Methods for approaching innovation and the uses of research in ESTIME
In the first part, I examine the problems of definition (section 1), I stress the importance of identifying the parties involved in the sphere of innovation (section 2), then I set out some findings that came out of my observations on innovation (section 3), before dealing with what are the standard methods used for observing innovation in industrial concerns (section 4). Subsequently (in the second part) I set out guidelines concerning field-study interviews. This work is under way and this document should be seen as a working document./version with corrections from September 2005/
Part 1. The issues involved in our study and its objective
1) Our point of interest is the uses of science. This embraces innovation in industry and the utilization of research and researchers in various sectors of society outside the sphere of university and research organizations.
2) What is of interest here is innovation in the broad sense. The focus is not so much innovation in industrial companies as the acquisition and development of technology and innovation. Innovation, stricto sensu = new products and new manufacturing processes. However, the novelty is highly relative: new for a given company (but technology well known elsewhere), new for the local/national market (but already known on another market) or new on the world scale (also termed radical innovation). Furthermore, the novelty can be associated either with the company (it is the company that introduces a new product, and the market follows) or with the market (the market changes, the company follows). Finally the novelty often presents the obligation to reorganize production, sales effort, or even the entire company structure (a process known as organizational innovation). The latter is often difficult to distinguish from changes in strategy of a company, modification of marketing or other strategy. Hence we prefer not to deal with this in our survey (although we do find out about reorganization efforts within the companies we visit). Precise definitions can be found in the Oslo Manual published by the OECD (OECD, 1992).
3) Care has to be taken with vocabulary used by the various parties involved in research. Terminology is abundant and proliferate: centre of expertise, technology networks, incubators, industrial clusters have specific meanings in each country. The origin of the terms and the realities that they designate, the institutions that bear them, constitute indices of absorption by society of notions of innovation and technological development in the country.
4) Investigative approaches to industrial innovation are nowadays quite clear, but in the area of the uses of sciences outside industrial companies, the situation is more fluid from the point of view of empirical studies. Examples in French can be found in a publication on the uses of science: (Callon, Lascoumes and Barthe, 2001) More generally, it is the work on the users, the associations of health service users, associations for sufferers of diseases (for sufferers from genetic diseases, or AIDS for instance), work on field activists in environmental issues, works on “community research” and technical democracy and so on which examine this question head on. Many studies on researchers’ role as experts also look at this question of the uses of research. Finally, studies on public services (including examples of waste management, and more generally of public-sector management) have also tackled this central question of the usages of knowledge in society.
For reasons of budget and sheer size of the task, we take only a small selection of examples from the field (see further on) and focus mainly on the NGOs. The previous research by IRD in Africa has shown the growing weight of NGOs financed by the international donor agencies as one of the main drivers of research.
2. The world of innovation : the parties involved in the uses of research
Innovation in industrial companies, in the same way as the uses of research outside the realms of industry and laboratories, comes about in a fertile milieu. This milieu can be described exactly. It is made up of institutions which take part in technological and economic development. I avoid talking here in terms of “innovation system” so as not to be drawn into controversy about whether or not a system exists (a good presentation is found in Amable, Barré and Boyer, 1997). See also, for a review the relationships between technology and development the report by Calestous Juma et. al 2004 on “UN Millenium Project, Task Force on Science, Technology and Innovation”.)
In brief, it can be said that the institutions which take part in innovation can be categorized as follows :
- Companies. They are institutional creations, the essential actor of the world of innovation. There is a tendency when considering innovation to think in terms of markets. However, for the purposes of our study –as analysts of innovation- it is the industrial company that sees its market, and can in some cases create it or influence it. The company’s strategic perspective on innovation –and hence on these markets, the risks it is prepared to run, on the activities it can finance, the investments that it can put in- is at the heart of the processes of innovation as much as it shapes that world.
