Author
Abstract
Este artigo tem por objetivo contribuir para a compreensão das principaisespecificidades dos processos de desenvolvimento tecnológico das economiasretardatárias. Segundo esta compreensão, são investigadas as razões pelas quais asmedidas convencionais de políticas de Ciência e Tecnologia (C&T), normalmenteinspiradas no chamado modelo linear e na teoria econômica neoclássica, não sãogeralmente apropriadas ou suficientes para os países em desenvolvimento. Isto aconteceporque os retardatários competem basicamente com base na imitação e não com baseem produtos ou processos inovadores. Esta característica de seus processos tecnológicosos obriga a recorrer ao uso de mão-de-obra barata, à proteção estatal ou à exploraçãopredatória de recursos naturais como forma de compensar suas produtividades iniciaisrelativamente baixas. Os casos de quatro países retardatários ? Brasil, México, Coréiado Sul e Taiwan ? são brevemente analisados. Nas últimas duas décadas, estes quatropaíses elevaram grandemente suas participações na produção científica mundial.As duas economias asiáticas também foram capazes de obter elevações muito grandesem suas participações na produção tecnológica mundial, assim como reduziremgrandemente os hiatos de produtividade e renda per capita que as separam da economiaindustrial líder, os Estados Unidos. As duas economias latino-americanas, no entanto,seguiram na direção oposta. Tal fato coloca em xeque o pressuposto do modelo linearde que haveria uma relação mais ou menos direta entre o nível da produção deconhecimento científico de um país e sua produção de tecnologias ou inovações.O artigo conclui-se com apresentação de algumas implicações desta análise para aspolíticas de C&T de países em desenvolvimento. This paper aims to contribute to the understanding of the main specificities oflatecomers` processes of technological development. Building on the basis of thisunderstanding, it searches for the reasons why the conventional measures of Scienceand Technology (S&T) policies, usually inspired by the so-called linear model and byneoclassical economics, are frequently inappropriate or insufficient for developingeconomies. This is so because latecomers compete primarily by imitating, rather thanby innovating. Such feature of their technological processes compels them to rely oncheap labor, on state protection or natural resources depletion as a way tocompensate for its relatively low initial productivity. The cases of four latecomers ?Brazil, Mexico, South Korea and Taiwan ? are briefly analyzed. During the last twodecades, all these four countries were successful in greatly increasing their shares ofworld scientific productions. The two Asian economies were also able to achieve verylarge increases in their shares of world technological productions, greatly shrinkingthe productivity and per capita income gaps that separate them from the levels of theleading industrial economy, the US. The two Latin-American economies, however,went in the opposite direction on those respects. Such fact put into question thelinear model`s assumption of a more or less direct connection between a country`sscientific achievements and its technological production or innovation performance.The paper is concluded by presenting some implications of its analysis for S&Tpolicies for developing economies.
Suggested Citation
Eduardo Baumgratz Viotti, 2004.
"Technological Learning Systems, Competitiveness and Development,"
Discussion Papers
1057, Instituto de Pesquisa Econômica Aplicada - IPEA.
Handle:
RePEc:ipe:ipetds:1057
Download full text from publisher
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.
- Eduardo Baumgratz Viotti, 2015.
"Technological Learning Systems, Competitiveness and Development,"
Discussion Papers
0138, Instituto de Pesquisa Econômica Aplicada - IPEA.
- Daniela Russi & Ana C. Gonzalez-Martinez & José Carlos Silva-Macher & Stefan Giljum & Joan Martínez-Alier & Maria Cristina Vallejo, 2008.
"Material Flows in Latin America,"
Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 12(5-6), pages 704-720, October.
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:ipe:ipetds:1057. 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: Fabio Schiavinatto (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ipeaabr.html .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.