Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-75dct Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-07T06:20:50.525Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Needham Puzzle Reconsidered: Organizations, Organizing, and Innovation in China

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 April 2016

Mie Augier ,
Jerry Guo  and
Harry Rowen (1925–2015)
Mie Augier
Affiliation:
Naval Postgraduate School, USA
Jerry Guo
Affiliation:
Carnegie Mellon University, USA
Harry Rowen (1925–2015)
Affiliation:
Stanford University, USA
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This paper discusses some aspects of innovation in China. As China seeks to transition to a knowledge-based economy, it may become more important for China to develop innovative technologies to sustain economic growth. How do China's history, culture, institutions, and organizations aid or hinder innovation? How does China's national innovation system compare to the innovation culture in the US, as well as other developed and emerging economies? What are the prospects for the future of the Chinese national innovation system?

Our starting point is the Needham Puzzle – the paradox that while China was once a world leader in technological development, it fell behind; the Industrial Revolution happened in Europe rather than in China. Potential explanations for the Needham Puzzle may shed light on the challenges facing innovation in modern China. We identify three factors that might help explain the Needham Puzzle; assess how the Needham Puzzle and Chinese culture and history have affected the modern innovation system; discuss comparative aspects of innovation ecosystems in the United States and elsewhere; and suggest that Chinese innovation emphasizes exploitation and refinement of existing knowledge to the exploration and development of new knowledge. We also discuss implications for the future of innovation in China.

摘要:

摘要:

这篇论文讨论了中国创新的某些方面。随着中国力图向知识经济过渡, 发展创新技术以维持经济增长对中国来说可能变得更加重要。中国的历史、文化、制度和组织如何帮助或阻碍创新༟中国的国家创新系统如何与美国的创新文化、以及其他发达和新兴经济体比较༟中国国家创新系统的未来前景是什么༟我们的出发点是李约瑟难题——虽然中国曾经是技术发展的世界领导者, 然而它落后了的悖论༛工业革命发生在欧洲而不是中国。对李约瑟难题的潜在解释可能揭示当代中国创新面临的挑战。我们找出了可能帮助解释李约瑟难题的三个因素༛评价了李约瑟难题与中国文化和历史如何影响当代创新系统༛讨论了美国和其它地方创新生态系统可比较的方面༛提出中国创新强调的是利用和提炼现有知识, 而不是探索和开发新知识。我们还讨论了对中国未来创新的启示。

वर्तमान शोध पत्र में चीन में नवोन्मेष के कुछ आयामों पर चर्चा है. यथा चीन ज्ञानपरक अर्थव्यवस्था की ओर उन्मुख होता है, तथा निरंतर आर्थिक विकास के लिए नवप्रवर्तनशील तकनीक का विकास आवश्यक है. इस संदर्भ में चीन का इतिहास, संस्कृति, संस्थान और संगठन किस प्रकार नवोन्मेष को पोषित अथवा बाधित करते हैं? राष्ट्रीय स्तर पर चीन का नवोन्मेष तंत्र अमरीका व अन्य विकसित और उदीयमान अर्थव्यवस्थाओं की नवोन्मेष परम्पराओं की तुलना में कैसा है? चीन के इस राष्ट्रीय नवोन्मेष तंत्र के भविष्य में क्या संभावनाएं हैं? उपरोक्त सन्दर्भ में हमारे शोध का प्रारम्भिक आधार नीडहैम पहेलिका है जो ऐतिहासिक परिप्रेक्ष्य में इस विडम्बना की द्योतक है की चीन, जो कभी विश्व में तकनीकी विकास में अग्रगण्य था, बाद में पिछड़ गया; औद्योगिक क्रान्ति चीन में न हो कर यूरोप में हुई. नीडहैम पहेलिका के संभावित कारण कदाचित चीन की वर्तमान नवोन्मेष सम्बन्धी चुनौतियों पर भी प्रकाश डाल सकते हैं. हमने ऐसे तीन कारक खोजे हैं जिन से नीडहैम पहेलिका समझी जा सकती है; हम ने आकलन किया है की किस हद तक नीडहैम पहेलिका और चीन की संस्कृति और इतिहास ने समकालीन नवोन्मेष तंत्र पर प्रभाव डाला है; हम ने तुलनात्मक आधार पर अमरीका तथा अन्य देशों के नवोन्मेष के परिवेश को देखा है, और हमारा मत है की चीनी नवोन्मेष में नव ज्ञान सर्जन की तुलना में उपलब्ध ज्ञान की गवेषणा और परिमार्जन पर अधिक महत्व दिया जाता है. हम ने चीन में नवोन्मेष की भावी संभावनाओं पर भी चर्चा की है.

