial, 3rd Edition," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262691914, April.
    3. Rosenberg, Nathan, 1963. "Technological Change in the Machine Tool Industry, 1840–1910," The Journal of Economic History, Cambridge University Press, vol. 23(4), pages 414-443, December.
    4. Dosi, Giovanni, 1993. "Technological paradigms and technological trajectories : A suggested interpretation of the determinants and directions of technical change," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 22(2), pages 102-103, April.
    5. Bo Carlsson & Gunnar Eliasson, 2003. "Industrial Dynamics and Endogenous Growth," Industry and Innovation, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 10(4), pages 435-455.
    6. Ron Boschma & Anne L. J. ter Wal, 2007. "Knowledge Networks and Innovative Performance in an Industrial District: The Case of a Footwear District in the South of Italy," Industry and Innovation, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 14(2), pages 177-199.
    7. Kolodny, Harvey & Stymne, Bengt & Shani, Rami & Figuera, Juan Ramon & Lillrank, Paul, 2001. "Design and policy choices for technology extension organizations," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 30(2), pages 201-225, February.
    8. Paul Robertson & Eduardo Pol & Peter Carroll, 2003. "Receptive Capacity of Established Industries as a Limiting Factor in the Economy's Rate of Innovation¹," Industry and Innovation, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 10(4), pages 457-474.
    9. Lipsey, Richard G. & Carlaw, Kenneth I. & Bekar, Clifford T., 2005. "Economic Transformations: General Purpose Technologies and Long-Term Economic Growth," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780199290895.
    10. Patel, Parimal & Pavitt, Keith, 1994. "The continuing, widespread (and neglected) importance of improvements in mechanical technologies," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 23(5), pages 533-545, September.
    11. Zander, Ivo, 1997. "Technological diversification in the multinational corporation--historical evolution and future prospects," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 26(2), pages 209-227, May.
    12. Cantwell, John & Piscitello, Lucia, 2000. "Accumulating Technological Competence: Its Changing Impact on Corporate Diversification and Internationalization," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 9(1), pages 21-51, March.
    13. Oldsman, Eric, 1996. "Does manufacturing extension matter? An evaluation of the industrial technology extension service in New York," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 25(2), pages 215-232, March.
    14. Lissoni, Francesco, 2001. "Knowledge codification and the geography of innovation: the case of Brescia mechanical cluster," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 30(9), pages 1479-1500, December.
    15. Michael Hobday & Andrew Davies & Andrea Prencipe, 2005. "Systems integration: a core capability of the modern corporation," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 14(6), pages 1109-1143, December.
    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. Bodas Freitas, Isabel Maria & Marques, Rosane Argou & Silva, Evando Mirra de Paula e, 2013. "University–industry collaboration and innovation in emergent and mature industries in new industrialized countries," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(2), pages 443-453.
    2. Zheng, Bobo & Xu, Jiuping & Ni, Ting & Li, Meihui, 2015. "Geothermal energy utilization trends from a technological paradigm perspective," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 430-441.
    3. Kirner, Eva & Kinkel, Steffen & Jaeger, Angela, 2009. "Innovation paths and the innovation performance of low-technology firms--An empirical analysis of German industry," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(3), pages 447-458, April.
    4. Ugo Rizzo & Daniela Freddi & Laura Ramaciotti, 2015. "The Impact of New Scientific Knowledge on Firms’ Routines and Capabilities: The Case of Mechatronics," International Journal of Innovation and Technology Management (IJITM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 12(06), pages 1-20, December.
    5. Paul L. Robertson & David Jacobson, 2011. "Knowledge Transfer and Technology Diffusion: An Introduction," Chapters, in: Paul L. Robertson & David Jacobson (ed.), Knowledge Transfer and Technology Diffusion, chapter 1, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    6. Sick, Nathalie & Bröring, Stefanie, 2022. "Exploring the research landscape of convergence from a TIM perspective: A review and research agenda," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 175(C).
    7. Ugo Rizzo, 2015. "Why do scientists create academic spin-offs? The influence of the context," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 40(2), pages 198-226, April.
    8. Zhao, Shengchao & Zeng, Deming & Li, Jian & Feng, Ke & Wang, Yao, 2023. "Quantity or quality: The roles of technology and science convergence on firm innovation performance," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 126(C).
    9. Hartmut Hirsch-Kreinsen & Isabel Schwinge, 2014. "Policy measures for the promotion of knowledge-intensive entrepreneurship in low-tech industries," Chapters, in: Hartmut Hirsch-Kreinsen & Isabel Schwinge (ed.), Knowledge-Intensive Entrepreneurship in Low-Tech Industries, chapter 10, pages 218-238, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    10. Schmidt, Arne & Walter, Sascha G. & Walter, Achim, 2010. "Contingency Factors and the Technology-Performance-Relationship in Start-ups," EconStor Preprints 37082, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics.
