So-called futureorieente technologies such as biotechnology (3. 6%of projects, 4. 5%of subsidies) and nanotechnology (5. 7%of projects, 3. 8%of subsidies) do not seem to have been promoted particularly.
801,686 3. 1 140,803 Biology 23 3. 6 5, 462,365 4. 5 237,494 Electrical machinery/electronics 32 5. 0 6
Biology 7 3. 5 Electrical machinery/electronics 12 6. 0 Information technology 21 10.6 Machinery, construction of apparatus 23 11.6 Material sciences
Biology 13 7 53.8 Electrical machinery/electronics 18 12 66.7 Information technology 38 20 52.6 Machinery 70 46 65.7 Material sciences
and the future of complex themes, such as climate change, demography, biodiversity, bioethanol, energy efficiency etc. In the last three years, CGEE has conducted some relevant national strategic foresight exercises,
discussion and prioritization of results in an integrated format Analyses of recommendations of each panel compared to previous Brazilian foresight studies and international information Final report and dissemination of results Biotechnology Mapping
and IPR as applied to biotechnology development Validation of results in workshoops final report and disseminnatio of results Nanotechnology Mapping current situation and future trends in S&t in Brazil and in a number of selected nations,
The case of Taiwanese pharmaceutical biotechnology and agricultural biotechnology innovation systems (1945 2000) Chao-chen Chung1 1manchester Business school, University of Manchester, Manchester, M13 9pl, UK.
Through comparing the Taiwanese pharmaceutical biotechnology and agricultural biotechnology innovation systems we find that even within the same nation different NSTISS reveal different dynamics, in terms of actors and networks, the application of technology and knowledge and institutions.
We conclude that the new research, technology development and innovation policies should be customized according to the differing dynamics of the NSTISS.
biotechnology; pharmaceuticals; agriculture. 1. Introduction Over the last two decades scholars working on innovattio systems have established different ways in
The Taiwanese biotechnology industry and the two sectors which adopt biotechnology (i e. pharmaceuticals and agriculture) provide an interesting case for our discussiion Historical records for the period 1945 2000 in Taiwan clearly show the process through which the three innovation systems,
and the technological innovation system for biotechnology, gradually configured each other. Indeed, the pharmaceutical and the agricultural sectors not only possessed contrasting opportunities for the development of biotechnology,
but were shaped extensively by different national institutions. The pharmaceuttica sector, which was composed mainly of local enterpriises that were small-and medium-sized enterprises (SMES), only adopted biotechnology after the 1980s.
The Taiwanese government shaped the sector through its policies on pharmaceuticals and biotechnology. On the other hand, the agricultural sector,
which was dominated by public research organizations, started to adopt biotechnollog before 1945. The Taiwanese government supported the sector through agricultural policies,
which were considered not part of the biotechnology policies. In summary within the same national border of Taiwan differren configurations of the three innovation systems show different dynamics,
Section 3 analyzes the evolution of the Taiwanese innovation systems for biotechnology, pharmaceuticals and agriculture through the lens of the configuration of the three innovation systems.
We choose the Taiwanese biotechnology and two biotechnology-related sectors as an empirical case because that case is discussed seldom in the existing literatuure Modern biotechnology,
as defined by Laage-Hellman et al. 2004), is developed the biotechnology in the post-genetic engineering era in the 1970s
and comprised of a broad range of knowledge fields. 1 The biotechnology developed before the post-genetic engineering era is defined in this paper as traditional biotechnology.
While the majority of the existing literature on modern biotechnollog focuses on the empirical experiences of European countries and the USA (Mckelvey et al. 2004;
Boschert and Gill 2005), only a few papers discuss the develoopmen of biotechnology (both traditional and modern) in Taiwan (Dodgson et al. 2008;
Indeed, the existing literature considers Taiwanese biotechnology to be a‘new sector 'which has emerged only in the last ten years
Nevertheless, as we will show in Section 3, Taiwan adopted traditional biotechnology before 1945 and adopted modern biotechnology as early as the 1980s.
Biotechnology is not a sector but a technology which is adopted by at least two sectors in Taiwan,
the Taiwanese government has implemented not a‘set of policies'towards biotechnology, but has adopted different sets of policies towards pharmaceuttica biotechnology and agricultural biotechnology.
The evolution of biotechnology and the two sectors before 2000 in fact deeply influences the development after 2000.
Since the history of biotechnology and the two sectors in Taiwan is missing, we select Taiwan as our empirical case and focus on the development in the period 1945 2000.
