查人人中国名人网中国影像地方志 下载:帮忙翻译一下
来源：百度文库 编辑：查人人中国名人网 时间：2024/04/30 05:46:28
Over the last decade there have been several new concepts emphasizing the systemic characteristics of innovation but with focus on other levels of the economy than the nation state. The literature on ‘regional systems of innovation’ has grown rapidly since the middle of the 1990s (Cooke, 1996; Maskell and Malmberg, 1999). Bo Carlsson with colleagues from Sweden developed the concept ‘technological systems’ (Carlsson and Jacobsson, 1997) while Franco Malerba developed the concept of ‘sectoral systems of innovation’ (Breschi and Malerba, 1997).
Sometimes these concepts have been presented or interpreted as alternatives to the national system approach and it has been argued that many, if not most, interesting interactions in the context of modern innovation tend to cross national borders and that there is no a priori reason why the national level should be taken as a given for the analysis. Our view on the issue has always been pragmatic and reflects that we see the policy dimension of the concept as important. As long as nation states exist as political entities with their own agendas related to innovation, it is useful to work with national systems as analytical objects.
But the other analytical levels are certainly not only legitimate — they are necessary in order to get a realistic understanding of the working of national systems and, not least, the policy constraints and policy efficiency at the national level. They are also useful in their own right. Regional innovation policy calls for a focus on regional systems and understanding the evolution of global technological systems or sectoral systems is fundamental when it comes to define the needs for supranational co-ordination and rule-setting.
Sometimes these concepts have been presented or interpreted as alternatives to the national system approach and it has been argued that many, if not most, interesting interactions in the context of modern innovation tend to cross national borders and that there is no a priori reason why the national level should be taken as a given for the analysis. Our view on the issue has always been pragmatic and reflects that we see the policy dimension of the concept as important. As long as nation states exist as political entities with their own agendas related to innovation, it is useful to work with national systems as analytical objects.
But the other analytical levels are certainly not only legitimate — they are necessary in order to get a realistic understanding of the working of national systems and, not least, the policy constraints and policy efficiency at the national level. They are also useful in their own right. Regional innovation policy calls for a focus on regional systems and understanding the evolution of global technological systems or sectoral systems is fundamental when it comes to define the needs for supranational co-ordination and rule-setting.
在过去十年那里比国家状态有是几个新概念强调创新的系统特征但以焦点在其它经济上的水平。文学在创新..regional 系统。迅速地增长从90 年代(Cooke 1996 的中部年; Maskell 和Malmberg, 1999) 。Bo Carlsson 与同事从瑞典开发了概念..technological 系统。(Carlsson 和Jacobsson 1997) 当佛朗哥・Malerba 开发了创新..sectoral 系统的概念。(Breschi 和Malerba 1997) 。有时这些概念被提出了或解释作为选择对全国系统方法和它被争论许多, 如果不是多数, 有趣的互作用就现代创新状况倾向于横渡国界并且没有演绎原因为什么全国水平应该被采取作为被测量为分析。我们的意图关于问题是重实效的和总反射, 我们象重要看概念的政策维度。只要国家状态存在作为政治个体以他们自己的议程与创新有关, 它是有用工作以全国系统作为分析对象。但其它分析水平一定是不仅合法的。他们是必要为了得到对全国系统工作的现实理解和, 不是最少, 政策限制和政策效率在全国水平。他们是还有用的。地方创新政策要求一个焦点在地方系统并且了解全球性技术系统或部分系统的演变是根本的当它来定义对超国家的协调和规则设置的需要。