Comparative Analysis for Science, Technology and Innovation Policy; Lessons Learned from Some Selected Countries (Brazil, India, China, South Korea and South Africa) for Other LdCs Like Iran.

Reza Salami, Javad Soltanzadeh


Having recognized the importance of designing Science, Technology and Innovation policies (STIP), many Less Developed Countries (LDCs) such as Iran have nowadays attempt to reshape their STI policies. The policy makers of LDCs like Iran can adopt and design suitable strategies learning from the successful experiences of prosperous nations. This paper performs a comparative analysis of STI policies of some successful countries in managing their technological change. This is mostly due to the fact that the other LDCs can draw valuable lessons from these success stories which in turn can also contribute to success in their own short and long term development. Firstly, the empirical experiences of some successful nations namely (Brazil, India, China, South Africa and South Korea) will be studied. The empirical experience in STI policymaking will be surveyed. The most critical success factors contributed mostly to their management of STI policies will also be compared. Finally, a general framework of STI policymaking drawing from the experiences of these countries will be proposed for other LDCs like Iran.


Iran; science; technology and innovation policy; ldcs; comparative analysis

Full Text:

PDF [en]


AMMAN, E., & Baer, W. (2002). The Development of Brazil’sTechnology Capabilities in the post war period. Latin American Business Review , 3 (1), 1-29.

BARNES, J., Bessant, J., Dunne, N., & Mor, M. (2001). Developing manufacturing competitiveness within South African industry: the role of middle management. Technovation , 21 (5), 293-309.

BARTzOKAS, A. (2008). Monitoring and analysis of poli- cies and public financing instruments conducive to higher levels of R&D investments The “POLICY MIX” Project Country Review Korea. Maastricht, The Netherlands: United Nations University.

BRANSCOMB, L. (1993). U.S. SCIENCE AND TECH- NOLOGY POLICY: ISSUES FOR THE 1990s. Cambridge: Harvard University.

CAMPOS, N. (2005). Building a Science and Technology Sector in Brazil - a Historical Approach. Sao Paulo: Spanish chamber of Commerce in Brazil.

CHAKRABORTY, C., & Nunnenkamp, P. (2008). Economic Reforms, FDI, and Economic Growth in India: A Sector Level Analysis. World development , 36 (7), 1192-1212.

CHOW, G. (2002). China’s Economic Transformation. Oxford : Blackwell Publishing, 2002.

CHRISTIE, P. (2006). Changing regimes: Governmentality and education policy in post-apartheid South Africa. International Journal of Educational Development , 26 (4), 373–381.

CHUNG, S. (2003). Innovation in Korea. In L. V. Shavinina, The International Handbook on Innovation (pp. 890-903). Oxford: Pergamon.

DARYL, E. C., & Pearson Jr, W. (2002). Report Policy for science, people for science. Technology in Society , 145–154.

DAYASINDHU, N., & Chandrashekar, S. (2005). Indian remote sensing program: A national system of innovation. Technological Forecasting and Social Change , 72 (3), 287-299.

ETzKOWITz, Henry., & Brisolla, Sandra N. (1999), Failure and success: the fate of industrial policy in Latin America and South East Asia, Research Ploicy, 28(4): 337–350

ETzKOWITz, H., Henry, J. M., & Almeida, M. (2005). Towards “meta-innovation” in Brazil: The evolution of the incubator and the emergence of a triple helix. Research Policy , 411– 424.

FAGERBERG, J., & Srholec, M. (2008). National innovation systems, capabilities and economic development. 37 (9).

FAGERBERG, J., Srholec, M., & Knell, M. (2007). The Competitiveness of Nations: Why Some Countries Pros- per While Others Fall Behind. World Dvelopment , 35 (10), 1595–1620.

FAN, P., & Watanabe, C. (2006). Promoting industrial de- velopment through technology policy: Lessons from Japan and China. Technology in Society , 28 (3), 303-320.