By analyzing the historical archives, such as government documents and the historical records of the institutions embedded in the innovation systems,
we will discover how the technological innovattio system for biotechnology gradually emerged with the Taiwanese national innovation system,
Taiwan. 273 3. The Taiwanese pharmaceutical biotechnology and agricultural biotechnology innovation systems This section analyzes the history of biotechnology and the two sectors in Taiwan through the lens of the NSTIS.
The Taiwanese government announced its first biotechnology policy, the‘Eight Key Industries'in 1982. After 1982, Taiwan started to have a biotechnology policy.
We discuss the evolution of the pharmaceutical biotechnology innovation system in Section 3. 1 and the evolution of the agricultural biotechnology innovation system in Section 3. 2. 3. 1 The evolution of the Taiwanese pharmaceutical biotechnology innovation system
3. 1. 1 Pharmaceutical companies: networks and knowledge base. Pharmaceutical technology was introduced originalll to Taiwan by Japan.
The knowledge base of all these firms was chemical engineerrin rather than biotechnology. Even if modern biotechnollog was developed in the USA in the 1970s,
these companies did not adopt any modern biotechnology in their products. In 1982, to fit the new‘Good Manufacturing Practice'regulations announced by the government,
) Only after the 1980s, was modern biotechnology graduaall adopted by the companies producing Chinese herbal medicines.
Modern biotechnology was applied to extract the functional ingredients of the herbs. Furthermore, modern biochemistry, which was introduced by scientists trained in the USA,
Modern biotechnology was introduced to Taiwan's universities in the 1980s by a group of young scientists.
These young scientists transferred modern pharmaceutical biotechnology, such as molecular biotechnology and biochemistry, from the universities of the USA to Taiwan and soon became the leaders of the pharmaceutical colleges.
Because of the particippatio of these young scientists, modern biotechnology was dispersed quickly among the universities and extensivvel deepened the level of pharmaceutical research for small molecular medicines and Chinese herbal medicines (Zheng,
2001: 242. Nevertheless, from the 1980s until 2000, the networks between the researchers and between universities and pharmaceutical companies were established not fully.
Since the universities were supposed not to directly interact with firms, the Development Centre of Biotechnology (DCB),
which could transfer pharmaceutical biotechnology from the universities to pharmaceutical companies. 3. 1. 3 National institutions:
Pharmaceutical and biotechnology policies. The Taiwanese government did not strategically promote a‘set of consistent policies'to foster the development of pharmaceutical biotechnologgy Instead,
each policy directed towards pharmaceutical biotechnology had its own historical background and changed with the evolution of pharmaceuticals and biotechnnology The Eight Key Industries policy,
which was the first biotechnology policy announced in 1982, should be regarded as an important milestone in the change of policies.
Besides recognizing biotechnology as one of the eight key industries in which the government should invest more resourrces there was no other concrete policy promoted under the framework of the Eight Key Industries.
Furthermore, according to the Eight Key Industries policy, the development of biotechnology was almost equal to the development of the pharmaceutical sector
whose knowledge base was chemical engineering rather than biotechnology (MOEA 2010). Policies of regulation, FDI and R&d were directed towards the pharmaceutical biotechnology innovation system.
The Law of Pharmaceutical Affairs was passed in 1970 and remained the most important regulation controlling the manufacture of medicines until 2000.
) In terms of R&d policies, fundamental biological and pharmaceutical research in universities was funded continuously, and the DCB was found in 1984 to transfer pharmaceutical technology of chemical engineering from the universities to pharmaceuticca companies (DCB 2010).
However, there was no R&d policy to encourage universities to transfer pharmaceuttica biotechnology to companies, and before the late 1990s, there was no particular target for the funding of R&d policies.
before the late 1990s, the government did not have specific policies to encourage the development of modern pharmaceutical biotechnology.
Only in the late 1990s did the government start to support the development of modern pharmaceutical biotechnnolog through supporting the innovation of new herbaceous medicines. 3. 2 Evolution of the Taiwanese agricultural biotechnology innovation system 3. 2
The Ass research organizations used the traditional biotechnology of hybridization to improve the genes of Japanese rice with the genes of Japonica, a Taiwanese rice
However, the introduction of modern biotechnology in the 1980s extensively changed the knowledge and technology used for seed innovation.
The modern biotechnology of genetic modification was introduced to the ASS through a group of Taiwanese scienttist who were trained in the USA.
While the traditional biotechnology of hybridization was retained for the innovattio of seeds and expanded to the innovation of new species of livestock, such as farm animals and aquaculture,
The technology used by these private companies was the traditional biotechnology of hybridizatiio which was used also by the ASS.
Through the flow of personneel knowledge of the traditional biotechnology of hybridizaatio was transferred between the university and the ASS.
) A group of Taiwanese scientists trained in US universities introduced modern molecular biotechnology to Taiwanese universities in the 1980s.
