Science and Public policy February 2010 0302-3427/10/010063-16 US$12. 00 Beech tree Publishing 2010 63 Science and Public policy, 37 (1 february 2010, pages
http://www. ingentaconnect. com/content/beech/spp Impact of Swiss technology policy on firm innovation performance: an evaluation based on a matching approach Spyros Arvanitis, Laurent Donzé and Nora Sydow This paper investigates the impact of the promotional activities of The swiss Commission of Technology
and Innovation (CTI) on the innovation performance of the supported firms based on a matched-pairs analysis of 199 firms supported by the CTI in the period 2000 2002.
There have also been some recent prograamme for the promotion of specific technologies (e g. Medtech, Topnano21),
have also been applied to evaluate the technology programmes of European countries (see Almus and Czarnitzki, 2003;
This study was supported financially by The swiss Federal office for Professional Education and Technology. Impact of technology policy on innovation by firms Science and Public policy February 2010 64 avoids the functional form restrictions implicit in running a regression of some type.
A brief description of the approach pursued in this paper is as follows: we identified the subsidized firms in the period 2000 2002 from the CTI database.
and provide a summary and some implications for technology policy. Conceptual framework Technology policy: public fiscal policies to support innovation Most OECD countries use large amounts of public funds to support activities that are intended to enhaanc innovation in the business sector.
These funds are used often to provide direct support for private sector research and innovation. A further way of supporting private investment in innovation is through tax incentives for R&d expenditures (see Jaumotte and Pain, 2005 for a survey of the main fiscal policies to support innovation.
Swiss technology policy There is a long tradition in Switzerland of refraining from directly funding business firms for innovation activities.
He has published extensivvel on the economics of innovation, technology diffusion, determinants of the performance of firms,
Impact of technology policy on innovation by firms Science and Public policy February 2010 65 consensus not only among political actors but also among organizations representing business interests.
There have also been programmes for the promotion of specific technologies (e g. Medtech Topnano21) but this kind of specific support has always been of minor importance.
and a public partner, is fundamental to Swiss technology policy. To the best of our knowledge, it is unique in Europe as a main promotional policy. 2 Methods of evaluation of measures of technology policy Evaluating the outcomes of subsidized projects is difficult,
both because of the difficulties in estimatiin the wider social benefits that they generate and because of the difficulties in assessing
Empirical evidence on the effectiveness of technology policy Recent overviews of the empirical literature suggest that the empirical evidence as to the effectiveness of subsidies is not homogeneous (David et al.
and a public partner, is fundamental to Swiss technology policy. To the best of our knowledge, it is unique in Europe as a main promotional policy Impact of technology policy on innovation by firms Science and Public policy February 2010 66 either matching approaches (as in this paper) or selecctio
correction approaches. Most studies use contemporraneou data on the states of subsidized and non-subsidized firms (as in this paper.
Finallly in three studies some technology diffusion measure is chosen as the goal variable. Most studies Table 1. Summary of selected empirical studies Study/country Policy instrument being evaluated Number of firms Approach Impact on target variable Sakakibara (1997),
2002), Switzerland Programme of promoting use of Computer Integrated Manufacturing Technologies (CIMT)( CIM Programme, 1990 1996) 463 Selection correction:
+-positive (negative) and statistically significant effect at 10%test level Impact of technology policy on innovation by firms Science and Public policy February 2010 67 find a positive policy effect but in some cases
The projects in the fields of machiiner and apparatus construction as well as informattio technology (software) amounted to about 33%of all projects
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.
%Impact of technology policy on innovation by firms Science and Public policy February 2010 68 significantly lower than the respective share of projeect of these scientific fields.
subsidy per project (in CHF) Construction technology 27 4. 3 3, 801,686 3. 1 140,803 Biology 23 3. 6 5, 462,365 4. 5 237,494 Electrical machinery/electronics 32 5. 0 6
CTI database, authors'calculations Table 3. Subsidized enterprises by scientific field 2000 2002 Scientific field Number of firms Percentage Construction technology 11 5. 5
CTI database, authors'calculations Impact of technology policy on innovation by firms Science and Public policy February 2010 69 firms which are subsidized not out
G g a-=0 N a Impact of technology policy on innovation by firms Science and Public policy February 2010 70 (6) where and is the kernel7 at the point In a fifth step,
5%test level Impact of technology policy on innovation by firms Science and Public policy February 2010 71 innovation performance than non-subsidized firms (at the 5%test level.
