Convergence in Innovation

  • Jani Saarinen
  • Robert van der Have


In the literature of economics and innovation, the concept of convergence has been approached from a plurality of perspectives. Most commonly, convergence has been understood in technological terms or in the context of regional economic development within or between nations. In the past, the innovation concept, however, has not been linked explicitly to convergence. During the last decades, by contrast, innovation has emerged in the discussions related to national and sectoral systems of innovations, as well as in the growth and development policy of EU. Here, innovation has become very prominent as a means of convergence. Despite of the emerging role of innovation in these discussions, innovations and innovativeness has always been analyzed with help of some proxies (like patents, R&D investments, etc.). Characteristics of innovations and innovation processes have not been taken more systematically into account when new policies are planned and executed.


Innovation Policy Technology Policy Product Class National Innovation System Herfindahl Index 
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.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Abramovitz, M. (1986) ‘Catching Up, Forging Ahead and Falling Behind’, Journal of Economic History, Vol. 46, No. 2.Google Scholar
  2. Acs, Z. and Audretsch, D. (1988) ‘Innovation in Large and Small Firms: An Empirical Analysis’, American Economic Review, Vol. 78. No. 4, pp. 678–90.Google Scholar
  3. Acs, Z. and Audretsch, D. (1991) ‘R&D, Firm Size, and Innovative Activity’, in Z. Acs and D. Audretsch (eds), Innovation and Technological Change: An International Comparison Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
  4. Archibugi, D. and Möller, K. (1993) ‘Monitoring the Technological Performance of a Small Economy Using Patent Data: The Case of Denmark’, Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, Vol. 5, No. 2.Google Scholar
  5. Bruland, K. and Mowery, D. (2005) ‘Innovation Through Time’, in J. Fagerberg, D. Mowery and R. Nelson (eds), The Oxford Handbook of Innovation, Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  6. Denison, E. D. (1967) Why Growth Rates Differ, Washington, DC: The Brookings Institution.Google Scholar
  7. Dosi, G. (1982) ‘Technological Paradigms and Technological Trajectories: A Suggested Interpretation of the Determinants and Directions of Technical Change’, Research Policy, Vol. 11, pp. 147–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Dosi, G. (1988) ‘Sources, Procedures and Microeconomic Effects of Innovation’, Journal of Economic Literature, Vol. 26, pp. 1120–71.Google Scholar
  9. Dosi, G., Pavitt, K. and Soete, L. (1990) The Economics of Technical Change and International Trade, Hemel Hempstead: Harvester Wheatsheaf.Google Scholar
  10. Eela, R. (2001) ‘Suomen teknologiapolitiikka valtion tiede- ja teknologianeuvoston katsausten valossa’ (Finnish Technology Policy in the Light of the Reviews of the Science and Technology Policy Council), VTT, Group for Technology Studies, Working Papers 56, Espoo, 2001.Google Scholar
  11. Elfvengren, E. (1958) Kostnaderna för teknisk naturvetenskaplig och ekonomics forskning i Finland, Taloudellinen Tutkimuskeskus, Helsinki: Sarja B, p. 10.Google Scholar
  12. Freeman, C. (1987) Technology Policy and Economic Performance: Lessons from Japan, London: Pinter.Google Scholar
  13. Freeman, C. and Soete, L. (1997) The Economics of Industrial Innovation, 3rd edn, London and Washington: Pinter.Google Scholar
  14. Griliches, Z. (1984) ‘Introduction’, in Z. Griliches (ed.), R&D, Patents and Productivity, Chicago: Chicago University Press, pp. 1–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Griliches, Z. (1995) ‘R&D and Productivity: Econometric Results and Measurement Issues’, in P. Stoneman (ed.), The Handbook of the Economics of Innovation and Technological Change, Oxford: Blackwell Scientific.Google Scholar