Until 2000, most results of modern biotechnology research done by the universities were transferred to the ASS for further application (Su 2004:
) Indeed, until the 1990s, the modern biotechnology innovated by the universities was transferred only occasionally to particular agricultural companies, such as Taikong. 3. 2. 3 National institutions:
The Taiwanese government supported the development of agriculttura biotechnology through its agricultural policies. The purpose of these policies changed dramatically in the 1980s.
when the first biotechnology policy, the Eight Key Industries, was announced in 1982, agricultural biotechnology was recognized not as a part of the development of biotechnologgy Indeed,
since the 1980s, compared with the prosperoou ICT industries, the agricultural sector was recognized gradually as the sector with low productivity.
The two main agricultural policies promoting agricultuura biotechnology innovation system were agricultural R&d and regulation policies.
Before the 1980s, research into traditional biotechnology was funded in order to increase the productivity of the agricultural sector,
and after the 1980s, research in modern biotechnology was funded merely to increase the farmers'welfare (Chang 2004:
modern agricultural biotechnologies innovated by universities and public research organizatiion were commercialized not but were transferred to farmers on a nonprofit base.
the R&d funding for modern agricultural biotechnology was decreased even slightly (Wong 1998: 115), and at the same time, the Farmers'Insurance was launched (CLA 2010.
In sum, besides its agricultural policies, the Taiwanese government did not have particular policies to support the development of agricultural biotechnology.
due to the governmment'policies, these biotechnologies were commercialized seldom. 4. Discussion and conclusion The Taiwanese pharmaceutical biotechnology innovation system and agricultural biotechnology innovation system reveal different dynamics.
The three innovation systems, i e. the Taiwanese national innovation system, the two sectoral systems of pharmaceuticals and agriculture,
and the technological innovation system for biotechnology, were configured differently. Different NSTISS not only had different components, but also evolved differently.
in the pharmaceuticca biotechnology innovation system local SMES led the innovation and manufacturing. MNCS were involved only once in the manufacturing activities of the system
However, in the agricultuura biotechnology innovation system the public research organizations, the ASS, were the foundations on
Only in the 1990s did some universities occasionally transfer modern biotechnology to agricultural SMES. In brief, within the same nation different NSTISS may involve different groups of actors
The system only adopted modern biotechnology and did not produce any opportunities for the development of traditional biotechnollogy Modern biotechnology was introduced only to the system after the 1980s
and was used to extract and analyze the medical ingredients of herbs. Modern biotechnology was integrated with the traditional Chinese knowledge of herbal medicine to produce new herbaceous medicines.
In contrast, in the agricultural biotechnology system both the public research organizations and private SMES adopted biotechnology as their main knowledge base.
The system provided the chance for the development of both traditional and modern biotechnology. The traditiiona biotechnology of hybridization had already been used before 1945
in order to improve the genes of rice and subtropical vegetables and fruits. Since the 1980s the modern technique of genetic modification was applied to improve the genes of subtropical fruits (such as papayas) and non-edible organisms (such as ornamental fish.
In summary, the two NSTISS in Taiwan used different processes to adopt biotechnology and produced different sets of products.
Thirdly, the national institutions which shape various NSTISS may differ and may each have a characteristic path of co-evolution with the NSTIS.
The policies directed towards the pharmaceutical biotechnology system were regulations, FDI and R&d. Before the 1980s,
when the pharmaceutical companies graduaall adopted biotechnology to innovate new herbaceous medicines, R&d policies became more and more importannt Indeed, the Eight Key Industries,
the first biotechnoloog policy, targeted the development of the pharmaceutical sector, rather than biotechnology. Whilst the public organizations such as the DCB transferred technologies to pharmaceutical companies,
they supported pharmaceutical companies to adopt more chemical engineerrin rather than biotechnology. On the other hand the agricultural biotechnology system was supported only by agricultural policies.
Before the 1980s while agricultural products were exported, the agricultural R&d policies focused on the quantity of agricultural products.
Even though the system certainly adopted biotechnnolog for innovation, the commercialization of agriculttura biotechnology was encouraged not by policies.
In the case of biotechnollogy a government should have different sets of policies for the development of pharmaceutical biotechnology and agricultural biotechnology.
DNA (the coding), proteins and molecules, cell and tissue culture and engineeering process biotechnology, and sub-cellular organnism (Laage-Hellman et al. 2004).
2. The medical device sector also adopts biotechnology through the development of bio-chips whose knowleedg base is across electronic engineering and biotechnollog (Dr. Chip 2010).
