Knowledge that Transforms

Russia disposes of a number of leading-edge product/process technologies, and of a broad range of technological capabilities, but lags in some key product/process technologies, and, for historical reasons, over the whole area of organisational technology. There is, therefore, a strong basis for developing business-sector R&D collaboration between Russia and the advanced industrial economies, and the argument is strengthened by reference to the experience of the countries of central-east Europe. But the scope for technology exchange is still far from exhausted in the Russian case. Collaboration is in practice seriously hampered by the weaknesses of the Russian business environment, the general sense of political instability in the country, and by fears on the part of the Russian side that their science and technology will be 'stolen'. Explicitly R&D-oriented policies can do little to solve such all encompassing problems, but better general policies for the business sector could have some impact. By the same token EU-Russia dialogue can best facilitate R&D collaboration by concentrating on the improvement of the overall regulatory and governance environment in Russia

This article critically reviews the literature on the economic benefits of publicly funded basic research. In that literature, three main methodological approaches have been adopted — econometric studies, surveys and case studies. Econometric studies are subject to certain methodological limitations but they suggest that the economic benefits are very substantial. These studies have also highlighted the importance of spillovers and the existence of localisation effects in research. From the literature based on surveys and on case studies, it is clear that the benefits from public investment in basic research can take a variety of forms. We classify these into six main categories, reviewing the evidence on the nature and extent of each type. The relative importance of these different forms of benefit apparently varies with scientific field, technology and industrial sector. Consequently, no simple model of the economic benefits from basic research is possible. We reconsider the rationale for government funding of basic research, arguing that the traditional ‘market failure’ justification needs to be extended to take account of these different forms of benefit from basic research. The article concludes by identifying some of the policy implications that follow from this review.

In this paper, we argue that the literature on knowledge codification has been overly concerned with the economic properties of its outcomes, neglecting the importance of its underlying learning processes. Following Zollo and Winter [Organisation Science, 2001, in press], the paper distinguishes three learning processes: experience accumulation, knowledge articulation and knowledge codification and suggests a framework to analyse the learning abilities of project-based firms. We propose that mechanisms for inter-project learning draw upon these learning processes and can be found at various levels of the project-based firm. Using empirical evidence from six case studies, we discern three empirical patterns, that we defined learning landscapes, of such mechanisms. Implications for the literature and practice of knowledge codification are discussed.