1. In Search of Useful Theory of Innovation By Richard R. Nelson and Sydney G. Winter 발표자 : 이기영, 한혜나

2. Introduction Role of PolicyRole of Theory most important policy issues involve finding ways to make the currently lagging sectors more progressive, if in fact that can be done. must organize knowledge and guide research regarding what lies behind the uneven performance of the different economic sectors. 기존 이론이 가진 문제점 1. 혁신에 관한 knowledge 와 research 가 산발적으로 흩어짐 2. 연구의 중심이 production 이 얼마나 fit 한가와 어떻게 shift 하는가에 있음 기존 이론이 간과한 혁신의 속성 1. 근본적으로 가진 불확실성 (Uncertainty) 2. 산업부문별로 혁신을 지원하는 institutional structure 가 매우 다양함

3. Table 1. Productivity growth in the private business economy by industry group and industry 1948-1966 전체요소생산성 년 변화 : 화학 4.9 vs 담배 1.1 종업원별 output 년 변화 : 화학 6.0 vs 전자장비 -4.1 전체요소생산성 년 변화 : 화학 4.9 vs 담배 1.1 종업원별 output 년 변화 : 화학 6.0 vs 전자장비 -4.1 Kendrick 1973 ‘Postwar Productivity Trends in the U.S.

4. 2. The State of Current Understanding  2.1 The economist’s model of differential productivity growth(1) Researchercontributionlimitation Kendrick - 산업 전 분야에 걸친 total factor productivity -Production theory 에 기반 종업원별 생산성보다 전체요소 생산 성 성장률의 산업별 차이 초점 Mansfield-Explicit production function formulation -R&D expenditure 를 capital 의 형태로 봄 - 제조업 부문만 다룸 Leonard -Funding 을 R&D 하는 그 산업 자체에서 했는지, 정부에서 했는지로 분류 - 제조업부문만 다룸 - 전체 산업에서 어떤 funding 경로가 효 과적인지 연구한 것인지 아니면 항공 산업이나 미사일 처럼 정부가 funding 을 함과 동시에 그 연구결과의 buyer 인 산업에 한정 되있는 것 인지 의문 Brown and Conrad - 타 산업의 R&D 와 그 중간재를 구입한 산업 변수 (own&indirect R&D) - 제조업부문만 다룸 Terleckyj (1974) - 비 제조업 부문을 함께 다룸 -Capital equipment 와 intermediate input R&D 구분 -slight misspecification the regresstion weight

5. 2. The State of Current Understanding  2.1 The economist’s model of differential productivity growth(2) R&D Expenditure Productivity -Institutional variables -Innate differences across industries

6. 2. The State of Current Understanding  2.2 Building blocks for a broader theoretical structure Productivity growth 를 theoretical structure 로 삼는 것이 좋지 않은 이유 1.- innovation involves uncertainty in an essential way. - Rather, a theoretical structure must encompass an essential diversity and disequilibrium of choices. Because of the uncertainty involved, different people, and different organizations, will disagree as to where to place their R & D chips, and on when to make their bets. Some will be proved right and some wrong. 2.A second fact that the microcosmic studies have illuminated is that the institutional structure for innovation often is quite complex within an economic sector, and varies significantly between economic sectors. different people different organizations 어디에 R&D chips 를 둘 것인지 ? 언제 투자를 할지 의견 분분 최종결정들이 맞거나 혹은 틀릴 수도 있음 어디에 R&D chips 를 둘 것인지 ? 언제 투자를 할지 의견 분분 최종결정들이 맞거나 혹은 틀릴 수도 있음 혁신을 위한 제도적 구조는 산업 분야별 다양함 ( 농업은 비영리기관에서 연구개발 하도록 진흥하는 제도 존재 ) 혁신을 위한 제도적 구조는 산업 분야별 다양함 ( 농업은 비영리기관에서 연구개발 하도록 진흥하는 제도 존재 )

