IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/respol/v38y2009i5p726-735.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Learning for learning economy and social learning

Author

Listed:
  • Hyysalo, Sampsa

Abstract

Failure to meet the preferences and needs of users has been consistently stressed as a major cause of unsuccessful R&D for over 30 years. Yet little seems to change. An important element in this "producer-user paradox" is a lack of frameworks able to inform empirical research and the work that people do when they bridge designing, implementing, using and managing new technology. "Learning economy" and "social learning in technological innovation" appear promising as such integrative frameworks not least due to their emphasis on learning between producers and users. The present paper examines the value in the way learning is treated in these frameworks for empirical research and for the practitioners, and to this aim contrasts these frameworks to findings from a line of studies on learning between producers and users of new health technologies.

Suggested Citation

  • Hyysalo, Sampsa, 2009. "Learning for learning economy and social learning," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(5), pages 726-735, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:respol:v:38:y:2009:i:5:p:726-735
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0048-7333(09)00009-2
    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. Pavitt, Keith, 1984. "Sectoral patterns of technical change: Towards a taxonomy and a theory," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 13(6), pages 343-373, December.
    2. Bengt-ake Lundvall & Bjorn Johnson, 1994. "The Learning Economy," Industry and Innovation, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 1(2), pages 23-42.
    3. K. J. Arrow, 1971. "The Economic Implications of Learning by Doing," Palgrave Macmillan Books, in: F. H. Hahn (ed.), Readings in the Theory of Growth, chapter 11, pages 131-149, Palgrave Macmillan.
    4. von Hippel, Eric & Tyre, Marcie J., 1995. "How learning by doing is done: problem identification in novel process equipment," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 24(1), pages 1-12, January.
    5. Freeman, Chris, 1994. "The Economics of Technical Change," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 18(5), pages 463-514, October.
    6. Lundvall, Bengt-Ake & Johnson, Bjorn & Andersen, Esben Sloth & Dalum, Bent, 2002. "National systems of production, innovation and competence building," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 31(2), pages 213-231, February.
    7. Williams, Robin & Edge, David, 1996. "The social shaping of technology," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 25(6), pages 865-899, September.
    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. Adomako, Samuel & Amankwah-Amoah, Joseph & Dankwah, George Obeng & Danso, Albert & Donbesuur, Francis, 2019. "Institutional voids, international learning effort and internationalization of emerging market new ventures," Journal of International Management, Elsevier, vol. 25(4).
    2. Björn Fischer & Britt Östlund & Nicole K. Dalmer & Andrea Rosales & Alexander Peine & Eugène Loos & Louis Neven & Barbara Marshall, 2021. "Co-Design as Learning: The Differences of Learning When Involving Older People in Digitalization in Four Countries," Societies, MDPI, vol. 11(2), pages 1-16, June.
    3. Planko & Jacqueline Cramer & Maryse Chappin & Marko Hekkert, 2014. "Strategic collective system building by firms who launch sustainability innovations," Innovation Studies Utrecht (ISU) working paper series 14-04, Utrecht University, Department of Innovation Studies, revised Sep 2014.
    4. Slavo Radosevic & Esin Yoruk, 2012. "SAPPHO Revisited: Factors of Innovation Success in Knowledge-Intensive Enterprises in Central and Eastern Europe," DRUID Working Papers 12-11, DRUID, Copenhagen Business School, Department of Industrial Economics and Strategy/Aalborg University, Department of Business Studies.
    5. Kivimaa, Paula, 2014. "Government-affiliated intermediary organisations as actors in system-level transitions," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(8), pages 1370-1380.
    6. Roelofsen, Anneloes & Boon, Wouter P.C. & Kloet, Roy R. & Broerse, Jacqueline E.W., 2011. "Stakeholder interaction within research consortia on emerging technologies: Learning how and what?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(3), pages 341-354, April.
    7. Lew, Jia Hui & Marwede, Malte & Herstatt, Cornelius, 2015. "Does cognitive distance affect product development for distant target groups? Evidence from the literature using co-citation methodology," Working Papers 89, Hamburg University of Technology (TUHH), Institute for Technology and Innovation Management.
    8. Zhao, S.L. & Cacciolatti, L. & Lee, S.H. & Song, W., 2015. "Regional collaborations and indigenous innovation capabilities in China: A multivariate method for the analysis of regional innovation systems," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 94(C), pages 202-220.