Sumário:

Sumário:

Este artigo discute alguns aspectos da inovação na China. Como a China procura fazer a transição para uma economia baseada no conhecimento, pode se tornar mais importante para a China desenvolver tecnologias inovadoras para sustentar o crescimento econômico. Como a história, cultura, instituições e organizações da China auxiliam ou dificultam a inovação? Como o sistema nacional de inovação da China se compara com a cultura de inovação nos EUA, bem como em outras economias desenvolvidas e emergentes? Quais são as perspectivas futuras do sistema de inovação nacional chinês? Nosso ponto de partida é o enigma de Needham - o paradoxo de que apesar da China uma vez ter sido um líder mundial no desenvolvimento tecnológico, ela ficou para trás; a Revolução Industrial aconteceu na Europa, e não na China. Explicações potenciais para o enigma Needham podem esclarecer os desafios da inovação na China moderna. Nós identificamos três fatores que podem ajudar a explicar o enigma Needham; avaliar como o enigma Needham e a cultura chinesa e a história afetaram o moderno sistema de inovação; discutir aspectos comparativos dos ecossistemas de inovação nos Estados Unidos e em outros lugares; e sugerir que a inovação chinesa enfatiza a exploração e refinamento do conhecimento existente para a exploração e desenvolvimento de conhecimento novo. Nós também discutimos implicações para o futuro da inovação na China.

Аннотация:

АННОТАЦИЯ:

Статья исследует некоторые аспекты инноваций в Китае. Поскольку Китай стремится перейти к наукоемкой экономике, развитие новейших технологий становится все более важным для поддержания устойчивого экономического роста в Китае. Каким образом история и культура Китая, его институты и организации способствуют или препятствуют инновациям? Чем отличается национальная система инноваций в Китае от культуры инноваций в США, а также в других развитых и развивающихся странах? Каковы перспективы национальной системы инноваций в Китае?

Нашей отправной точкой будет «загадка Нидхэма» – парадокс, почему Китай, будучи некогда мировым лидером, отстал в технологическом развитии; почему индустриальная революция произошла в Европе, а не в Китае. Решение «загадки Нидхэма» может выявить препятствия для развития инноваций в современном Китае. Мы определяем три фактора, которые возможно приведут к решению «загадки Нидхэма»: мы исследуем, как «загадка Нидхэма», китайская культура и история, повлияли на современную систему инноваций; проводим сравнительный анализ с инновационными экосистемами в США и других странах; и предполагаем, что китайские инновации основываются на использовании и преобразовании существующих знаний, а не на приобретении и развитии новых знаний. Мы также рассматриваем перспективы для будущего инноваций в Китае.

Resumen:

RESUMEN:

Este artículo discute algunos aspectos sobre la innovación en China. A medida China busca hacer la transición hacia una economía basada en el conocimiento, puede llegar a ser más importante para China el desarrollar tecnologías innovadoras para sostener el crecimiento económico. ¿Cómo la historia, cultura, instituciones y organizaciones de China ayudan u obstaculizan la innovación?, ¿Cómo funciona el sistema de innovación de China en comparación con la cultura innovadora en los Estados Unidos, así como en otras economías desarrolladas y emergentes?, ¿Cuáles son las perspectivas para el futuro del sistema de innovación chino?. Nuestro punto de partida es el Rompecabezas de Needham –la paradoja de que mientras China fue una vez un líder mundial en desarrollo tecnológico, se quedó atrás; la revolución industrial tuvó lugar en Europa y no en China. Las posibles explicaciones para el rompecabezas de Needham puede dar luces sobre los desafíos que enfrenta la innovación en la China moderna. Identificamos tres factores que pueden ayudar a explicar el rompecabezas de Needham: evaluar como el rompecabezas de Needham y la cultura e historia china han afectado el sistema de innovación moderno; discutir aspectos comparativos de los ecosistemas de innovación en los Estados Unidos, y en otros lugares; y sugerir que la innovación china enfatiza la explotación y el perfeccionamiento del conocimiento existente para la explotación y el desarrollo de nuevo conocimiento. También se discuten las implicaciones para el futuro de la innovación en China.