- Public bodies for the promotion of industry, companies and entrepreneurs, public organizations that finance technological development. Draw the distinction between Ministries and ministerial bodies that contribute to policy and agencies which do the financing (agencies = offices that companies can address in order to obtain project finance); also includes state bodies that finance economic development (development banks). Particular importance should be attributed to organizations which set production standards and those that deal with patents and intellectual property.
- Intermediary bodies : associations of engineers, scientists, business people, research centres, born of either private or public initiatives for the promotion of Research and Technological Development (like for example "RD Maroc” in Morocco, or ADIAT in Mexico).
- Consultancy firms that conduct work in demand for researching technological and economic information. Large increase in these firms associated with the development of Internet applications (known as technological or strategic monitoring. Such concerns usually perform many other consultancy services to earn their living: on specific technologies (energy, web, computerization) or lucrative ancillary activities (training, in languages or ICT skills for instance). Numerous firms of this type focus on management and have been set up on the initiative of business schools and their stock-in-trade is enterprise and entrepreneurs. Close relationship with colleges of commerce and the business schools.
- Engineering consultancies. Specialists of a field (building, public works, environment) or a sector (energy, environment, ICT industry, electronics industry, telecommunications), these firms strictly speaking do not produce anything (they are in the tertiary sector) but work with clients in order to develop markets and technologies.
- Venture-capital firms. Development agencies or banks that act as financers of projects for creation of new companies, various projects linked to technology development. Financial concerns managing portfolios of companies (financial participation in new-technology companies).
- Technological networks : special highlight of networks, organizing bodies, companies, laboratories into networks. These can arise as a result of deliberate policy of public authorities, or of a university for instance (business incubators, creation of university-based companies).
- Industrial districts. These should not be confused with technological networks. They are a product of industrial history: for example a manufacturing area specialized in textiles, clothing and so on. Regional bodies can sometimes play a significant role (chambers of commerce, local councils, wilaya, regional government, local development promotion bodies).
- The world of standards. Patents, ISO standards, quality standards, standards linked to the promotion of a local brand (local rural product, specific product), environmental standards. For patents, the increasingly central role of patents offices in the different countries. Each country has its own patents system, hence studies should seek to gain knowledge and understanding and obtain statistics. This world of standards is taking on increasing proportions, owing in particular to the fact that quality standards are used more and more as non tariff-based barriers to international trade. The world of standards tends to be more private than public, more participatory than linked to command by the State.
- Infrastructure. The different elements of infrastructure have an essential role in the world of innovation. They form a material base on which participants involved in innovation can evolve. For the purposes of our study we can concentrate on the information technologies, because of the highly particular part they play. Focus can be trained on the uses of computer technology, computerization of industry, the uses of in the sphere of research. I asked Pascal Renaud of the IRD to help us in this area. Studies in the field can at first be restricted to investigating the efforts that have been made in that domain or surveys that have been conducted on computerization (a survey on this subject exists in Morocco for example).
3. Observations on innovation in industry
Before describing the plans for surveys of industrial companies some indications can be given arising from observations we have made in distant countries (Brazil, Mexico, Venezuela). [Problem : a large proportion of the bibliography is in Spanish or Portuguese]
1) Innovation in companies is rare, atypical and exceptional. It depends as much on the history of the company as on its links with the market and that counts as much if it is no longer only the dynamics of the industrial centre itself. That explains the presence of some highly innovative firms that work in traditional sectors.
Therefore in our interviews it is important to capture:
- The particular history of the company, which –if it is a small one— is closely bound to that of its founder or directors.
- The external links companies have with particular customers who are often the ones who give orders for innovations, the end-users of the company’s products and who lay down specific requirements regarding manufacturing processes which lead to innovation. Verify especially if the company is an integral part of a sub-contracting network for an important client, if it has OEM (Own Equipment Manufacturer) agreements, in other words where production takes place “as if” it was done by the customer himself, therefore with very strict production agreements (This is the path to development adopted by the Taiwanese and indeed by China).
- Relationships with the suppliers (especially with the largest concerns) of equipment and other technical components (skills and production standards, parts and other components, equipment maintenance).
