|
on Knowledge Management and Knowledge Economy |
|
Issue of 2009‒10‒17
eight papers chosen by Laura Stefanescu European Research Centre of Managerial Studies in Business Administration |
| By: | Ferguson, J.E. (Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Faculteit der Economische Wetenschappen en Econometrie (Free University Amsterdam, Faculty of Economics Sciences, Business Administration and Economitrics); Huysman, M.H. |
| Abstract: | Over the past forty years, worldwide efforts have been mobilized to address the inequalities that have led to the marginalization and deprivation of billions of people. These efforts have been broached by the sector of development cooperation, which is increasingly recognized as a knowledge-intensive sector. In this article, we critically analyze how knowledge management is perceived and approached within development organizations. We identify a contradiction in terms of the ambition of knowledge management to foster an open networking perspective, versus the approach by which knowledge management is implemented. This approach is characterized by four biases: a management, technology, objectivist, and transfer bias. We argue that as a result of these biases, knowledge management risks becoming counter effective to development purposes, strengthening rather than mitigating power inequalities. We present the concept of situated mutual learning as a promising avenue to overcoming the prevailing contradictions, contributing to more sustainable and effective development interventions. The study is based on seven case studies of development organizations and comprises fifty interviews of practitioners and policy makers actively involved in knowledge management. |
| Keywords: | development cooperation; knowledge management; transfer bias; situated mutual learning |
| Date: | 2009 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:dgr:vuarem:2009-3&r=knm |
| By: | Fagerberg, Jan (Centre for Technology, Innovation and Culture, University of Oslo); Srholec, Martin (Centre for Technology, Innovation and Culture, University of Oslo); Verspagen, Bart (UNU-MERIT, and Maastricht University) |
| Abstract: | Is innovation important for development? And if so, how? One popular perception of innovation, that one meets in media every day, is that has to do with developing brand new, advanced solutions for sophisticated, well-off customers, through exploitation of the most recent advances in knowledge. Such innovation is normally seen as carried out by highly educated labour in R&D intensive companies, being large or small, with strong ties to leading centers of excellence in the scientific world. Hence innovation in this sense is a typical “first world” activity. There is, however, another way to look at innovation that goes significantly beyond the high-tech picture just described. In this broader perspective, innovation (the attempt to try out new or improved products, processes or ways to do things) is an aspect of most if not all economic activities. It includes not only technologically new products and processes but also improvements in areas such as logistics, distribution and marketing. The term may also be used for changes that are new to the local context, even if the contribution to the global knowledge frontier is negligible. In this broader sense, it is argued, innovation may be as relevant in the developing part of the world as elsewhere. The paper surveys the existing literature on the subject with a strong emphasis on recent evidence on the macro and, in particular, micro level. |
| Keywords: | innovation and development, innovation capabilities, technology transfer |
| JEL: | O14 O19 O31 O33 O40 |
| Date: | 2009 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:dgr:unumer:2009032&r=knm |
| By: | Bahlmann, M.D. (Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Faculteit der Economische Wetenschappen en Econometrie (Free University Amsterdam, Faculty of Economics Sciences, Business Administration and Economitrics); Huysman, M.H.; Elfring, T. |
| Abstract: | Recent theorizing in cluster literature emphasizes the importance of inter-cluster knowledge linkages in addition to local knowledge dynamics, enabling new and innovative ideas to flow from one cluster to the other. This paper contributes to this topic by studying inter-cluster knowledge linkages at an individual level of analysis, making use of qualitative social network measures. Central to this case is the Amsterdam New Media-cluster, with a special focus on entrepreneurs engaging in lively inter-cluster exchange of knowledge and debate, resulting in the exchange of new visions and ideas across cluster boundaries. The proposed distinction between local buzz and global pipelines is complemented by adding a third category of inter-local knowledge exchange: global buzz. |
| Keywords: | pipelines; global/ local buzz; entrepreneurship; cluster |
| Date: | 2009 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:dgr:vuarem:2009-2&r=knm |
| By: | R. Antonietti; G. Cainelli |
