Technology Transfer in China - Literature Review and Policy Implications

Journal of Science and Technology Policy in China
Technology transfer in China: literature review and policy implications

Leong Chan Tugrul U. Daim
Article information:
To cite this document:
Leong Chan Tugrul U. Daim, (2011),"Technology transfer in China: literature review and policy
implications", Journal of Science and Technology Policy in China, Vol. 2 Iss 2 pp. 122 - 145
Permanent link to this document:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/17585521111155192
Downloaded on: 26 April 2016, At: 15:25 (PT)
References: this document contains references to 64 other documents.
To copy this document: permissions@emeraldinsight.com
Downloaded by Universite Laval At 15:25 26 April 2016 (PT)
The fulltext of this document has been downloaded 1947 times since 2011*
Users who downloaded this article also downloaded:
(2012),"Technology transfer in Asia: challenges from a cross-cultural perspective", Journal of Technology
Management in China, Vol. 7 Iss 1 pp. 4-21 http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/17468771211207312
(1999),"A new strategy of technology transfer to China", International Journal of Operations &
Production Management, Vol. 19 Iss 5/6 pp. 527-538 http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/01443579910260856
(1997),"Technology transfer through acquisition", Management Decision, Vol. 35 Iss 3 pp. 194-204 http://
dx.doi.org/10.1108/00251749710169404
Access to this document was granted through an Emerald subscription provided by emerald-srm:331053 []
For Authors
If you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald for
Authors service information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission guidelines
are available for all. Please visit www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information.
About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.com
Emerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The company
manages a portfolio of more than 290 journals and over 2,350 books and book series volumes, as well as
providing an extensive range of online products and additional customer resources and services.
Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the Committee
on Publication Ethics (COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for digital archive
preservation.
*Related content and download information correct at time of download.
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at
www.emeraldinsight.com/1758-552X.htm
JSTPC
2,2 Technology transfer in China:
literature review and policy
implications
122
Leong Chan and Tugrul U. Daim
Department of Engineering and Technology Management,
Portland State University, Portland, Oregon, USA
Abstract
Purpose The purpose of this paper is to review international technology transfer issues and
contribute to the development of effective technology policies in China.
Design/methodology/approach The construct of this paper is based on comprehensive review of
recent literatures in technology transfer and innovation. Detailed discussions follow to give
implications in policy making.
Findings Technology transfer policy needs to consider influencing factors from various sources
and levels. Government should strive to nurture indigenous innovation capacity, and improve the
efficiency of international technology transfer.
Originality/value The environments and conditions for international technology transfer have
changed significantly in the last decade. Due to Chinas rapid development in recent years, many
traditional channels of technology transfer are no longer efficient or effective. This paper brings
related research issues up to date by reviewing some latest literatures from the perspectives of
innovation and technology development. The findings and implications are meaningful for both
industry and policy makers.
Keywords China, International technology transfer, Technology policy, Innovation systems
Paper type Research paper
1. Introduction
Technology transfer to China has been a widely studied topic in academia. As the
largest technology importer in the world, China generates many business opportunities
and attracts a lot of investments from developed countries. The lucrative Chinese
market is a focal interest globally not only because of its growing rate and size, but also
due to its increasing involvement and influence in world economy. International
technology transfer serves as a major channel for China to shorten the learning curve,
enjoy the latecomer advantage, and achieve technology leapfrogging. It is an important
approach to improve national technology level and strengthen national competence. It
has been almost a decade since Chinas entry into World Trade Organization (WTO),
the environment and conditions for international technology transfer has considerably
changed during this period. Along with the growing trend of globalization, innovation
resources are allocated more diversely around the world, especially, collaborative
Journal of Science and Technology innovation networks have emerged to link together both developed and developing
Policy in China countries. However, barriers still existed because of huge gaps among countries in
Vol. 2 No. 2, 2011
pp. 122-145 terms of social values, economic development, and technology level. Technology
q Emerald Group Publishing Limited
1758-552X
policies vary significantly from country to country, which have complicated the
DOI 10.1108/17585521111155192 process of international technology transfer.
This paper explores recent international technology transfer issues between Technology
Western developed countries and China. It brings major research topics up to date transfer
by reviewing some latest technology management literatures. The paper will
investigate technology transfer from the perspective of innovation systems, and in China
identify obstacles faced by major players. Based on literature findings, discussions
emphasize on the development of policies guidelines to overcome the barriers and
promote international technology transfer in the long run. The focus of this paper is to 123
study governments technology policy and its influence on international technology
transfer. Due to the ever changing environment of world politics and economy, there
are numerous uncertainties in policy making for every country. It is not uncommon
some policies cannot meet governments original requirement as they were legislated.
The rapid development of high technology has made stable technology policy a
difficult task. Therefore, it is necessary to study the causal factors and intrinsic
relationship of issues involved. Policy measures in China can typically represent the
interests of many other emerging economies such as Brazil, India, etc. It is meaningful
to better understand the trends of international technology transfer and develop