GA´SPA´R, T., Gervai, P., & Trautmann, L. (2003). The end of neoliberal history—the future of economics. Futures , 589– 608.

GORE, C. (2000). The Rise and Fall of the Washington Consensus as a Paradigm for Developing Countries. World Development , 28 (5), 789-804.

GROSSE, R. (2005). International Business Strategies in Brazil. In S. Jane, Emerging Economic and the transformation of international business. Edward Elgar.

HAK EUN, J., Lee, K., & Wu, G. (2006). Explaining the “University-run enterprises” in China: A theoretical framework for university–industry relationship in developing countries and its application to China. Research Policy , 1329–1346.

HIPKIN, I., & Bennett, D. (2003). Managerial perceptions of factors influencing technology management in South Africa. Technovation , 23 (9), 719-735.

KIM, L., & Dahlman, C. J. (1992). Technology policy for industrialization: An integrative framework and Korea’s experience. Research Policy , 21 (5), 437-452.

KOSTOFF, R. N., Bhattacharya, S., & Pecht, M. (2007). Assessment of China’s and India’s science and technology literature — introduction, background and approach. Technological Forecasting & Social Change , 74 (4), 1519–1538.

KRISHNAN, R. T. (2003). The Evolution of a Developing Country Innovation System During Economic Liberalization:The Case of India. The First Globelics Con- ference.

LALL, S. (2003). Reinventing industrial strategy: The role of government policy in building industrial competitiveness. QEH Working Paper Series .

LALL, S. (1995). The Creation Of Comaprative Advan- tage: Role of Industrial Policy. In I. Haque, Trade, Technology and industrial Competitivness (pp. 103-134). New York: World Bank.

LALL, S., & Teubal, M. (1998). “Market-stimulating” technology policies in developing countries: A framework with examples from East Asia. World Development , 26 (8), 1369-1385.

LEE,J.-d.,&Park,C.(2006).Researchanddevelopmentlinka- ges in a national innovation system: Factors affecting success and failure in Korea. Technovation , 26 (9), 1045-1054.

LIANG, Q., & Teng, J.-z. (2006). Financial development and economic growth: Evidence from China. China Economic Review , 17 (4), 395-411.

LUNDVALL, B.-Å., & Borrás, S. (2004). Science, Technology and Innovation Policy. In D. C. J. Fagerberg, The Oxford Hand Book Of Innovation (pp. 599-631). London: Oxford Press.

MANI, S. (2002). Government, Innovation and Technology Policy: An Analysis of the South African experience since 1994. New Industrial Realities and Firm Behaviour in Africa. Oxford.

METCALFE, J. (2005). science, technology and innovation policy. In G. Wignaraja, Competitiveness strategy in developing countries (pp. 95-130). New York: Routledge pub.LTD.

MICHELSON, E. S. (2008). Globalization at the nano frontier: The future of nanotechnology policy in the United States, China, and India. Technology in Societ , 30 (3-4), 405-410.

MOHAN, R., & Aggarwal, V. (1990). Commands and controls: Planning for indian industrialnext term develop- ment, 1951–1990. Comparative Economics , 681-712 .

MUCHIE, M. (2004). Resisting the deficit model of development in Africa: Re-thinking through the making of an African national innovation system. Social Epistemology, 18 (4), 315-332.

NARASIMHA, R. (2008). Science, technology and the economy: An Indian perspective. Technology in Society, 30 (3-4), 330 – 338.

NELSON, R., & Rosenborg, N. (1993). Technologyical innovation and National Systems. In R. Nelson, National Innovation Systems. A Comparative Analysis (pp. 3-22). New York/Oxford: Oxford University Press.

OECD. (2005). Innovation Policy And Performance A Cross-Country Comparison. Paris: Oecd.

OECD. (2008). Oecd Science, Technology And Industry Outlook 2008. Paris: Oecd.

