Home /Archive /2020, Volume 16 /16(2) /Technology Gaps: the Concept, Models, and Ways of Overcoming

Technology Gaps: the Concept, Models, and Ways of Overcoming

TitleTechnology Gaps: the Concept, Models, and Ways of Overcoming
Publication TypeJournal Article
Year of Publication2020
AuthorsVishnevsky, VP, Harkushenko, OM, Knjazev, SI
Short TitleNauka innov.
DOI10.15407/scin16.02.003
Volume16
Issue2
SectionGeneral Problems of the Modern Research and Innovation Policy
Pagination3-19
LanguageUkrainian
Abstract
Introduction. The Fourth industrial revolution and accelerated development of Industry 4.0 disruptive technologies are accompanied by the formation of new value creation networks and the redistribution of production facilities that partially return to advanced economies.
Problem Statement. Processes of technological development and new value chains’ formation are turbulent, so that some countries have taken lead in the sphere of technology, while others have become outsiders. Between them, new technology gaps are emerging or existing ones are changing, and this, in turn, has a critical impact on the development of national economies: productivity, job creation, profitability of businesses, employment, and population income.
Purpose. To develop a framework for defining the concept and estimating the size of technology gaps between countries with different levels of industrial development in the context of the Fourth industrial revolution.
Materials and Methods. Historical analysis of technology gap economic concepts, statistical analysis of indicators of economic and R&D development of world economies, economic and mathematical modeling of the cyber-physical technology life cycle.
Results. Within the economic theory of the technology life cycle, an emendated concept of technology gap has been proposed. It is mainly related to jump transition from one technological curve to another. To assess the size of technology gaps, a logistic function has been proposed. It determines the relationship between labor productivity and capital/labor ratio taking into account the interdependence of physical and digital capital. Using this function, technology gaps between industrialized European economies and Ukraine, which manifest themselves as multiple lags in productivity, have been identified.
Conclusions. In order to reduce the technology gaps between Ukraine and European countries, it is necessary to create a new, innovation-oriented business ecosystem that is formed in the course of gene-cultural-technological co-evolution and, above all, requires a set of measures to accelerate the development of Ukrainian R&D sphere, as well as related culture and institutions.
Keywordsbusiness ecosystem, cyber-physical technology, industrial revolution, technological curve, technology gap
References
1. World Economic Forum. (2015). Industrial Internet of Things: Unleashing the Potential of Connected Products and Services. Cologny/Geneva, Switzerland: World Economic Forum.   
2. Miebach Consulting. (2017). Miebach’s nearshoring study shows: the production is being relocated closer to the industrialized countries. Miebach Consulting. 
URL: https://www.miebach.com/en/publications/?publication=203 (Last accessed: 07.08.2019).
3. European Commission, Directorate-General for Research and Innovation. (2018). Re-finding Industry – Defining Innovation. Report of the independent High Level Group on industrial technologies. Brussels: European Commission.
4. Smit, J., Kreutzer, S., Moeller, C., Carlberg, M. (2016). Industry 4.0: Study. Brussels: European Union.
5. Vishnevsky, V. P., Kniaziev, S. I. (2017). Smart-industry: prospects and problems. Economy of Ukraine, 7(660), 22–35 [in Russian].
6. European Commission. (2016). Key Enabling Technologies – Internal Market, Industry, Entrepreneurship and SMEs. European Commission. 
URL: https://ec.europa.eu/growth/industry/policy/key-enabling-technologies_en
(Last accessed: 09.11.2019).
7. McKinsey & Company. (2013). Disruptive technologies: Advances that will transform life, business, and the global economy. New-York, USA: The McKinsey Global Institute. 
8. McKinsey Global Institute. (2017). A future that works: automation, employment, and productivity. New-York, USA: McKinsey & Company. 
9. Lawrence, M., Roberts, C., King, L. (2017). Managing Automation. Employment, inequality and ethics in the digital age. IPPR Commission on Economic Justice. Discussion Paper. IPPR 2017. 
10. Global Innovation Index. (2019). Global Innovation Index (GII) 2019: Creating Healthy Lives – The Future of Medical Innovation. Global Innovation Index. 
URL: https://www.globalinnovationindex.org/Home (Last accessed: 09.11. 2019).
11. Harvard’s Growth Lab. (2019). The Atlas of Economic Complexity. Harvard’s Growth Lab. 
URL: http://atlas.cid.harvard.edu/rankings/ (Last accessed: 09.11.2019). 
12. IMD business school. (2019). IMD World Digital Competitiveness Ranking 2019. IMD business school. 
URL: https://www.imd.org/wcc/world-competitiveness-center-rankings/world-digi...
(Last accessed: 09.11.2019).
13. Godin, B. (2010). Conceptual foundations of scientific, technological and innovation policy. Foresight and STI Governance, 2(2), 34–43 [in Russian]. 
14. Heckscher, E. F. (2006). The impact of foreign trade on income distribution. Milestones in Economic Thought. P. 154–173. In International Economy (Ed. A .P. Kireev). V. 6. Moscow: TEIS [in Russian].
15. Posner, M. V. (1961). International trade and technical change. Oxford Economic Papers,13(3), 323-341.
https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.oep.a040877
16. Jones, R. (1970). The Role of Technology in the Theory of International Trade. In The Technology Factor in International Trade (Ed. R. Vernon). Cambridge, MA: NBER. P. 73-94.
