nep-knm New Economics Papers
on Knowledge Management and Knowledge Economy
Issue of 2009‒09‒26
six papers chosen by
Laura Stefanescu
European Research Centre of Managerial Studies in Business Administration

  1. What Turns Knowledge into Innovative Products? The Role of Entrepreneurship and Knowledge Spillovers By Block, J.H.; Thurik, A.R.; Zhou, H.
  2. Reverse knowledge transfer and its implications for European policy By Narula, Rajneesh; Michel, Julie
  3. Policy approaches regarding technology transfer: Portugal and Switzerland compared By Maria das Dores B. Moura Oliveira; Aurora A.C. Teixeira
  4. Knowledge Flat-talk: A Conceit of Supposed Experts and a Seduction to All By Klein, Daniel B.
  5. Integrated Scenario-based Design Methodology for Collaborative Technology Innovation By Fabrice Forest; Olivier Lavoisy; Valérie Chanal
  6. Innovation for the base of the pyramid: Critical perspectives from development studies on heterogeneity and participation By Arora, Saurabh; Romijn, Henny

  1. By: Block, J.H.; Thurik, A.R.; Zhou, H. (Erasmus Research Institute of Management (ERIM), RSM Erasmus University)
    Abstract: The knowledge spillover theory of entrepreneurship seeks to explain the sources of entrepreneurship and its consequences with regard to economic performance. This paper extends this theory and links it to innovation performance. We propose that a high rate of entrepreneurship facilitates the process of turning knowledge into innovative products while it has no effect on the relation between knowledge and imitative products. We use European country-level data to test our propositions. Our results show that a high rate of entrepreneurship increases the chances that knowledge turns into innovative products. The findings highlight the importance of entrepreneurs in the process of commercialization of knowledge. Implications for innovation policy are discussed.
    Keywords: innovation;entrepreneurship;knowledge;patents;technology policy;knowledge spillovers;commercialization of knowledge;economic growth;O30
    Date: 2009–09–15
  2. By: Narula, Rajneesh (John H Dunning Centre for International Business, Henley Business School, University of Reading); Michel, Julie (Center for Competitiveness, Faculty of Economics and Social Sciences, University of Fribourg)
    Abstract: There is a growing international dispersion of R&D activities by MNEs for the purposes of maintaining and augmenting their knowledge assets. Firms need to tap into alternative knowledge sources , as home countries are rarely able to meet all their technological needs. However, accessing to foreign knowledge implies integration with the host country innovation system that requires considerable time and resources. Although asset-augmenting activities are seen as primarily benefitting the MNE, we argue that home country innovation systems can also benefit from reverse knowledge transfer. Policy makers need to promote these linkages and flows, rather than seeing R&D internationalisation as a threat to the home economy. New knowledge developed abroad by firms can and should be encouraged to be transferred to the rest of the firm and to the local environment of the home country.
    Keywords: reverse knowledge transfer, R&D, innovation policy, EU
    JEL: F23 O32 L22
    Date: 2009
  3. By: Maria das Dores B. Moura Oliveira (UPIN – Universidade do Porto Inovação, Universidade do Porto); Aurora A.C. Teixeira (INESC Porto; CEFUP, Faculdade de Economia, Universidade do Porto)
    Abstract: The environment in which technology transfer takes place plays a key role in defining the best approaches and, ultimately, their success. In the present paper we analyse the extent to which Technology Transfer Offices (TTOs) efficiency is influenced by framework conditions and, in particular, by the innovation policies and programmes. We hypothesise that countries with higher technology transfer efficiency levels would have innovation policies more supportive to technology transfer efforts. Results based on an in depth account and statistical analysis of over 60 innovation policies from Switzerland (widely associated to high levels of technology transference efficiency) and Portugal (a laggard country in this particular) corraborate our initial hypothesis. Switzerland policies overall include more references to knowledge and technology transfer, in the form of licenses, R&D collaboration and spin-offs, than Portuguese policies. One exception is the case of patents (intellectual property rights, in general) with stronger weight in Portuguese policies and, to some extent, the support to spin-off creation and venture capital. The findings highlighted significant differences in variables with impact in technology transfer, namely the priorities addressed, target groups and funding eligibility, aspects of the innovation process targeted and forms of funding. From the exercise it was possible to derive some policy implications. Specifically, we advance that if a country wishes to increase technology transfer efficiency then it should implement a mandate for R&D cooperation between different actors, give priority to fund cutting edge science and research performers, and attribute a higher emphasis on applied industrial research and prototype creation aspects of the innovation process.