effective technology policies.
Following the introduction, Section 2 depicts the connections between technology
transfer and innovation. Several technology development models are presented to
illustrate related researches. Section 3 studies different interests between domestic and
foreign actors. Considering that technology transfer process is a bilateral dynamic
relationship, interest balance between the two sides are discussed. Based on a
comprehensive literature review, Section 4 gives detailed analysis on the issues faced
by the stakeholders which include universities, public research institutes (PRIs),
state-owned enterprises (SOEs), high-tech small- to medium-sized enterprises (SMEs),
joint ventures (JVs), and foreign R&D centers (FR&D). Section 5 further analyzed
international technology transfer issues at various levels, which are the macro level,
meso level, and micro level. These findings from discussion contribute to Section 6
where technology policy in China was examined. In Section 7, implications on
innovation policy have been highlighted for future improvement.
2. Innovation and technology transfer

The intimate connection between technology transfer and innovation has been
highlighted in the literatures. For example, Guan et al. (2006) claimed that technology
transfer is a key contributor to innovation performance, competitiveness, and economic
development of a country. From the perspective of developing country, international
technology transfer is also an effective strategy to catch up with the leading countries
in many high-tech sectors. Facing incessantly changing technologies and intense
global competition, Chinese firms should acquire more state-of-the-art technologies
that lead to innovation and improvement (Meyer, 2001). However, technology transfer
may not naturally result in future innovation of the receiver. Many literatures explored
the relationship between technology transfer activities and innovation performance
with special reference to Chinese industrial firms. For instance, base on a nationwide
survey covering more than 2000 firms, statistical results showed that technology
transfer has both positive and negative impacts on Chinese firms (Guan et al., 2006).
Technology transfer activities would generally improve innovation performance of
average industrial firms, but it might also impede the innovation performance
JSTPC of high-tech firms. Therefore, it is crucial for policy makers to understand how
2,2 to best utilize technology transfer as a tool to foster innovation and sustain future
development.
2.1 Technology development models

124 Technology transfer plays important role in the development of industrializing
economies. Scholars developed linear growth models to illustrate technology progress in
late developing countries. The development process was seen as a series of successive
upgrading in parallel with a nations economic environment. Guan et al. (2006) presented
a technological progress trajectory for the catch-up countries from imitation to
innovation that is comprised of acquisition, assimilation and improvement of
technology (Figure 1). Wang and Zhou (1999) considered the role of foreign enterprises
and created a model of transfer-digestion-absorption-innovation-dissemination
(TDAID) in Chinas perspective for increasing involvement in international
production and trade activities within a global market (Figure 2). Leonard-Barton
(1995) proposed a model to describe import substitution (Figure 3), which starts from
import kits, progresses to localization of parts and components, then to product
redesign, and finally to novel product design. As a more practical approach, Hobday
(1995) suggested another linear model for newly industrialized countries (Figure 4): from
cheap labor assembling, through the second stage of original equipment manufacturing
(OEM), then to the third stage original design manufacturing (ODM), and finally to
original brand-name manufacturing (OBM). The author emphasizes the importance of
OEM as a learning platform, calling it an enduring technological training school for
later comers.
Figure 1.
Acquisition Assimilation Improvement
Technological progress
trajectory
Source: Guan et al. (2006)
Figure 2.
New mechanism for Transfer Digestion Absorption Innovation Dissemination
transferring technology to
China TDAID
Source: Wang and Zhou (1999)
Figure 3. Localization Product Novel product