7. 2. The State of Current Understanding  2.2 Building blocks for a broader theoretical structure  If there is to be any hope of integrating the disparate pieces of knowledge about the innovation process, a theory of innovation must incorporate explicitly the stochastic evolutionary nature of innovation, and must have considerable room for organizational complexity and diversity. any nontrivial change in product or process innovation. First, in contrast with the production function oriented studies discussed earlier, we posit that almost any nontrivial change in product or process, if there has been no prior experience, is an innovation. That is, we abandon the sharp distinction between moving along a production function and shift to a new one that characterizes the studies surveyed earlier. Second, we treat any innovation as involving considerable uncertainty both before it is ready for introduction to the economy, and even after it is introduced, and thus we view the innovation process as involving a continuing disequilibrium. Premises 반드시 생산성이 다른 부문으로 shift( 향 상 또는 저하 ) 되야만 하는 것이 아니라 제품이나 프로세스에 적잖은 변화를 가 져온다면 혁신으로 간주함. 혁신 프로세스에 관한 산발적인 지식들이 통합될 수 있다면 혁신이론 (Theory of Innovation) 은 확률론적으로 진화하는 혁신의 본질 (the stochastic evolutionary nature of innovation) 을 분명하게 내포하고 있어야 한다. 또한 조직의 복잡성과 다양성이 있을 거라는 여지를 가져야 한다. 혁신 프로세스에 관한 산발적인 지식들이 통합될 수 있다면 혁신이론 (Theory of Innovation) 은 확률론적으로 진화하는 혁신의 본질 (the stochastic evolutionary nature of innovation) 을 분명하게 내포하고 있어야 한다. 또한 조직의 복잡성과 다양성이 있을 거라는 여지를 가져야 한다. 실질경제에 도입되기 이전과 이후의 어 떠한 혁신이든지 상당한 불확실성을 갖 고 있다고 간주함. 그러므로 혁신프로세 스를 계속되는 불균형함을 포함하는 것 으로 생각한다.

8. 3. The generation of Innovation  3.1 The profit maximization hypothesis and its limitations In many cases, the organizations doing R & D are not motivated by profits at all, but are governmental, or private not-for-profit institutions. The difficulty here can be resolved on the surface by treating the term ‘profit’ very broadly to stand for whatever objectives the organizations happen to have. In many sectors there are a complex of R & D organizations, some profit oriented, some governmental, some academic, doing different things, but interacting in a synergistic way. In particular, in medicine, agriculture, and several other sectors, private for-profit organizations do the bulk of R & D that leads to marketable products, but academic institutions play a major role in creating basic knowledge and data used in the more applied work. 산업별로 다양한 R&D 조직이 있다. R&D 의 목적이 산업별로 다양하다. 산업별로 다양한 R&D 조직이 있다. R&D 의 목적이 산업별로 다양하다.

9. 3. The generation of Innovation  3.2. R&D strategies and probabilistic outcomes An R &D project, and the procedures used by an R & D organization to identify and screen R & D projects, can be viewed as interacting heuristic search processes. A quasi stable commitment to a particular set of heuristics regarding R & D project selection can be regarded as an R & D strategy. Often it is possible to identify a few R & D strategies that are prevalent in a particular sector in a particular era. An R & D strategy might be modeled extensively in terms of the heuristics employed in the search processes and their consequences. Algorithm for calculating an optimum Good Heuristics 상호반응을 보이면서 경험을 통해 올바른 결정이 무엇인지 각자 스스로 탐색하는 프로세스라고 볼 수 있다. 상호반응을 보이면서 경험을 통해 올바른 결정이 무엇인지 각자 스스로 탐색하는 프로세스라고 볼 수 있다.

10. 3. The generation of Innovation  3.3 Natural trajectories In many cases natural trajectories are specific to a particular technology or broadly defined ‘technological regime’ - ex) In airframe design, theoretical understanding (at a relatively mundane level) always has indicated that there are advantages of getting a plane to fly higher where air resistance is lower. This leads designers to think of pressurizing the cabin, demanding aircraft engines that will operate effectively at higher altitudes, etc.

11.  4.1 Elements of the selection model the selection environment determines how relative use of different technologies changes over time. In almost all economic sectors the firms - for-profit private organizations, public agencies, individual professionals - are subject to monitoring mechanisms which influence the innovations that score well or poorly according to the objectives of the firms a second innovation spreading mechanism that needs to be considered – imitation General model of the selection environment can be built from specification of these three elements: the definition of ‘worth’ or profit that is operative for the firms in the sector, the, manner in which consumer and regulatory preferences and rules influence what is profitable, and the investment and imitation processes that are involved. 4. The Selection Environment

12.  4.2 The market as a selection environment Successful innovation leads to both higher profit for the innovator and to profitable investment opportunities. Both the visible profits of the innovators and the losses experienced by the laggers stimulate the latter to try to imitate.  4.3 Nonmarket selection environment A hallmark of nonmarket sectors is that the separation of interests between firms and customers is not as sharply defined as in market sectors. 4. The Selection Environment

13.  innovation be treated as inherently stochastic, and that the formulation be capable of encompassing considerable institutional complexity and variety.  the uncertainty and institutional diversity surrounding innovation can help make thinking about policy issues more sophisticated than has been the norm.  There is far more to institutional variation than differences in the average size or market power of firms. In some of the sectors the critical institutions are not firms at all in the ordinary sense (e.g., medical care, garbage collection, etc.). 5. THOUGHTS ON THE EFFECTS OF INSTITUTIONAL STRUCTURE

14. Discussion