حرکت های «جمعی» و تغییرات نهاد و فناوری: بررسی چند نظام نوآوری منتخب

حمیدی مطلق, روح الله; بابایی, علی; ملکی, علی

حرکت های «جمعی» و تغییرات نهاد و فناوری: بررسی چند نظام نوآوری منتخب

نوع مقاله : مقاله مروری

نویسندگان

¹ پژوهشگر پژوهشکده سیاست گذاری علم، فناوری و صنعت دانشگاه صنعتی شریف

² عضو هیئت علمی پژوهشکده سیاست گذاری علم، فناوری و صنعت دانشگاه صنعتی شریف

چکیده

شواهد متعددی در مورد تأثیر حرکت‌های جمعی بر تحولات نهادی ـ فناورانۀ صنایع مختلف وجود دارد. به‌این ترتیب، اگرچه نقش بنگاه‌ها و تلاش فردی آنها برای رقابت و دستیابی به منافع، یکی از پیشران‌های اصلی تحولات نهادی و فناوری است، اما پیشران مهم دیگر در تحولات نهادی و فناوری، «همکاری‌های جمعی» برای دستیابی به اهدافی فراتر از سودآوری فرد فرد بنگاه‌هاست. در این مقاله و با بررسی چند نظام نوآوری منتخب (صنعت رنگ آلمان، صنعت ایمپلنت حلزونی آمریکا، صنعت خودروی آمریکا و صنعت فناوری اطلاعات تایوان) نشان داده خواهد شد که در پس تغییرات نهاد و فناوری، شبکه‌ای از افراد و کنشگران کلیدی (کارآفرینان نهادی) حضور داشته و حرکت‌های جمعی این شبکۀ کنشگران است که منجر به شکل‌گیری و تکامل نهادهای جدید می‌شود. این مقاله، به نقد دو دیدگاه مطرح در تبیین تغییرات نظام‌های نوآوری (دیدگاه دولت‌محور و فردمحور) می‌پردازد.

کلیدواژه‌ها

20.1001.1.24767220.1395.06.2.4.9

عنوان مقاله [English]

Collective Action and techno-institutional transformations: a study on some selected innovation systems

نویسندگان [English]

Rouholah Hamidi Motlagh ¹
Ali Babaee ¹
Ali Maleki ²

چکیده [English]

Numerous evidences exist about the effect of collective actions on techno-institutional transformations in different industries. Hence, although the firms and their individual efforts for achieving interests is a main driving force of techno-institutional transformations, but another important driving force is the collective actions to achieve aims beyond profitability of individual firms. In this article, by studying some selected innovation systems – German’s dye industry, United States’ cochlear implant industry, United States’ auto industry, and Taiwan’s IT industry- we show that a network of individuals and key actors (i.e. institutional entrepreneurs) are the main driving force in every techno-institutional transformation, and collective actions of this network cause the formation and evolution of new institutions. This article criticizes two well-known perspectives in explaining innovation system changes, i.e. state-based perspective and individual-based perspective.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

Collective Action
Institutional Change
Technological Transformation
Institutional Entrepreneur

مراجع

منابع
1. Chandler, A. D. (1969). Strategy and Structure: Chapters in the History of the American Industrial Enterprise. MIT Press Books, 1.
2. Chandler, A. D. (1977). The visible hand: The management revolution in American business. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Belknap.
3. Commons, J. R. (1924). Legal foundations of capitalism. Transaction Publishers.
4. Davis, L. E., North, D. C., & Smorodin, C. 1971. Institutional change and American economic growth: CUP Archive.
5. Demil, B., & Bensédrine, J. (2005). Processes of legitimization and pressure toward regulation: corporate conformity and strategic behavior. International Studies of Management & Organization, 35(2), 56-77.
6. DiMaggio, P. J. (1988). Interest and agency in institutional theory. Institutional patterns and organizations: Culture and environment, 1, 3-22.
7. Dorado, S. (2005). Institutional entrepreneurship, partaking, and convening.Organization studies, 26(3), 385-414.
8. 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.
9. Evans, P. B. (1995). Embedded autonomy: states and industrial transformation (Vol. 25). Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
10. Garud, R., & Jain, S. (1996). The embeddedness of technological system.Advances in strategic management, 13, 389-408.
11. Hannan, M. T., & Freeman, J. (1977). The population ecology of organizations. American journal of sociology, 929-964.
12. Hardy, C., & Maguire, S. (2008). Institutional entrepreneurship. The Sage handbook of organizational institutionalism, 198-217.
13. Hayek, F. A. 1973. Rules and Order. Law, Legislation and Liberty, Vol. 1: London and Henley: Routledge and Kegan Paul.
14. Hodgson, G. M. (1988). Economics and institutions. In Journal of Economic Issues.
15. Hung, S. C., & Whittington, R. (2011). Agency in national innovation systems: Institutional entrepreneurship and the professionalization of Taiwanese IT.Research Policy, 40(4), 526-538.
16. Kemp, R., Schot, J., & Hoogma, R. (1998). Regime shifts to sustainability through processes of niche formation: the approach of strategic niche management. Technology analysis & strategic management, 10(2), 175-198.
17. Lawrence, T. B., Hardy, C., & Phillips, N. (2002). Institutional effects of interorganizational collaboration: The emergence of proto-institutions.Academy of management journal, 45(1), 281-290.
18. Lundvall, B. _., Joseph, K. J., Chaminade, C., & Vang, J. (Eds.). (2011).Handbook of innovation systems and developing countries: building domestic capabilities in a global setting. Edward Elgar Publishing.
19. Maguire, S., Hardy, C., & Lawrence, T. B. (2004). Institutional entrepreneurship in emerging fields: HIV/AIDS treatment advocacy in Canada. Academy of management journal, 47(5), 657-679.
20. Mahboudi, F., Hamedifar, H., & Aghajani, H. (2012). Medical biotechnology trends and achievements in Iran. Avicenna journal of medical biotechnology,4(4), 200.
21. Murmann, J. P. (2003). Knowledge and competitive advantage: The coevolution of firms, technology, and national institutions. Cambridge University Press.
22. Nelson, R. R. (1994). The co-evolution of technology, industrial structure, and supporting institutions. Industrial and corporate change, 3(1), 47-63.
23. Nelson, R. R. (2008). What enables rapid economic progress: What are the needed institutions? Research policy, 37(1): 1-11.
24. Nelson, R. R., & Nelson, K. (2002). Technology, institutions, and innovation systems. Research policy, 31(2), 265-272.
25. Niosi, J. (2011). Complexity and path dependence in biotechnology innovation systems. Industrial and Corporate Change, 20(6), 1795-1826.
26. North, D. C. (1990). Institutions, institutional change and economic performance. Cambridge university press.
27. Rao, H., Morrill, C., & Zald, M. N. 2000. Power plays: How social movements and collective action create new organizational forms. Research in organizational behavior, 22: 237-281.
28. Scott, W. R. (2013). Institutions and organizations: Ideas, interests, and identities. Sage Publications.
29. Suchman, L., Blomberg, J., Orr, J. E., & Trigg, R. (1999). Reconstructing technologies as social practice. American behavioral scientist, 43(3), 392-408.
30. Van de Ven, A. H., & Garud, R. 1994. The coevolution of technical and institutional events in the development of an innovation. Evolutionary dynamics of organizations: 425-443.
31. Veblen, T. (1912). The Theory of the Leisure Class: An Economic Study of Institutions. Macmillan.
32. Williamson, O. E. (1975). Markets and hierarchies. New York, 26-30.
33. Williamson, O. E. (1985). The economic intstitutions of capitalism. Simon and Schuster.