    11. Hung, Shiu-Wan & Wang, An-Pang, 2012. "Entrepreneurs with glamour? DEA performance characterization of high-tech and older-established industries," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 29(4), pages 1146-1153.

    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. Qiu, Ranfeng & Cantwell, John, 2018. "General Purpose Technologies and local knowledge accumulation — A study on MNC subunits and local innovation centers," International Business Review, Elsevier, vol. 27(4), pages 826-837.
    2. Simms, Christopher & Frishammar, Johan, 2024. "Technology transfer challenges in asymmetric alliances between high-technology and low-technology firms," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 53(3).
    3. Ekaterina Prytkova, 2021. "ICT's Wide Web: a System-Level Analysis of ICT's Industrial Diffusion with Algorithmic Links," Jena Economics Research Papers 2021-005, Friedrich-Schiller-University Jena.
    4. Clifford Bekar & Kenneth Carlaw & Richard Lipsey, 2018. "General purpose technologies in theory, application and controversy: a review," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 28(5), pages 1005-1033, December.
    5. Taalbi, Josef, 2017. "What drives innovation? Evidence from economic history," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(8), pages 1437-1453.
    6. Timothy Bresnahan & Pai-Ling Yin, 2010. "Reallocating innovative resources around growth bottlenecks," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 19(5), pages 1589-1627, October.
    7. Cantner, Uwe & Vannuccini, Simone, 2021. "Pervasive technologies and industrial linkages: Modeling acquired purposes," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 56(C), pages 386-399.
    8. Nikulainen, Tuomo & Kulvik, Martti, 2009. "How General Are General Purpose Technologies? Evidence from nano-, bio- and ICT-technologies in Finland," Discussion Papers 1208, The Research Institute of the Finnish Economy.
    9. Appio, Francesco Paolo & Martini, Antonella & Fantoni, Gualtiero, 2017. "The light and shade of knowledge recombination: Insights from a general-purpose technology," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 125(C), pages 154-165.
    10. Cano-Kollmann Marcelo & Mudambi Ram & Tavares-Lehmann Ana Teresa, 2022. "The geographical dispersion of inventor networks in peripheral economies," ZFW – Advances in Economic Geography, De Gruyter, vol. 66(1), pages 49-63, May.
    11. John Cantwell & Rajneesh Narula, 2001. "The Eclectic Paradigm in the Global Economy," International Journal of the Economics of Business, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 8(2), pages 155-172.
    12. Bresnahan, Timothy, 2010. "General Purpose Technologies," Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, in: Bronwyn H. Hall & Nathan Rosenberg (ed.), Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, edition 1, volume 2, chapter 0, pages 761-791, Elsevier.
    13. Arman Avadikyan & Gilles Lambert & Christophe Lerch, 2016. "A Multi-Level Perspective on Ambidexterity: The Case of a Synchrotron Research Facility," Working Papers of BETA 2016-44, Bureau d'Economie Théorique et Appliquée, UDS, Strasbourg.
    14. Grillitsch, Markus & Asheim, Björn & Fünfschilling, Lea & Kelmenson, Sophie & Lowe, Nichola & Lundquist, Karl Johan & Mahmoud, Yahia & Martynovich, Mikhail & Mattson, Pauline & Miörner, Johan & Nilsso, 2023. "Rescaling: An Analytical Lense to Study Economic and Industrial Shifts," Papers in Innovation Studies 2023/11, Lund University, CIRCLE - Centre for Innovation Research.
    15. Mark Knell & Simone Vannuccini, 2022. "Tools and concepts for understanding disruptive technological change after Schumpeter," Jena Economics Research Papers 2022-005, Friedrich-Schiller-University Jena.
    16. Battke, Benedikt & Schmidt, Tobias S. & Stollenwerk, Stephan & Hoffmann, Volker H., 2016. "Internal or external spillovers—Which kind of knowledge is more likely to flow within or across technologies," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(1), pages 27-41.
    17. Funk, Jeffery, 2009. "Components, systems and discontinuities: The case of magnetic recording and playback equipment," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(7), pages 1192-1202, September.
    18. Yang, Chia-Hsuan & Nugent, Rebecca & Fuchs, Erica R.H., 2016. "Gains from others’ losses: Technology trajectories and the global division of firms," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(3), pages 724-745.
    19. Rita Strohmaier & Marlies Schuetz & Simone Vannuccini, 2019. "A systemic perspective on socioeconomic transformation in the digital age," Economia e Politica Industriale: Journal of Industrial and Business Economics, Springer;Associazione Amici di Economia e Politica Industriale, vol. 46(3), pages 361-378, September.
    20. Sofia Patsali, 2019. "Opening the black box of university-suppliers' co-invention: some field study evidence," Working Papers of BETA 2019-46, Bureau d'Economie Théorique et Appliquée, UDS, Strasbourg.

    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:38:y:2009:i:3:p:548-558. 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.