IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/teinso/v28y2006i3p281-301.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Time and technological innovation: Implications for public policy

Author

Listed:
  • Rycroft, Robert W.

Abstract

The speed with which modern technologies are innovated seems to be accelerating and there appears to be some consensus that faster technological change is likely to create substantial problems for public policy makers. But what is the empirical evidence for the impression of more rapid technological advancement? And what does this evidence imply for the future of policy making? Answering these questions involves assessing the empirical research based in four temporal models that form the bases for measuring innovation time (product cycle, barrier–breakthrough, technological discontinuity, and continuous change) according to four analytical approaches (product concentrations, expert opinion, sales growth and decline, and age of cited patents). Based on this assessment, multiple categories of policy-relevant temporal indicators are recommended.

Suggested Citation

  • Rycroft, Robert W., 2006. "Time and technological innovation: Implications for public policy," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 28(3), pages 281-301.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:teinso:v:28:y:2006:i:3:p:281-301
    DOI: 10.1016/j.techsoc.2006.06.001
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160791X06000170
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.techsoc.2006.06.001?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. Frenken, Koen, 2000. "A complexity approach to innovation networks. The case of the aircraft industry (1909-1997)," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 29(2), pages 257-272, February.
    2. Hobday, Mike, 1998. "Product complexity, innovation and industrial organisation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 26(6), pages 689-710, February.
    3. Edwin Mansfield, 1988. "The Speed and Cost of Industrial Innovation in Japan and the United States: External vs. Internal Technology," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 34(10), pages 1157-1168, October.
    4. Dale W. Jorgenson & Kevin J. Stiroh, 2000. "Raising the Speed Limit: U.S. Economic Growth in the Information Age," Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, Economic Studies Program, The Brookings Institution, vol. 31(1), pages 125-236.
    5. Ayres, Robert U., 1994. "Toward a non-linear dynamics of technological progress," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 24(1), pages 35-69, June.
    6. Gerard J. Tellis & Stefan Stremersch & Eden Yin, 2003. "The International Takeoff of New Products: The Role of Economics, Culture, and Country Innovativeness," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 22(2), pages 188-208, October.
    7. Barry L. Bayus, 1998. "An Analysis of Product Lifetimes in a Technologically Dynamic Industry," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 44(6), pages 763-775, June.
    8. Mansfield, Edwin, 1995. "Academic Research Underlying Industrial Innovations:," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 77(1), pages 55-65, February.
    9. Levinthal, Daniel A, 1998. "The Slow Pace of Rapid Technological Change: Gradualism and Punctuation in Technological Change," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 7(2), pages 217-247, June.
    10. Mansfield, Edwin, 1991. "Academic research and industrial innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 20(1), pages 1-12, February.
    11. Kim B. Clark, 1989. "Project Scope and Project Performance: The Effect of Parts Strategy and Supplier Involvement on Product Development," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 35(10), pages 1247-1263, October.
    12. Deeds, David L. & Hill, Charles W. L., 1996. "Strategic alliances and the rate of new product development: An empirical study of entrepreneurial biotechnology firms," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 11(1), pages 41-55, January.
    13. Akbar Zaheer & Bill McEvily & Vincenzo Perrone, 1998. "Does Trust Matter? Exploring the Effects of Interorganizational and Interpersonal Trust on Performance," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 9(2), pages 141-159, April.
    14. Peter N. Golder & Gerard J. Tellis, 2004. "Growing, Growing, Gone: Cascades, Diffusion, and Turning Points in the Product Life Cycle," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 23(2), pages 207-218, December.