Keywords

ChinacompetitioninnovationR & D
Type
Articles
Information
Management and Organization Review , Volume 12 , Issue 1 , March 2016 , pp. 5 - 24
Copyright
Copyright © The International Association for Chinese Management Research 2016 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Adams, S. B. 2011. Growing where you are planted: Exogenous firms and the seeding of Silicon Valley. Research Policy, 40 (3): 368–379.Google Scholar
Augier, M., & March, J. 2011. The roots, rituals, and rhetorics of change: North American business schools after the Second World War. Palo Alto: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Augier, M., March, J. G., & Marshall, A. W. 2015. The flaring of intellectual outliers. Organization Science, 26 (4): 1140.Google Scholar
Baark, E. 2007. Knowledge and innovation in China: Historical legacies and emerging institutions. Asia Pacific Business Review, 13 (3): 337–356.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Becker, M. 2004. Organizational routines: A review of the literature. Industrial and Corporate Change, 13 (4): 643–678.Google Scholar
Broadberry, S., & Gupta, B. 2006. The early modern great divergence: Wages, prices and economic development in Europe and Asia, 1500–1801. The Economic History Review, 59 (1): 2–31.Google Scholar
Buck, P. 1975. Order and control: The scientific method in China and the United States. Social Studies of Science, 5 (3): 237–267.Google Scholar
Cauley, L. 2005. End of the line: The rise and fall of AT&T. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
Chang, P., & Shih, H. 2004. The innovation systems of Taiwan and China: A comparative analysis. Technovation, 24 (7): 529–539.Google Scholar
Cheatham, T. E. Jr., Clark, W. A., Holt, A. W., Ornstein, S. M., Perlis, A. J., & Simon, H. A. 1973. Computing in China: A travel report. Science, October 12: 134–140.Google Scholar
Chen, C. J. 2012. Transforming rural China: How local institutions shape property rights in China. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Cheung, K., & Lin, P. 2004. Spillover effects of FDI on innovation in China: Evidence from the Provincial Data. China Economic Review, 15 (1): 25–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cohen, M. D., March, J. G., & Olsen, J. P. 1976. A garbage can model of organizational choice. Administrative Science Quarterly, 17 (1): 1–25.Google Scholar
Crozier, M. 1967. The bureaucratic phenomenon. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Dennis, M. A. 1987. Accounting for research: New histories of corporate laboratories and the social history of science. Social Studies of Science, 17 (3): 479–518.Google Scholar
Dobson, W., & Safarian, A. E. 2008. The transition from imitation to innovation: An enquiry into China's evolving institutions and firm capabilities. Journal of Asian Economics, 19 (4): 301–311.Google Scholar
Etzkowitz, H. 2013. Silicon Valley at risk? Sustainability of a global innovation icon: An introduction to the Special Issues: Silicon Valley: Global model or unique anomaly. Social Science Information, 52 (4): 515–538.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Flexner, A. 1939. The usefulness of useless knowledge. Harpers, 179: 544–552.Google Scholar
Fortun, M., & Schweber, S. S. 1993. Scientists and the legacy of World War II: The case of Operations Research (OR). Social Studies of Science, 23 (4): 595–642.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gebhardt, C. 2013. Upgrading the Chinese economy by overhauling Special Economic Zones: Innovation model shopping or the emergence of a Chinese innovation model? Industry and Higher Education, 27 (4): 297–312.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Geiger, R. L. (Ed.). 2004. Research and relevant knowledge: American research universities since World War II. New Brunswick: Transaction Publishers.Google Scholar
George, A. 1969. The Chinese Communist Army in action. Columbia: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
Gertner, J. 2003. The idea factory: Bell Labs and the great age of American innovation. New York: Penguin Press.Google Scholar
Hitch, C. J. 1958. The character of research and development in a competitive economy. RAND Corporation Publications, P-1297.Google Scholar
Jullien, F. 2004. A treatise on efficacy: Between Western and Chinese thinking. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press.Google Scholar
Klepper, S. 2010. The origin and growth of industry clusters: The making of Silicon Valley and Detroit. Journal of Urban Economics, 67 (1): 15–32.Google Scholar
Klomp, L., & van Leeuwen, G. 2001. Linking innovation and firm performance: A new approach. International Journal of the Economics of Business, 8 (3): 343–364.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Koellinger, P. 2008. The relationship between technology, innovation, and firm performance – Empirical evidence from e-business in Europe. Research Policy, 37 (8): 1317–1328.Google Scholar
Kristensen, P. M., & Nielsen, R. T. 2013. Constructing a Chinese international relations theory: A sociological approach to intellectual innovation. International Political Sociology, 7 (1): 19–40.Google Scholar
Landes, D. 2006. Why Europe and the West? Why not China? Journal of Economic Perspectives, 20 (2): 3–22.Google Scholar
Laufer, B. 1917. Review: Antike Technik. American Anthropologist, 19 (1): 71–78.Google Scholar
Leites, N. C. 1948. Psycho-cultural hypotheses about political acts. World Politics, 1 (1): 102–119.Google Scholar