Import kits
Model for import of Parts redesign design
substitution
Source: Leonard-Barton (1995)
Figure 4.
Late industrializing Cheap labor Original equipment Original design Original brand
countries development assembling manufacturing manufacturing manufacturing
model
Source: Hobday (1995)
Most of the above models connect international technology transfer with the concept of Technology
innovation or improvement in technology. However, implementation in the real world is transfer
not as easy as the models have depicted. Many papers have conceded that there are many
problems, and at least it is still difficult task for China. Wang and Zhou (1999) argued in China
that lack of sufficient technological capability is a major inadequacy at the firm level for
implementation. The restructuring of the Chinese research and development (R&D)
system from a centrally planned mechanism into a flexible system should be an attempt 125
to solve the problem. Guan et al. (2006) reported that China spent more on technology
acquisition the earliest stage of the technological progress trajectory, but much less on
the last two stages than Japan and Korea when their economy started booming. Chen
and Sun (2000) also pointed that the proportion of hardware transfer is still high. Except
for some large-sized companies, most importers stay at the level of cooperation in
transferring hardware. This is a negative influence on Chinese industry in that it is
mature technology which is still largely transferred. Many authors from developing
countries focus on how latecomers can catch up with advanced countries by
leapfrogging or direct innovation at the technological frontier (Mathews, 2001; Lee and
Lim, 2001; Ernst and Kim, 2002). Lee (2005) identified two catch-up modes: Taiwan
followed the sequential steps of OEM, ODM, and OBM, by learning from foreign
countries; Korea jumped from OEM directly to OBM without consolidating
design technology. The author suggests that China might be a third model mixing
both Korean and Taiwanese models in it, but more researches are needed.
It is generally accepted that technology transfer activities alone may not necessarily
result to sustainable innovation. Relying too much on foreign direct investment (FDI)
has brought many disadvantages in the domestic industries. Technology acquisition
from firms in more advanced countries is obviously important to firms in
industrializing countries that are trying to catch up technologically (Guan et al.,
2006). However, since technology suppliers are not usually willing to disseminate core
technology to other enterprises, China can acquire only some medium- or low-level
technology using this source so a technology gap exists when compared with the
international latest technology (Wang and Zhou, 1999). Therefore, Guan et al. (2006)
suggest that the innovation activities in Chinese manufacturing firms could not be
boosted substantially merely through the acquisition of key equipment and apparatus
from abroad. Enterprise should formulate viable technology transfer strategies for
strengthening new product development and managing innovation process rather than
simply attaining for production scale or speed.
3. Different interests between domestic and foreign companies on

technology transfer
It is important for technology policy makers to fully understand the diversified
motivations and interests among the players of international technology transfer.
Western technology suppliers (WTS) and Chinese technology receivers (CTR) have
different perceptions and criteria for success. While WTSs ultimate aim is to penetrate
Chinas domestic market, utilize Chinas low labor costs and maximize financial returns,
CTRs aim is to acquire advanced technology, reputable trademark, technical or
managerial know-how, to develop R&D capacity, and gain access to international
markets (Farhang, 1997). Different interests also existed between industry and
government. Industrial players are commercially motivated for profit and market share,
JSTPC while the governments aimed for long-term national development, social welfare, and
2,2 technological competitiveness (Bruun and Bennett, 2002). Domestic and foreign scholars
have different standpoints, thus they have completely different perspective over the
technology transfer issues.
3.1 Foreign companies interests

126 The motivations of foreign technology providers have been studied in details in the
literatures. Through four cases of Swedish manufacturing firms which have
transferred technology to China, Farhang (1997) generalized some of the Western
companies motivations for transferring technology to China. These include: access to
the Chinese domestic market with a view to Chinas future development potentials;
achieve short-term financial revenues through direct sales of machinery or plant in the
form of turnkey or components and parts, or as license fees and royalties; utilization of
Chinas low labor costs and improving access to certain resources; and achieve
long-term financial revenue from the equity investment in the JV.
The above motivations cannot be easily realized, and major barriers or difficulties for
Western companies exist in many aspects. One of the most possible threats to foreign
companies arises from losing the technological lead to China in high-tech sectors. Most
foreign companies are aware of this threat and are sensitive about raising potential
Chinese competitors (Bruun and Bennett, 2002). In the short run, there might be
more common interests rather than conflicts between the foreign companies and their
Chinese counterparts, such as growth in local market share and profit. However, in the
long run, the Chinese counterparts might emerge as international competitors and capture
more market share globally. Considering all the good prospects of the original
motivations, this issue might therefore be a double-edged sword for the foreign
companies. Literatures also examine the question of technology transfer from the
perspective of techno-economic security and how companies respond to the possibility of
losing competitive advantage through misappropriation or leakage. Techno-economic
security raises the issue from a company level to a political level. Since this risk is often
exacerbated by insufficient legal protection of intellectual property rights in China, Europe
Union (EU) officially urged China to strengthen the protection of IPR. The issue of
techno-economic security relating to technology transfer to China has a special
significance also because of uncertainty about, and non-transparency of, the legislation
compared to Western systems (Bruun and Bennett, 2002).
3.2 Chinese companies interests

The motivations of CTR are quite different from their foreign counterparts. First, they
focus on the acquisition of advanced technology, reputable trademark, technical, and
managerial know-how; second, they want to gain access to international markets
through export of the product produced by means of the acquired technology and
earning of foreign exchange; third, they want to become competitive on the local Chinese
market and secure a technological base for long-term profits; fourth, they hope to
develop R&D capacity; last but not least, they may benefit from the Chinese government
subsidies which encourage technical cooperation with foreign firms (Farhang, 1997).
There are many difficulties for the domestic players to implement the above goals.
For example, based on a questionnaire survey covering 200 sample companies and
factories in mechanical industries in China, literature provided a detailed analysis
on various difficulties perceived by Chinese technology importers (Chen and Sun, Technology
2000). Major difficulties include inappropriate technology, limited access to overseas transfer
market information, misunderstanding and lack of mutual trust, steep price of the
advanced technology, unmatched engineering standard, incompatible production in China
management system, training and on-spot service support, difficult to improve the
transferred technology, and extra restrictions in the contract papers. Many uncertainty
factors may influence the purchase behaviors of foreign technologies by the Chinese 127
companies. These practical considerations for evaluating foreign technologies can
include: domestic market value of the technology, profit return from the technology,
foreign advanced level of the technology, market value cited from other exporters,
market value of alternative technology, domestic advanced level of the technology,
international market value of the technology, method of payment for purchasing the
technology, risk level of the technology import for recipient firms, and suppliers cost
on the technology (R&D and transferring cost) (Chen and Sun, 2000).
3.3 Interests balance

