مفهوم پردازی تطبیقی «تدارکات عمومی حامی توانمندسازی» در مقایسه با تدارکات عمومی حامی نوآوری: گامی به سوی پیاده‌ سازی پیوست فناوری

نوع مقاله: مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 1- پژوهشگر پژوهشکده سیاستگذاری علم، فناوری و صنعت دانشگاه صنعتی شریف 2- دانشجوی دکتری سیاستگذاری علم و فناوری، دانشگاه علم و صنعت

2 عضو هیئت علمی دانشکده مهندسی صنایع دانشگاه علم و صنعت ایران، تهران، ایران

3 استادیار پژوهشکده سیاستگذاری علم، فناوری و صنعت دانشگاه صنعتی شریف

4 عضو هیئت علمی دانشکده پیشرفت دانشگاه علم و صنعت ایران

چکیده

با توجه به عدم موفقیت سیاست‌های ساخت داخل در ایران و بسیاری از کشورهای درحال‌توسعه، «تدارکات عمومی حامی نوآوری» می‌تواند به‌عنوان یک سیاست نوآوری در طرف تقاضا مبنای نظری برای پیاده‌سازی پیوست فناوری در کشور فراهم نماید؛ اما کشورهای درحال‌توسعه از ویژگی‌هایی متمایز از اقتصادهای توسعه‌یافته برخوردارند که یکی از مهم‌ترین آن‌ها فقدان توانمندی‌های فناورانه در میان تأمین‌کنندگان است که نقشی محوری در همپایی فناورانه آن‌ها دارد. مقاله پیش رو مفهوم جدید «تدارکات عمومی حامی توانمندسازی» را مبتنی بر شواهد به‌دست‌آمده از پروژه‌های انتقال فناوری ده گروه کالای راهبردی در صنعت نفت کشورمان توسعه می‌دهد که توسعه‌ای بر سیاست تدارکات عمومی حامی نوآوری محسوب می‌شود. این سیاست توانمندسازی تأمین‌کنندگان را در محوریت خود قرار می‌دهد. این مطالعه چالش‌های مشترک متعددی را میان این دو سیاست برمی‌شمرد، ازجمله نیاز به تغییرات سازمانی در تدارک دهندگان دولتی، مدیریت ریسک، بهره‌گیری از ساختارهای میانجیگر نوآوری (دانشی) و انجام اصلاحات حقوقی؛ اما دو تمایز اساسی نیز به‌عنوان ویژگی مختص «تدارکات عمومی حامی توانمندسازی» مفهوم‌پردازی شد: 1) توانمندسازی تأمین‌کنندگان به‌عنوان هدف اصلی سیاست، 2) استقرار نظام پایش و ارزیابی دوسویه که هم توانمندی تأمین‌کنندگان و هم محصول تدارک داده‌شده را توأمان رصد و ارزیابی می‌کند.

کلیدواژه‌ها


عنوان مقاله [English]

Comparative Conceptualisation of ‘Public Procurement for Capability Building’ (PPCB) In Relation to Public Procurement for Innovation (PPI): A Step Towards Implementation of Iranian Technology Annex

نویسندگان [English]

  • Najmoddin Yazdi 1
  • Abdollah Jassbi 2
  • Ali Maleki 3
  • Ali Bonyadi Naeini 4
1 1- Researcher at The research Institute for Science, Technology and Industry Policy (RISTIP); Sharif University of Technology 2- PhD student of Science and Technology Policy, Iran University of Science and Technology (IUST)
2 Faculty member at Industrial Engineering Department, Iran University of Science and Technology (IUST), Tehran, Iran
3 Assistant professor at The research Institute for Science, Technology and Industry Policy (RISTIP); Sharif University of Technology;
4 Faculty member of Progress Department, Iran University of Science and Technology (IUST)
چکیده [English]