    Keywords: Technology transfer, innovation policies, technology transfer efficiency
    Date: 2009–09
  4. By: Klein, Daniel B. (The Ratio Institute)
    Abstract: Knowledge consists of the triad: information, interpretation, and judgment. Information is the reading of the facts through a working interpretation. Much of modern political economy has miscarried by discoursing as though interpretation were symmetric and final. This move has the effect of flattening knowledge down to information – here dubbed “knowledge flat-talk.” Economic prosperity depends greatly on discovery, but discovery is often a transcending of the working interpretation, not merely the acquisition of new information. Models typically assume that the modeler’s working interpretation is common knowledge. But often the sets of relevant knowledge of the relevant actors do not approximate the common knowledge assumption. We need better understanding and appreciation of asymmetric interpretation and its dynamics.
    Keywords: knowledge; information; interpretation; judgment; common knowledge
    JEL: A10 D80
    Date: 2009–09–21
  5. By: Fabrice Forest (PACTE - Politiques publiques, ACtion politique, TErritoires - CNRS : UMR5194 - Université Pierre Mendès-France - Grenoble II - Institut d'Études Politiques de Grenoble - Université Joseph Fourier - Grenoble I); Olivier Lavoisy (PACTE - Politiques publiques, ACtion politique, TErritoires - CNRS : UMR5194 - Université Pierre Mendès-France - Grenoble II - Institut d'Études Politiques de Grenoble - Université Joseph Fourier - Grenoble I); Valérie Chanal (PACTE - Politiques publiques, ACtion politique, TErritoires - CNRS : UMR5194 - Université Pierre Mendès-France - Grenoble II - Institut d'Études Politiques de Grenoble - Université Joseph Fourier - Grenoble I)
    Abstract: The paper presents a scenario-based methodology developed and tested throughout cooperative research and development projects. It is aimed at supporting information technology innovation with an end-to-end Human and Social Sciences assistance. This methodology provides an integrated approach combining a vision of the potential users, business aspects and technological challenges throughout the design process. An original combination of different methods is proposed and experimented: user-centred design, scenario-based design, user and functional requirements analysis, business value analysis, user acceptance studies, and visualization methods. This methodology has been implemented in three European R&D projects, in the domain of the telecommunications and Internet infrastructure. The key contributions of this approach are that it unifies brings together visions of the users, potential business value and technology challenges thanks to scenario construction.
    Keywords: Scenario-based design ; user requirements ; business economics ; functional requirements ; visualization
    Date: 2009–12
  6. By: Arora, Saurabh (School of Innovation Sciences, Eindhoven University of Technology); Romijn, Henny (School of Innovation Sciences, Eindhoven University of Technology)
    Abstract: This article criticises current BoP approaches for under-appreciating two issues that play vital roles in projects targeting the poor at the BoP: heterogeneity among the poor, and the intricacies of participatory partnerships between TNCs, the non-profit sector (NGOs) and local poor communities in the global south. Our main contention is that the extant BoP literature has a naive view of what working with the poor really involves, which grossly underestimates adverse power relationships and disregards the hierarchies between the poor and outsiders who administer development interventions. To unpack the hidden complexities associated with heterogeneity and partnership dynamics, we draw on extensive knowledge from the field of development studies, which has accumulated key insights about working in and with poorer communities over several decades.
    Keywords: innovation and development, participation, poverty alleviation, TNCs
    JEL: I30 M14 O19 O31 O32 Z10
    Date: 2009

This nep-knm issue is ©2009 by Laura Stefanescu. It is provided as is without any express or implied warranty. It may be freely redistributed in whole or in part for any purpose. If distributed in part, please include this notice.
General information on the NEP project can be found at For comments please write to the director of NEP, Marco Novarese at <>. Put “NEP” in the subject, otherwise your mail may be rejected.
NEP’s infrastructure is sponsored by the School of Economics and Finance of Massey University in New Zealand.