Transference of appropriate technology has proved to be the common interest and
most important issue for both China and Western developed countries. This is true at
both political and enterprise levels. In the early stages of Chinas economic reforms,
localization and production of goods for the export-market are some of the most
important aspects. Most Chinese firms aim to replace as many imported components
and inputs as possible and within the shortest time feasible in order to keep investment
cost down and to save foreign exchange (Farhang, 1997). However, in recent years,
there is a deliberate long-term concern at the political level about the importance of
technology development in key areas like, e.g. biotechnology and telecommunications
in order to develop social welfare. Special attention is paid to attract technology and
know how in such areas (Bruun and Bennett, 2002).
Particularly in recent years, many new buyers in the technology market are often
confused about the right technology and its suppliers. The question also arises from
foreign perspective whether Western countries should strive for an appropriate
balance between the need to transfer urgently required technology to China and the
need to maintain its own competitive edge in the high-tech sector (Bruun and Bennett,
2002). With regard to the conflicting interests between foreign and domestic companies
over appropriate technologies, scholars suggested some possible solutions. These
include CTR and WTS informing each other of the exact nature of their capabilities
and resources; selecting and evaluating technology and agreeing on technology fee;
investigating and evaluating the infrastructure around the technology to determine the
absorptive capacity and to ensure proper diffusion; discussing on how to adapt
technology to CTR conditions; providing adequate Chinese legal protection for the
technology transferred (Farhang, 1997).
Although Chinese industries often lack the necessary technological accumulations
and absorptive capacities, the government still insists on importing the most advanced
technology. The goal is to achieve leapfrogging and catch-up. However, the Chinese
enterprises may not fully understand which specific technology to pursuit. Similarly,
the foreign side may not understand what technology is more suitable for the Chinese
market (Farhang, 1997). In this connection, scholars have used extension of technology
acceptance model to study international transfer of product technology. Empirical tests
JSTPC proved that several antecedents have significant influence on the success of technology
2,2 transfer. These include: technological compatibility, ease of adoption, technical,
and economic benefits to the adopting firm. All of these factors have direct and indirect
effects on attitudes toward the adoption of foreign-developed technology, and on
behavioral intentions to adopt such technology. As a result, decision makers need to
weigh factors such as perceived ease of use, perceived usefulness, and potential
128 technology and economic benefits (Benedetto et al., 2003).
4. Issues of stakeholders and innovators

While balancing the different interests of both sides, technology policies also need to
consider and address various issues faced by stakeholders and actors. Technology
transfer can be a lengthy, complex, and dynamic process and its success is influenced
by various factors originating from many different sources (Kumar et al., 1999; Walter,
2000). From the perspective of innovation systems, we can examine the unique
characteristics of each participants, or innovators, in the transaction process. It is

important for policy makers to have a better understanding of the problems and special
needs of each actor. The situation in China is even more complicated than many other
developing countries due to its legacy of a central planned economy. This section will
focus the analysis on issues faced by some key actors in Chinas evolving innovation
systems. Table I presents recent literatures (2006-2009) on technology transfer and
innovation in China. The stakeholders and innovators being studied in these literatures
have been identified and listed. An analysis section is followed to discuss major
barriers and obstacles faced by each of these identified stakeholders.
4.1 Higher education institutions

