Banji Oyelaran-Oyeyinka

Learning through inter-organisational interactions: public research institutes in the Nigerian biopharmaceutical system of innovation

AbstractUsing field-level data collected in Nigeria in 2003–04, this paper examines the possibilities for learning through inter-organisational interactions in biotechnological systems of innovation, using public research institutes as an example. The paper considers interactions to be all forms of formal andninformal linkages and contacts between various agents in the system of innovation, such as firms, universities, traditional medicine practitioners, hospitals and other external agencies. Using results obtained in the survey and the experiences of other countries that have succeeded in developing biotechnological capacity, critical interactions and scope for policy interventions are discussed.En utilisant des données de terrain collectées au Nigeria en 2003-2004, cet article examine les possibilités dapprentissage à travers les interactions norganisationnelles dans les systèmes dinnovations biotechnologiques, en sappuyant sur lexemple dinstituts de recherche publics. Il considère quenles interactions correspondent à tous les liens formels et informels ainsi que les contacts entre les divers agents du système dinnovation, tels que les entreprises, les universités, les praticiens de la médecine traditionnelle, les hôpitaux et autres agences externes. En sappuyant sur les résultats obtenus dans cette enquête et les expériences de pays qui ont remporté des succès en matière daccroissement de capacités biotechnologiques, desninteractions décisives et des possibilités dinterventions sont discutées.

Special issue : Innovation research and economic development in Africa : introduction

The volume of the literature on innovation policy studies in Africa is in comparative regional perspective relatively low although the region embraced the idea of Science and Technology as a force for development over three decades ago. Due in large part to the pre-existing weak scientific infrastructure in most African countries and in particular the poorer countries of Africa, the regions contribution has been limited in innovation studies so far (Lorentzen and Mohamed 2009). However, as with other regions - at the academic, policy and political levels - African countries are increasingly adopting the systems approach to innovation. This is reflected in the increasing attention in the scholarly debate over economic development in Africa (Muchie et al. 2003, Hounkonnou et al. 2012, Kingiri 2011, Oyelaran-Oyeyinka 2006, Oyelaran and McCormick 2007). Over the last ten years, the systems approach has also received increasing attention from national policy makers in Africa as well as from donors and international organisations such as the OECD, the World Bank, UNCTAD and UNIDO. Many of these organisations fund activities aimed at supporting the promotion of innovation systems while there has also been scholarly collaboration in articulating continental STI programmes.

The state and innovation policy in Africa

This paper examines the role of African states in the process of industrialisation. It sets out to examine the nexus of state capacity, innovation policy and the dynamics of development. The methodology is largely qualitative through which a historical narrative of governmental investments in large industries most of which failed is related. While we attribute much of industrial failure to a ‘weak’ state, we recognise the difficulty involved in of the process of technological learning to industrialise in an environment of underdevelopment. The paper recognises state capacity building as a complex multi-level undertaking that must put collaborative learning as a central plank of development. The country encountered a process of industrialisation that is complex because states need to provide coordination among very many disparate actors using a bureaucratic outfit that was short on the fundamentals of science technology and industrialisation processes. We recommend a regime of sustained state capacity building whereby the Nigerian state and by extension other countries, continuously learn from its past shortcomings while learning to coordinate all the critical actors to take advantage of the prospective growth surge across African countries.

Determinants of productivity and inter-firm collaboration in Nigerian Clusters

Interactive learning is the touchstone of innovation while the strength of actors constitutes the capacity of each node of the system; however, very few studies exist on a quantitative measure of these interactions. This paper provides evidence on the microeconomic processes of interactive learning showing the key roles of human capital in current productivity of firms, their broad collaboration mechanisms and actions of state agencies in firm performance. Horizontal relationship between suppliers, traders and subcontractors is regularly formed in clusters. Education of owners, skill of workers and past productivity records are the key determinants of firm-level productivity.

The state and innovation policy in late development: evidence from South Africa and Malaysia

This paper analyses the main institutional mechanisms that foster the emergence and performance of firms in knowledge-intensive sectors in developing countries. We use the empirical data collected in 2005 and 2006 in the South African computer hardware and software sectors and the Malaysian computer hardware sector to illustrate the linkages between interactive learning and technological capabilities and how state support plays a critical role in enabling this in the case of knowledge-intensive industries. However, as the analysis in this paper shows, state support is not just implementing a set of policies that succeed elsewhere; it is the ability of the state to set up institutions that reflect a harmony between knowledge and physical infrastructure and the formal and informal institutional compensations that are important to them, and structure the idiosyncratic exchange processes of developing economies.

Innovation Systems in Latecomer Development Sectoral Evidence from South Africa and Malaysia

This chapter analyzes the determinants of innovation and firm performance resulting from collaborative learning in the South African and Malaysian computer sectors, which consists of firms specializing in software and hardware. These analyses focus on two main propositions. The first is to examine the well-established notion that the microeconomic processes of interactive learning lead to innovation even in the context of a latecomer economy. The second proposition is that firms in a latecomer economy require state support to produce and innovate because markets do not function well. In such contexts, policy choices made are instrumental in explaining the success/failure of sectors. This chapter uses the empirical data collected in South Africa and Malaysia to illustrate the interlinkages between state policy, technological capabilities (TCs), and interactive learning. Sections 2 and 3 present the results of the innovation surveys in the South African and Malaysian computer sectors, respectively. The empirical analysis focuses specifically on factors that impact upon new product development in the sector, and a discussion of the actors and triggers for innovation. This chapter then discusses the comparative insights on learning and collaborative behavior as well as state support in the concluding section.

Comparative Analysis of Innovation Capacity in Latecomer Countries

This chapter re-examines the key findings and perspectives arising out of the country case studies analysed within the sectoral systems of innovation framework that we coded in terms of innovation capacity in latecomer economies. The four country experiences for biotechnology capacity sketch out the complex landscape of both hope and distress for food security and economic development among latecomers. There are several strands of comparison that scholars of innovation and development could decidedly take up ranging from analysing general hindrances to innovation capacity across latecomers, tracing successes and extrapolating their causes, and exploring potential for duplication across the country and elsewhere within other latecomers.

Agricultural Biotechnology Innovation Capacity and Economic Development

This book presents the findings of a multi-year study of the agricultural system of biotechnology across six countries in Asia and Africa. The basic proposition of the study that informs the book was applied across all countries. The key questions were framed to expose what those countries in the catch-up phase require to build and sustain a competitive science and technological infrastructure to deal with the food crisis and to solve the underlying challenge of poverty. The underlying hypothesis of this line of inquiry is that the resolution of the problems of endemic poverty will require — among other development efforts — that countries make long-term sustainable investments not only in science and technological infrastructure but also in developing the right kinds of institution and policy to exploit modern biotechnology. To achieve this, latecomer countries will have to invest in resources for building a complex multidimensional and dynamic range of knowledge, skills, actors, institutions, and policies within specific political policy structures defined as ‘innovation capacity’.

Sectoral Systems for Agricultural Biotechnology

The shift from the previous conception of knowledge production and use as something originating exclusively out of research and development (RD terms that are fully described in subsequent sections.

Vietnam Biotechnology: Building Local Capacity

The development of modern biotechnology in Vietnam can be dated to 1994, when according to a government Resolution 18/CP,1 biotechnology was targeted as one of the country’s sectoral priorities in terms of scientific research for the period of 1995–2010. According to this resolution, biotechnology is considered an essential prerequisite to achieve national goals for food, feed and fiber production, healthcare, and environmental protection.