Asian Journal of Innovation and Policy

Asian Society for Innovation and Policy (아시아기술혁신학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

A New Measurement to Understand Convergence Phenomenon

  • Kim, Keun-Hwan (Korea Institute of Science and Technology Information) ;
  • Moon, Yeong-Ho (Korea Institute of Science and Technology Information)
  • Received : 2013.03.21
  • Accepted : 2013.04.29
  • Published : 2013.05.01
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Many scholars have persevered in understanding the convergence process by developing a measurement that reflects the characteristics of the convergence phenomenon as a process. Recently a series of studies suggested a framework in terms of diversity and coherence. However, an index for coherence is required to reflect the vital features of the conceptual definition, and thus a new index for coherence is proposed in this paper. Technology Convergence Index combines diversity and coherence and indicates the degree of the convergence in information computer technology (ICT), biotechnology (BT) and nanotechnology (NT) sectors. The index can not only be used to track each technology field that consists of a major technology sector, but also to compare other leading countries. Based on a comparison study between the United States and South Korea, the degrees of technology convergence of Korea in ICT, BT, and NT sectors have ameliorated.

Keywords

References

  1. Acs, Z. and David B.A. (1989) Patents as a measure of innovative activity, Kyklos, 42(2), 171-180. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6435.1989.tb00186.x
  2. Archibugi, D. (1992) Patenting as an indicator of technological innovation: a review, Science and Public Policy, 19(6), 357-368.
  3. Appelgren, E. (2004) Convergence and divergence in media: different perspectives, 8th ICCC International Conference on Electronic Publishing Brasilia- DF, Brazil, June.
  4. Bassecoulard, E., Alain L. and Michel Z. (2007) Mapping nanosciences by citation flows: a preliminary analysis, Scientometrics, 70(3), 859-880. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-007-0315-1
  5. Benhamou, F. and Stephanie P. (2010) Application of the Stirling Model to Assess Diversity Using UIS cinema data, UNESCO Institute for Statistics, Retrieved on 15 March 2013 from http://www.uis.unesco.org/culture/Documents/Stirling%20model%20cinema.pdf.
  6. Coenen, C. (2008) Converging Technologies: the Status of the Debate and Political Activities, Office of Technology Assessment at the German Parliament (TAB), background paper, Retrieved on 12 January 2013 from http://www.tab-beimbundestag.de/en/publications/reports/hp016.html.
  7. Colecchia, A. and Paul S. (2002) ICT investment and economic growth in the 1990s: Is the United States a unique case? A comparative study of nine OECD countries, Review of Economic Dynamics, 5(2), 408-442. https://doi.org/10.1006/redy.2002.0170
  8. Curran, C.S. and Jens L. (2011), Patent indicators for monitoring convergence: examples from NFF and ICT, Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 78(2), 256-273. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2010.06.021
  9. Debackere, K., Marc L. and Reinhilde V. (1999) Can technology lead to a competitive advantage? A case study of Flanders using European patent data, Scientometrics, 44(3), 379 - 400. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02458486
  10. Doorn, M. (2006) Converging Technologies, Retrieved on 30 August 2012 from http://www.stt.nl/uploads/documents/70.pdf.
  11. Dosi, G. (1982) Technological paradigms and technological trajectories: a suggested interpretation of the determinants and directions of technical change, Research policy, 11, 147-162. https://doi.org/10.1016/0048-7333(82)90016-6
  12. Duysters, G. and John H. (1998) Technological convergence in the IT industry: the role of strategic technology alliances and technological competencies, International Journal of the Economics of Business, Taylor and Francis Journals, 5(3), 355-368. https://doi.org/10.1080/13571519884431
  13. Fai, F. and Nicholas von T. (2001) Industry-specific competencies and converging technological systems: evidence from patents, Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, 12, 141-170. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0954-349X(00)00035-7
  14. Huang, Z., Hsinchun C., Lijun Y. and Mihail C.R. (2005) Longitudinal nanotechnology development (1991-2002): national science foundation funding and its impact on patents, Journal of Nanoparticle Research, 7(4-5), 343-376. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11051-005-5468-3
  15. Karvonene, M. and Tuomo K. (2011) Patent analysis for analyzing technological convergence, Foresight, 13(5), 34-50.
  16. Kim, K.H., Shim, W., Moon, Y.H, Kim, K.H, Son, J.K. and Kwon O.J. (2012) The structure of bio-information-nano technology convergence from firms' perspective, Proceedings of PICMET 2012, 579-588.
  17. Lee, J.Y., Kim, D.H., Moon Y.H., Kwon, O.J. and Ahn, S.J. (2012) A comparison study on the technology convergence trends between the global and South Korea, Proceedings of 2012 Fall Conference of the Korean Institute of Industrial Engineers, 1191-1204.
  18. Lei, D. (2000) Industry evolution and competence development: the imperatives of technological convergence, International Journal of Technology Management, 19, 699-738. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJTM.2000.002848
  19. Leydesdorff, L. and Ismael R. (2011) Indicators of the interdisciplinarity of journals: diversity, centrality, and citations, Journal of Informetrics, 5(1), 87-100. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2010.09.002
  20. Lind, J. (2004a) The convergence hype cycle: usage in management practice during an impending market re-definition, ITS Biannual Conference, Berlin, Sep 5-7.
