走向更实用主义?中国的创新和标准化之路

D. Ernst
{"title":"走向更实用主义?中国的创新和标准化之路","authors":"D. Ernst","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.2742918","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Why China’s approach mattersOnly a few years ago, China’s approach to innovation and standardization barely played a role in international economic diplomacy. With its economic power on the rise, that assessment has changed dramatically. Today, China’s innovation policy and its perceived threat to American innovation and competitiveness are a hot topic in U.S.-China economic relations, adding further to contentious disputes about exchange rates, trade, and foreign direct investment. The role of standardization, together with intellectual property rights and government procurement, are at the center of this conflict.As the United States and China display fundamental differences in their levels of development and in their economic institutions, they pursue quite different approaches to standards and innovation policy. The American consensus is that market forces and the private sector should play a primary role in innovation and standardization. China, on the other hand, relies much more on the government to define the strategic objectives and key parameters.In the United States, there is a widespread expectation that further reforms of China’s standards system will “naturally” converge to (almost) full compliance with a U.S.-style, market-led, voluntary standards system. That expectation can be found, for instance, in the “United States Standards Strategy,” approved by the Board of Directors of the American National Standards Institute (ANSI) on December 8, 2005, which proposes a “universal application of the globally accepted principles for development of global standards” which is based on the U.S. voluntary standards system.Limited ConvergenceYet, as documented in a new study , China’s evolving standards system provides little evidence that convergence to the American system is likely to materialize. When Chinese reformers argue for a transition to a more market-driven standards system, they emphasize that the government will continue to play an important role as a promoter, enabler, and coordinator of an integrated standards and innovation policy.","PeriodicalId":347047,"journal":{"name":"KDI School of Public Policy & Management Research Paper Series","volume":"22 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2011-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"7","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Toward Greater Pragmatism? China's Approach to Innovation and Standardization\",\"authors\":\"D. Ernst\",\"doi\":\"10.2139/ssrn.2742918\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Why China’s approach mattersOnly a few years ago, China’s approach to innovation and standardization barely played a role in international economic diplomacy. With its economic power on the rise, that assessment has changed dramatically. Today, China’s innovation policy and its perceived threat to American innovation and competitiveness are a hot topic in U.S.-China economic relations, adding further to contentious disputes about exchange rates, trade, and foreign direct investment. The role of standardization, together with intellectual property rights and government procurement, are at the center of this conflict.As the United States and China display fundamental differences in their levels of development and in their economic institutions, they pursue quite different approaches to standards and innovation policy. The American consensus is that market forces and the private sector should play a primary role in innovation and standardization. China, on the other hand, relies much more on the government to define the strategic objectives and key parameters.In the United States, there is a widespread expectation that further reforms of China’s standards system will “naturally” converge to (almost) full compliance with a U.S.-style, market-led, voluntary standards system. That expectation can be found, for instance, in the “United States Standards Strategy,” approved by the Board of Directors of the American National Standards Institute (ANSI) on December 8, 2005, which proposes a “universal application of the globally accepted principles for development of global standards” which is based on the U.S. voluntary standards system.Limited ConvergenceYet, as documented in a new study , China’s evolving standards system provides little evidence that convergence to the American system is likely to materialize. When Chinese reformers argue for a transition to a more market-driven standards system, they emphasize that the government will continue to play an important role as a promoter, enabler, and coordinator of an integrated standards and innovation policy.\",\"PeriodicalId\":347047,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"KDI School of Public Policy & Management Research Paper Series\",\"volume\":\"22 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2011-08-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"7\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"KDI School of Public Policy & Management Research Paper Series\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2742918\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"KDI School of Public Policy & Management Research Paper Series","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2742918","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 7

摘要

就在几年前,中国的创新和标准化方法在国际经济外交中几乎没有发挥作用。随着中国经济实力的上升,这种评估发生了巨大变化。今天,中国的创新政策及其对美国创新和竞争力的威胁是美中经济关系中的一个热门话题,进一步加剧了有关汇率、贸易和外国直接投资的争议。标准化的作用,以及知识产权和政府采购,是这场冲突的中心。由于美国和中国在发展水平和经济制度方面存在根本差异,两国在制定标准和创新政策方面的做法也大不相同。美国人的共识是,市场力量和私营部门应该在创新和标准化中发挥主要作用。另一方面,中国更多地依靠政府来确定战略目标和关键参数。在美国,人们普遍期望中国标准体系的进一步改革将“自然地”向(几乎)完全符合美国式的、市场主导的、自愿的标准体系靠拢。例如,这种期望可以在2005年12月8日由美国国家标准协会(ANSI)董事会批准的“美国标准战略”中找到,该战略提出“普遍应用全球公认的原则来制定全球标准”,该原则以美国自愿标准体系为基础。有限的趋同然而,正如一项新的研究所记录的那样,中国不断发展的标准体系几乎没有证据表明,与美国体系的趋同可能会成为现实。当中国的改革者主张向更加市场化的标准体系过渡时,他们强调政府将继续发挥重要作用,作为综合标准和创新政策的推动者、推动者和协调者。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Toward Greater Pragmatism? China's Approach to Innovation and Standardization
Why China’s approach mattersOnly a few years ago, China’s approach to innovation and standardization barely played a role in international economic diplomacy. With its economic power on the rise, that assessment has changed dramatically. Today, China’s innovation policy and its perceived threat to American innovation and competitiveness are a hot topic in U.S.-China economic relations, adding further to contentious disputes about exchange rates, trade, and foreign direct investment. The role of standardization, together with intellectual property rights and government procurement, are at the center of this conflict.As the United States and China display fundamental differences in their levels of development and in their economic institutions, they pursue quite different approaches to standards and innovation policy. The American consensus is that market forces and the private sector should play a primary role in innovation and standardization. China, on the other hand, relies much more on the government to define the strategic objectives and key parameters.In the United States, there is a widespread expectation that further reforms of China’s standards system will “naturally” converge to (almost) full compliance with a U.S.-style, market-led, voluntary standards system. That expectation can be found, for instance, in the “United States Standards Strategy,” approved by the Board of Directors of the American National Standards Institute (ANSI) on December 8, 2005, which proposes a “universal application of the globally accepted principles for development of global standards” which is based on the U.S. voluntary standards system.Limited ConvergenceYet, as documented in a new study , China’s evolving standards system provides little evidence that convergence to the American system is likely to materialize. When Chinese reformers argue for a transition to a more market-driven standards system, they emphasize that the government will continue to play an important role as a promoter, enabler, and coordinator of an integrated standards and innovation policy.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Spectrum Flexibility and Mobile Development A Systematic Review of Experimental Approaches on Public Service Motivation The Development of Central Bank Digital Currency in China: An Analysis The Legacy of State Repression on Contemporary Trust: Indiscriminate versus Targeted Repression in Soviet Russia Perception of the Risk of the COVID-19 Pandemic by Population : The Case of Gabon
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1