2) Innovation is not a continuous, permanent process. Some occasions are more significant for innovation than others, because many more things are learned, more quickly and in a more significant way. Such occasions might typically be :
- The installation of new facilities or equipment (new investment).
- The removal of a production unit from one site to another or the relocation of a system installation from one area of the same site to another (re-design of product flows in the company, new production layout).
- The consequent upgrading of the scale of production. Moving up from 1000 to 100 000 units of product is a significant leap.
- Modification of a production process for reasons of productivity (for example a change-over from manual production to automatic methods, or from batch production to mass production). There are other occasions where changes are made to production modification which are significant for prompting either innovations or at least processes that might lead to some. Firstly, at times of negotiation to meet certain customer requirements; then there are changes taking place exterior to the company which change its approaches to technological systems. Finally, in specific local and political negotiations, in a region, a town, a local council, or with a public organization concerning standards of production, safety or other aspects. Such aspects tend to be important in the pharmaceuticals and food-processing sectors.
3) Innovation, when associated with research, must not be considered in a linear way (first research, then innovation). Several examples in fact exist where innovation is achieved in close relation with a Research & Development (R&D) unit, but the process is not a linear one. The most frequent situations are where interactions take place between the various participants involved (Rosenberg called these interactive relations between research and production). The important point for the purposes of the survey is to know where R&D is placed in the company structure: as an element of decisions at “corporate” level (concerning the whole economic and financial group), with a specific production unit, or in with specific products. There can be a multitude of ways of incorporating R&D in the company: as a service to assist production (“trouble-shooting”), assistance for customers (especially in the case of industrial clients or, subsidiaries of companies which pass on customers’ orders to the production units), or as an autonomous unit, or even as an independent company (or “business unit”, independent within a group). The position R&D has in the structure reveals more about the importance the company attributes to it than the simple size of that operation. For small companies, the situation of R&D is more difficult to grasp. Statistically, the small- and medium-sized companies do more R&D than the large firms, in relative terms (and the effort invested is naturally less in absolute terms), which goes against common expectation. This stems from two reasons that are known empirically in the literature: a problem of size (calculation in % of the amount of R&D in a small- or medium-sized company (SMC) that does R&D gives a higher figure than in a large company) ; a problem of the place given over to R&D (the SMCs that conduct research have to exert much more effort than those that do not and proportionally R&D effort represents a much greater task than for large companies). Finally the technical references an SMC takes as a basis for their work tend to be more local, internal, than in a large company. In other words, the SMC has a tendency to do things itself rather than have work done, make design an integral part of internal operations rather than subcontract, because the cost of that can be exorbitant. But it is also a matter of choice: SMCs are more secret than large companies, the heads of SMCs that conduct research invest more personal effort, it is not an activity like any other ….
4) Innovation is often the fruit of accomplishments made during a company’s history, the fruit of its technological apprenticeship. The company’s experiences are of prime importance in this respect (cf. an appendix to Arvanitis, 2000, an article on methodology for a list of activities that can be included under the term technological apprenticeship –Table 1, p.57). Moreover, the more dynamic companies are often those that export, whose foreign customers tend to specify highly demanding requirements. In China, for example, companies achieve the entirety of their technological apprenticeship by means of the links they have with customers from abroad.
5) Innovation is highly dependent on the type of productive technologies. The principal distinct categories are: a) industrial production of single or rare items in batches (batch processing); b) mass production of goods but in batches (food products, household appliances, mechanical engineering); continuous-flow production processes (chemicals, petrochemicals). These technological differences coincide partly but not exclusively with distinct industrial sectors (this is why sectoral statistics fit poorly with innovation statistics). Economists who study industrial sectors encounter numerous problems for pinning down these combined technological and economic differences. The first sectoral typology was produced by K. Pavitt in 1984 (Pavitt, 1984) who designated this relationship between the characteristics of industrial sectors and the technologies they use technological trajectories. It has since been revised (in chap.5 of the excellent book Managing Innovation (Tidd, Bessant and Pavitt, 1997).
