Foreign Direct Investment and R&amp;D: Substitutes or Complements—A Case of Indian Manufacturing after 1991 Reforms

Sasidharan, Subash; Kathuria, Vinish

doi:10.1016/j.worlddev.2010.05.012

Cited by 103 publications

(72 citation statements)

References 45 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Different actors are sources of ITT, among which foreign firms (Bell, 2009, Gereffi et al 2005, Hanlin and Kaplinsky 2016, Sasidharan and Kathuria 2011, Saliola and Zanfei 2009, Yeung and Coe 2015, Zanello et al 2015; foreign universities and research centres located in LICs (Li 2011, Lundvall 2007; technology transfer offices (Fu and Gong 2011) and intermediate services, among which are those that provide metrology, standards, testing and quality services (MSTQ) (Pietrobelli and Rabellotti 2011). Domestic firms are recipients of ITT but also actors for intra-national technology transfer.…”

Section: The Accumulation Of Capabilitiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Typical channels of ITT that connect foreign and domestic firms include technological licenses , Hoekman et al 2005, Li 2011, Lundvall 2007, Pack 2008, Şeker 2011; intermediate outputs , Li 2011, Hanlin and Kaplinsky 2016; foreign direct investments (FDIs) (Sasidharan andKathuria 2011, Savona andBontadini 2016;. When universities and research centres are involved, usually channels of ITT extend to international collaboration on research projects and international mobility of students, researchers and scholars, and obviously migration of labour force within and across countries (Hoekman et al 2005;Lundvall 2007;Rodrik 2005).…”

Section: The Accumulation Of Capabilitiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…When universities and research centres are involved, usually channels of ITT extend to international collaboration on research projects and international mobility of students, researchers and scholars, and obviously migration of labour force within and across countries (Hoekman et al 2005;Lundvall 2007;Rodrik 2005). ITT is traditionally associated with (often non-defined) spillover effects, which can usefully be characterised as imitation and demonstration effects, labour mobility, informal networking, backward linkages within supply chain and reverse engineering , Gorodnichenko et al 2014, Sasidharan and Kathuria 2011.…”

Section: The Accumulation Of Capabilitiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…At the firm level, alongside firms' characteristics such as size, age, sector, whether they are exporters or foreign owned, what matters for ITT is the absorptive capacity of recipient firms (Li 2011); the level and compatibility of in-house R&D of recipient firms (Sasidharan and Kathuria 2011); the appropriateness of the technology transferred (Hanlin and Kaplinsky 2016) and the technological capabilities of suppliers (Saliola and Zanfei 2009). When looking at the contexts in which firms and other actors operate, particularly relevant are the presence of export processing zones ; the existence of IPR protection laws (Altenburg 2009, Zhou 2006 and market structure and competition levels (Sasidharan and Kathuria 2011). Importantly, the governance modes of the GVCs are of dramatic importance when it comes to the effectiveness and benefit of ITT (Gereffi et al 2005, Pietrobelli and Rabellotti 2011, Saliola and Zanfei 2009Savona and Bontadini, 2016).…”

Section: The Accumulation Of Capabilitiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Innovation for Inclusive Structural Change. A Framework and Research Agenda

Ciarli

Savona

Thorpe³

et al. 2018

SSRN Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The paper proposes the foundations of an analytical framework to map different innovation pathways and explain how innovation leads to inclusive structural change in low-income countries. Innovation pathways depend on how actors, interactions, and variables affect the origin of innovation; the uptake of the innovations (adoption and diffusion); the impact of this diffusion on upgrading, structural change and inclusion; the complementarity between these processes; the potential trade-offs between structural change and inclusion. The paper offers a set of novel applications to test the proposed framework, through different examples of innovation pathways: (a) international technology transfer, based on an extensive systematic literature review; (b) product and process innovation in the dairy sector in Kenya, based on a secondary case study; (c) an organisational innovation in the provision of antiretroviral treatment in Mozambique, also a case study; (d) a systematisation of metrics and indicators of innovation, structural change and inclusion and an empirical exploration of their relationship. The learning generated will support a multidisciplinary, multi-methods research agenda to map the dynamics around innovation, structural change, and inequality and generate an integrated platform of evidence on these processes. In doing so, we respond to the recently increasing demand coming from international institutions, inter-departmental research funds, NGOs and national ministries, for better knowledge to shape a more effective innovation policy for sustainable and inclusive development in low income countries.

show abstract

Section: The Accumulation Of Capabilitiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: The Accumulation Of Capabilitiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: The Accumulation Of Capabilitiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: The Accumulation Of Capabilitiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Innovation for Inclusive Structural Change. A Framework and Research Agenda

Ciarli

Savona

Thorpe³

et al. 2018

SSRN Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Many developing countries have tried hard to attract FDI to help address their lack of domestic 4 capital and their comparatively weak technological bases (Ito et al, 2012;Sasidharan & Kathuria, 2011). First, FDI brings capital and new technology into the domestic market, which directly fuels domestic innovation and growth (Buckley, Wang, & Clegg, 2007).…”

Section: Foreign Investment and Regional Innovationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Firm ownership, industrial structure, and regional innovation performance in China's provinces

Li¹,

Sutherland²,

Ning³

et al. 2014

Technology Analysis & Strategic Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Use policyThe full-text may be used and/or reproduced, and given to third parties in any format or medium, without prior permission or charge, for personal research or study, educational, or not-for-prot purposes provided that:• a full bibliographic reference is made to the original source • a link is made to the metadata record in DRO • the full-text is not changed in any way The full-text must not be sold in any format or medium without the formal permission of the copyright holders.Please consult the full DRO policy for further details. provinces. Specifically, we explore how the extent of specialization and diversification in regional industrial structures at the province level foster both MAR and Jacobs spillovers, as well as how foreign and state ownership influence regional innovation. We find: (i) China's regional innovation systems benefit from Jacobs but not MAR externalities, with the former spurring higher quality innovation in the form of increased invention patenting; (ii) state owned enterprises and foreign invested enterprises advance local innovation, with the latter again fostering higher quality innovation; (iii) a convergence towards the combination of low specialization and high diversity in provincial industry is taking place between China's more developed inland coastal provinces and less developed inland provinces. Implications and suggestions for policy-making and future research are discussed.

show abstract

Technological innovations and firms’ productivity in new patent regime: Evidences from Indian pharmaceutical industry

Dhanora

Danish

Sharma

2020

Journal of Public Affairs

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Innovative firms enjoy more market benefits by conducting both technological (product and process) and nontechnological (organizational and marketing) innovations. This study aims to examine the relationship between technological innovations and firms’ productivity in Indian pharmaceutical industry in new patent regime. In particular, we analyze the direct impact of product and process innovation on the productivity of 168 Indian pharmaceutical firms over 2000–2013. Findings of this study reveal that technological innovations are positive source of firms’ productivity. However, this relationship varies with types of technological innovations and also ownership structure of firms. Moreover, this study also finds that the impact of technological innovation is stronger for multinational enterprises.

show abstract

Foreign Direct Investment and R&D: Substitutes or Complements—A Case of Indian Manufacturing after 1991 Reforms

Cited by 103 publications

References 45 publications

Innovation for Inclusive Structural Change. A Framework and Research Agenda

Innovation for Inclusive Structural Change. A Framework and Research Agenda

Firm ownership, industrial structure, and regional innovation performance in China's provinces

Technological innovations and firms’ productivity in new patent regime: Evidences from Indian pharmaceutical industry

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About