IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/jtecht/v47y2022i5d10.1007_s10961-021-09878-x.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Recalibrating, reconfiguring, and appropriating innovation: a semantic network analysis of China’s mass innovation and mass entrepreneurship (MIME) initiatives

Author

Listed:
  • Pengfei Fu

    (Tongji University)

  • David Sarpong

    (Brunel University London
    National Research University Higher School of Economics)

  • Dirk Meissner

    (National Research University Higher School of Economics)

Abstract

The new turn to Mass Innovation and Mass Entrepreneurship (MIME) initiatives in China mark a concrete step to reconfiguring and appropriating the western maker movement rhetoric to fit China’s context. In this paper, we explore the nascent China’s maker movement under the guidance of the state’s MIME initiative to identify the key issues, actions, rationales, and logics of appropriation linked to this public policy agenda. Empirically, we employ a semantic network analysis to identify policy frames of the two principal documents of the MIME issued in 2015 and 2018. Providing insight into the heterogeneous nature of MIME discourses and innovation policy in China, our study Sheds light on how social innovation derives from activism and connect with emerging creative cities discourse, entrepreneurship, and local economic development. Implication for the theory and practice of innovation policy are outlined.

Suggested Citation

  • Pengfei Fu & David Sarpong & Dirk Meissner, 2022. "Recalibrating, reconfiguring, and appropriating innovation: a semantic network analysis of China’s mass innovation and mass entrepreneurship (MIME) initiatives," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 47(5), pages 1506-1523, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:kap:jtecht:v:47:y:2022:i:5:d:10.1007_s10961-021-09878-x
    DOI: 10.1007/s10961-021-09878-x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10961-021-09878-x
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10961-021-09878-x?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. Meissner, Dirk & Sarpong, David & Ofosu, George & Botchie, David, 2021. "The rise of do-it-yourself (DiY) laboratories: Implications for science, technology, and innovation (STI) policy," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 165(C).
    2. Elias G. Carayannis & Dirk Meissner, 2017. "Glocal targeted open innovation: challenges, opportunities and implications for theory, policy and practice," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 42(2), pages 236-252, April.
    3. Dale Dougherty, 2012. "The Maker Movement," Innovations: Technology, Governance, Globalization, MIT Press, vol. 7(3), pages 11-14, July.
    4. Adrian Smith & Sabine Hielscher & Sascha Dickel & Johan Söderberg & Ellen van Oost, 2013. "Grassroots Digital Fabrication and Makerspaces: Reconfiguring, Relocating and Recalbirating Innovation?," SPRU Working Paper Series 2013-02, SPRU - Science Policy Research Unit, University of Sussex Business School.
    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. Bernhard Truffer, 2024. "New methodological inroads to regional path development - Epistemological reflections on the contribution of semantic network analysis," GEIST - Geography of Innovation and Sustainability Transitions 2024(05), GEIST Working Paper Series.

    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. Elisabeth Unterfrauner & Jing Shao & Margit Hofer & Claudia M. Fabian, 2019. "The environmental value and impact of the Maker movement—Insights from a cross‐case analysis of European maker initiatives," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 28(8), pages 1518-1533, December.
    2. Katerina Troullaki & Stelios Rozakis & Kostas Latoufis & Chris Giotitsas & Christina Priavolou & Fausto Freire, 2022. "Sustainable Rural Electrification: Harnessing a Cosmolocal Wind," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(13), pages 1-16, June.
    3. Troxler, Peter & Wolf, Patricia, 2017. "Digital maker-entrepreneurs in open design: What activities make up their business model?," Business Horizons, Elsevier, vol. 60(6), pages 807-817.
    4. Vladimiras Dolgopolovas & Valentina Dagiene, 2022. "On Semiotics Perspectives of Computational Thinking: Unravelling the “Pamphlet” Approach, a Case Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(4), pages 1-22, February.
    5. Greg Schrock & Marc Doussard & Laura Wolf-Powers & Stephen Marotta & Max Eisenburger, 2019. "Appetite for Growth: Challenges to Scale for Food and Beverage Makers in Three U.S. Cities," Economic Development Quarterly, , vol. 33(1), pages 39-50, February.
    6. Steve Marotta, 2021. "Making sense of ‘maker’: Work, identity, and affect in the maker movement," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 53(4), pages 638-654, June.
    7. Langley, David J. & Zirngiebl, Marthe & Sbeih, Janosch & Devoldere, Bart, 2017. "Trajectories to reconcile sharing and commercialization in the maker movement," Business Horizons, Elsevier, vol. 60(6), pages 783-794.
    8. J. M. Pearce, 2016. "Return on investment for open source scientific hardware development," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 43(2), pages 192-195.
    9. Laurent Dupont & Alex Gabriel & Mauricio Camargo & Claudine Guidat, 2017. "Collaborative Innovation Projects Engaging open communities: a Case Study on Emerging Challenges," Post-Print hal-01582548, HAL.
    10. Yingqiu Wu & Zhonghong Ma, 2022. "The Power of Makerspaces: Heterotopia and Innovation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(1), pages 1-18, December.
    11. Stefania Fiorentino, 2019. "The Maker Faire of Rome as a window of observation on the new perspectives for local economic development and the new urban entrepreneurial ecosystems," Local Economy, London South Bank University, vol. 34(4), pages 364-381, June.
    12. Welter, Friederike & May-Strobl, Eva & Wolter, Hans-Jürgen & Günterberg, Brigitte, 2014. "Mittelstand im Wandel," IfM-Materialien 232, Institut für Mittelstandsforschung (IfM) Bonn.
    13. Leckel, Anja & Veilleux, Sophie & Dana, Leo Paul, 2020. "Local Open Innovation: A means for public policy to increase collaboration for innovation in SMEs," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 153(C).
    14. Adrien Labaeye, 2019. "Sharing Cities and Commoning: An Alternative Narrative for Just and Sustainable Cities," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(16), pages 1-23, August.
    15. Hamalainen, Markko & Karjalainen, Jesse, 2017. "Social manufacturing: When the maker movement meets interfirm production networks," Business Horizons, Elsevier, vol. 60(6), pages 795-805.
    16. Barrett, Gillian & Dooley, Lawrence & Bogue, Joe, 2021. "Open innovation within high-tech SMEs: A study of the entrepreneurial founder's influence on open innovation practices," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 103(C).
    17. Kolja Oswald & Xiaokang Zhao, 2021. "Collaborative Learning in Makerspaces: A Grounded Theory of the Role of Collaborative Learning in Makerspaces," SAGE Open, , vol. 11(2), pages 21582440211, June.
    18. Bhawani Bhatnagar & Viktor Dörfler & Jillian MacBryde, 2023. "Navigating the open innovation paradox: an integrative framework for adopting open innovation in pharmaceutical R&D in developing countries," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 48(6), pages 2204-2248, December.
    19. Tabarés, Raúl & Kuittinen, Hanna, 2020. "A tale of two innovation cultures: Bridging the gap between makers and manufacturers," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 63(C).
    20. Tindara Abbate & Fabrizio Cesaroni & Angelo Presenza, 2021. "Knowledge transfer from universities to low- and medium-technology industries: evidence from Italian winemakers," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 46(4), pages 989-1016, August.

    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:kap:jtecht:v:47:y:2022:i:5:d:10.1007_s10961-021-09878-x. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.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.