    15. Janowicz, M.K. & Noorderhaven, N.G., 2002. "The Role of Trust in Interorganizational Learning in Joint Ventures," Other publications TiSEM f10debea-9d7b-47c3-8d4f-b, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    16. Richard C. Levin & Alvin K. Klevorick & Richard R. Nelson & Sidney G. Winter, 1987. "Appropriating the Returns from Industrial Research and Development," Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, Economic Studies Program, The Brookings Institution, vol. 18(3, Specia), pages 783-832.
    17. Marcie J. Tyre & Wanda J. Orlikowski, 1994. "Windows of Opportunity: Temporal Patterns of Technological Adaptation in Organizations," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 5(1), pages 98-118, February.
    18. Windrum, Paul & Birchenhall, Chris, 1998. "Is product life cycle theory a special case? Dominant designs and the emergence of market niches through coevolutionary-learning," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 9(1), pages 109-134, March.
    19. Janowicz, M.K. & Noorderhaven, N.G., 2002. "The Role of Trust in Interorganizational Learning in Joint Ventures," Discussion Paper 2002-119, Tilburg University, Center for Economic Research.
    20. Klevorick, Alvin K. & Levin, Richard C. & Nelson, Richard R. & Winter, Sidney G., 1995. "On the sources and significance of interindustry differences in technological opportunities," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 24(2), pages 185-205, March.
    21. A. Heirman & B. Clarysse, 2004. "Do Intangible Assets and Pre-founding R&D Efforts Matter for Innovation Speed in Start-Ups?," Working Papers of Faculty of Economics and Business Administration, Ghent University, Belgium 04/238, Ghent University, Faculty of Economics and Business Administration.
    22. Fine, Charles H., 1996. "Industry clockspeed and competency chain design : an introductory essay," Working papers #147-96. Working paper (S, Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), Sloan School of Management.
    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. Focacci, Chiara Natalie & Perez, Carlota, 2022. "The importance of education and training policies in supporting technological revolutions: A comparative and historical analysis of UK, US, Germany, and Sweden (1830–1970)," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 70(C).
    2. Smoliński, Adam & Pichlak, Magdalena, 2009. "Innovation in Polish industry: The cluster concept applied to clean coal technologies in Silesia," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 31(4), pages 356-364.
    3. Ferreira, Paula & Rocha, Ana & Araujo, Madalena & Afonso, Joao L. & Antunes, Carlos Henggeler & Lopes, Marta A.R. & Osório, Gerardo J. & Catalão, João P.S. & Lopes, João Peças, 2023. "Assessing the societal impact of smart grids: Outcomes of a collaborative research project," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 72(C).
    4. Geurts, Amber & Geerdink, Tara & Sprenkeling, Marit, 2022. "Accelerated innovation in crises: The role of collaboration in the development of alternative ventilators during the COVID-19 pandemic," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 68(C).
    5. Yusuf, Shahid, 2008. "Intermediating knowledge exchange between universities and businesses," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(8), pages 1167-1174, September.
    6. Meeta Dasgupta & R.K. Gupta & A. Sahay, 2011. "Linking Technological Innovation, Technology Strategy and Organizational Factors," Global Business Review, International Management Institute, vol. 12(2), pages 257-277, June.
    7. Varnum, Michael E. W. PhD & Krems, Jaimie & Morris, Colin & Grossmann, Igor, 2019. "People Prefer Simpler Content When There Are More Choices: A Time Series Analysis of Lyrical Complexity in Six Decades of American Popular Music," OSF Preprints nmruj, Center for Open Science.
    8. Ratten, Vanessa, 2013. "Cloud computing: A social cognitive perspective of ethics, entrepreneurship, technology marketing, computer self-efficacy and outcome expectancy on behavioural intentions," Australasian marketing journal, Elsevier, vol. 21(3), pages 137-146.
    9. Setyawati, Dinita, 2020. "Analysis of perceptions towards the rooftop photovoltaic solar system policy in Indonesia," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 144(C).
    10. Marek Jemala & Ľubomír Jemala, 2014. "Key Sub-Disciplines and Methods of Technology Planning in Dynamic Environments," Acta Oeconomica Pragensia, Prague University of Economics and Business, vol. 2014(2), pages 71-84.

