Indigenous Innovation and Globalization: The Challenge for China's Standardization Strategy
Indigenous Innovation and Globalization: The Challenge for China's Standardization Strategy
复制标题
DOI：
--
复制
发表时间：
2011-06
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
D. Ernst
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
D. Ernst
该研究考察了中国不断发展的创新和标准体系的定义特征，并探讨了对中国和全球经济的可能影响。中国认为标准化是提高其创新能力的重要工具，但人们对中国创新体系的这一关键组成部分知之甚少。分析的核心是中国标准化战略面临的一个根本性挑战：中国如何协调其加强自主创新的主要目标与其在国际贸易中的主导作用以及深度融入全球企业生产和创新网络？主要论点：1.最近的标准化政策举措和三个ICT标准项目（TD-SCDMA、闪联和AVS）的最新进展表明，中国政府和行业正在从错误中吸取教训，并正在采取更灵活和务实的方法。2.中国的标准化战略需要从更广泛的发展战略背景下来看待，以赶上美国、欧盟和日本的生产率和收入水平。为了实现这一目标，中国政府寻求从单纯的标准接受者转变为国际标准的共同制定者，甚至在某些领域成为国际标准的主要制定者。3.在“双轨”方法中，中国正在国际体系内开展工作，其长期目标是创造对全球标准至关重要的具有专利价值的技术。通过将中国技术纳入全球标准，中国寻求加强其讨价还价的能力，并减少其面临的高额特许权使用费。然而，与此同时，中国试图利用其日益增长的地缘政治影响力来推动新的国际标准化规则，从而改变国际标准体系本身。4.全球化和日益复杂的情况使中国有必要将以政府为中心的标准化战略与市场主导的标准化要素结合起来。联合收割机。中国需要增加政策工具和制度的灵活性，以科普技术、市场和商业战略意外变化的破坏性影响。5.以目前的形式，中国的信息安全标准和认证政策可能会对中国标准化体系的升级产生意想不到的破坏性副作用。监管范围广泛，中国安全和贸易政策之间缺乏协调，可能会造成严重的贸易争端。6.一旦战略重点转移到提升安永的创新战略，中国在“追赶”期间取得成功的标准化政策就需要调整。在全球化和日益复杂的情况下，任何保持现状的企图都有可能限制学习和创新，而这是持续产业升级的两个基本先决条件。7.然而，变革应受到需要在积累的能力基础上再接再厉的限制。“大爆炸式”变革抛弃了后者，往往涉及高得令人望而却步的机会成本。它还可能破坏社会共识--这是经济发展的最基本前提。政策影响：1.国际社会应该同意，以技术为中心的竞争不一定是零和游戏。然而，当这一进程涉及处于不同发展阶段的国家时，就需要有支持性的公共政策，将以技术为中心的竞争转变为正和博弈。2.国际社会应该承认，像中国这样的后来者面临的挑战是巨大的;因此，人们不应该总是像对待发达工业经济体那样，用同样的标准来评判后来者的表现。中国需要找到自己的制度和法律的途径来发展一个既能促进自主创新又能科普全球化和日益复杂的挑战的标准体系。3.国际社会将希望监督中国决策者如何通过试错法寻找方法，将加强中国企业和行业创新能力的主要目标与中国在国际贸易中的主导作用及其深度融入全球企业生产和创新网络相协调。4.中国应努力减少其现行信息安全标准和认证政策可能引发的贸易冲突。建立信任的一项重要措施是改善数据的获取和收集，以便更好地评估如何在不破坏中国融入全球经济的情况下实施信息安全标准和认证。5.一个具体的建议是建立一个美国-中国标准与创新研究院将为两国的工程师、高管和技术人员以及政府官员和学者提供培训。该研究所还可以提供技术咨询服务，使中国和美国公司能够解决两国不同标准体系所产生的问题。
The study examines defining characteristics of the evolving Chinese innovation and standards system and explores possible impacts for China as well as the global economy. China considers standardization to be an essential tool for improving its innovative capacity, yet very little is known about this critical building block of China’s innovation system. At the center of the analysis is a fundamental challenge for China’s standardization strategy: How can China reconcile its primary objective of strengthening indigenous innovation with its leading role in international trade and deep integration into global corporate networks of production and innovation? Main Argument: 1. Recent policy initiatives on standardization and recent developments in three ICT standards projects (TD-SCDMA, IGRS, and AVS) indicate that both the Chinese government and industry are learning from mistakes and are moving to a more flexible and pragmatic approach. 2. China’s standardization strategy needs to be viewed in the broader context of its development strategy to catch up with the productivity and income levels of the United States, the European Union, and Japan. To achieve this goal, China’s government seeks to move from being a mere standard-taker to become a co-shaper, and in some areas a lead shaper, of international standards. 3. In a “two-track” approach, China is working within the international system with the long-term goal of creating patent-worthy technology essential to global standards. By including Chinese technology into global standards, China seeks to strengthen its bargaining power and to reduce its exposure to high royalty fees. At the same time, however, China seeks to use its increasing geopolitical influence to promote new sets of rules for international standardization, and hence to transform the international standards system itself. 4. Globalization and rising complexity make it necessary for China to combine a government-centered standardization strategy with elements of market-led standardization. China needs to increase the flexibility of policy tools and institutions in order to cope with sometimes disruptive effects of unexpected changes in technology, markets, and business strategies. 5. In its current form, China’s policy on information security standards and certification could create unintended disruptive side effects for the upgrading of China’s standardization system. An extensive scope of regulation and a lack of coordination between Chinese security and trade policies could create potentially serious trade disputes. 6. China’s policies for standardization that were successful during “catching up” need to be adjusted once the strategic focus shifts to an upgrading Ernst through-innovation strategy. Any attempt to preserve the status quo ante in the context of globalization and increasing complexity is likely to constrict learning and innovation, the two fundamental prerequisites for sustained industrial upgrading. 7. Change, however, should be constrained by the need to build on accumulated capabilities. “Big Bang” change, which discards the latter, often involves prohibitively high opportunity costs. It may also destroy social consensus — the most fundamental prerequisite for economic development. Policy Implications: 1. The international community should agree that technology-centered competition does not need to be a zero-sum game. However, when this process involves countries at different stages of development, supportive publicpolicies are required to transform technology-centered competition into a positive-sum game. 2. The international community should acknowledge that the challenges faced by latecomers like China are significant; thus, one should not always apply the same criteria to judging the performance of latecomers as one would with the advanced industrial economies. China will need to find its own institutional and legal approaches to develop a standards system that can both foster indigenous innovation and cope with the challenge of globalization and rising complexity. 3. The international community will want to monitor how Chinese policymakers are searching through trial-and-error for ways to reconcile the primary objective of strengthening the innovative capacity of Chinese firms and industries with the country’s leading role in international trade and its deep integration into global corporate networks of production and innovation. 4. China should seek to reduce trade conflicts that could arise from its current policy on information security standards and certification. An important trust-building measure would be to improve access to and collection of data that allow for a better assessment of how information security standards and certification can be implemented without disrupting China’s integration into the global economy. 5. One concrete suggestion is to create a U.S.-China Institute of Standards and Innovation to train engineers, executives, and technicians, as well as government officials and academics from both countries. Such an institute could also provide technical consulting services to enable both Chinese and U.S. companies to solve problems that arise from dealing with the differing standards systems in the two countries.