Higher education institutions (HEIs) have long been key players in technology transfer
and innovation activities. HEIs were seen as having two tasks to train high-level
qualified personnel with professional skills and to develop science, technology, and
culture (Liu and Jiang, 2001). There are more than 1,000 state-owned universities in
China, of which 200 have been regarded as strong in research (National 211 Program).
Some of these premium universities are well-equipped with facilities and laboratories,
where faculties carry out basic research in high technology areas. Universities
participate in technology transfer through various channels, which has been identified
in literature (Liu and Jiang, 2001): establishment of university industry cooperation,
collaboration with local governments, enabling of high technology spin-offs, building
of science and technology (S&T) cooperation network with other universities, etc.
In recent years, there are still many obstacles hindering technology transfer from
universities in China. First of all, most Chinese universities suffer from budget
constraints. Second, the performance evaluation system does not stimulate staffs
attitude toward technology transfer. Employees pay more attention on publications and
programs with high academic value. Third, R&D activities at universities tend to
overlook market demand and economic value. Last but not least, distribution of benefits
and protection of IPR are also notable issues in universitys technology transfer
activities (Liu and Jiang, 2001; Hong, 2008; Kroll and Liefner, 2008). Many of these
problems conforms with early findings in related topics (Corsten, 1987) which include:
attitude of many professors, inclination towards perfectionism, lack of practicality, lack
of realism and hostility to compromise prompted by the search for scientific truth,
Author (Year) Innovators studied Brief summary
Wu and Pangarkar (2006) MNCs, SMEs, SOEs Explores how local firms in emerging markets can counter the threat posed by the entry of MNCs.
Performance levels depend on the strategy adopted by the firm
Fan (2006) SOEs Domestic firms should focus on in-house R&D development to build their innovation capability,
supplemented with external alliances
Siu et al. (2006) SMEs Examines the interplay of government intervention, manufacturing systems and business
approaches and impacts upon the new product development of SMEs in China
Chen and Reger (2006) MNCs The motives for German FDI are long-term based and market-oriented, which can be characterized
through seeking new markets and enlarging market shares. Technology transfer is mainly
dedicated to production and managerial facilities
Duanmu and Fai (2007) MNCs, SMEs Investigates vertical knowledge transfers from inward-invested MNEs to indigenous Chinese
suppliers
Liu and Buck (2007) FR&D Foreign R&D activities by MNEs in a host country significantly affect the innovation performance
of domestic firms
Gao et al. (2007) MNCs, SMEs, SOEs Development of strong manufacturing capabilities will not necessarily be an effective strategy for
local firms competing against MNEs. The way to go is developing innovation capabilities and core
technologies
Motohashi and Yun (2007) SOEs, SMEs, PRIs, Chinese manufacturing firms still possess only a low level of technological capability. Collaboration
University with PRIs and universities needs to be promoted
Hutschenreiter and Zhang SOEs, PRIs Technology imports, and international technology transfer will continue to play an important role in
(2007) Chinas development, but the country needs to continue investing in R&D and education and to
overcome the institutional and structural weaknesses
Hu (2007) Technology parks Examines Chinas technology parks growth in response to the policy incentives and external
economies from the concentration of high-technology firms
Chen and Kenney (2007) PRIs, University, Explores the role of URIs in the development of the Chinese economy through the comparison of
Clusters developments of regional technology clusters
Liu and Zou (2008) FR&D Foreign R&D activities by MNCs in China significantly affect the innovation domestic firms and
there exist both intra-industry and inter-industry spillovers
Fisher-Vanden and SOEs Explores different purpose of internal R&D and technology import. Chinese firms simultaneously
Jefferson (2008) expend resources on disparate forms of technical change that embody different factor biases
Zheng et al. (2009) SOEs Chinas reform measures often resulted in one-time level effects on productivity, but further
institutional reforms are required to consolidate Chinas move to a full-fledged market economy
(continued)
Technology
transfer
technology transfer and

