China, India and Brazil: Tiger technologies, dragon multinationals and the building of national systems of economic learning

Abstract

The biggest business story today is China, along with India and Brazil.These three emerging giants are predicted by Goldman Sachs to account for over half of global business activity by 2050. Competition and strategy as practised by these countries -and by firms and countries of the Asia-Pacific more generallycan no longer be thought of as a 'peripheral' feature of the world economy. Now Asia-Pacific -its firms, industries, countries -is moving to the core of the global economy, whereas strategies and competitive behaviours developed here are proving to be of much more than peripheral interest. In this paper I reflect on the technology leverage strategies developed to enter advanced industries (tiger technologies), on the accelerated internationalization achieved through complementing the global value chains created through globalization (dragon multinationals) and on the national innovative capacities developed in the region, and to what extent the practices of China, India and Brazil in developing national systems of economic learning may be said to replicate the strategies that worked so successfully in East Asia. The paper concludes that the propagation of East Asian strategies to these emerging giants promises much greater success than in countries following the precepts of the Washington Consensus.

National innovation systems and the intermediary role of industry associations in building institutional capacities for innovation in developing countries: A critical review of the literature

“…Much of this involved studies that moved away from the newly industrialised economies of East Asia to focus on the large and rapidly emerging economies of China, India, and to a lesser extent Brazil (see Lundvall et al, 2006). These three countries, particularly China and India, emerged rapidly as global economic powers following consecutive government policies toward greater economic liberalisation: China's 'open door' policies of the late 1970s and market reforms in the 1980s and 1990s, and India's liberalisation policies beginning in 1991 (see Mathews, 2009). Although the actual policies employed by these two countries differed somewhat due to different historical and national contexts, the strategies employed for 'catching up' purposes were very similar.…”

“…These included: greater openness to foreign trade and foreign direct investment, the denationalisation of certain industries (China), the opening up of indigenous industries to global competition, and greater support for private enterprise and entrepreneurial activity; along with co-current policies toward the technological development, maturation, and the global orientation of indigenous industries (see Krishnan, 2003;Motohashi and Yun, 2007). These liberalisation policies, Mathews (2009) argues, are very reminiscent of the catching up strategies employed earlier by Japan and the newly industrialised countries of East Asia.…”

“…Furthermore, Brazil's intense focus on incentivising MNCs came at the expense of indigenous producers who were essentially crowded out. It was not until later, following a more focused and somewhat protectionist export strategy (e.g., steel and agribusiness) that Brazil emerged as a global export leader in raw commodities, agriculture, and more recently aerospace and biofuels leading to significant economic gains over the past decade (Mathews, 2009). …”

Determinantes estratégicos de ecoeficiências de empresas chinesas no Brasil

“…Um estudo anterior destaca que empresas chinesas precisam desenvolver capacidades e recursos organizacionais para absorver conhecimento que as habilite no desenvolvimento de ações de sustentabilidade ambiental (Urban, Siciliano, Sour, Lonn, & Tan-Mullins, 2015). O governo chinês enfatiza particularmente a promoção das exportações por meio de IED (Lu, Liu, & Wang, 2011 (Albert & Xu, 2014;Lin et al, 2013;Mathews, 2009;Zhanga & Daly, 2011 O tripé da estratégia admite, a partir da VI, que as instituições influenciam no comportamento e nas estratégias das empresas de mercados emergentes . Apesar dos aspectos institucionais em mercados emergentes serem amplamente destacados na literatura (Hoskisson et al, 2013;Khanna et al, 2010;Meyer et al, 2009;Peng, 2002) sentido ao analisar mercados desenvolvidos, onde as regras de operação seriam mais exigentes em relação as normas e certificações demandadas de ecoeficiência, se comparadas com a realidade institucional de mercados emergentes (Khanna et al, 2010).…”

“…A China, de modo ainda mais intenso, consolidou uma plataforma exportadora inserida em diversas cadeias de valor de forma a suprir consumidores e empresas de todo o mundo (Liu, Oliva, Grisi, Gaspar, & Lamenza, 2008;Mathews, 2009). As empresas chinesas desenvolveram um modelo produtivo baseado na oferta de produtos baratos, e com funcionalidade equivalente.…”