    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. Perkmann, Markus & King, Zella & Pavelin, Stephen, 2011. "Engaging excellence? Effects of faculty quality on university engagement with industry," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(4), pages 539-552, May.
    2. James Adams, 2006. "Learning, internal research, and spillovers," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 15(1), pages 5-36.
    3. Di Stefano, Giada & Gambardella, Alfonso & Verona, Gianmario, 2012. "Technology push and demand pull perspectives in innovation studies: Current findings and future research directions," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(8), pages 1283-1295.
    4. Larsen, Maria Theresa, 2011. "The implications of academic enterprise for public science: An overview of the empirical evidence," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(1), pages 6-19, February.
    5. Beck, Mathias & Junge, Martin & Kaiser, Ulrich, 2017. "Public Funding and Corporate Innovation," IZA Discussion Papers 11196, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    6. Fontana, Roberto & Geuna, Aldo & Matt, Mireille, 2006. "Factors affecting university-industry R&D projects: The importance of searching, screening and signalling," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(2), pages 309-323, March.
    7. David, Paul A. & Hall, Bronwyn H. & Toole, Andrew A., 2000. "Is public R&D a complement or substitute for private R&D? A review of the econometric evidence," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 29(4-5), pages 497-529, April.
    8. Becker Wolfgang & Peters Jürgen, 2005. "Innovation Effects of Science-Related Technological Opportunities / Innovationseffekte von technologischen Möglichkeiten aus dem Wissenschaftsbereich: Theoretical Considerations and Empirical Findings," Journal of Economics and Statistics (Jahrbuecher fuer Nationaloekonomie und Statistik), De Gruyter, vol. 225(2), pages 130-150, April.
    9. Foray, Dominique & Lissoni, Francesco, 2010. "University Research and Public–Private Interaction," 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 275-314, Elsevier.
    10. Bastian Rake, 2017. "Determinants of pharmaceutical innovation: the role of technological opportunities revisited," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 27(4), pages 691-727, September.
    11. Keld Laursen & Ammon Salter, 2003. "Searching Low and High What Types of Firms use Universities as a Source of Innovation?," DRUID Working Papers 03-16, DRUID, Copenhagen Business School, Department of Industrial Economics and Strategy/Aalborg University, Department of Business Studies.
    12. Jürgen Janger, 2015. "Business Science Links For a New Growth Path. WWWforEurope Working Paper No. 107," WIFO Studies, WIFO, number 58413, January.
    13. A. Bellucci & L. Pennacchio, 2016. "University knowledge and firm innovation: evidence from European countries," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 41(4), pages 730-752, August.
    14. Juergen Peters & Wolfgang Becker, 1998. "Technological Opportunities, Academic Research, and Innovation Activities in the German Automobile Supply Industry," Discussion Paper Series 175, Universitaet Augsburg, Institute for Economics.
    15. Roman Fudickar & Hanna Hottenrott, 2019. "Public research and the innovation performance of new technology based firms," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 44(2), pages 326-358, April.
    16. Peter W. Roberts & Raphael Amit, 2003. "The Dynamics of Innovative Activity and Competitive Advantage: The Case of Australian Retail Banking, 1981 to 1995," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 14(2), pages 107-122, April.
    17. Andrea Bonaccorsi, 2011. "A Functional Theory of Technology and Technological Change," Chapters, in: Cristiano Antonelli (ed.), Handbook on the Economic Complexity of Technological Change, chapter 12, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    18. Gun Jea Yu & Joonkyum Lee, 2017. "When should a firm collaborate with research organizations for innovation performance? The moderating role of innovation orientation, size, and age," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 42(6), pages 1451-1465, December.
    19. Papachristos, George & Papadonikolaki, Eleni & Morgan, Bethan, 2024. "Projects as a speciation and aggregation mechanism in transitions: Bridging project management and transitions research in the digitalization of UK architecture, engineering, and construction industry," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 132(C).
    20. Igors Skute & Kasia Zalewska-Kurek & Isabella Hatak & Petra Weerd-Nederhof, 2019. "Mapping the field: a bibliometric analysis of the literature on university–industry collaborations," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 44(3), pages 916-947, June.

    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:28:y:2006:i:3:p:281-301. 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.