6) The industrial company is an integral element in a techno-economic industrial world to which belong the parties that will have been discerned: legal context, relations with public bodies, the world of standards, relations with customers and suppliers, and so on. This integration can be observed directly and empirically (in contrast to indirect influences such as opinions, exchange rates, or macroeconomic importance which always act in an indirect way, conveyed by the vision the company has of its market, its economic universe, and possibilities for expansion). The simplest way of detecting the company’s vision of the indirect influences from, its economic environment is to ask the company how it perceives its immediate future.
4. Methods of observation of innovation in industry
Innovation in industrial companies. It is evident that companies constitute the most important party involved in innovation. There exist two highly different types of method for studying them.
- Questionnaire surveys of innovatory companies. This type entails a questionnaire-based survey, meeting the criteria stipulated in the Oslo Manual, in other words an enquiry protocol geared to finding out the extent of innovation in companies. Through this can be observed consistent features linked to the fact the company belongs to a particular economic sector, for instance. The company surveys can be processed in a multitude of ways. The underlying idea is always to obtain the widest set of samples possible, which are the most representative of the different industrial sectors and services.
- Qualitative surveys by interview. Visits to companies and qualitative enquiries can help define the situation of particular companies. Contrary to questionnaire-based surveys such enquiries are aimed at focusing on specific companies and their history, evolution, integration in certain markets, and position in relation to the current frontiers of technology. What such a method loses in breadth, is gained in depth.
Secondary processing of innovation surveys:
- Analysis of questionnaire surveys. The presentation of questionnaire surveys (the “simple tabulations” of enquiries) can yield a static description of companies. Causal statistical analyses can also be employed. For example: correlation between innovation effort (new products) and internal R&D, engineering and technology adaptation activities. Necessitates knowledge of the standard methods of causal statistics. Economic studies often call on such analyses because they can capture the dynamics of the various sectors. The results are difficult to link up with field surveys of companies.
- Taxonomy of innovating companies by secondary processing of innovation surveys. This is more of a qualitative approach (but which can also be made quantitative by using clustering techniques of hierarchization on questionnaire data, also known as type AFC and AHA classification methods). It entails identifying types of company not by their demographic characteristics (like size, industrial sector, market type) but on the basis of technological activities. That involves a re-coding of the answers given on innovation questionnaires, quite a long process. Necessitates tools rarely used in economics (descriptive and factorial statistics, classification). The result obtained is a taxonomy of companies. The advantage is the possibility of obtaining results that are directly verifiable by field surveys.
Let us make clear this important point, because we propose to conduct this type of analysis on data from innovation surveys done in Morocco and Jordan, if the partners agree to this.
In an innovation survey questions are put concerning the number of innovations, their degree of novelty, patents, licences, efforts made towards R&D and in engineering, the technical links with technology centres or other companies or agencies devoted to the development of new products and processes. These questions can reveal a specific technological profile for a company. The answers are not usually standardized. They can be expressed in terms of % of sales for R&D; or, to questions on the number of persons working in an R&D unit they are given as the number of persons or the % of the total personnel of the company. By the same token, the presence or absence of links to universities, technical centres or other institutions for product and process development can be deduced from other questions (for example, about suppliers). The exercise thus involves simplifying these questions to yield binary Yes/No type answers transformable into variables for factorial analysis. Once this task has been accomplished, the statistical classification analysis takes on a specific sense, as it helps identify those company variables that relate to their technological approach and activity, both in graphical and proportional terms. This work also brings out the similarities and differences in behaviour and makes visible the relation between these questions and questions concerning the size of the company, the types of market it serves, the company’s economic results. Such analysis of company types commonly provides quite simple rough profiles or it can give a finer picture, depending on the different answers obtained concerning the variables involved.
See the publications in the Appendix (in English) : (Pirela, Rengifo, Arvanitis and Mercado, 1993; Arvanitis and Villavicencio, 1998, 2000).