| Date: | 2009–09 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:bol:prinwp:007&r=knm |
| By: | Rune Dahl Fitjar (International Research Institute of Stavanger); Andrés Rodríguez-Pose (IMDEA Ciencias Sociales) |
| Abstract: | How do peripheral and relatively isolated regions innovate? Recent research has tended to stress the importance of agglomeration economies and geographical proximity as key motors of innovation. According to this research, large core areas have significant advantages with respect to peripheral areas in innovation potential. Yet, despite these trends, some remote areas of the periphery are remarkably innovative even in the absence of critical innovation masses. In this paper we examine one such case – the region of Southwest Norway – which has managed to remain innovative and dynamic, despite having a below average investment in R&D in the Norwegian context. The results of the paper highlight that innovation in Southwest Norway does not stem from agglomeration and physical proximity, but from other types of proximity, such as cognitive and organizational proximity, rooted in soft institutional arrangements. This suggests that the formation of regional hubs with strong connections to international innovative networks may be a way to overcome peripherality in order to innovate. |
| Keywords: | innovation; institutions; distance; trust; open-mindedness; periphery; Norway |
| Date: | 2009–10–09 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:imd:wpaper:wp2009-13&r=knm |
| By: | Adam Copeland; Dennis Fixler (Bureau of Economic Analysis) |
| Abstract: | This paper develops a framework for constructing an R&D output price index. Based on a model of the innovator, we show that the price of innovation is equal to the expected discounted stream of profits attributable to the adoption of the innovation. Using this relationship, we construct an R&D output price index using data on NAICS 5417, Scientific R&D services. |
| JEL: | E60 |
| Date: | 2009–02 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:bea:wpaper:0044&r=knm |
| By: | Pierre-Alexandre Balland |
| Abstract: | Increasing attention had been given recently to understand how networks affect organizational performance in innovation studies. Surprisingly, underlying mechanisms of their evolution have been more neglected, and still remain unclear. This lack of interest is denounced today by recent papers which claim that it is a crucial issue for economic geography. Especially the influence of different forms of proximity on the network’s changes needs to be clarified. This paper contributes to this ongoing debate by determining empirically how organizations choose their partners given to their geographical, organizational, institutional, cognitive and social proximity. The relational database is constructed from publicly available information on the R&D collaborative projects of the 6th European Union Framework Program within the navigation by satellite industry (GNSS). Patterns of evolution of the GNSS collaboration network are determined according to a longitudinal study of the relational changes occurred between four consecutive years, from 2004 to 2007. Empirical results show that geographical, organizational and institutional proximity favour collaboration. Inversely, organizations prefer to avoid partnerships when they share a cognitive proximity (same knowledge bases). The last result demonstrates that the kind of project studied does not create a sufficient level of social proximity to stimulate collaboration. |
| Keywords: | proximity, collaboration networks, innovation, network longitudinal analysis, R&D collaborative projects, SIENA |
| JEL: | O32 R12 |
| Date: | 2009–10 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:egu:wpaper:0914&r=knm |
| By: | Tom Broekel; Ron Boschma |
| Abstract: | The importance of geographical proximity for interaction and knowledge sharing has been discussed extensively in economic geography in recent years. There is increasing consensus that it is just one out of many types of proximities that might be relevant. We argue that proximity may be a crucial driver for agents to connect and exchange knowledge, but too much proximity between these agents on any of the dimensions might harm their innovative performance at the same time. In a study on knowledge networks in the Dutch aviation industry, we test this so-called proximity paradox empirically. We find evidence that the proximity paradox holds to some degree. Our study clearly shows that cognitive, social and geographical proximity are crucial for explaining the knowledge network of the Dutch aviation industry. But while it takes cognitive, social and geographical proximity to exchange knowledge, we found evidence that proximity lowers firms’ innovative performance, but only in the cognitive dimension. |
| Keywords: | proximity, paradox, social network analysis, knowledge networks, aviation |
| JEL: | R11 R12 O32 |
| Date: | 2009–10 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:egu:wpaper:0915&r=knm |