Boschert, K. and Gill, B. 2005)‘ Germany's agri-biotechnology policy: Precaution for choice and alternatives',Science and Public policy, 32: 285 92.
and measuring modern biotechnology'.'In: Laage-Hellman, J.,Rickne, A. and Mckelvey, M. eds. The Economic Dynamics of Modern Biotechnology, pp. 20 42.
Cheltenham: Edward Elgar. Cai, H.-Q. 2007) The King of watermelon: the story of Wen-Yu, Chen(:.
Development Center of Biotechnology. DCB (2004) The Yearbook of Chinese Herbal Medicine Industry 2004. Taipei:
Development Center of Biotechnology. Ding, Y.-X. 2001)‘ The history, current condition and future of pharmaceutical industry('.
the case of biotechnology innovation networks',Research policy, 37: 430 45. Dr. Chip. 2010), Products. Dr. Chip:<
<http://www. bio-drchip. com. tw/HOME2ENG/06products. asp>accessed 14 december 2010. Edquist, C. and Hommen, L.,eds,(2008) Small Country Innovation systems:
Giesecke, S. 2000)‘ The contrasting roles of government in the development of biotechnology industry in the US and Germany',Research policy, 29: 205 23.
The Economic Dynamics of Modern Biotechnology, p. 319. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar. Lee, S.-J. and Hua, J. 2004)‘ The economic evaluation of the food industry using biotechnology'(.
'Taipeij: Food Industry Research and development Institute. Lin, J.-Y. 1995)‘ The experiments and research of Taiwan's Agriculture Experiment Station within recent one hundred years'(.
The Business of Biotechnology. Oxford: OUP. Mckelvey, M.,Orsenigo, L. and Pammolli, F. 2004)‘ Pharmaceutical analyzed through the lens of a sectoral innovaatio system'.
Taiwan's Biotechnology Policy and Promotion Status. Biotechnology & Pharmaceutical industries Program Office<http://www. bpipo. org. tw/en/policy. html>accessed 14 december 2010.
Background of National science and Technology Program for Bio agriculture. National science and Technology Program for Bio agriculture<http://dpiab. sinica. edu. tw/intro. php>accessed 14 december 2010.
OECD. 1999) Managing National Innovation systems. OECD: Paris. Senker, J. 2004)‘ An overview of biotechnology in Europe:
firms, demand, government policy and research'.'In: Laage-Hellman, J.,Rickne, A. and Mckelvey, M. eds.
The Economic Dynamics of Modern Biotechnology, pp. 99 134. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar. Science and Technology research and Information Center (2005)‘ Strategic planning on the development of Taiwan agricultural biotechnology industry'(.
'Taipei: Science and Technology research and Information Center. Su, J.-C. 2004)‘ Global perspective of Taiwan's agricultural science and technology:
The challenges of biotechnology',International Political science Review, 26: 169 91. Wong, J.-W. 1998)‘ The relationship between bureaucratic organizzatio and agricultural innovation:
Similarly, in many respects, breakthrough technologies due to developments in information and communiccatio technologies and nano-and biotechnologies have disruptive impacts on economies, markets and innovative consumer goods and services.
and DIVERSITAS, addressing global biodiversity is that they provide a scientific framework with internationalll agreed scientific priorities.
and make them accesssibl for further biological study. During the early years of the HGP
2 Food, Agriculture and Fisheries, and Biotechnology'.'Brussels: European commission. ERAC-GPC. 2011)‘ Voluntary Guidelines on Framework Conditions for Joint Programming in Research 2010'.
Many of the sophisticated community annotation systems that are used currently in biology are based on the wiki concept (Mons et al. 2008;
The cases of agri-biotechnology and mobile phoning',Science Technology and Human Values, 35: 783 811.
Brohee, S.,Barriot, R. and Moreau, Y. 2010)‘ Biological knowleedg bases using Wikis: combining the flexibility of Wikis with the structure of databases',Bioinformatics, 26: 2210 1. Chilton,
P. A. 2004)‘ Analyzing Political Discourse: Theory and Practice'.'London: Routledge. Choo, C. W. 2001)‘ Environmental scanning as information seeking and organizational learning',Information Research, 7/1<http://choo. fis. utoronto. ca/IR/choo choo
2008)‘ Calling on a million minds for community annotattio in Wikiproteins',Genome Biology, 9: 5. Morrison, J. L. 1992)‘ Environmental scanning'.
Stein, L. D. 2008)‘ Towards a cyberinfrastructure for the biological sciences: progress, visions and challenges',Nature Reviews Genetics, 9: 678 88.
and overconsumption of water 3 ENV68 Global decline of freshwater availability leading to an increase in water scarcity 3 ENV70 Global decline in biodiversity
< Back - Next >
Overtext Web Module V3.0 Alpha
Copyright Semantic-Knowledge, 1994-2011