Arvanitis, Rigas (2000). "Apprentissage technologique et efficience productive: des outils pour l’analyse du développement technologique". Pratique des transferts de technologie et efficience productive dans les pays émergents, Guangzhou (P.R.. China) 18-22 January 2000, INIDET & IRDGUS (French and Chinese versions): 55-86. (This article examines a comparison of questionnaire-based surveys and an analysis based on case studies)
Arvanitis, Rigas and Daniel Villavicencio (1998). "Technological learning and innovation in the Mexican chemical industry: an exercise in taxonomy." Science, Technology & Society, 3 (1): 153-180. (An example of classification in the chemical industry in Mexico).
Pirela, Arnoldo, Rafael Rengifo, Rigas Arvanitis and Alexis Mercado (1993). "Technological learning and entrepreneurial behaviour: A taxonomy of the chemical industry in Venezuela." Research Policy, 22 (5-6): 431-454. (Contains one of the first exercices in the taxonomy of enterprises, in the chemical industry of Venezuela)
|The idea for the moment is to restrict ourselves to two examples: MOROCCO and JORDAN and to base this work on their innovation surveys|
Part 2. METHODS – Guidelines for interviews
Set out here are the survey framework (Section 5), the surveys that should ideally be conducted (Section 6) and guidelines on interviews (technical centres, companies and NGOs).
5. Framework of the surveys: review of work already completed
Part of our research is a compilation of works realized in the country in question. It is important to find:
Results of various surveys on technological development, innovation, patents, standards.
Works on the economic situation, macroeconomic assessment of the economic role of company.
Outlines of political and economic situations in relation to our subject..
Gather together information on policies for the promotion of applied research and technological research. This concerns:
policies on technology development
institutions responsible for these policies
promotion of Internet, www services, information technology, computerization of research organizations and industrial companies,
policies for modernization of companies,
policy on patents and intellectual property.
A large proportion of this information is contained in national plans for research or in discussion documents on innovation and on technological development in industry and public organizations.
Account should be taken of the fact that discussions on the valorization of research deal with a related subject, the interlinking between university and industry-, which increasingly is termed “technology transfer” in the literature in English.
It would be necessary to know if a research team has already conducted innovation surveys in companies. In particular, enquiries that take as reference the guide known as the Oslo Manual (OECD), which has been used in different countries of Europe and America. In Europe, this survey has now been standardized in order to make comparisons possible. Most European countries utilize it regularly (the CIS, community innovation survey). Verification has to be made that the government has not already carried out a survey of this type. Some of the information required necessitates interviews with political officials in government bodies: Ministries of research or industry, institutions for the protection of intellectual property, standards authorities.
Finally, bodies like chambers of commerce, business promotion organizations, or industrial associations can hold documentation on these aspects of technological development.
Some of this information can naturally also be used for research system analysis in the ESTIME project. In the same way bibliometric indicators can yield information such fields as engineering sciences.
A more global framework-setting study should be done. I would set to work on it from March 2006, notably in aspects concerning the commercial policies with Europe, the policies on innovation as it is seen from Brussels (http://trendchart.cordis.lu/tc_country_list2.cfm?ID=70) See the framework study for the MEDA countries: (Crehant and Chaabouni, 2004)
Keeping the bibliography up to date is essential: that takes time and must not be neglected.
6. Surveys to be conducted
Observations already made point to three sets of surveys that must be conducted, some of which will be given particular importance in the case of ESTIME
1) Surveys for capturing the “world of innovation”
A description of this world of innovation generally presupposes a good knowledge of the country and the institutions. Surveys should therefore be done among governing organizations of research and technological development, technical institutes, research promoting bodies, and standards authorities. Our effort could be concentrated on certain parties involved, who are in some way our prime sources of information, including the intermediary organizations. By the same token some surveys can focus on one or two NGOs in fields such as agriculture, health or education.
2) Surveys on companies
The choice of companies is an important one to make. We can couple surveys among companies with secondary processing to produce company taxonomies if enquiries on innovations exist.
