nach oben

Erschienen in:

2012 | OriginalPaper | Buchkapitel

2. Institutions and Systems: Analysing Technical Innovation Processes from an Institutional Perspective

verfasst von : Raymund Werle

Erschienen in: Innovation Policy and Governance in High-Tech Industries

Verlag: Springer Berlin Heidelberg

Einloggen

Aktivieren Sie unsere intelligente Suche, um passende Fachinhalte oder Patente zu finden.

search-config

KI-gestützte Suche

Aus

Abstract

Different sub-disciplines of the social sciences analyse the evolution and diffusion of technical innovations from an institutional perspective. Important contributions are provided by socio-economic studies of national systems of innovation, by politico-economic research on the varieties of capitalism, and by the sociology of technology. These studies often start from rather simple distinctions between types of technical innovations (e.g., radical versus incremental) which they usually do not elaborate on. Also, most of them neglect that particularly large and complex technical systems require specific institutional provisions for their functioning. Such “black-boxing” of technology by and large facilitates detecting generalisable relations between institutional constellations and technical innovations. But a more sophisticated analysis of the relationship between institutions and technical innovations needs more precise concepts of both technology and institutions, and it must dismiss the prevailing institutional determinism. Processes of technical and institutional innovations are characterised by co-evolution, interaction and mutual adjustment.

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 102.000 Bücher
über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 67.000 Bücher
über 390 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 67.000 Bücher
über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Vorheriges Kapitel Innovation Policy and High-Tech Development: An Introduction

Nächstes Kapitel Ecologies of Games Shaping Large Technical Systems: Cases from Telecommunications to the Internet

Freeman shows that Japan’s institutional constellation was conducive to process innovations and lead to competitive advantages in the consumer goods industry, in the automobile production and in the production of semiconductors. In other areas of technology, Japan lacked innovativeness because its institutional system was less supportive to innovations.

The view that platform technologies possess a cumulative character and can be continuously developed over years is often challenged (Dolata 2003). However, this does not alter the usefulness of distinguishing between discrete and cumulative technologies.

Amable, B. (2000). Institutional complementarity and diversity of social systems of innovation and production. Review of International Political Economy, 7(4), 645–687.CrossRef

Archibugi, D., & Pianta, M. (1992). The technological specialization of advanced countries. Dordrecht: Kluwer.

Baumol, W. J. (2002). The free-market innovation machine. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Bessen, J., & Meurer, M. J. (2008). Patent failure: How judges, bureaucrats, and lawyers put innovators at risk. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Block, F., & Keller, M. R. (2009). Where do innovations come from? Transformations in the U.S. economy, 1970–2006. Socio-economic Review, 7(3), 459–483.CrossRef

Breschi, S., & Malerba, F. (1997). Sectoral innovation systems: Technological regimes, Schumpeterian dynamics, and spatial boundaries. In C. Edquist (Ed.), Systems of innovation: Technologies, institutions and organizations (pp. 130–156). London: Pinter.

Carlsson, B. (1994). Technological systems and economic performance. In M. Dodgson & R. Rothwell (Eds.), The handbook of industrial innovation (pp. 13–24). Aldershot: Edward Elgar.

Carlsson, B., Jacobsson, S., Holmén, M., & Rickne, A. (2002). Innovation systems: Analytical and methodological issues. Research Policy, 31(2), 233–245.CrossRef

Casper, S. (2000). Institutional adaptiveness, technology policy and the diffusion of new business models: The case of German biotechnology. Organization Studies, 21(5), 887–914.CrossRef

Casper, S., & Glimstedt, H. (2001). Economic organization, innovation systems and the Internet. Oxford Review of Economic Policy, 17(2), 265–281.CrossRef

Casper, S., & Matraves, C. (2003). Institutional frameworks and innovation in the German and UK pharmaceutical industry. Research Policy, 32(10), 1865–1897.CrossRef

Casper, S., Lehrer, M., & Soskice, D. (1999). Can high-technology industries prosper in Germany? Institutional frameworks and the evolution of the German software and biotechnology industries. Industry and Innovation, 6(1), 5–24.CrossRef

Castilla, E. J., Hwang, H., Granovetter, E., & Granovetter, M. (2000). Social networks in Silicon Valley. In C.-M. Lee, W. F. Miller, M. G. Hancock, & H. S. Rowen (Eds.), The Silicon Valley edge: A habitat for innovation and entrepreneurship (pp. 218–247). Stanford: Stanford University Press.

