Teuken Bidikay - Revista Latinoamericana de Investigación en Organizaciones, Ambiente y Sociedad

Vol. 11 Núm. 17 (2020): X Aniversario
Artículos

Transferencia de tecnología 4.0 en ecosistemas latinoamericanos de innovación

PDF (English)
  • Lorena del Carmen Álvarez-Castañón
Lorena del Carmen Álvarez-Castañón
Universidad de Guanajuato
Biografía
DOI: https://doi.org/10.33571/teuken.v11n17a10

Publicado 2020-11-22

Palabras clave

  • transferencia de tecnología,
  • ecosistema de innovación,
  • tecnología 4.0,
  • reestructuración productiva de sectores locales

Cómo citar

Álvarez-Castañón, L. del C. (2020). Transferencia de tecnología 4.0 en ecosistemas latinoamericanos de innovación. Teuken Bidikay - Revista Latinoamericana De Investigación En Organizaciones, Ambiente Y Sociedad, 11(17), 181–196. https://doi.org/10.33571/teuken.v11n17a10

Derechos de autor 2020 Lorena del Carmen Álvarez-Castañón

Creative Commons License

Esta obra está bajo una licencia internacional Creative Commons Atribución-NoComercial-CompartirIgual 4.0.

Crossref
Scopus
Google Scholar
Europe PMC

Resumen

Este artículo analiza los procesos de transferencia de tecnología 4.0, las condiciones implicadas en ésta y las principales tendencias tecnológicas transferibles en América Latina. El enfoque de complejidad en el ecosistema permite explicar cómo los actores o subsistemas se (re)adaptan o (re)aprenden con base en su interacción sin ser gestionados por alguna entidad o componente específico. El proceso metodológico se basa en un análisis cienciométrico, uno temático con base en los proyectos financiados con recurso público de 2002 a 2018, y otro del ecosistema de innovación en la región emergente del Bajío mejicano. Los hallazgos muestran la relevancia de los organismos intermedios en el liderazgo social para la transferencia tecnológica. Big data, IoT y cloud computing son las principales tecnologías 4.0 potencialmente transferibles para responder a condiciones territoriales heterogéneas.
PDF (English)

