The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Technological infrastructure and international competitiveness
Open accessAbstract
The paper is probably the first written paper using the concept of ‘the national innovation system’ and it analyses how technological infrastructure differs between countries and how such differences are reflected in international competitiveness. It makes a critical review of new (in the 1980s) developments in the theory of international trade and confronts them with recent empirical results. It shows how competitiveness cannot be explained by wage rates/prices/currency rates. Technological leadership gives absolute rather than comparative advantage and technological leadership will reflect institutions supporting coupling, creating, clustering comprehending and coping in connection with technology. The analysis is rooted in historical context through references to Friedrich List and his criticism of Adam Smith and laissez-faire. Special emphasis is put on List's concept of mental capital. Finally, the analytical arguments are illustrated by the catching-up and forging ahead of first Germany and later Japan. The paper concludes that disequilibria in international trade will be persistent and that for laggard economy the free trade doctrine may be unduly restrictive. Another conclusion is that public investment in technological infrastructure and intellectual capital is crucial for successful economic development. It is pointed out that there is a need to couple education, science, trade and industry policy in order to build competitiveness.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Lundvall, B.-Å., & Rikap, C. (2022) · Research Policy · doi:10.1016/j.respol.2021.104395 · Cited by 222
Metadata
- Authors
- Freeman, C.
- Venue
- Industrial and Corporate Change
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2004-06-01
- Volume
- 13
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 541-569
- ISSN
- 0960-6491 (ISSN-L)
- 1464-3650
- OpenAlex
- W1978667536
- Cited by
- 300
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 27.47
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.