innovation in China
Journal literatures on
in China
129
Table I.
2,2
130
Table I.
JSTPC
Hong (2008) University Examines university-industry collaborations in China, and shows a decentralizing/localizing trend
in knowledge flow
Girma and Gong (2008a, b) SOEs, MNCs Reforming the largely inefficient SOEs presents a major challenge. Limited regional linkages and
low level of absorptive capacity are found to be the main reasons for the disappointing performance
Kim and Zhang (2008) SOEs, MNCs This paper investigates the clustering of Chinese electronics manufacturers with foreign producers.
It analyzes how MNCs collaboration with local firms fosters local economic development
Ge (2009) Clusters Investigates the linkage between globalization and industry agglomeration in China. Export-
oriented and foreign-invested industries have a higher degree of agglomeration than other
industries
Asakawa and Som (2008) FR&D, MNCs Explores and compares the uniqueness of MNCs in managing their R&D in China and India. The
paper supports the trend that more innovation is required by firms and managers to strategize
about their R&D investments in China
Girma and Gong (2008a, b) SOEs Competition from sectoral FDI has a deleterious impact on the growth and survival probability of
SOEs
Kiyota et al. (2008) MNCs, CMOs Examines the determinants of the backward vertical linkages of Japanese foreign affiliates in
manufacturing, focusing on the local backward linkages, or local procurement in China
Ying (2008) FR&D, CROs Technological latecomers growth is depending on spillovers of the pioneer R&D. The Chinese R&D
productivity growth depends on the simultaneous expansion of the domestic and foreign knowledge
stock in China
Kroll and Liefner (2008) University, SMEs Spin-offs has been proved as an appropriate solution for technology transfer at Chinese universities,
but many of the companies still suffer from defective incentive structures and lack of performance
Zhou (2008) MNCs, CMOs Examines how the synergy between Chinas domestic and the international market has affected its
most competitive indigenous companies
Bin (2008) FR&D, MNCs Investigates the direct and interactive contributions of four technology acquisition channels
including: in-house R&D, foreign technology transfer, domestic technology transfer, and inter-
industry R&D spillover
Girma et al. (2009) MNCs, SOEs Inward FDI in the sector level has a negative effect on innovative activity in SOEs in average, but
there is a positive effect of FDI on SOEs that export, invest in human capital, or undertake R&D
Chen et al. (2009) MNCs As emerging markets develop, foreign firms are being viewed less and less as providers of capital
and/or technology, and more as integral parts of society
Swan and Allred (2009) MNCs The relationship between a perceived influence of China on technology strategy and MNC
subsidiary process technology sourcing strategy is moderated by the innovation context
(continued)
Li (2009) Clusters Government support, the constitution of the R&D performers, and the regional industry-specific
innovation environment are significant determinants of innovation efficiency
Hatani (2009) MNCs Drawing on the global value chain analysis and institutional views, MNCs inhibit technology
spillovers even at the lower tiers of the supply hierarchy within the emerging economy context
Wei et al. (2009) High-tech zones Analyses Suzhous transformation model of development into a globalizing FDI and high-tech
center. Pathway of development is promoted by integrating globalizing regional development with
domesticating globalization, and by moving beyond the divide of globalization and localization
Lee (2009) Clusters The formation of cross-border high-tech regions is shaped and determined at the level of the
industrial system, thus involves the relocation and institutional re-embedding of industrial systems
across the border
Guan et al. (2009) SOEs, SMEs Innovation activities of Chinese firms were mainly directed at quality improvement. SMEs that
obtained support from the government through generally perform better
Fan et al. (2009) MNCs Chinas FDI inflow is inefficiently large because weak institutions deter domestic investment while
special initiatives attract FDI are thus either unsupported or not unique to China
Huang and Sharif (2009) SMEs Foreign-funded companies were less active than Guangdong domestic companies in pursuing R&D
and innovation activities
Technology
transfer
in China
131
Table I.
JSTPC lack of regard for deadlines and profitability, communication difficulties, and
2,2 confidentiality problems.
4.2 Public research institutes

PRIs are the major sources of technological innovation and transfer in China.
Their missions are mainly to serve the ministerial departments and enterprises within
132 their industry. Due to the legacy of centrally planned economy structure, technology
development and transfer activities in these institutes were managed by vertical
administration from the government departments. However, in recent years, research
institutes are encouraged to work with the industry, undertake research projects from
other sources, and make profits from the outcomes of their research. Research
institutes have gained more autonomy or even become completely independent of the
government. Now, these institutes can, and have to, decide what research projects to
take and how to raise funds for projects and salaries (Liu and Jiang, 2001).
Although the recent changes have been regarded as improvements toward the
market-oriented reforms, the impacts of such technology policies still need to be

examined in the long run. To certain extent, the S&T system reform prioritized for
commercialization has weakened the development of basic research and
public-benefit-oriented research (Chen and Kenney, 2007). Those applied-oriented
research institutes have gained the most benefit from the reform whereas those
involved in basic research cannot easily obtain enough funding. Neither can they attract
nor recruit enough top-level researchers. Moreover, the supply of public-benefit-oriented
research has been insufficient to meet the basic demand of the nation. For example, the
severe acute respiratory syndromes scare in 2003 exposed the weakness of the public
health system to defend the nation against serious diseases (Zhong and Yang, 2007).
Several challenges remain with regard to how to improve the efficiency of PRIs and,
more strategically, as to what role the they should play in Chinas emerging
enterprise-centered innovation system (Hutschenreiter and Zhang, 2007).
4.3 State-owned enterprises