Chandler, A. D. (1977). The visible hand: The managerial revolution in American business. Cambridge, MA: Belknap.

Coriat, B., & Weinstein, O. (2002). Organizations, firms and institutions in the generation of innovation. Research Policy, 31(2), 273–290.CrossRef

Crouch, C. (2003). Institutions within which real actors innovate. In R. Mayntz & W. Streeck (Eds.), Die Reformierbarkeit der Demokratie: Innovationen und Blockaden (pp. 71–98). Frankfurt am Main: Campus.

David, P. A. (2001). The evolving accidental information super-highway. Oxford Review of Economic Policy, 17(2), 159–187.CrossRef

Dolata, U. (2003). Unternehmen Technik. Akteure, Interaktionsmuster und strukturelle Kontexte der Technikentwicklung: Ein Theorierahmen. Berlin: Edition Sigma.

Dolata, U. (2009). Technological innovations and sectoral change. Transformative capacity, adaptability, patterns of change: An analytical framework. Research Policy, 38(6), 1066–1077.CrossRef

Dosi, G. (1982). Technological paradigms and technological trajectories: A suggested interpretation of the determinants and directions of technical change. Research Policy, 11(3), 147–162.CrossRef

Dosi, G. (1988). Sources, procedures, and macroeconomic effects of innovation. Journal of Economic Literature, 26(3), 1120–1171.

Edquist, C. (1997). Systems of innovation approaches: Their emergence and characteristics. In C. Edquist (Ed.), Systems of innovation: Technologies, institutions and organizations (pp. 1–35). London: Pinter.

Edquist, C., & Lundvall, B.-Å. (1993). Comparing the Danish and the Swedish systems of innovations. In R. R. Nelson (Ed.), National innovation systems: A comparative analysis (pp. 265–298). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Faber, J., & Hesen, B. (2004). Innovation capabilities of European nations: Cross-national analyses of patents and sales of product innovations. Research Policy, 33(2), 193–207.CrossRef

Feick, J., & Werle, R. (2010). Regulation of cyberspace. In M. Cave, R. Baldwin, & M. Lodge (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of regulation (pp. 523–547). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Freeman, C. (1987). Technology policy and economic performance: Lessons from Japan. London: Pinter.

Freeman, C., & Louçã, F. (2002). As time goes by: From the industrial revolutions to the information revolution. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Freeman, C., & Perez, C. (1988). Structural crises of adjustment, business cycles and investment behaviour. In G. Dosi, C. Freeman, R. R. Nelson, G. Silverberg, & L. Soete (Eds.), Technical change and economic theory (pp. 38–66). London: Pinter.

Gallini, N. T. (2002). The economics of patents: Lessons from recent US patent reform. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 16(2), 131–154.CrossRef

Geels, F. W. (2004). From sectoral systems of innovation to socio-technical systems. Insights about dynamics and change from sociology and institutional theory. Research Policy, 33(6–7), 897–920.CrossRef

Geels, F. W. (2005). Technological transitions and system innovations: A co-evolutionary and socio-technical analysis. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.

Geels, F. W. (2007). Transformations of large technical systems: A multilevel analysis of the Dutch highway system (1950–2000). Science, Technology & Human Values, 32(2), 123–149.CrossRef

Gibbons, M., Limoges, C., Nowotny, H., Schwartzman, S., Scott, P., & Trow, M. (1994). The new production of knowledge: The dynamics of science and research in contemporary societies. London: Sage.

Giesecke, S. (2000). The contrasting roles of government in the development of biotechnology industry in the US and Germany. Research Policy, 29(2), 205–223.CrossRef

Graham, S. J. H., & Mowery, D. C. (2003). Intellectual property in the US software industry. In W. M. Cohen & S. A. Merrill (Eds.), Patents in the knowledge based economy (pp. 219–258). Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.