3) Surveys on researchers actively engaged in knowledge communication, the use of technology, the utilization of knowledge in fields of activity outside research.
Interviews with researchers active in society and economic life are important. By the same token, so are interviews in research laboratories that conduct work in valorization, and have partnerships with industrial companies. Enquiries among NGO representatives.
7. Guidelines for interviews
The survey will then investigate the organizations that promote innovation and technology transfer from universities to industry, whether public or private.
Public or semi-public agencies or bodies for the promotion of innovation (as in Section 1 of this document)
Technical centres or sectoral innovation centres
Chambers of commerce or sectoral organizations for the promotion of enterprise (textiles, food industries, hydrocarbons, etc.)
Associations of industrial companies or other ad hoc associations that hold events to promote industry and commerce (trade fairs, exhibitions, conferences)
Public-private units of technology transfer, incubation of companies or enterprise creation by university researchers (spin-off).
Organizations for the promotion of Science & Technology information
Organizations for the promotion of information and communication technologies.
The interview must highlight (SEE THE GUIDE TO INTERVIEWS AT TECHNICAL CENTRES) :
the history of the organization
its integration in the economic world
some examples of work performed
problems and questions on the vision this organization has of the question of industrial or technological development
Valorization of university research
Check that the universities or ministry departments have not already carried out surveys among university staff on their efforts to contact industrial firms.
Conduct some interviews at a number of universities, chosen for their pertinence or the importance of their activity.
Or further, gather information on experiences in the promotion of innovation by university staff (case studies).
Brief guide to interviews in industrial companies
- History of the setting-up of the company and its access to markets and to technology. The aim is rapidly to capture an idea of the size of the firm (in terms of personnel), of the production, the type of product, and of the production site.
- Ask the company to define its position with regard to the competition and technological development. Who is the competition, where is it situated? What are the technical developments and product developments and what is the company’s position in relation to these products. Where is the technological frontier, the best product in their sector?
- What types of customer relations does the company have: do the customers order specific products or do they just use the product on offer? Are there frequent exchanges, or are relations kept up only through trade?
- How has it acquired the production technology and the models for products? Licences, copying, technology transfer contracts, designs and models supplied by the customers, development effort by the company itself.
- Has the company experience in the search for information on technologies: participation at trade fairs, at conferences, information search on internet, patent analysis, technological watch, whether systematic or not. How does it go about obtaining useful information?
- Has it achieved product innovations? Innovations in manufacturing processes? What type of innovation? Have they made any modification to product models, or adaptations? Give a few examples and explain the reasons for these adaptations and modifications.
- Does the company possess its own R&D centre, or a product and process R&D unit? If so, how many people involved, what level of training, what budget, position in the company structure. If there is no R&D centre has the company an engineering unit?. Same questions (how many persons, what budget).
- Has the company any appointed suppliers of technology and what kind of relationship does it maintain with these suppliers? Are they foreign firms, national ones?
- Is there any input from consultants relative to production technology? 10. What regulatory standards have they adopted? For example ISO or other norms for production and products (national or international standards).
- Does the company hold any relations with public or semi-public technological centres? National or abroad? What type, further explanation and examples. Does there exist any technology centre known to them that is specialized in their sector?
- Are there any relations with university researchers, contracts with universities, recruitment of students, trainees, or PhD students?
- How is training achieved? On-the-job, external courses, training courses on the premises?
- What in your opinion are the main difficulties the company has to face? If technology is not among these, what problems are specifically associated with acquisition of technologies and models of new or improved products?
- What perspective do they have for the near future?
Brief guide to interviews at technical centres
- History of the foundation of the technical centre, of the field of intervention, of the industrial sector. What can they tell us of the sector of activity they work in?
- Types of service offered by the centre. Forms of intervention for clients: advice, technical reports, in-company interventions, product or process commercialization, training, computerization, setting-up marketing procedures or mechanisms, assistance in decision-making for companies.
- Is research conducted and do centres make a distinction between that and other kinds of service to clients?
- Who are their main clients; companies, technical and R&D centres, international organizations?