SOEs are medium- to large-sized companies left by the centrally planned system.
These enterprises enjoyed preferential treatment in terms of policy and resource
allocation that was basically extended through government policies and regulations on
matters such as energy, raw materials, equipment, manpower, etc. (Guan et al., 2009).
In recent economic reforms, some SOEs have been transformed into other categories of
ownership such as shareholding enterprises, limited liability firms, and privatized
SOEs. Except for the last category, the privatized SOEs, the government still maintain
majority share control of companies in other two categories. The corporate governance
mechanism in these companies is quite different from other types of companies.
Top executives are appointed by the government and their experiences in these
companies are continual building part of their political careers. As a result, these
managers tend to focus on short-term economic performance rather than risky
long-term strategic investment in R&D (Girma and Gong, 2008a, b).
SOEs are still facing many problems even after the economic reforms in recent years.
Empirical evidences indicated that most of SOEs in China had spent a great portion of
the innovation cost in the acquisition of technological equipment from foreign countries
(Guan, 2002). They preferred material technology to immaterial elements. It was also
revealed that acquisition of key equipment and apparatus from abroad could not Technology
effectively boost substantial innovation activity for Chinese manufacturing firms transfer
(Guan et al., 2006). Jefferson et al. (2006) found that while R&D performers are more
concentrated among SOEs, these enterprises are not efficient in knowledge production. in China
Their poor performances are due to the lack of flexibility caused by extensive
government interventions in their economic management (Organization for Economic
Co-Operation and Development (OECD), 2002). The inefficiencies have lead to 133
low-profits and escalating debts, and this has led to further government interventions to
prop the poor firms up by transferring resources from the better performing firms to the
bad firms. There is a large spread in returns between the performance of the small
number of state firms that do well and the bulk of them that do very poorly (Zheng et al.,
2009). According to OECD (2008) reports, Chinese SOEs still record much lower levels of
productivity than other firms, often appear to be less efficient knowledge producers and
often lack the basis for R&D. Moreover, many SOEs have lost their previous
monopolistic advantages, although they continue to enjoy priority access to resources
(but to a much lesser extent), given that the socialist legacy continues to exert a leaden
impact on industrial innovation. To sustain the transition process, the central
government has been forced to pay more attention to developing S&T policy that fits the
strategic orientations of different forms of enterprises, particularly those of SOEs
(Guan et al., 2009).
4.4 Small- to medium-sized enterprises

Chinas economic reform in the last 30 years has resulted in the rapid expansion of the
private sector. SMEs, which mostly consist of new ventures, have played a significant
role and have largely contributed to industrial growth. These SMEs are emerging firms
specialized in niche areas of some sub-sectors. They aim to profit by achieving
competition advantage in these market segments.
There are particular problems of technology transfer for SMEs, and literatures have
identified many of the obstacles. Chen and Sun (2000) found that small companies
emphasize on purchase of technical equipment together with technical support
and technical service. They favor more on market value and immediate market profit
than an advanced level of technology. Technology transfer is frequently
problem-solution-oriented rather than strategic in nature, and based less on
conceptual or pure research (Corsten, 1987). Literature also has similar findings on
these enterprises, which include: lack of strategic perspectives, weak in R&D
capabilities, ineffective communication with research institutes, and lack of financial
resources (Liu and Jiang, 2001). According to OECD (2008) reports, Chinas financial
system does not meet the funding needs of private firms, notably SMEs. The capital
market is underdeveloped and SMEs find it difficult to secure loans since banks favor
large companies, particularly SOEs. Smaller, privately owned firms thus largely depend
on self-funding. Moreover, government policies focused on SOEs have at the same time
crowded out support to non-state-owned companies which hold a large potential
(Hutschenreiter and Zhang, 2007).
4.5 Joint ventures

Equity JVs are the preferred modes for the Chinese central government to acquire and
introduce high technology from abroad. The policy of trading domestic market
JSTPC for foreign technologies has been adopted and the government expects foreign
2,2 investors to transfer technologies to China through JVs. For many a Western firm China
offers the attraction of a large domestic market for capital goods, intermediate products,
and final goods and services. To others China may hold the promise of becoming a
low-cost production base from which they could eventually serve not only the domestic
market, but also the global market (Farhang, 1997). JVs would be preferred when
134 competition in the host country is intense and when cultural distance is large between
the host and the foreign countries (Barkema et al., 1996).
Many multinational firms who invested in China chose to form JVs with Chinese
partners. Two external factors appeared to be the major determinants of this choice
which are environment factors and the market factors. Chinas entry into the WTO has
further reinforced FDI and triggered a new wave of international technology transfer.
Yet, these FDI tend to favor low-tech industries that extract more resources from China
(Wu and Pangarkar, 2006). Although the situation has started to change in recent years,
innovation only improved in several limited industries, and S&T achievements in many
high-tech areas still grow at relatively slow rate. From the foreign perspective, with a
joint-venture framework the training required may easily extend beyond the realm of the
JV and into spheres involving, for example, suppliers of raw materials and actual
construction of the manufacturing plant. In order to achieve the internationally-accepted
quality standards and other requirements, the foreign companies were compelled to
offer an industry-level education and training (Farhang, 1997; Chen and Reger, 2006). An
observation is that there seems to be a trend away from JVs. Typically the earlier
establishments started as JVs, but today the wholly foreign-owned enterprise is the
preferred legal set-up among many foreign companies (Bruun and Bennett, 2002;
Kim and Zhang, 2008).
4.6 MNCs and foreign R&D centers

