Notice bibliographique
Résumé
The level of change brought by science and technology in the 20th century has been unprecedented. Innovation across almost all sectors created a tremendous amount of prosperity, with states competing to get a share. The 21st century continues on this trajectory, albeit with an increased focus on innovation: as opportunities for growth in labour intensive industries decrease, innovation becomes even more central for creating economic development and security. At the same time, cutting-edge technologies have high risk, cost, and uncertainty, making the decision-making calculus for governments more complex. What is the role of the state in facilitating and driving the growth of cutting-edge technologies in the 21st century? The dissertation explores this key question, with a focus on biotech and specifically genomics. The story of the Human Genome Project demonstrates why and how a highly collaborative and decentralized culture was established internationally, while competition was fierce. The Chinese firm BGI and American Illumina are case studies that demonstrate how and why firms can collaborate and compete simultaneously. China and the USA, the two frontrunners in this field, are used as case studies, with a comparison of their developmental states from the 1940s until today revealing several surprising similarities. To approach the core research question, two frameworks are developed. The first compares three main approaches in literature as it relates to innovation and the state: liberalism, national innovation systems, and the developmental state. The argument is that the developmental state provides a stronger foundation for understanding how states facilitate and drive the growth of cutting-edge innovation. The second framework concerns the three dynamics that states need to manage and leverage to reap the benefits of cutting-edge innovation. Based on 32 interviews with policy and science experts in multiple countries, three dynamics are identified as key: collaboration and competition, centralization and decentralization, and techno-nationalism and techno-globalism. These three dynamics are often seen as opposites in a zero-sum game when, instead, they coexist and shape government decisions. As the cases of the USA and China demonstrate, developmental states have successfully leveraged these dynamics to benefit domestically. The dissertation makes several contributions, both theoretically and empirically. The theoretical contributions are around the relationship between globalization and the state, the role of developmental states in driving the growth of cutting-edge technologies, and the three dynamics identified key in this pursuit. In addition, the dissertation also contributes empirical knowledge through the comparative case studies of China and the USA, where several similarities between these two otherwise seemingly polar opposite cases emerge.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,003 | 0,002 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,002 | 0,005 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,010 | 0,006 |
| Communication savante | 0,004 | 0,003 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,003 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,002 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».