5%test level Impact of technology policy on innovation by firms Science and Public policy February 2010 72‘low-subsidy'firms from that of the respective groups of non-subsidized firms.
and universities that provide cooperating firms with knowledge that is primarily of high technological value. This does not mean that higher subsidies cannot generate (additioonal economic success:
the technological orientaatio of subsidized projects is quite broad, also covering currently fashionable fields such as biotechnnolog and nanotechnology.
All this is also in accordance with the general principles of The swiss technology policy tending to be‘non-activist',providiin primarily for the improvement of framework condittion for private innovation activities.
Impact of technology policy on innovation by firms Science and Public policy February 2010 73 Appendix Table A1.
structure of answering enterprises by scientific field Scientific field Number of addressed enterprises Number of answering enterprises Percentage share of answering enterprises Construction technology 16 11 68.8
high-tech manufacturing; definition: high-tech manufacturing: chemistry, plastics, machinery, electrical machinery, electronics/instruments; modern service industries: banking/insurance, computer services;
other business services; traditional manufacturing: food/beverage/tobacco, textiles, clothing/leather; wood processing, paper, printing, glass/stone/clay, metal, metalworking, watches, other manufacturing, energy;
Italian (continued) Impact of technology policy on innovation by firms Science and Public policy February 2010 74appendix (continued) Table A3.
*See footnotes to Table A3 for key (continued) Impact of technology policy on innovation by firms Science and Public policy February 2010 75 Appendix (continued) Table A5.
*See footnotes to Table A3 for key (continued) Impact of technology policy on innovation by firms Science and Public policy February 2010 76 Appendix (continued) Table A7.
*See footnotes to Table A3 for key (continued) Impact of technology policy on innovation by firms Science
and Feller (2007) for recent reviews of the central issues related to the evaluation of the effectiveness of technology programmes.
technology policy see OECD (2006b) and European commission (2008. Lepori (2006) gives a longteer analysis of public research policy primarily with respect to universities and public research organizations.
*See footnotes to Table A3 for key Impact of technology policy on innovation by firms Science
Technology transfer and public policy: a review of research and theory. Research policy, 29 (4/5), 627 655.
Economics of Innovation and New technology, 9 (2), 111 148. Caliendo, M and R Huber 2005.
Matched-pair analysis based on business survey data to evaluate the policy of supporting the adoption of advannce manufacturing technologies by Swiss firms, KOF Working Paper No. 65, July 2002.
Evaluating technology programmes: tools and methods. Research policy, 29 (4/5), 657 678. Görg, H and E Strobl 2007.
Science, Technology and Industry Board Innovatiio and Performance in the Global economy. Paris: OECD. Pointner, W and C Rammer 2005.
In Policy Evaluation in Innovation and Technology Towards Best Practices, pp 225 253. OECD: Paris. Silverman, R 1986.
*Ron Johnston2 and Fabiana Scapolo3 1mark Boden, European commission Joint research Centre, Institute for Prospective Technological Studies, Seville, Spain 2professor Ron Johnston, Australian Centre for Innovation
Shaping and Driving Structural and Systematic Transformations organised by the Institute of Prospective Technological Studies of the European commission's Joint research Centre (JRC-IPTS) was held in May 2011.
Drivers of dynamic processes of change and sudden disruptive transformations range from rapid technological changes to shifts in social norms, values and lifestyles.
This instruumen adapts the methodology of technology roadmapping to addressing critical innovation policy challennge at the level of national and regional innovation systems, within a global context.
and it combines analysis of enabling technologies, applications, products, markets and drivers with empirical analysis of the policy instruments that are utilised currently.
or a strategy for a region to engage in an active market creation in the context of some promising emerging technology.
Collaboration and interdisciplinary problemsollvin approaches are fostered as project consortia have to consist of at least four institutes, preferably with diverging technological competences.
The emergence of the communication capacities of social networking technologies is itself providing a challenge to existing systems,
as they allow for foreseeing breakthroughs, technology leaps, trends and discontinuities, new perspectives and opportunity maps present themselves to a corporation through identifying its challenges
technological and innovation‘think tank'created in 2001. It has been qualified as a‘social organization'by the Brazilian Presidency,
and is supervised by the Brazilian Ministry of Science, Technology and Innovation. Its inception was part of government efforts to promote science, technology and innovation (ST&I) develoopmen in Brazil in order to advance economic growth, competitiveness and well-being.
Its scope covers three integrated themes: strategic foresight exercises (future studies; strategic evaluation of large programs and projects;
conflicts may occur between new democratic practices, technological expertise and scientific freedom. On the other hand, as the future is unpredictable,
and are also being questioned by those beyond the strict sphere of science and technology (S&t).
in a knowledge-based society, democratic governance must ensure that citizens are able to make an informed choice from the options made available to them by responsible scientific and technological progress.
2004) have coined the term technology futures analysis (TFA), which comprises technology intelligence, forecasting, roadmapping, technollog assessment, and foresight.
In addition, this methodological approach was based on the perception that decision-making emerges from a negotiaatio between multiple actors.
FINEP is one the main agencies under the Ministry of Science, Technology, and Innovation (MCTI.
considering existing challenges to Brazilian energy matrix in next 20 years Technologies for generation of electric energy, fuel supply and energy transmission and distribution, distributed generaatio and storage, planning
63 technological topics were examined by experts, using Delphi technique and considering four dimensions of analysis:
techno-economic, strategic, environmental and social Identification of an initial list of 63 technological topics Identification of seven priority technological topics, considdere‘robust'Multi-criteria analysis:
identified technological topics were evaluated using hierarchical criteria and analysis of robustness Final report and dissemination of results Water resources Establishment of ST&I priority agenda aimed at guiding future investments made by governmental agencies in six predefined themes Quality
This should include social and cultural aspects associated with GMO commercial use and consumption in agricultural and health sectors Future economic and social impacts of GMO technologies;
technological and commerciia strategies (long term perspective; financing mechanisms; future of plant breeding and plant breeder profile;
the incubation of firms and the implementation of a technological infrastruuctur in private and public organizations. Implicit in its mission is the requirement for management
when precompetitive technological programs reach government decision-making at high levels. Academia: representatives from universities and research institutions tend to impose barriers to accepptin strategic foresight activities.
2011)‘ Strategic foresight applied to the management plan of an innovation development agency',Technology analysis & Strategic management, 24: 267 83.
European commission, Joint research Centre, Institute for Prospective Technological Studies. 2011)‘ The FOR-LEARN Online foresight Guide, '<http://forlearn. jrc. ec. europa. eu/guide/0 home/index. htm>accessed 12 december 2011.
Sustainable futures, Strategies, and Technologies. Bethesda, MD: World Future Society. Godet, M. 2001) Creating Futures Scenario planning as a Strategic management Tool.
2004)‘ Technology futures analysis: towards integration of the field and new methods',Technological forecasting and Social Change, 71: 287 303.
Vecchiato, R. and Roveda, C. 2010)‘ Foresight in corporate organizations',Technology analysis & Strategic management, 22:99 112.
*and Sylvia Schwaag Serger1 1lund University research Policy Institute, P o box 117, SE-221 00 Lund, Sweden, 2institute of Science, Technology and Society, School of Humanities
China, science policy, research, innovation. 1. Introduction and problem definition In recent years, there has been a rapidly growing interest in the development of science, technology and innovation (STI) in the People's republic of china.
So far, scholarly interest has focused on the overall evolution and design of China's science and technology (S&t system (Ke 2004;
Ergas (1987) identifies two principal orientations of countries'technology policy: diffusion-and missionorienttation While Ergas'categorization is useful,
Technology and Education of the State Council, created in 1998, and currently chaired by Prime minister Wen Jiabao.
‘key fields'and‘priority themes'(zhongdian lingyu jiqi youxian zhuti),‘mega-engineering projects'(zhongda zhuanxiang),‘frontier technologies,
while key technology programs play the role of supporting economic development, oriented to priority fields and themes identified in the MLP.
1 The most salient programs in recent history are the National Key technologies R&d Program established in 1984,
the State High-tech R&d Program (also known as the 863 Program), initiated in 1986 and the State Basic R&d Program (also known as the 973 Program), established in 1997.
The 863 Program serves the goal of‘leading to the future'by supporting the development of frontier technologies.
on promoting the developmeen of high-tech small and medium-sized enterprises (SMES), on creating or supporting research institutes and labs, on increasing international cooperation etc.