Guerrieri, P. (1999). Patterns of national specialisation in the global competitive environment. In D. Archibugi, J. Howells, & J. Mitchie (Eds.), Innovation policy in a global economy (pp. 139–159). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRef

Hall, P. A., & Soskice, D. (2001). An introduction to varieties of capitalism. In P. A. Hall & D. Soskice (Eds.), Varieties of capitalism: The institutional foundations of comparative advantage (pp. 1–70). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Hall, B. H., & Ziedonis, R. H. (2001). The patent paradox revisited: An empirical study of patenting in the US semiconductor industry, 1979–1995. RAND Journal of Economics, 32(1), 101–128.CrossRef

Heller, M. A., & Eisenberg, R. S. (1998). Can patents deter innovation? The anticommons in biomedical research. Science, 280(5364), 698–701.CrossRef

Henisz, W. J., Zelner, B. A., & Guillén, M. F. (2005). The worldwide diffusion of market-oriented infrastructure reform, 1977–1999. American Sociological Review, 70(6), 871–897.CrossRef

Hirsch-Kreinsen, H. (2002). Unternehmensnetzwerke – revisited. Zeitschrift für Soziologie, 31(2), 106–124.

Hollingsworth, J. R. (2000). Doing institutional analysis: Implications for the study of innovations. Review of International Political Economy, 7(4), 595–644.CrossRef

Hollingsworth, J. R., & Boyer, R. (1997). Coordination of economic actors and social systems of production. In J. R. Hollingsworth & R. Boyer (Eds.), Contemporary capitalism: The embeddedness of institutions (pp. 1–47). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Höpner, M. (2005). Epilogue to ‘explaining institutional complementarity’: what have we learnt? Complementarity, coherence and institutional change. Socio-Economic Review, 3(2), 383–387.CrossRef

Hughes, T. P. (1982). Conservative and radical technologies. In S. B. Lundstedt & E. W. Colglazier (Eds.), Managing innovation (pp. 31–44). New York: Pergamon.

Hughes, T. P. (1983). Networks of power: Electrification in western society 1880–1930. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press.

Jaffe, A. B. (2000). The US patent system in transition: Policy innovation and the innovation process. Research Policy, 29(4–5), 531–557.CrossRef

Jansen, D. (2002). Netzwerkansätze in der Organisationsforschung. In J. Allmendinger & T. Hinz (Eds.), Organisationssoziologie: Sonderheft 42 der Kölner Zeitschrift für Soziologie und Sozialpsychologie (pp. 88–118). Wiesbaden: Westdeutscher Verlag.

Kitschelt, H. (1991). Industrial governance structures, innovation strategies and the case of Japan: Sectoral or cross-national comparative analysis? International Organization, 45(4), 453–493.CrossRef

Kitschelt, H., & Streeck, W. (2003). From stability to stagnation: Germany at the beginning of the twenty-first century. West European Politics, 26(4), 1–32.CrossRef

Kowol, U., & Krohn, W. (1995). Innovationsnetzwerke: Ein Modell der Technikgenese. In J. Halfmann, G. Bechmann, & W. Rammert (Eds.), Technik und Gesellschaft. Jahrbuch 8: Theoriebausteine der Techniksoziologie (pp. 77–105). Frankfurt am Main: Campus.

Krücken, G., & Meier, F. (2003). Wir sind alle überzeugte Netzwerktäter: Netzwerke als Formalstruktur und Mythos der Innovationsgesellschaft. Soziale Welt, 54, 71–92.

Küppers, G. (2002). Complexity, self-organisation and innovation networks: A new theoretical approach. In A. Pyka & G. Küppers (Eds.), Innovation networks: Theory and practice (pp. 22–52). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.

Lange, K. (2009). Institutional embeddedness and the strategic leeway of actors: The case of the German therapeutical biotech industry. Socio-economic Review, 7(2), 181–207.CrossRef

Larédo, P., & Mustar, P. (2001). Research and innovation policies in the new global economy: An international comparative analysis. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.

Leydesdorff, L., & Etzkowitz, H. (1998). The triple helix as a model for innovation studies. Science and Public Policy, 25(3), 195–203.