Considering the failure of local content policies (LCPs) in Iran and many developing countries, ‘Public procurement for innovation’ (PPI) as a trending demand-side innovation policy could provide a new theoretical basis for implementation of Technology Annex in the country. However, developing countries are of specificities compared with advanced economies, from which lack of technological capabilities of suppliers has a pivotal role in technological catch-up. The present paper suggests the new concept ‘public procurement for capability building’ (PPCB) based on the technology transfer projects of ten strategic groups of high-tech products based on the evidences of the case of Ten Strategic Equipment Groups in the oil industry of Iran, which is in fact an extension to PPI concept. The suggested concept puts building suppliers’ capabilities as the main goal of the policy.
The study showed various commonalities between these two policies, including needs for organisational changes in public procurers, risk management, utilising innovation (knowledge) intermediaries, and legal adjustment. However, two critical distinctions were conceptualised for PPCB, including 1) capability building as the main goal of the policy, and 2) establishment of a dual-track evaluation system which monitors and evaluates both the suppliers’ capabilities and the procured products.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Public Procurement for Capability Building (PPCB)
  • Public Procurement for Innovation (PPI)
  • Iranian Technology Annex
  • Technological Capabilities of Suppliers
  • Local Content Policies
Bell, M., 2007. Technological learning and the development of production and innovative capacities in the industry and infrastructure sectors of the Least Developed Countries: What roles for ODA. UNCTAD Division for Africa, Least Developed Countries Specialised Programme, Brighton, Science Policy research.
Bell, M. and Figueiredo, P.N., 2012. Building innovative capabilities in latecomer emerging market firms: some key issues. Innovative firms in emerging market countries, pp.24–109.
Buchinger, E., Schiefer, A., 2017. Monitoring & measurement of innovation procurement in Austria, Policy note, Austrian Institute of Technology (AIT), Vienna.
Cohen, W.M., Levinthal, D.A., 1989. Innovation and learning: the two faces of R & D. The Economic Journal, 99(397), pp.569–596.
Dumay, J., 2011. Intellectual capital and strategy development: an interventionist approach. Vine, 41(4), pp.449–465.
Dumay, J., 2009. Reflective discourse about intellectual capital: research and practice. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 10(4), pp.489-503.
Edler, J., 2016a. Local needs, global challenges: The meaning of demand-side policies for innovation and development. In Global Innovation Index, pp.97-102.
Edler, J., 2016b. The impact of policy measures to stimulate private demand for innovation. In Handbook of innovation policy impact, p.318.
Edler, J., 2010. Demand-oriented innovation policy. In The theory and practice of innovation policy: An international research handbook, Edward Elgar: Cheltenham, pp.177-208.
Edler, J., Cunningham, P. and Gök, A. eds., 2016. Handbook of innovation policy impact. Edward Elgar Publishing.
Edler, J. and Georghiou, L., 2007. Public procurement and innovation—Resurrecting the demand side. Research Policy, 36(7), pp.949-963.
Edler, J., Georghiou, L., Blind, K. and Uyarra, E., 2012. Evaluating the demand side: New challenges for evaluation. Research Evaluation, 21(1), pp.33-47.
Edler, J. and Yeow, J., 2016. Connecting demand and supply: The role of intermediation in public procurement of innovation. Research Policy, 45(2), pp.414-426.
Edquist, C., 2011. Design of innovation policy through diagnostic analysis: identification of systemic problems (or failures). Industrial and Corporate Change, 20(6), pp.1725-1753.
Edquist, C. and Hommen, L., 2000. Public technology procurement and innovation theory. In Public technology procurement and innovation (pp. 5-70). Springer, Boston, MA.
Edquist, C. and Hommen, L., 1999. Systems of innovation: theory and policy for the demand side. Technology in Society, 21(1), pp.63-79.
Edquist, C., Vonortas, N.S., Zabala-Iturriagagoitia, J.M. and Edler, J., 2015. Public procurement for innovation. Edward Elgar Publishing.
European Commission (EU Com), 2007. A lead market initiative for Europe.
Hagerstrand, T., 1952. The propagation of innovation waves.
Hausmann, R. and Rodrik, D., 2003. Economic development as self-discovery. Journal of Development Economics, 72(2), pp.603-633.
Héder, M., 2017. From NASA to EU: The evolution of the TRL scale in Public Sector Innovation. The Innovation Journal, 22(2), pp.1-23.
Helfat, C.E. and Peteraf, M.A., 2003. The dynamic resource-based view: Capability lifecycles. Strategic Management Journal, 24(10), pp.997-1010.
Izsak, K. and Edler, J., 2011. Trends and challenges in demand-side innovation policies in Europe. Thematic Report.
Jassbi, A., Maleki, A., Bonyadi, A. and Yazdi, N., 2017. Intermediation in public procurement of innovation for technology transfer purposes. Presented at the 14th Asialics conference & the 7th International Conference on Management of Technology and Innovation, Tehran.
Kiamehr, M., Hobday, M. and Kermanshah, A., 2013. Latecomer systems integration capability in complex capital goods: the case of Iran’s electricity generation systems. Industrial and Corporate Change, 23(3), pp.689-716.