National Key technologies R&d Program, the 863 Program and the 973 Program; and two group programs:
Plan National Key technologies R&d Program 1984 Foster key technologies to upgrade traditional industries and create new ones State Key Laboratory Program 1984 Support selected laboratories in universities,
1986 National High-technology R&d Program (863 Program) 1986 Foster China's overall innovation capacity in high-tech sectors and enhance its international competitiveness Spark Program 1986
Support technology transfer to rural areas and promote development of agriculture based on S&t achievements State Key and New Product Program 1988 Support new high-tech products for key industries 9th Five-year Plan National Program
on Key Basic research Priorities (973 Program) 1997 Support basic research Innovation Fund for Technology-based SMES 1999 Support innovative activity by high-tech SMES Special
Technology development Project for Research institutes 1999 Support central government-related technology development research institutes Action Plan for Thriving Trade by Science and Technology 2000 Facilitate exports of high-tech products
with high value-added and foster international competitiveness 10th Five-Year Plan Agriculture S&t Transfer Fund 2001 Foster development of S&t achievements in agriculture
and diffusiio of agricultural technologies 11th Five-Year Plan Mega-science Program 2006 Promote four top scientific areas Mega-engineering Projects 2006 Promote technology
Use global S&t resources to develop critical technologies; provide a platform for international cooperation State Engineering Technology research Centers Provide technologies
and equipment to firms Soft Science Research program Provide reliable scientific advice to national and local policy-makers Source:
based on data on national S&t programs provided in the China Statistical Yearbook on Science and Technology (2009).
unfortunately there is a lack of data), the 863 Program and the Key technologies Program, clearly identify specific‘missions
both regarding thematic missions or technologies and the aim to strengthen. The concentration of resources in mission-and excellencefoccuse programs reflects a long-lasting orientation in Chinese research and innovation policy
2009 China Statistical Yearbook on Science and Technology Data from 2008. Note: In order to simplify, some programs have been grouped into one‘bubble'.
The‘National S&t Infrastructure+Programs'include the National S&t Infrastructure Program, the S&t Basic Work Program, the Special Technology development Project for Research institutions and the NSFC Fund for Less Developed Regions.
1648 1900 National High-tech R&d Program (863 Program)* 2974 3768 4025 3795 4440 5592 Key technology R&d Program 1053 1338 1345
1614 1624 3000 5441 5066 National science and Technology Infrastructure Program 100 593 573 754 686 24 S&t Basic Work 200 200
200 103 178 150 Special Technology development Project for Research institutions 158 214 193 183 186 200 250 250 Innovation Fund for Small Technology
MOST (2009)( see Note 2) and China Statistical Yearbook on Science and Technology (2009).**Data for 863 Program are from MOST (2009)( see Note 2),
and as such should be located quite close to the 863 Program and the Key technologies Program, further confirming that government S&t funding is concentrated strongly on mission-based research. 3. 2 Mission Traditionally,
Another strongly mission-oriented program is the Key technologies Program. Created in the 10th Five-year Plan,
MOST (see Note 2) and China Statistical Yearbook on Science and Technology (2009). Research priority setting in China. 265 the ideal of planning also shapes and influences programs for excellence.
aiming at promoting the development of high-tech industry and the use of S&t in rural economic development, respectively.
which provides loans to high-tech SMES, is another diffusion measure, as are the Agricultural S&t Transfer Fund and the New National Products Program.
Other programs with institution-and capacity-building features are the S&t Basic Program and the Special Technology development Project for Research institutions.
However, total funding for these programs is compared small with programs such as the 863 Program, the Key technologies Programs,
like‘leapfrogging'technological developmmen and concentrating research resources in a few selected sectors. Perhaps the most important investments in institutionaan capacity-building are made in the field of education.
and Fangyun Chen) to national leaders, calling for the acceleration of China's high-tech development. They stressed the need to meet the challenges of the global technology revolution and competition and pointed to the US Strategic Defense Initiatives as well as Europe's EUREKA Program.
In March 1986 Deng xiaoping personally approved the drafting of a National High-tech R&d Program, the 863 Program.