OECD. (2006). OECD Science, Technology and Industy Outlook. Paris: Organization For Economic Co-Operation And Development.

OH, D., & Kim, Y. (2004). Evaluating National Research and Development Programs in Korea. Seoul: Korea Institute of S&T Evaluation and Planning, .

PARKA, H. W., & Leydesdorff, L. (2010). Longitudinal trends in networks of university–industry–government relations in South Korea: The role of programmatic incentives. ScienceDirect, 39, 640 – 649.

PAYA, Ali & Baradaran Shoraka, Hamid-Reza. (2006). Futures Studies in Iran: Learning through trial and error, Futures, 42 (5): 484 – 495.

PEREIRA, Jose Matias et al.. (2006). Brazilian New Patterns of an Industrial, Technological and Foreign Trade Policy, Journal of Technology Management & Innovation,vol.1 issue 3.17-28.

RATCHFORD, J. T., & Blanpied, W. A. (2008). Paths to the future for science and technology in China, India and the United States. Technology in Society , 30 (3-4), 211-233.

REDDY, P. (1997). New trends in globalization of corporate R&D and implications for innovation capability in host countries: A survey from India. Prasada Reddy , 25 (11), 1821-1837.

RONGPING, M. (2004). Dvelopment Science & Technology Policy in China. Beijing: Insititue Policy & Management, Chinese Academy Of Science.

RONGPING, M., & Wan, Q. (2008). The development of science and technology in China: A comparison with India and the United States. Technology in Society , 30 (3-4).

RYAN, M. P. (2010). Patent Incentives, Technology Markets, and Public–Private Bio-Medical Innovation Networks in Brazil. World Development , 38 (8), 1082-1093.

SAKAKIBARA, M., & Cho, D.-S. (2002). Cooperative R&D in Japan and Korea: a comparison of industrial policy. Research Policy , 31 (5), 673-692.

SARKISIAN, A., (2008). Intellectual property rights for developing countries: Lessons from Iran, Technovation 28 (2008), 786 –798.

SALAMI, R. (2008). Reshaping and Reforming National Innovation System toward Knowledge Based economic. SLPTMD Conference.

SONG, J. (2008). Awakening: Evolution of China’s science and technology policies. Technology in Society , 30 (3-4),


THORBECKE, E. (2006). The Evolution of the Development Doctrine, 1950-2005. Helsinki, Finland: World Institute for Development Economics Research.

THROPE, C. (2007). Political Theory in Science and Technology Studies. In E. J. Hackett, O. Amsterdamska, M. Lynch, & J. Wajcman, The Handbook Of Science & Technology Studies. London, England: MIT Press.

TUAN, C., Ng, L. F., & Zhao, B. (2009). China’s post-economic reform growth: The role of FDI and productivity progress. Journal of Asian Economics , 20 (3), 280-293.

UNCTAD. (2005). Science, Technology and Innovation Policy Review The Islamic Republic of Iran. Geneva: United Nations Conference on Trade and Development.

VERSPAGEN. (1991). A new empirical approach to catching up or falling behind. 2 (2).

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 , 653-680.

WALCOTT, S. M. (2002). Chinese Industrial and Science Parks: Bridging the Gap. The Professional Geographer, 54 (3), 349-364.

WEF. (2010). World Competitiveness Report. Geneva: World Economic Forum.

WORLD BANK. (2009). Annual Report 2009. New York: World Bank.

WORLD BANK. (2010). Brazil Data. Retrieved from world bank:

XIWEI, Z., & Xiangdong, Y. (2007). Science and techno- logy policy reform and its impact on China ’ s national innovation system. Technology in Society , 317-325.


Copyright (c)

2017 © Universidad Alberto Hurtado - Facultad de Economía y Negocios. 
Erasmo Escala 1835 - Santiago, Chile.
Economic Analysis Review | Observatorio Económico | Gestión y Tendencias 

Journal Supported by Chimera Innova Group