Lee, K., 2013. Capability failure and industrial policy to move beyond the middle-income trap: from trade-based to technology-based specialization. In The industrial policy revolution, I (pp. 244-272). Palgrave Macmillan, London.
Lee, K. and Malerba, F., 2018. Economic catch-up by latecomers as an evolutionary process. In Modern evolutionary economics: An overview, pp.172-207.
Lember, V., Kattel, R. and Kalvet, T. eds., 2013. Public procurement, innovation and policy: International perspectives. Springer Science & Business Media.
Maleki, A. and Yazdi, N., 2018a. Public procurement for capability building (PPCB) for economic catch-up, The 17th International Schumpeter Society Conference (ISS 2018), Seoul.
Maleki, A. and Yazdi, N., 2018b. Incorporating experiential knowledge into academic science for a new meaning of citizen science (CS), presented at The Workshop of “Anthropocene and Citizen Science: Evidence Gained through the Opening-up of Academic Knowledge Production”, The Kerschensteiner Kolleg of the Deutsches Museum, Munich.
Malerba, F., Mani, S. and Adams, P. eds., 2017. The rise to market leadership: New leading firms from emerging countries. Edward Elgar Publishing.
Malerba, F., Nelson, R.R., Orsenigo, L. and Winter, S.G., 2016. Innovation and the evolution of industries: History-friendly models. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Mowery, D. and Rosenberg, N., 1979. The influence of market demand upon innovation: a critical review of some recent empirical studies. Research Policy, 8(2), pp.102-153.
Neij, L., 2001. Methods of evaluating market transformation programmes: experience in Sweden. Energy Policy, 29(1), 67–79.
Noori, J., Yazdi, N. and Mohsennia, S., 2017. How public procurement of innovation (PPI) in developed world could inform technology transfer in developing countries, Presented at the 3rd International Conference on Public Policy (ICPP3), Singapore.
Obwegeser, N. and Müller, S.D., 2018. Innovation and public procurement: Terminology, concepts, and applications. Technovation, Volume (74), pp.1-17.
OECD, 2017. Public Procurement for innovation: Good practices and strategies. OECD Public Governance Reviews, OECD Publishing, Paris.
Pollard, D., 2006. Innovation and technology transfer intermediaries: A systemic international study. In Innovation through collaboration (pp. 137-174). Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
Roberts, H., Westin, O. and Dumay, J.C., 2010. A critical reflective discourse of an interventionist research project. Qualitative Research in Accounting & Management, 7(1), pp.46-70.
Rodrik, D., 2008. One economics, many recipes: Globalization, institutions, and economic growth. Princeton University Press.
Rodrik, D., 2004. Industrial policy for the twenty-first century. KSG Working Paper No. RWP04-047.
Rogers, E.M., 1962. Diffusion of innovations. The Free Press, New York.
Rolfstam, M., 2009. Public procurement as an innovation policy tool: The role of institutions. Science and Public Policy, 36(5), pp.349–360.
Rush, H., Bessant, J. and Hobday, M., 2007. Assessing the technological capabilities of firms: developing a policy tool. R&D Management, 37(3), pp.221-236.
Teece, D.J., 2012. Dynamic capabilities: Routines versus entrepreneurial action. Journal of Management Studies, 49(8), pp.1395-1401.
Teece, D.J., Pisano, G. and Shuen, A., 1997. Dynamic capabilities and strategic management. Strategic Management Journal, 18(7), pp.509-533.
Trindade, P.C., Antunes, P. and Partidário, P., 2017. SPP toolbox: Supporting sustainable public procurement in the context of socio-technical transitions. Sustainability, 10(1), pp.1-26.
Tsipouri, L., Edler, J., Rolfstam, M. and Uyarra, E., 2010. Risk management in the procurement of innovation: Concepts and empirical evidence in the European Union. Paris.
Uyarra, E., 2016. The impact of public procurement of innovation, In Handbook of innovation policy impact. Edward Elgar Publishing, Cheltenham, pp. 355–587.
Uyarra, E., Edler, J., Garcia-Estevez, J., Georghiou, L. and Yeow, J., 2014. Barriers to innovation through public procurement: A supplier perspective. Technovation, 34(10), pp.631–645.
Uyarra, E., Moñux, D., Li, Y., Esteban, A., Rigby, J., Ospina, M.J. and Edler, J., 2016. Spurring innovation-led growth in Latin America and the Caribbean through public procurement, Discussion Paper No. IDB-DP-488, Inter-American Development Bank.
Van Seggelen, G.G., 2016. The role of innovation intermediaries in the public procurement for innovation process: The case of the Dutch satellite data service sector. Master of Science in Innovation Management and Innovation Sciences. Eindhoven University of Technology.
Viotti, E.B., 2002. National learning systems: A new approach on technological change in late industrializing economies and evidences from the cases of Brazil and South Korea. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 69(7), pp.653-680.
Von Hippel, E., 1986. Lead users: a source of novel product concepts. Management science, 32(7), pp.791–805.
Yeow, J., Rigby, J. and Li, Y., 2017. The effect of a government target for the procurement of innovation: the case of the UK’s small business research initiative. In Global Public Procurement Theories and Practices (pp. 113-135). Springer, Cham.
محسنی کیاسری، م.، محمدی، م.، جعفرنژاد، ا.، مختازاده، ن. و اسدی‌فرد ر.، 1396. دسته‌بندی ابزارهای سیاست نوآوری تقاضامحور با استفاده از رویکرد فراترکیب، مدیریت نوآوری، (2)6، ص. 109-138.
ملکی، ع. و یزدی، ن.، 1396. بازتعریف سیاست‌های خرید دولتی به‌منظور ارتقاء یادگیری و نوآوری، اولین کنفرانس حکمرانی و سیاست‌گذاری عمومی، تهران.
یزدی، ن.، 1394. فناورانه و نوآورانه کردن خریدهای دولتی، سیاست‌نامه علم و فناوری، (1)5، ص. 27-39.