Lundvall, B.-Å. (1992). User-producer relationships, national systems of innovation and internationalisation. In B.-Å. Lundvall (Ed.), National systems of innovation: Towards a theory of innovation and interactive learning (pp. 45–67). London: Pinter.

Lundvall, B.-Å., Johnson, B., Andersen, E. S., & Dalum, B. (2002). National systems of production, innovation and competence building. Research Policy, 31(2), 213–231.CrossRef

Mayntz, R. (1993). Große technische Systeme und ihre gesellschaftstheoretische Bedeutung. Kölner Zeitschrift für Soziologie und Sozialpsychologie, 45(1), 97–108.

Mayntz, R. (2009). The changing governance of large technical infrastructure systems. In R. Mayntz (Ed.), Über Governance: Institutionen und Prozesse Politischer Regelung (pp. 121–150). Frankfurt am Main: Campus.

Mayntz, R., & Hughes, T. P. (1988). The development of large technological systems. Campus: Frankfurt a.M.

Mowery, D. C. (1994). Science and technology policy in interdependent economies. Boston: Kluwer.CrossRef

Mowery, D. C., & Rosenberg, N. (1993). The U.S. national innovation system. In R. R. Nelson (Ed.), National innovation systems: A comparative analysis (pp. 29–75). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Mowery, D. C., & Simcoe, T. (2002). The internet. In B. Steil, D. G. Victor, & R. R. Nelson (Eds.), Technological innovation and economic performance (pp. 229–264). Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Nelson, R. R. (1987). Understanding technical change as an evolutionary process. Amsterdam: Elsevier.

Nelson, R. R. (1988). Institutions supporting technical change in the United States. In G. Dosi, C. Freemann, R. R. Nelson, G. Silverberg, & L. Soete (Eds.), Technical change and economic theory (pp. 312–329). London: Pinter.

Nelson, R. R. (1994). The coevolution of technologies and institutions. In R. W. England (Ed.), Evolutionary concepts in contemporary economics (pp. 139–156). Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.

Nelson, R. R., & Rosenberg, N. (1993). Technical innovation and national systems. In R. R. Nelson (Ed.), National innovation systems. A comparative analysis (pp. 3–21). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Nelson, R. R., & Winter, S. G. (1982). An evolutionary theory of economic change. Cambridge: Belknap.

Owen-Smith, J., Riccaboni, M., Pammolli, F., & Powell, W. W. (2002). A comparison of US and European university-industry relations in the life sciences. Management Science, 48(1), 24–43.CrossRef

Pavitt, K., & Patel, P. (1999). Global corporations and national systems of innovations: Who dominates whom? In D. Archibugi, J. Howells, & J. Mitchie (Eds.), Innovation policy in a global economy (pp. 94–119). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRef

Perrow, C. (1984). Normal accidents, living with high-risk technologies. New York: Basic Books.

Podolny, J. M., & Page, K. L. (1998). Network forms of organization. Annual Review of Sociology, 24(1), 57–76.CrossRef

Porter, M. E. (1990). The competitive advantage of nations. New York: Free Press.

Powell, W. W. (1990). Neither market nor hierarchy: Network forms of organization. Research in Organizational Behavior, 12(1), 295–336.

Powell, W. W., White, D. R., Koput, K. W., & Owen-Smith, J. (2005). Network dynamics and field evolution: The growth of interorganizational collaboration in the life sciences. American Journal of Sociology, 110(4), 1132–1205.CrossRef

Rammert, W. (1997). New rules of sociological method: Rethinking technology studies. The British Journal of Sociology, 48(2), 171–191.CrossRef

Riccaboni, M., Powell, W. W., Pammoli, F., & Owen-Smith, J. (2003). Public research and industrial innovation: A comparison of US and European innovation systems in the life sciences. In A. Geuna, A. J. Salter, & W. E. Steinmueller (Eds.), Science and innovation: Rethinking the rationales for funding and governance (pp. 169–201). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.

Rip, A., & Kemp, R. (1998). Technological change. In S. Rayner & E. L. Malone (Eds.), Human choice and climate change two: Resources and technology (pp. 327–399). Columbus: Batelle Press.