- Do they participate in international joint ventures in technical fields? Have they taken part in any joint developments involving several client or partner companies?
- What is their main source of finance? What part have client enterprises in the budget? Do they receive public funds or semi-public funding (from a chamber of commerce)?
- What relations are held with the government, the public institutions, or other research organizations? Are there standards, directives or other legal and regulatory constraints which oblige clients to pass by way of this technical centre (example of reports on product conformity, on environmental aspects, standards to certify).
- Do they contribute to the development of standards for products or manufacturing procedures?
- Do they take part in drawing up patents? Are they patent-holders themselves?
- Do they provide information on markets, technology, or both? How does the centre conduct the search for information on technologies: attendance at trade fairs, participation in conferences, Internet search, patent analyses, technological watch, systematic or otherwise. How do they go about obtaining useful information?
- How are relations forged with companies? Contracts, payment for services.
- Have they contributed to the development of product or process innovations in particular companies? Or not? Why and how did it come about? Some examples.
- How do they go about solving problems of intellectual property? Example: development of a new procedure or a new product which is patented by the company?
- How do they envisage their future development?
Brief guide to interviews with NGOs
- History of the foundation of the NGO, its field of action.
- Types of service the NGO offers. Forms of intervention
- How does the NGO forge relations with research institutions?
- What are the target populations?
- The NGO’s main source of finance: companies, public organizations, international organizations?
- Does it rely on the support of international schemes of technical collaboration?
- What relations has it with government, public institutions, other research organizations? Do there exist standards, directives or other legal or regulatory constraints?
- Forms of action and resources mobilized to achieve their objectives.
- How do they envisage their future development?
Amable, Bruno, Rémi Barré and Robert Boyer (1997). Les sytèmes d’innovation à l’ère de la globalisation. Paris, Economica. 401 pp.
Arvanitis, Rigas (2000). "Apprentissage technologique et efficience productive: des outils pour l’analyse du développement technologique". Pratique des transferts de technologie et efficience productive dans les pays émergents, Guangzhou (R.P. Chine), 18-22 January 2000, INIDET & IRDGUS (French and Chinese versions): 55-86.
Arvanitis, Rigas and Daniel Villavicencio (1998). "Technological learning and innovation in the Mexican chemical industry: an exercise in taxonomy." Science, Technology & Society, 3 (1): 153-180.
Arvanitis, Rigas and Daniel Villavicencio (2000). "Learning and innovation in the chemical industry in Mexico", in Developing innovation systems: Mexico in a Global Context. Mario Cimoli (Ed.). London, Pinter: 189-205.
Calestous Juma and Yee-Cheong Lee, Eds. (2005). Innovation: Applying Knowledge in development. London, Earthscan, UN Millenium Project, Task Force on Science, Technology and Innovation. 254 pp.
Callon, Michel, Pierre Lascoumes and Yannick Barthe (2001). Agir dans un monde incertain. Essai sur la démocratie technique. Paris, Le Seuil. 360 pp.
Crehant, Patrick and Reffaat Chaabouni (2004). Annual Policy Trends Report for MEDA countries: Algeria, Egypt, Jordan, Lebanon, Morocco, Syria, Tunisia. Bruxelles, European Commission, Entreprise DG Innovation SMEs Programme. 25 pp.
OECD (1992). Oslo Manual. OECD Proposed Guidelines for Collecting and interpreting Technological Innovation Data. (1992). Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development, Paris.
Pavitt, Keith (1984). "Sectoral Patterns of Technical Change." Research Policy, 13 (4): 343-373.
Pirela, Arnoldo, Rafael Rengifo, Rigas Arvanitis and Alexis Mercado (1993). "Technological learning and entrepreneurial behaviour: A taxonomy of the chemical industry in Venezuela." Research Policy, 22 (5-6): 431-454.
Tidd, Joe, John Bessant and Keith Pavitt (1997). Managing innovation. Integrating technological, Market and organizational change. Chichester & New York, Wiley. 377 pp.