  16. Heijs, J. (2003) ‘Freerider Behaviour and the Public Finance of R&D Activities in Enterprises: The Case of the Spanish Low Interest Credits for R&D’, Research Policy, Vol. 32, No. 3, pp. 445–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Kodama, F. (1986) ‘Technological Diversification of Japanese Industry’, Science, Vol. 233. pp. 291–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Lemola, T. (2002a) ‘Tiede- ja teknologiapolitiikan muotoutuminen’, in Päiviö Tommila and Allan Tiitta (eds), Suomen Tieteen Historia, Helsinki: WSOY.Google Scholar
  19. Lemola, T. (2002b) ‘Convergence of National Science and Technology Policies: The Case of Finland’, Research Policy, Vol. 31, pp. 1481–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Lemola, T. (2003) ‘Innovation Policy in Finland’, in P. Biegelbauer and S. Borrás (eds), Innovation Policies in Europe and the US, Ashgate: The New Agenda.Google Scholar
  21. Lingärde, S. and Saarinen, J. (2004) ‘Technological Specialisation in Sweden and Finland 1963–97: Contrasting Developments’, in J. Ljungberg and J.-P. Smits (eds), Technology and Human Capital in Historical Perspective, London: Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 205–28.Google Scholar
  22. Lönnqvist, K. and Nykänen, P. (1999) ‘Teknologiapolitiikan alkuvaiheet Suomessa 1940–1970 luvuilla’, VTT, Group for Technology Studies, Working Papers No. 40/99, VTT, Espoo.Google Scholar
  23. Mansfield, E. (1988) ‘The Speed and Cost of Industrial Innovation in Japan and United States: External vs Internal Technology’, Management Science, Vol. 34, October, pp. 1157–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Nelson, R. and Winter, S. (1977) ‘In Search of Useful Theory of Innovation’, Research Policy, Vol. 6, No. 1, pp. 36–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Nelson, R. (ed.) (1993) National Innovation Systems: A Comparative Analysis, New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  26. OECD (1963) Science and the Policies of Governments: The Implications of Science and Technology for National and International Affairs, OECD: Paris.Google Scholar
  27. OECD (1986) OECD Science and Technology Indicators, OECD: Paris.Google Scholar
  28. OECD (1993) Frascati Manual, Paris: OECD.Google Scholar
  29. OECD (1997) National Innovation Systems, OECD: Paris.Google Scholar
  30. Pavitt, K. (1984) ‘Sectoral Patterns of Technical Change: Towards a Taxonomy and a Theory’, Research Policy, Vol. 13, No. 6, pp. 343–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Ray, G. F. (1988) ‘Finnish Patenting Activity’, ETLA Discussion Papers No. 263, Helsinki.Google Scholar
  32. Saarinen, J. (2005) ‘Innovations and Industrial Performance in Finland 1945–98’, Lund Studies in Economic History, Vol. 34, Stockholm: Almqvist & Wiksell International.Google Scholar
  33. Scherer, F. M. (1967) ‘Research and Development Resource Allocation Under Rivalry’, Quarterly Journal of Economics, Vol. 81.Google Scholar
  34. Schumpeter, J. (1911) Theorie der wirtschaftlichen entwicklung, Leipzig: Duncker & Humboldt. English translation, The Theory of Economic Development, Harvard, 1934; 8th edn, 1968, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  35. Schumpeter, J. (1942) Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy, Harper & Brothers, Harper Colophon edition 1975.Google Scholar
  36. Science and Technology Policy Council of Finland (1996) Finland: A Knowledge-Based Society, Helsinki: Oy Edita Ab.Google Scholar
  37. Science and Technology Policy Council of Finland (2000) Review 2000: The Challenge of Knowledge and Know-How, Helsinki: Oy Edita Ab.Google Scholar
  38. Science and Technology Policy Council of Finland (2003) Knowledge, Innovation and Internationalisation, Helsinki: Oy Edita Ab.Google Scholar
  39. Toivanen, H. (2000) ‘Software Innovation in Finland’, VTT, Group for Technology Studies. Working Papers No. 52/00, VTT, Espoo.Google Scholar
  40. Törnudd, E. (1958) ‘Teknillisestä tutkimuspanoksesta meillä ja muualla’, Paperi ja Puu, No. 5, pp. 269–71.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Jani Saarinen and Robert van der Have 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jani Saarinen
  • Robert van der Have

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations