What do we know about innovation in nanotechnology? Some propositions about an emerging field between hype and path-dependency

This contribution formulates a number of propositions about the emergence of novel nanoscience and nanotechnology (N&N). Seeking to complement recent work that aims to define a research agenda and draws on general insights from the innovation literature, this paper aims to synthesize knowledge from innovation-related studies of the N&N field. More specifically, it is suggested that N&N is often misconstrued as either a field of technology or an area of (broadly) converging technologies while evidence to date suggests rather that N&N be considered a set of inter-related and overlapping about not necessarily merging technologies. The role of instrumentation in connecting the various N&N fields is underlined. Finally, the question is raised whether change in N&N tends to be incremental rather than discontinuous, being the result of technological path-dependencies and lock-ins in industry-typical search regimes that are only slowly giving way to more boundary-crossing activities.

[1]  Mihail C. Roco,et al.  Converging Technologies for Improving Human Performance: Nanotechnology, Biotechnology, Information Technology and Cognitive Science , 2003 .

[2]  K. Pavitt.  Sectoral Patterns of Technical Change : Towards a Taxonomy and a Theory : Research Policy , 1984 .

[3]  Mihail C. Roco,et al.  Nanostructure Science and Technology , 1999 .

[4]  Mihail C. Roco,et al.  Converging Technologies for Improving Human Performance , 2003 .

[5]  Mihail C. Roco,et al.  WTEC panel report on nanostructure science and technology : R & D status and trends in nanoparticles, nanostructured materials, and nanodevices , 1999 .

[6]  Christine M. Shea.  Future management research directions in nanotechnology: A case study , 2005 .

[7]  Bernward Joerges,et al.  Instrumentation between science, state and industry , 2001 .

[8]  T. Shinn,et al.  Paths of commercial knowledge: Forms and consequences of university–enterprise synergy in scientist-sponsored firms , 2006 .

[9]  Martin S. Meyer,et al.  Patent citation analysis in a novel field of technology:An exploration of nano-science and nano-technology , 2001, Scientometrics.

[10]  M. Meyer,et al.  Nanotechnology-interdisciplinarity, patterns of collaboration and differences in application , 1998, Scientometrics.

[11]  G. Dosi.  Technological Paradigms and Technological Trajectories: A Suggested Interpretation of the Determinants and Directions of Technical Change , 1982 .

[12]  D. Leonard-Barton,et al.  Wellsprings of Knowledge: Building and Sustaining the Sources of Innovation , 1995 .

[13]  Tibor Braun,et al.  Nanoscience and nanotecnology on the balance , 1997, Scientometrics.

[14]  Thed N. van Leeuwen,et al.  Scientific capabilities and technological performance of national innovation systems: An exploration of emerging industrial relevant research domains , 2006, Scientometrics.

[15]  Joachim Schummer,et al.  Multidisciplinarity, interdisciplinarity, and patterns of research collaboration in nanoscience and nanotechnology , 2004, Scientometrics.

[16]  Roberto Simonetti,et al.  Objects and Subjects in Technological Interdependence. Towards a Framework to Monitor Innovation , 1998 .

[17]  Koenraad Debackere,et al.  Do science-technology interactions pay off when developing technology? , 2004, Scientometrics.

[18]  Michael R. Darby,et al.  Grilichesian Breakthroughs: Inventions of Methods of Inventing and Firm Entry in Nanotechnology , 2005 .

[19]  Michael R. Darby,et al.  Socio-Economic Impact of Nanoscale Science: Initial Results and Nanobank , 2005 .

[20]  J. Fagerberg.  Innovation: A Guide to the Literature , 2003 .

[21]  Ineke Malsch.  Nanotechnology in Europe: scientific trends and organizational dynamics , 1999 .

[22]  Martin Meyer,et al.  Nanotechnology: Generalizations in an Interdisciplinary Field of Science and Technology , 2004 .

[23]  Aldo Geuna,et al.  The Role of University Spinout Companies in an Emerging Technology: The Case of Nanotechnology , 2006 .

[24]  Martin Meyer,et al.  Publications and patents in nanotechnology , 2003, Scientometrics.

[25]  José López.  BRIDGING THE GAPS: SCIENCE FICTION IN NANOTECHNOLOGY , 2006 .

[26]  M. Meyer,et al.  Are patenting scientists the better scholars? , 2005, Proceedings. 2005 IEEE International Engineering Management Conference, 2005..

[27]  Olle Persson,et al.  The Intellectual Base and Research Fronts of JASIS 1986-1990 , 1994, J. Am. Soc. Inf. Sci..

[28]  Henk F. Moed,et al.  Handbook of Quantitative Science and Technology Research: The Use of Publication and Patent Statistics in Studies of S&T Systems , 2004 .

[29]  Richard A. L. Jones,et al.  The Social and Economic Challenges of Nanotechnology , 2003 .

[30]  Martin Meyer,et al.  Knowledge integrators or weak links? An exploratory comparison of patenting researchers with their non-inventing peers in nano-science and technology , 2006, Scientometrics.

[31]  野中 郁次郎,et al.  The Knowledge-Creating Company: How , 1995 .

[32]  Michel Zitt,et al.  Delineating complex scientific fields by an hybrid lexical-citation method: An application to nanosciences , 2006, Inf. Process. Manag..

[33]  P. David.  Path Dependence, its Critics, and the Quest for ‘Historical Economics’ , 2005 .

[34]  Nathan Rosenberg,et al.  Scientific instrumentation and university research , 1992 .

[35]  Rod Coombs,et al.  `Knowledge management practices' and path-dependency in innovation , 1998 .

[36]  Kimberly S. Hamilton,et al.  The increasing linkage between U.S. technology and public science , 1997 .

[37]  M. Meyer,et al.  Technological generalizations and leitbilder—the anticipation of technological opportunities , 2002 .

[38]  Martin Meyer.  Hurdles on the Way to Growth: Commercializing Novel Technologies, The Case of Nanotechnology , 2000 .

[39]  Cristiano Antonelli,et al.  The Dynamics Of Localized Technological Changes. The Interaction Between Factor Costs Inducement, Demand Pull And Schumpeterian Rivalry , 1998 .

[40]  Keith Smith,et al.  Science, technology and innovation indicators: A guide for policy-makers , 1998 .

[41]  Robert J. W. Tijssen,et al.  Measuring and Evaluating Science—Technology Connections and Interactions , 2004 .

[42]  G. Avnimelech,et al.  Creating venture capital industries that co-evolve with high tech: Insights from an extended industry life cycle perspective of the Israeli experience , 2006 .

[43]  Derek deS. Price,et al.  The Science/Technology Relationship, the Craft of Experimental Science, and Policy for the Improvement of High Technology Innovation : Research Policy , 1987 .