Insights into the Impact of BID’s Technology Modernization Program on Argentina’s STI Policy

  • Gustavo LugonesEmail author
  • Fernando Porta
  • DarÍo Codner


Since the mid-1990s, policies on science, technology, and innovation (STI) have recovered an outstanding place on the agenda of Latin America countries. Several changes have taken place in both institutional systems and policy regulation, planning, and coordination agencies. At the same time, new instruments for the promotion of scientific research and technological innovation in the productive sector were incorporated. International lending agencies such as the Inter-American Development Bank (IDB) played an important role, especially in Argentina where specific policies and instruments were developed and implemented through successive versions of the Technological Modernization Program (PMT). This chapter shows the results of the evaluation of this program and its main instruments in the last 10 years carried out by experts from Quilmes National University. The evaluation shows that the program implementation has strengthened both scientific and technological capabilities of the country and that it has also increased the competitiveness of the productive sector through the production and incorporation of knowledge and technology. In short, the implementation of PMT III has contributed to the development and strengthening of the National Innovation System and the Regional Innovation Systems in Argentina.


Technological Innovation Innovation System National Innovation System Regional Innovation System Human Resource Training 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. Afcha Chávez S (2011) El impacto de los subsidios a la I+D en la empresa: Evidencia empírica sobre enfoques alternativos de evaluación. Revista Iberoamericana de Ciencia, Tecnología y Sociedad CTS 17(6)Google Scholar
  2. Arora A, Gambardella A (1998) The Impact of NSF Support for Basic Research in Economics. Cited in Chudnovsky et al (2006b)Google Scholar
  3. Bisang R (1995) Libremercado, intervenciones estatales e instituciones de Ciencia y Técnica. Revista Redes 3Google Scholar
  4. Cárdenas E et al (2000) La industrialización y el Estado en América Latina: los años de la postguerra. FCE, MexicoGoogle Scholar
  5. Carullo J et al (2003) Programa de consejerías tecnológicas. Evaluación y recomendaciones. Informe final. Paper written for the Secretary of Science, Technology and Productive Innovation. Centro Redes, Buenos AiresGoogle Scholar
  6. Chudnovsky D et al (2006a) Evaluating a Program of Public Funding of Private Innovation Activities. An Economic Study of FONTAR in Argentina. Office of Evaluation and Oversight (OVE)—IDB, Washington DCGoogle Scholar
  7. Chudnovsky D et al (2006b) Evaluating a program of public funding of scientific activity. A case study of FONCYT in Argentina. Office of Evaluation and Oversight (OVE) - IDB, Washington DCGoogle Scholar
  8. Cimoli M et al (2009) Science, technology and innovation policies in global open economies. The Case of Latin America and the Caribbean. Revista Globalización, Competitividad y Gobernabilidad 3(1)Google Scholar
  9. Codner D (2005) Evaluación de impacto de instrumentos de promoción de la ciencia y la tecnología del FONCYTGoogle Scholar
  10. Crespi G, Geuna A (2004) The Productivity of Science. SPRU Report prepared for the Office of Science and Technology (OST) of the Department of Trade and Industry (DTI), UK. Cited in Chudnovsky et al (2006b)Google Scholar
  11. Crespi G, Geuna A (2005) Modeling and Measuring Scientific Production: Results for a Panel of OECD Countries. SPRU Electronic Working Paper Series 133. Cited in Chudnovsky et al (2006b)Google Scholar
  12. Dosi G et al (1988) Technical Change and Economic Theory. Pinter, LondonGoogle Scholar
  13. Loria Díaz E (ed) (2001) Viejos y nuevos dilemas de las revistas académicas mexicanas. Universidad Autónoma del Estado de México, MexicoGoogle Scholar
  14. Georghiou L (2002) Impact and Additionality of Innovation Policy. In: Boekholt P (ed) Innovation Policy and Sustainable Development: Can Innovation Incentives Make a Difference? IWT Observatory, Brussels. Cited in Afcha Chávez S (2011)Google Scholar
  15. Georghiou L (2004) Evaluation of Behavioural Additionality. Concept Paper. Making the Difference—The Evaluation of Behavioural Additionality of R&D Subsidies. IWT Studies 48:7–20. Cited in Afcha Chávez S (2011)Google Scholar
  16. Goldfarb B (2001) The Effect of Government Contracting on Academic Research: an Empirical Analysis of Reputation in Research Procurement. Discussion Paper No 00-24, Stanford Institute for Economic Policy Research. Cited in Chudnovsky et al (2006b)Google Scholar
  17. López A (2009) Las evaluaciones de programas públicos de apoyo al fomento y desarrollo de la tecnología y la innovación en el sector productivo en América Latina - Una revisión crítica. Regional Dialogue on Innovation, Science and Technology. IDB, Washington DCGoogle Scholar
  18. Lugones G et al (2005) Potencialidades y limitaciones de los procesos de innovación en Argentina. Working paper 26. Centro Redes, Buenos AiresGoogle Scholar
  19. Lundvall B-A (2009) Sistemas nacionales de innovación. Hacia una teoría de la innovación y el aprendizaje por interacción. UNSAM, Buenos AiresGoogle Scholar
  20. Nelson R, Rosenberg N (1993) National Innovation Systems. Oxford University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  21. OECD (2005) Behavioural Additionality or R&D Grants: Introduction and Synthesis. OECD, ParisGoogle Scholar
  22. OECD (2006) Government R&D funding and firm behaviour: measuring behavioural additionality. OECD, ParisGoogle Scholar
  23. Peirano F, Gutti P (2007) Una propuesta metodológica para la evaluación de impacto de las políticas de ciencia, tecnología e innovación. Paper presented at the XII Seminario Latino-Iberoamericano de Gestión Tecnológica, ALTEC, Buenos AiresGoogle Scholar
  24. Porta F, Lugones G (eds) (2011) Investigación Científica e Innovación Tecnológica en Argentina. Impacto de los fondos de promoción. BIG-MINCYT/Universidad Nacional de Quilmes, Buenos AiresGoogle Scholar
  25. Porta F et al (2010) Políticas de ciencia, tecnología e innovación en Argentina. Evolución reciente y balanceGoogle Scholar
  26. RICYT (2010) El Estado de la Ciencia. Principales Indicadores de Ciencia y Tecnología Iberoamericanos/Interamericanos. Buenos AiresGoogle Scholar
  27. Sanz-Menéndez L (1997) Science and Technology Policy Evaluation in the Context of Advanced S&T Policy Planning. Working Paper 97-03. CSIC, MadridGoogle Scholar
  28. Sarewitz D (2010) Advancing the Science of Science and Innovation Policy. CSPO Report #10-04. Consortium for Science, Policy and Outcomes (Arizona State University), PhoenixGoogle Scholar
  29. Stokes D (1997) Pasteur’s Quadrant: Basic science and technology innovation. Brooking Institution Press, Washington DCGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Gustavo Lugones
    • 1
    Email author
  • Fernando Porta
    • 1
  • DarÍo Codner
    • 1
  1. 1.Universidad Nacional de QuilmesBernalArgentina

Personalised recommendations