    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. Nanditha Mathew & George Paily, 2022. "STI-DUI innovation modes and firm performance in the Indian capital goods industry: Do small firms differ from large ones?," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 47(2), pages 435-458, April.
    2. Alhusen, Harm & Bennat, Tatjana & Bizer, Kilian & Cantner, Uwe & Horstmann, Elaine & Kalthaus, Martin & Proeger, Till & Sternberg, Rolf & Töpfer, Stefan, 2021. "A New Measurement Conception for the ‘Doing-Using-Interacting’ Mode of Innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(4).
    3. Havas, Attila, 2016. "Recent economic theorising on innovation: Lessons for analysing social innovation," MPRA Paper 77385, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    4. Alhusen, Harm, 2020. "Experience-based know-how, learning and innovation in German SMEs: An explorative analysis of the role of know-how in different modes of innovation," ifh Working Papers 27/2020, Volkswirtschaftliches Institut für Mittelstand und Handwerk an der Universität Göttingen (ifh).
    5. Marte C.W. Solheim & Ron Boschma & Sverre Herstad, 2018. "Related variety, unrelated variety and the novelty content of firm innovation in urban and non-urban locations," Papers in Evolutionary Economic Geography (PEEG) 1836, Utrecht University, Department of Human Geography and Spatial Planning, Group Economic Geography, revised Oct 2018.
    6. Soete, Luc & Verspagen, Bart & ter Weel, Bas, 2010. "Systems of Innovation," 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 1159-1180, Elsevier.
    7. Maxim Kotsemir & Alexander Abroskin & Dirk Meissner, 2013. "Innovation concepts and typology – an evolutionary discussion," HSE Working papers WP BRP 05/STI/2013, National Research University Higher School of Economics.
    8. Hötte, Kerstin, 2023. "Demand-pull, technology-push, and the direction of technological change," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(5).
    9. Mathew, Nanditha & Paily, George, 2020. "STI-DUI innovation modes and firm performance in the Indian capital goods industry: Do small firms differ from large ones?," MERIT Working Papers 2020-008, United Nations University - Maastricht Economic and Social Research Institute on Innovation and Technology (MERIT).
    10. Attila Havas, 2016. "Social and Business Innovations: Are Common Measurement Approaches Possible?," Foresight-Russia Форсайт, CyberLeninka;Федеральное государственное автономное образовательное учреждение высшего образования «Национальный исследовательский университет «Высшая школа экономики», vol. 10(2 (eng)), pages 58-80.
    11. Piva, Mariacristina & Santarelli, Enrico & Vivarelli, Marco, 2005. "The skill bias effect of technological and organisational change: Evidence and policy implications," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(2), pages 141-157, March.
    12. Andersen, Allan Dahl & Andersen, Per Dannemand, 2014. "Innovation system foresight," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 88(C), pages 276-286.
    13. Piotr Dzikowski, 2022. "Product and process innovation patterns in Polish low and high technology systems," Equilibrium. Quarterly Journal of Economics and Economic Policy, Institute of Economic Research, vol. 17(3), pages 747-773, September.
    14. Messaoud Zouikri & Mounir Amdaoud, 2018. "Compétences externes et innovation: le cas des firmes de l'industrie manufacturière algérienne," EconomiX Working Papers 2018-37, University of Paris Nanterre, EconomiX.
    15. Rens L.J. Vandeberg & Ellen H.M. Moors, 2008. "A framework for interactive learning in emerging technologies," Innovation Studies Utrecht (ISU) working paper series 08-06, Utrecht University, Department of Innovation Studies, revised Feb 2008.
    16. Lorentzen, Jochen, 2005. "The absorptive capacities of South African automotive component suppliers," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 33(7), pages 1153-1182, July.
    17. Havas, Attila, 2014. "Types of knowledge and diversity of business-academia collaborations: Implications for measurement and policy," MPRA Paper 65908, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 23 May 2015.
    18. Dosi, Giovanni & Nelson, Richard R., 2010. "Technical Change and Industrial Dynamics as Evolutionary Processes," 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 51-127, Elsevier.
    19. Edward J. Malecki, 2010. "Everywhere? The Geography Of Knowledge," Journal of Regional Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 50(1), pages 493-513, February.
    20. Simms, Christopher & Frishammar, Johan, 2024. "Technology transfer challenges in asymmetric alliances between high-technology and low-technology firms," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 53(3).

    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:5:p:726-735. 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.