Citas

  1. Álvarez, L. & Palacios, R. (2018). Towards a strategic reorganization of the innovation ecosystem in the Latin American university. Conference paper 17th International Schumpeter Society Conference on Innovation, Catch-up, and sustainable development. Seoul National University.
  2. Álvarez, L.; Estrada, S. & Palacios, R. (2018). El sistema de innovación ante el reto del desarrollo en la región del Bajío mejicano (59-84). En: Álvarez, L. y De la Rosa, M. Veredas del desarrollo regional sostenible. Ciudad de Méjico: Plaza y Valdés.
  3. Ankrah, S. & Al-Tabbaa, O. (2015). Universities–industry collaboration: A systematic review, Scandinavian Journal of Management, 31 (3), 387-408. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scaman.2015.02.003
  4. Arenal, A.; Armuña, C.; Feijoo, C.; Ramos, S.; XU, Z. & Moreno, A. (2020). Innovation ecosystems theory revisited: The case of artificial intelligence in China. Telecommunications Policy, 44 (6). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.telpol.2020.101960
  5. Beier, G.; Ullrich, A.; Niehoff, S.; Reißig, M. & Habich, M. (2020). Industry 4.0: How it is defined from a sociotechnical perspective and how much sustainability it includes – – A literature review. Journal of Cleaner Production, 259, 1-13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.120856
  6. Casas, R. (2020). Políticas públicas de ciencia y tecnología en América Latina. Ante la encrucijada de los cambios políticos. Teuken Bidikay, 11 (16), 21-28. https://doi.org/10.33571/teuken.v11n16a1
  7. Chang, Y.; Yang, P. & Chen, M. (2009). The determinants of academic research commercial performance: Towards an organizational ambidexterity perspective. Research Policy, 38 (6), 936-946. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2009.03.005
  8. Chesbrough, H. (2017). The Future of Open Innovation. Research-Technology Management, 60 (1). 35-38. https://doi.org/10.1080/08956308.2017.1255054
  9. Clifford, G. (2003). Interpretación de las culturas. Gedisa Edit. 387 pp.
  10. Coscieme, L.; Silva, H.; Fernández-Llamazares, A.; Palomo, I.; Mwampamba. T.H.; Selomane, O… & Valle, M. (2020). Multiple conceptualizations of nature are key to inclusivity and legitimacy in global environmental governance. Environmental Science & Policy, 104, 36-42. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2019.10.018
  11. Etzkowitz, H. (2003). Research groups as ‘quasi-firms’: the invention of the entrepreneurial university. Research Policy, 32, 109–121.
  12. Etzkowitz, H. (2018). Innovation Governance: From the “Endless Frontier” to the Triple Helix (291-311). In: Meusburger et al. Geographies of the University. Knowledge and Space. Springer.
  13. Fayomi, O.; Akande, I.; Esse, U. & Fayomi, G. (2019). Winning research through ideal research laboratory. Procedia Manufacturing, 35, 1228-1233. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.promfg.2019.06.080
  14. Fukuda, K. (2020). Science, technology and innovation ecosystem transformation toward society 5.0. International Journal of Production Economics, 220. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2019.07.033
  15. Giraldo, M. E. (2019). Políticas Regionales de Ciencia y Tecnología. Capacidades interactivas, redes y desarrollo territorial en dos parques tecnocientíficos de Méjico y Colombia. Centro de Investigaciones sobre América Latina y el Caribe (CIALC), UNAM. 420 pp.
  16. González, J. & Álvarez, L. (2019). Open innovation joined to knowledge management in Latin American public universities. Comparative case. Espacios, 40 (15), 17-28. http://www.revistaespacios.com/a19v40n15/a19v40n15p17.pdf
  17. Hasanefendic, S.; Heitor, M. & Horta, H. (2016). Training students for new jobs: The role of technical and vocational higher education and implications for science policy in Portugal. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 113 (Part B), 328-340. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2015.12.005
  18. Hermann, M., Pentek, T. & Otto, B. (2016). Design principles for industrie 4.0 scenarios. Conference paper Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences. Hawaii: IEEE.
  19. Hou, B., Hong, J.; Wang, H. & Zhou, C. (2018). Academia-industry collaboration, government funding and innovation efficiency in Chinese industrial enterprises. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 31 (6, 692-706 https://doi.org/10.1080/09537325.2018.1543868
  20. IBD & WEF (2019). Supply Chain 4.0, Global Practices and Lessons Learned for Latin America and the Caribbean. https://www.weforum.org/whitepapers/supply-chain-4-0-global-practices-and-lessons-learned-for-latin-america-and-the-caribbean-c4ffe6b1-b2f0-44f1-8b1d-c740cc11ca6f
  21. Ivanov, D. (2020). Predicting the impacts of epidemic outbreaks on global supply chains: A simulation-based analysis on the coronavirus outbreak (COVID-19/SARS-CoV-2) case. Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, 136. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tre.2020.101922
  22. Janse, N.; Telukdarie, A. & Dhamija, P. (2019). Society 4.0 applied in Africa: Advancing the social impact of technology. Technology in Society, 59. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techsoc.2019.04.001