17. Foster, R. (1986). Innovation: The Attacker's Advantage. New York: Summit Books.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-322-83742-4
18. Foster, R. (1987). Innovation: The Attacker's Advantage. Moscow: Progress [in Russian].
19. Fagerberg, J. (1988). International competitiveness. Economic Journal, 98(391), 355-374.
https://doi.org/10.2307/2233372
20. Nelson, R. R., Winter, S. G. (2002). An Evolutionary Theory of Economic change. Moscow: Delo [in Russian].
21. Fagerberg, J., Verspagen, B. (2002). Technology-gaps, innovation-diffusion and transformation: an evolutionary interpretation. Research policy, 31(8-9), 1291-1304.
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0048-7333(02)00064-1
22. Peres, C. (2002). Technological revolutions and Financial capital. The dynamics of bubbles and Golden ages. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar.
https://doi.org/10.4337/9781781005323
23. Peres, C. (2011). Technological revolutions and Financial capital. The dynamics of bubbles and Golden ages. Moscow: Delo Publishing House, ANE [in Russian].
24. Kondratiev, N. D. (2002). Big business cycles and foresight theory. Moscow: Economy [in Russian].
25. Schumpeter, J. A. (1982). History of Economic Analysis. Moscow: Progress [in Russian]. 
26. Lennerfors, T. T., Fors, P., van Rooijen, J. (2015). ICT and environmental sustainability in a changing society. Information Technology & People, 28(4), 758-774. 
https://doi.org/10.1108/ITP-09-2014-0219
27. Hirooka, M. (2006). Innovation Dynamism and Economic Growth. A Nonlinear Perspective. Cheltenham; Northampton (MA): Edward Elgar.
https://doi.org/10.4337/9781845428860
28. Akayev, A. (2011). The mathematical foundations of the Kondratiev–Schumpeter innovation-cyclic theory of economic development. Bulletin of the Institute of Economics RAS, 2, 39–60 [in Russian].
29. Dementiev, V. Ye. (2016). Long waves in the economy: institutional aspect. In Crises and forecasts in the light of the theory of long waves (Eds. L.Ye. Grinin, A.V. Korotayev, R. S. Grinberg). Moscow: Moscow editors’ office of Publishing house Uchitel. P. 124–139. [in Russian].
30. The World Bank. (2008). Technology & Development. Findings from a World Bank Report Global Economic Prospects 2008: Technology Diffusion in the Developing World. Washington, DC: The International Bank for Reconstruction and Development / The World Bank. 
31. Mühleisen, M. (2018). The Long and Short of the Digital Revolution. Finance & Development, 55(2), 1–2.
32. Vesperoni, E., Bluedorn, J., MacDonald, M. (2018). Future of work: measurement and policy challenges. Washington, DC: International Monetary Fund. 
33. Deloitte (2019, 22 January.). Closing technology, Talent Gaps for Industry 4.0. The Wall Street Journal. 
URL: https://deloitte.wsj.com/cio/2019/01/22/closing-tech-and-talent-gaps-for...
(Last accessed: 09.11.2019).
34. Caldwell, L. (2019, 11 January). Industry 4.0 Holds the Key to Closing the Manufacturing Industry’s Skills Gap. Forbes. 
URL: https://www.forbes.com/sites/lisa-caldwell/2019/01/11/industry-4-0-holds...
(Last accessed: 09.11.2019).
35. Schwab, K. (2016). The Fourth Industrial Revolution. Moscow: Eksmo. [in Russian]
36. Government of Japan (2015, December 18). Report on the 5th Science and Technology Basic Plan. Tokyo: Council for Science, Technology and Innovation Cabinet Office. 
37. Madykh, A. A., Okhten, О. О. (2018). Modeling the transformation of the impact of production factors on the economy in the process of smart industry formation. Econ. promisl., 4 (84), 26-41 [in Russian].
https://doi.org/10.15407/econindustry2018.04.026
38. Bughin, J., Manyika, J. (2013, July). Measuring the full impact of digital capital. McKinsey Quarterly.
39. Amosha, O. I., Nikiforova, V. A. (2019). Metallurgical Smart Industry Development: Global Experience and Lessons for Ukraine. Economy of Ukraine, 9-10, 3-23 [in Ukrainian].
https://doi.org/10.15407/economyukr.2019.09.003
40. Acemoglu, D., Robinson, J. (2016). Why Nations Fail: The Origins of Power, Prosperity, and Poverty. Moscow: AST [in Russian].
41. Harrison, L. (2014). Jews, Confucians, and Protestants: Cultural Capital and the End of Multiculturalism. Moscow: Misl' [in Russian].
42. Hodgson, G. M. (2003). The Mystery of the Routine. The Darwinian Destiny of an Evolutionary Theory of Economic Change. Revue économique, 54 (2), 355-384.
https://doi.org/10.3917/reco.542.0355
43. Auerswald, P., Dani, L. (2018). Economic Ecosystems. In The New Oxford Handbook of Economic Geography (Eds. G. L. Clark, M. P. Feldman, M. S. Gertler, D. Wójcik). Oxford University Press.
https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780198755609.013.47
44. Diamond, J. (2010). Guns, Germs, and Steel: The Fates of Human Societies. Moscow: AST [in Russian].
45. Vishnevsky, V. P., Kniaziev, S. I. (2018). How to increase the readiness of Ukraine's industry to smart transformations. Nauka innov., 14 (4), 55-69 [in Ukrainian].
https://doi.org/10.15407/scin14.04.055
46. The World Bank. (2019). World Development Indicators: Science and technology. The World Bank. 
URL: http://wdi.worldbank.org/table/5.13# (Last accessed: 14.11.2019).
47. Vishnevsky, V. P., Harkushenko, O. M., Kniaziev, S.I., Chekina, V. D., Hrechyshkin,  O. V. (2018). The Transformational Potential of Digitizing the Ukrainian Economy: The R&D Report (Final). NDR 0118U002109. Kyiv: The Institute of Industrial Economics, NAS of Ukraine [in Ukrainian].