  21. Lind, Jonas (2004b) Convergence: history of term usage and lessons for firm strategists, Proceedings of 15th Biennial ITS Conference, Berlin.
  22. Malin, M.V. (1968) The science citation index: a new concept in indexing, Library Trends, 16, 376.
  23. Mansfield, E. (1986) Patents and innovation: an empirical study, Management Science, 32, 173-181. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.32.2.173
  24. Narin, F. (1976) Evaluative Bibliometrics: the Use of Publication and Citation Analysis in the Evaluation of Scientific Activity, Cherry Hill, N.J.: Computer Horizons, Inc.
  25. Nam, I.S., Kim, W.S., Lee, J.S. and Jeong, B.H. (2004) A study on trend analysis of patents application in 6T area, Journal of the Society of Korea Industrial and Systems Engineering, 27(4), 49- 58.
  26. Newman, M. and Michelle G. (2004) Finding and evaluating community structure in networks, Physical Review E 69(2):026113, Retrieved on 1 November, 2012 from http://arxiv.org/pdf/cond-mat/0308217.pdf. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevE.69.026113
  27. Nordmann, A. (2004) Converging Technologies: Shaping the Future of European Societies, Retrieved on 1 November 2012 from http://www.ntnu.no/2020/pdf/fi nal_report_en.pdf.
  28. OECD (2000) Identifying Technology Areas for Patents, Retrieved on 3 October 2012 from http://www.oecd.org/sti/innovationinsciencetechnologyandindustry/40807441.pdf.
  29. OECD (2007) Directorate for Science, Technology and Industry, Retrieved on 3 October 2012 from http://www.oecd.org/science/innovationinsciencetechnologyandindustry/38780655.pdf.
  30. Pennings, J. and Phanish P. (2001) Market convergence and firm strategy: new directions for theory and research, ECIS Conference, Future of Innovation Studies, Eindhoven: Netherlands.
  31. Rafols, I. and Martin, M. (2010) Diversity and network coherence as indicators of interdisciplinarity: case studies in bionanoscience, Scientometrics, 82(2), 263-287. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-009-0041-y
  32. Rafols, I., Alan L.P. and Loet L. (2010) Science overlay maps: a new tool for research policy and library management, Journal of the American Society for Information Science & Technology, 61(9), 1871-1887. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.21368
  33. Rafols, I., Leot L., Alice O., Paul N. and Andy S. (2012) How journal rankings can suppress interdisciplinary research: a comparison between innovation studies and business and management, Research Policy, 41(7), 1262-1282. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2012.03.015
  34. Roco, M.C. and William B. (2002) Converging technologies for improving human performance, Journal of Nanoparticle Research, 4(4), 281-295. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1021152023349
  35. Roco, M.C. (2004) Science and technology integration for increased human potential and societal outcomes, Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1013, 1-16. https://doi.org/10.1196/annals.1305.001
  36. Roco, M.C. (2005) International perspective on government nanotechnology funding in 2005, Journal of Nanoparticle Research, 6(6), 707-712.
  37. Rosenberg, N. (1963) Technological change in the machine tool industry, 1840 - 1910, Journal of Economic History, 23(4), 414-443. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022050700109155
  38. Samuelson, P. and Hal R.V. (2001) The New Economy and Information Technology Policy, Retrieved on 29 December 2012from http://people.ischool.berkeley.edu/-hal/Papers/ infopolicy.pdf.
  39. Sandler, R. and William D.K. (2006) The national nanotechnology initiative and the social good, The Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics, 34(4), 675-681. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1748-720X.2006.00086.x
  40. Shapira, P., Jan Y. and Alan L.P. (2010) The emergence of social science research on nanotechnology, Scientometrics, 85(2), 595-611. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-010-0204-x
  41. Soos, S. and George K. (2011) Towards a typology of research performance diversity: the case of top Hungarian players, Scientometrics, 87, 357-371. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-011-0351-8
  42. Stieglitz, N. (2003), Digital dynamics and types ofsac industry convergence: the evolution of the handheld computers market in the 1990s and beyond, in Christensen, F.J. and Maskell, P. (eds.) The Industrial Dynamics of the New Digital Economy, London: Edward Elgar.
  43. Stirling, A. (1998) On the economics and analysis of diversity, SPRU Electronic Working Paper Number 28. University of Sussex.
  44. Stirling, A. (2007) A general framework for analyzing diversity in science, technology and society, Journal of the Royal Society Interface, 15(4), 707-719.
  45. Ter, W.A. and Ron A.B. (2009) Applying social network analysis in economic geography: framing some key analytic issues, Annals of Regional Science, 43(3), 739-756. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00168-008-0258-3
  46. Uldrich, J. (2003) The Next Big Thing is Really Small: How Nanotechnology Will Change the Future of Your Business, New York: Crown Business.
  47. Van Lieshout, M. Christien E., Andreas H., Dirk H., Ed N. and Ramon C. (2008) Converging Applications Enabling the Information Society, Retrieved on 15 February 2013 from http://www.vditz.de/fileadmin/media/publications/pdf/band_69_screen.pdf.
  48. Ziman, J. (1968) Public Knowledge: An Essay Concerning the Social Dimension of Science, Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
  49. Verbeek, A., Koenraad D., Marc L. and Edwin Z. (2002) Measuring progress and evolution in science and technology - I: the multiple uses of bibliometric indicators, International Journal of Management Reviews, 4(2), 179-211. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-2370.00083