Rosenkopf, L., & Tushman, M. L. (1994). The coevolution of technology and organization. In J. A. C. Baum & J. V. Singh (Eds.), Evolutionary dynamics of organizations (pp. 403–424). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Schmidt, S., & Werle, R. (1998). Coordinating technology: Studies in the international standardization of telecommunications. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.

Schneider, V. (2001). Die Transformation der Telekommunikation: Vom Staatsmonopol zum globalen Markt (1800–2000). Frankfurt am Main: Campus.

Schneider, V., & Bauer, J. (2009). Von der Governance- zur Komplexitätstheorie: Entwicklungen der Theorie gesellschaftlicher Ordnung. In J. Weyer & I. Schulz-Schaeffer (Eds.), Management komplexer Systeme (pp. 31–53). München: Oldenbourg.CrossRef

Schulz-Schaeffer, I. (2000). Sozialtheorie der Technik. Frankfurt am Main: Campus.

Soskice, D. (1994). Innovation strategies of companies: A comparative institutional approach of some cross-country differences. In W. Zapf & M. Dierkes (Eds.), Institutionenvergleich und Institutionendynamik: WZB-Jahrbuch 1994 (pp. 271–289). Berlin: Edition Sigma.

Soskice, D. (1999). Divergent production regimes: Coordinated and uncoordinated market economies in the 1980s and 1990s. In H. Kitschelt, P. Lange, G. Marks, & J. D. Stevens (Eds.), Continuity and change in contemporary capitalism (pp. 101–134). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Steil, B., Victor, D. G., & Nelson, R. R. (2002). Introduction and overview. In B. Steil, D. G. Victor, & R. R. Nelson (Eds.), Technological innovation and economic performance (pp. 3–22). Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Streeck, W. (2011). Skills and politics: General and specific. MPIfG Discussion Paper. Köln: Max-Planck-Institut für Gesellschaftsforschung.

Werle, R. (1998). An institutional approach to technology. Science Studies, 11(1), 3–18.

Werle, R. (2000). Innovationspotentiale im Internet: Selbstregelung auf Strukturebene. In W. Hoffmann-Riem (Ed.), Innovation und Telekommunikation: Rechtliche Steuerung von Innovationsprozessen in der Telekommunikation (pp. 141–160). Baden-Baden: Nomos.

Werle, R. (2002). Internet @ Europe: Overcoming institutional fragmentation and policy failure. In J. Jordana (Ed.), Governing telecommunications and the new information society in Europe (pp. 137–158). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.

Werle, R. (2007). Zur Interdependenz von Innovationen. In H. Hof & U. Wengenroth (Eds.), Innovationsforschung: Ansätze, Methoden, Grenzen und Perspektiven (pp. 31–40). Münster/Hamburg: LIT Verlag.

Weyer, J. (2006). Modes of governance of hybrid systems: The mid-air collision at Ueberlingen and the impact of smart technology. Science, Technology & Innovation Studies, 2(2), 127–149.

Weyer, J., Kirchner, U., Riedl, L., & Schmidt, J. F. K. (1997). Technik, die Gesellschaft schafft: Soziale Netzwerke als Ort der Technikgenese. Berlin: Edition Sigma.

Williamson, O. E. (1985). The economic institutions of capitalism: Firms, markets, relational contracting. New York: Free Press.

Titel: Institutions and Systems: Analysing Technical Innovation Processes from an Institutional Perspective
verfasst von: Raymund Werle
Verlag: Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Buch: Innovation Policy and Governance in High-Tech Industries
Print ISBN: 978-3-642-12562-1

Electronic ISBN: 978-3-642-12563-8

Copyright-Jahr: 2012
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-12563-8_2

Premium Partner

Marktübersichten

Die im Laufe eines Jahres in der „adhäsion“ veröffentlichten Marktübersichten helfen Anwendern verschiedenster Branchen, sich einen gezielten Überblick über Lieferantenangebote zu verschaffen.

Zur Marktübersicht

Springer Professional

Abstract

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu Ihrer Lizenz zu erhalten.

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Springer Professional "Technik"

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Premium Partner

Marktübersichten