Lin, J. 1995. The Needham Puzzle: Why the industrial revolution did not originate in China. Economic Development and Cultural Change, 43 (2): 269–292.Google Scholar
Lin, J. 2008. The Needham puzzle, the Weber question, and China's miracle: Long-term performance since the Sung dynasty. China Economic Journal, 1 (1): 63–95.Google Scholar
Lipset, S. M. 1959. Some social requisites of democracy: Economic development and political legitimacy. American Political Science Review, 53 (1): 69–105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Liu, F., Simon, D. F., Sun, Y., & Cao, C. 2011. China's innovation policies: Evolution, institutional structure, and trajectory. Research Policy, 40 (7): 917–931.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lu, Q., & Lazonick, W. 2001. The Organization of Innovation in a transitional economy: Business and government in Chinese electronic publishing. Research Policy, 30: 55–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mao, Z. 1937. On guerilla warfare. Thousand Oaks, CA: BN Publishing.Google Scholar
Mao, Z. 1959. Critique of Stalin's economic problems in the Soviet Union. In Z. Mao (1971): Selected Readings from the Works of Mao TseTung . [Cited 7 March 2016.] Retrieved from URL: https://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/mao/selected-works/volume-8/mswv8_66.htm Google Scholar
March, J. G. 1991. Exploration and exploitation in organizational learning. Organization Science, 2 (1): 71–87.Google Scholar
March, J. G. 2010. Rediscovering institutions: The organizational basis of politics. New York : The Free Press.Google Scholar
March, J. G., & Simon, H. A. 1958. Organizations. New York : John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
Marshall, A. 1890. Principles of economics. London: Macmillian and Co.Google Scholar
Maxwell, J. C. 1865. A dynamical theory of the electromagnetic field. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London, 155: 459–512.Google Scholar
McClelland, C. E. 1980. State, society, and university in Germany, 1700–1914. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Millman, S. (Ed.). 1983. A history of engineering and science in the Bell System. Murray Hill: Bell Laboratories.Google Scholar
Needham, J. 1980. Science and civilisation in China: State of the project. Interdisciplinary Science Review, 5 (4): 263–268.Google Scholar
Needham, J., & Wang, L. 1954. Science and civilisation in China: Introductory orientations. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Nguyen, C. 2009. The rise, fall and rebirth of the Chinese economy . Doctoral Dissertation: Texas Tech University.Google Scholar
Plechero, M., & Chaminade, C. 2013. The influence of micro-characteristics in different modes of globalization of innovation: A comparative study of Indian (Pune) and Chinese (Beijing) firms. Industry and Innovation, 20 (7): 661–682.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pye, L., & Leites, N. 1982. Nuances in Chinese political culture. Asian Survey, 22 (12): 1147–1165.Google Scholar
Pye, L. 2000. Asian values: From dynamos to dominos. In Harrison, L. & Huntington, S. (Eds.), Culture matters. How values shape human progress. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Ross, E. D. 1969. Democracy's college: The land-grant movement in the formative state. New York: Arno Press.Google Scholar
Rowen, H. S. 1997. Off-center on the Middle Kingdom. The National Interest, 48: 101.Google Scholar
Rowen, H. S., Hancock, M. G., & Miller, W. F. 2008. Greater China's quest for innovation. Palo Alto: Shorenstein APARC.Google Scholar
Schumpeter, J. 1942. Capitalism, socialism, and democracy. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Simon, H. 1991. Organizations and markets. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 5: 25–44.Google Scholar
Simon, H. 1993. Altruism and economics. American Economic Review, 83 (2): 156–161.Google Scholar
Sivin, N. 1982. Why the Scientific Revolution did not take place in China – Or didn't it? Chinese Science, 5: 45–66.Google Scholar
Reed, T. C., & Stillman, D. B. 2009. The nuclear express: A political history of the bomb and its proliferation. New York: Zenith Press.Google Scholar
Rosegrant, S., & Lampe, D. 1993. Route 128: Lesson's from Boston's high-tech community. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Vogel, E. 1991. The four little dragons: The spread of industrialization in East Asia. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Ware, W. H. (Ed.). 2008. RAND and the information evolution: A history in essays and vignettes. Santa Monica: RAND Corporation.Google Scholar
Weimin, S. 2009. Chinese logic and the absence of theoretical sciences in Ancient China. Dao, 8 (4): 403–423.Google Scholar
Winter, S. G. 2003. Understanding dynamic capabilities. Strategic Management Journal, 24 (10): 991–995.Google Scholar
Whittle, R. 2013. The man who invented the Predator. Air and Space Magazine, April.Google Scholar
Xie, W., & Li-Hua, R. 2009. What will make China an innovation-oriented country? Journal of Knowledge-based Innovation in China, 1 (1): 8–15.Google Scholar
Xie, W., & White, S. 2006. From imitation to creation: the critical yet uncertain transition for Chinese firms. Journal of Technology Management in China, 1 (3): 229–242.Google Scholar
Zhou, H. 2011. Confucianism and the legalism: A model of the national strategy of governance in Ancient China. Frontiers of Economics in China, 6 (4): 616–637.Google Scholar
Zhou, K. Z. 2006. Innovation, imitation, and new product performance: The case of China. Industrial Marketing Management, 35 (3): 394–402.CrossRefGoogle Scholar