What can we learn from the failures of technology and innovation policies in the European periphery?

Abstract

This paper examines the technology policy challenges facing peripheral European Union economies in their effort to catch up with the more advanced countries. It is argued that, generally, the subordinate position of peripheral economies within the EU compels them to replicate the technology policies followed in advanced countries. Yet the latter have proven more or less inappropriate for peripheral countries and regions because they usually do not properly accommodate their growth models and their corresponding production structures. On the other hand, the EU's preoccupation with 'high-tech' and 'best-practice' policies can be attributed to the underestimation of business organization and broader economic structures by the dominant theoretical paradigm of technology and innovation.

Knowledge Transfer and Technology Diffusion: An Introduction

“…Practices used to promote high-tech innovations in high-tech environments may not be appropriate for LMT organizations (Liagouras, 2010). Tödling et al (2009) suggest that while extensive internal R&D is needed in the introduction of advanced innovations, less internal R&D (largely to maintain absorptive capacity (Cohen and Levinthal, 1990)) is needed for the introduction of products that are only new to the fi rm (as is common for LMT organizations) and that this is generally accompanied by external knowledge acquired through cooperation with service fi rms such as suppliers.…”

“…However, an ability to tap into the latest learning is more realistic for codifi able than for tacit knowledge. Perhaps paradoxically, therefore, expense aside, R&D activities may be more easily within the grasp of fi rms in developing countries than are vital day-to-day technical activities as well as aspects of business organization that need to be worked out on the basis of experience (Liagouras, 2010).…”

On the Edge of the South European Model: Familism, Business and State in Greece

“…I try, however, to go further and ask why the industrial policy of 1980s and then the EU-inspired and funded technological policies failed to upgrade the productive base of the Greek economy. A preliminary answer could be that the -voluntary or coercive -imitation of EU's 'best practices' was ill-suited to addressing the backwardness or inertia of the Greek private sector (Liargovas 1998;Liagouras 2010). But then, this inertia must also be explained.…”

The EU cohesion Policy in Central and Eastern Europe, a Tool for Innovation?

“…Beyond this show of infatuation for the Lisbon strategy, the issue of the most appropriate innovation for Central and Eastern European economies remains an open question. Discourse and practice adopted in this matter by the most advanced countries of the Union are not necessarily adaptable to the peripheral countries (Liagouras, 2010). In the case of Greece, the demand for technology is feeble, the economic fabric is dominated by the construction sector and by the service sector (tourism), and SMEs are more penalised by organisational and financing problems than by the rarity of cutting-edge innovations.…”

“…In the 1980s, the country decided to reduce its dependence with respect to imports of technology-intensive goods and created the General Secretary for Research and Technology, the GSRT (Liagouras, 2010). Co-financed by the European funds, numerous projects emerged (technological parks, incubators) without generating perceptible impact on firms' innovative capacity.…”