Regional technology development path in an open developing economy: evidence from China

This article explores the paths of regional technology development in a large open developing economy. Findings from the research based on Chinese data suggest a differentiated approach to regional technology development. In technologically advanced regions, indigenous R&D plays a more important role than learning-by-doing while in backward regions the latter becomes more important. Interregional technology transfer is found to have a more significant impact on regional technology development than Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) and its effect intensifies when the technology level of the recipient region is close to the technological frontier. R&D plays a key role in both the assimilation of foreign technologies in advanced regions and the assimilation of interregional technology transfer; learning-by-doing only affects the latter.

[1]  Alwyn Young,et al.  Invention and Bounded Learning by Doing , 1991, Journal of Political Economy.

[2]  Edwin Mansfield,et al.  How Rapidly Does New Industrial Technology Leak Out , 1985 .

[3]  R. Findlay,et al.  Relative Backwardness, Direct Foreign Investment, and the Transfer of Technology: A Simple Dynamic Model , 1978 .

[4]  A. Atkinson,et al.  A New View of Technological Change , 1969 .

[5]  K. Arrow.  The Economic Implications of Learning by Doing , 1962 .

[6]  Xiaolan Fu,et al.  Indigenous and foreign innovation efforts and drivers of technological upgrading:evidence from China , 2011 .

[7]  S. Redding,et al.  Technological convergence, R&D, trade and productivity growth , 2005 .

[8]  S. Lall.  Industrial success and failure in a globalizing world , 2004 .

[9]  Z. Griliches.  Patent Statistics as Economic Indicators: a Survey , 1990 .

[10]  Leonard J. Mirman,et al.  On learning and growth , 2013 .

[11]  A. Kokko,et al.  Trade regimes and spillover effects of FDI: Evidence from Uruguay , 2001 .

[12]  K. Maskus,et al.  Transfer of Technology to Developing Countries: Unilateral and Multilateral Policy Options , 2004 .

[13]  Ann E. Harrison,et al.  Do Domestic Firms Benefit from Direct Foreign Investment? Evidence from Venezuela , 1999 .

[14]  Marjolein C. J. Caniëls,et al.  The effects of economic integration on regional growth, an evolutionary model , 1999 .

[15]  S. Girma.  Absorptive Capacity and Productivity Spillovers from FDI: A Threshold Regression Analysis , 2005 .

[16]  Asim Erdilek.  International Technology Transfer in the Middle East and North Africa , 1984 .

[17]  I. Ivarsson.  Transnational corporations and the geographical transfer of localised technology: a multi-industry study of foreign affiliates in Sweden , 2002 .

[18]  D. Acemoglu.  Directed Technical Change , 2001 .

[19]  E. Levitas,et al.  The Production, Transfer and Spillover of Technology: Comparing Large and Small Multinationals as Technology Producers , 1997 .

[20]  Jan Fagerberg,et al.  Technology and International Differences in Growth Rates , 1994 .

[21]  Lee G. Branstetter.  Are knowledge spillovers international or intranational in scope? ☆: Microeconometric evidence from the U.S. and Japan , 2001 .

[22]  Xiaolan Fu,et al.  Foreign Direct Investment, Absorptive Capacity and Regional Innovation Capabilities: Evidence from China , 2008 .

[23]  T. C. Edens,et al.  Economic Growth , 1957, The Journal of Economic History.

[24]  Susanto Basu,et al.  Appropriate Technology and Growth , 1996 .