  23. Jacobides, M. G. Cennamo, C. & Gawer, A. (2018). Towards a theory of ecosystems. Strategic Management Journal, 39 (8). 2255–2276. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.2904
  24. Järvi, K.; Almpanopoulou, A. & Ritala, P. (2018). Organization of knowledge ecosystems: Prefigurative and partial forms. Research Policy, 47 (8), 1523-1537. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2018.05.007
  25. Jenson, I.; Leith, P.; Doyle, R.; West, J. & Miles, M. (2016). Testing innovation systems theory using Qualitative Comparative Analysis. Journal of Business Research, 69 (4), 1283-1287. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2015.10.093
  26. Kim, Y.; Rheeb, M. & Kotha, R. (2019). Many hands: the effect of the prior inventor-intermediaries relationship on academic license. Research Policy, 48 (3), 813-819. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2018.11.007
  27. Leahey, E. & Barringer, S. (2020). Universities’ commitment to interdisciplinary research: To what end? Research Policy, 49 (2). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2019.103910
  28. Méjico. CONACYT (2018a). Programa de Estímulos a la innovación. https://www.conacyt.gob.mx/index.php/el-conacyt/convocatorias-y-resultados-conacyt/convocatorias-programa-de-estimulos-a-la-innovacion
  29. Méjico. CONACYT (2018b). Fondos Mixtos constituidos. https://www.conacyt.gob.mx/index.php/fondos-y-apoyos/fondos-mixtos
  30. Méjico. CONACYT (2018c). Fondo de Innovación tecnológica SE-CONACYT. https://www.conacyt.gob.mx/index.php/el-conacyt/convocatorias-y-resultados-conacyt/convocatorias-fondos-sectoriales-constituidos/convocatoria-se-conacyt-innovacion-tecnologica
  31. Méjico. GPI (2019). Guanajuato Puerto Interior: Smart port 4.0. http://puertointerior.com.mx
  32. Méjico. Novaera (2019). Ecosistema de innovación y emprendimiento del estado de Guanajuato. https://novaera.com.mx
  33. Milesi, D.; Verre, V. & Petelski, N. (2017). Science-industry R&D cooperation effects on firm’s appropriation strategy: The case of Argentine biopharma. European Journal of Innovation Management, 20 (3), 372-391. https://doi.org/10.24275/etypuam/ne/472017/verre
  34. OECD (2019). Shaping the Digital Transformation in Latin America: Strengthening Productivity, Improving Lives. OECD Publishing. 102 pp.
  35. Pérez, M. (2015). Ambientes innovadores en Méjico. Revista de Geografía Norte Grande, 62, 203-221. http://dx.doi.org/10.4067/S0718-34022015000300012
  36. Perkmann, M.; Tartari, V.; Mckelvey, M.; Autio, E.; Brostom, A.; D´Este, P... & Sobrero, M. (2013). Academic engagement and commercialisation: A review of the literature on university–industry relations. Research Policy, 42 (2), 423-442. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2012.09.007
  37. Phillips, M. & Ritala, P. (2019). A complex adaptive systems agenda for ecosystem research methodology. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 148, 1-13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2019.119739
  38. Russell, M. & Smorodinskaya, N. (2018). Leveraging complexity for ecosystemic innovation. Technological Forecasting & Social Change, 136, 114–131. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2017.11.024
  39. Schwab, K. (2017). The fourth industrial revolution. World Economic Forum.
  40. Shi, X.; Wu, Y. & Fu, D. (2019). Does University-Industry collaboration improve innovation efficiency? Evidence from Chinese Firms. Economic Modelling, 86, 39-53.
  41. Show, R.; Kim, Y. & Hua, J. (2020). Governance, technology and citizen behavior in pandemic: Lessons from COVID-19 in East Asia. Progress in Disaster Science, 6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pdisas.2020.100090
  42. Soares, T.J. Torkomian, A.L.V. & Seido, M. (2020). University regulations, regional development and technology transfer: The case of Brazil. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 158. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2020.120129
  43. Thuemmler, C. & Bai, C. (2017). Health 4.0: How virtualization and big data are revolutionizing healthcare. Springer. 254 pp.
  44. Villani, E.; Rasmussen, E. & Grimaldi, R. (2017). How intermediary organisations facilitate university–industry technology transfer: A proximity approach. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 114, 86-102. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2016.06.004
  45. WEF (2018). Latin America at a Turning Point: Shaping the New Narrative. World Economic Forum. http://www3.weforum.org/docs/LA18_Report.pdf
  46. WEF (2020). 2030: from technology optimism to technology realism. Insight Report. World Economic Forum. https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2020/01/decade-of-action-from-technology-optimism-to-technology-realism/
  47. Yao, C.; Huan, C. & Su, J. (2020). A bibliometrics-based research framework for exploring policy evolution: A case study of China's information technology policies. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 157. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2020.120116
  48. Yin, R. (2003). Case study research. Design and methods. 3a. ed. Thousand Oaks. 182 pp.