From April through September of 1986, the State Council mobilized hundreds of experts to draft an Outline for Development Of high Technology
which was issued on 18 november by the CCPCC and the State Council. The creation of the 973 Program, intended to strengthen basic research,
'or‘homegrown innovation'and strive to reduce China's dependence on foreign Technology research priority setting in China. 267 (Mei and Luo 2005).
on China's technological upgrading, with MOST expressing skepticism (Mei and Luo 2005). During 2005, officials involved in the drafting sought input from foreign experts
and enabling technological leapfrogging, strengthening linkages between academic environments and industry, supporting high value-added industry,
to enable the restructuring of industry from low-tech to high-tech, allowing China to move up the value chain,
973 Projects) with programs for industrial development (Mega-engineering Projects) and sectoral technology programs on a more modest scale (Key technologies Programs, 863 Projects).
U s. Government Technology policies, 1969 2008. Boulder, CO: Paradigm. Braun, D. 2008)‘ Organising the political coordination of knowledge and innovation policies',Science and Public policy, 35: 227 39.
Cantner, U. and Pyke, A. 2000)‘ Classifying technology policy from an evolutionary perspective',Research policy, 30: 759 75.
Cao, C.,Simon, D. and Suttmeier, R. P. 2006)‘ China's 15-year science and technology plan',Physics Today, 59:38 45.
China Statistical Yearbook on Science and Technology. 2009), p. 292. Beijing: China Statistics Press. D'Costa, A. and Parayil, G. 2009) New Asian Dynamics in Science, Technology and Innovation.
China and India in Perspective. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. The Economist. 2009)‘ China's struggling smaller firms.
Ergas, H. 1987)‘ The importance of technology policy'.'In: Dasgupta, P. and Stoneman, P. eds) Economic policy and technological Performance, pp. 51 97.
New york: Cambridge university Press. Feigenbaum, E. A. 2003) China's Techno-Warriors. National Security and Strategic Competition from the Nuclear to the Information age.
Fuller, D. B. 2009)‘ How law, politics and transnational networks affect technology entrepreneurship: Explaining diverrgen venture capital investing strategies in China',Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 27: 445 59.
High-tech Research in China. New york: Palgrave Macmillan. Ke, Y. 2004) Science and Technology in China Reform and Development.
Beijing: China Intercontinental Press. Kroll, H.,Conle',M. and Schu ller, M. 2010)‘ China innovattio system and innovation policy'.
Mu, R. and Qu, W. 2008)‘ The development of science and technology in China: A comparison with India and the United states',Technology in Society, 30: 319 29.
OECD. 2003)‘ Priority setting: issues and recent trends',Governance of Public research: Toward Better Practices, pp. 61 76.
Simon, D. and Goldman, M.,(eds),(1989) Science and Technology in Post-Mao China. Cambridge, MA:
Springut, M.,Schlaikjer, S. and Chen, D. 2011)‘ China's Program for Science and Technology Modernization:
Suttmeier, R. P. 1980) Science, Technology and China's Drive for Modernization. Stanford, CA: Hoover Institution Press..(
Science, technology and China's politiica future: a framework for analysis'.In: Simon, D. and Goldman, M. eds) Science and Technology in Post-Mao China.
Cambridge, MA: Harvard Contemporary Series. Suttmeier, R. P.,Cao, C. and Simon, D. 2006)‘ Knowledge innovation and the Chinese Academy of Sciences',Science, 312/5770: 58 9. US Embassy Beijing.
1996)‘ China's science and technology policy for the twenty-first century: A view from the top',<http://www. fas. org/nuke/guide/china/doctrine/stpol1. htm>accessed 25 may 2011.
Wan, G.,(ed.),2008) The 30 Years of China's Science and Technology Reform and Open-door policy.
Wang, Y.-F. 1993) China's Science and Technology policy: 1949 1989. Aldershot: Avebury. Weinberg, A m. 1963)‘ Criteria for scientific choice',Minerva, 1: 159 71.
2010)‘ Four Famous persons in the Scientific Community Give Suggestions to Deepen the reform of Science and Technology System, 16 august 2010,
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.
technology development and innovation policies should be customized according to the differing dynamics of the NSTISS. Keywords: innovation system; Taiwan;
national, sectoral and technological. We intend to draw the boundary for the‘new'innovation system which is embedded in the configuraatio of the three innovation systems.
journals. permissions@oup. com The government's research, technology development and innovation (RTDI) policies, which are special forms of national institutions
and particularly serve the national technological and industrial concerns, center our discussiio on the national institutions.
A national innovation system focuses on the national development of technology and industries. The national frontiers draw the boundary of an innovation system.
and mechanisms of a nation support technological and industrial innovattio within its borders (Nelson and Rosenberg 1993;
From Freeman's perspective (1987) research, technology development and innovation (RTDI) policies extensively shape the national system of innovation.
Indeed, actors and networks, knowledge and technology, and institutions are the three blocks of a sectoral innovation system.
Technological generatiion diffusion and utilization are at the core of the analysis. Comparing the energy innovation systems of Germany, Sweden and The netherlands,
technology and knowledge, and institutions. However, because a different system approach uses different criteria to draw the boundary of an innovation system,
2008) have specified only that a technological system may be a sub-system of a sectoral innovation system or may cut across several sectoral innovation systems.
C.-C. Chung has tried also to link the relationships within a sectoral innovation system to a country's international performannce as well as a sector to the technological opportunities which can be mobilized to develop new products and processes for that sector.
as the three innovation systems, is composed of actors and networks, technology and knowledge, and institutions. The components of the system are shaped by national institutions.
Biotechnology is not a sector but a technology which is adopted by at least two sectors in Taiwan,
we will discover how the technological innovattio system for biotechnology gradually emerged with the Taiwanese national innovation system,
Figure 1. Potential relationships between national (NSI) and sectoral (SSI) systems of innovation and a technological innovattio systems (TS.
Figure 2. Relationship of national, technological and sectoral innovation systems and NSTIS. National, sectoral and technological innovation systems:
Pharmaceutical technology was introduced originalll to Taiwan by Japan. In 1931, some Japanese pharmaceutical companies set up factories in Taiwan to produce pharmaceutical intermediaries and supply the demands of the Japanese army.
The MNCS brought advantageous manufacturing technologies to Taiwan, particularly the technologies of chemical engineering for pharmaceuticals.
In the 1980s, with advantageous technologies and marketing capabilities, MNCS shared more than 50%of the domestic market (Zheng 2001:
Because of a lack of extraction technologies, these herbs were used usually in their entirety. Furthermore, the functions of each herb were surveyed not in detail by scientific methods.
Taiwan. 275 1984 to apply the research into small molecules from the universities to develop new chemical medicines and then transfer such technologies to local firms.
and transferring the technology of chemical engineering to pharmaceutical manufacturing (Ding 2001: 229). ) The Industrial Technology research Institute, another public research organization, also helped local SMES upgrade their manufacturing facilities
in order to comply with the Good Manufacturing Practice regulations. But until the late 1990s, there was no institution
or transferred manufacturing technologies based on chemical engineering to local companies (Zheng 2001: 202). ) 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).
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.
they were allowed not to be cultivated in the normal farms (Science and Technology research and Information Center, 2005:
The technology used by these private companies was the traditional biotechnology of hybridizatiio which was used also by the ASS.
The majority of foreign exchanges were used to support the development of manufacturing industries, particularly the information and communication technologies (ICT.
Even though the technological level of the agricultural biotechnollog innovation system was very high due to the governmment'policies, these biotechnologies were commercialized seldom. 4. Discussion
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.
Department of Industrial Technology. Dodgson, M.,Mathews, J.,Kastelle, T. and Hu, M.-C. 2008)‘ The evolving nature of Taiwan's national innovation systems:
Freeman, C. 1987) Technology policy and Economic Performance: Lessons from Japan. Pinter: London. 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 evolution of technological systems in renewable energy technology',Industrial and Corporate Change, 13: 815 49.
Markard, J. and Truffer, B. 2008)‘ Technological innovattio systems and the multilevel perspective: Towards an integrated framework',Research policy, 37: 596 615.
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:
Science and Technology research and Information Center (2005)‘ Strategic planning on the development of Taiwan agricultural biotechnology industry'(.
Science and Technology research and Information Center. Su, J.-C. 2004)‘ Global perspective of Taiwan's agricultural science and technology:
A review of the past and projectiio for the future',Forum for Agricultural Innovation and Development Council of Agriculture, 26 nov 2004, pp. 15 21.
Overtext Web Module V3.0 Alpha
Copyright Semantic-Knowledge, 1994-2011