A growing number of Western and Japanese firms have been launching their R&D
operations in China (Asakawa and Som, 2008). This has no doubt brought China a new
channel of international technology transfer (Liu and Buck, 2007). On the one hand,
some companies have established foreign owned in-house R&D facilities in China.
On the other hand, many companies have setup virtual R&D networks, building
partnerships with local companies and research institutes, as well as universities to
conduct research. A wholly owned in-house R&D center in China can recruit and train
high-quality employees so it has better control over the research process. It also helps
the foreign side to win over beneficial policy measures from Chinese regulators who
favor innovative R&D investments (Liu and Zou, 2008). A virtual network is a good
choice for firms to reduce risks and costs. Risk sharing occurs when separate entities
invest in a common risky endeavor. Through cooperation with other firms, each entity
pays only a fraction of the investment. This allows research to be done more efficiently.
It expands companys capacity, increases flexibility, and reduces fixed infrastructure.
There is notably more D than R in the FR&D. In some cases explored by literature
(Bruun and Bennett, 2002), development is a dominant part of R&D. Most of the
investigated foreign companies expressed a wish to expand the research part, including
by transfer, but have so far been reluctant, because they see serious problems in the IPR
area (Asakawa and Som, 2008). The companies took the R&D function as being very
sensitive in terms of maintaining and increasing competitive advantage.
Many companies try to expand the R&D activities through cooperation with local Technology
universities. In addition to the quality of research this also has a strong bearing on transfer
recruiting qualified talents (Bin, 2008). R&D contributions that are not limited only
to China, but also for the companies global use, have therefore emerged. However, as in China
long as the IPR issues still exist in China, foreign companies tend to keep their core R&D
in headquarters or split up their R&D activities among various units to reduce risks of
losing core knowledge and technology (Bruun and Bennett, 2002). 135
5. Discussions on literature findings
The literatures listed in the above section have widely covered recent technology
transfer and innovation issues in China. However, many of the identified obstacles
still exist and unsolved. A careful examination of these literatures reveals
that international technology transfer issues can be categorized into several
interrelated levels, which include: macro level, meso level, and micro level. A good
understanding of influential factors at each of these levels provides better insight for
policy making.
At a macro level, literature findings show that there are many environmental factors
promoting international technology transfer, which include national policy, economy
growth, and market trend. For example, technology transfer needs appropriate legislation
on intellectual property protection. It is also directly influenced by market need
and investment. International technology transfer and acquisition should align with
national goal in technology development. Macro level regulations and incentives can have
major impacts on the efficiency of technology transfer process. International technology
transfer, especially high-tech exports and imports, are being strictly controlled at national
level. Western developed countries have issued various regulations regarding to
cross-border technological transactions. These restrictions have largely deterred
international technology transfer to China. For example, the USA has limited
technology transfer to China in many high-tech areas, which includes: computer and
communications technologies, ship-building, airplane, satellite, nuclear energy, etc.
This policy even inflicts many other EU countries working in high-tech projects with
China. As a result, China cannot solely rely on international technology transfer in
high-tech industries. Indigenous innovation should be emphasized and promoted
at the national level.
At the meso level, many actors of international technology transfer have been
identified in the above literatures. In the process of technical transactions, strategies of
stakeholders are the determinants for the success of international technology transfer.
Generally, the technology development process can be accelerated by cooperative
interactions among the players. It is closely related to the robustness of technological
innovation systems. Chinas entry into WTO has significantly improved the condition
for international technology transfer. Investments from the MNCs gained extra
freedom in accessing the huge Chinese market. These multinationals are extremely
important sources for China to acquire foreign technologies, but there are many factors
to consider such as intensified competition, crowding out of domestic enterprises and
newcomers. Recent literatures showed that international technology transfer can exist
in many new channels including R&D collaboration, cross border mergers and
acquisitions, and outsourcing. Technology learning has also been enhanced by some
non-formal channels which include academic communication, flow of scientists and
JSTPC engineers, etc. These channels are new opportunities for the emerging economies to
2,2 accelerate their catching up process. The issues faced by host government are to adjust
industrial policies, provide an innovative environment, thus to promote domestic
innovation capability.
At the micro level, many literatures focus on the issues of technology selection and
assessment. Characteristics of technology play a significant role in international
136 technology transfer. These features may include availability, maturity, adaptability,
gaps, etc. From the perspective of developing countries, emerging technology can
provide a window of opportunity for technology leapfrogging. Much has been written
in the literatures about the need to transfer appropriate technology for developing
countries. Therefore, technology adaptability in a foreign market is an important factor
for the success of international technology transfer. Technology gaps describe the
distance between domestic technological competency level and international
state-of-the-arts technologies. Literatures studying institutions and technological
development found technology gap may either enhance or deter the efficiency of
international technology transfer. Technology management techniques can be applied

to international technology transfer for evaluation of technology alternatives, selection
and acquisition of appropriate technologies, and strategic technological planning.
Many technology assessment approaches and tools have been identified to conduct
related research, which include: scenario analysis, impact analysis, risk assessment,
multi-criteria analysis, cost benefit analysis, Delphi, etc. Emerging high-tech areas
produce new challenges for developing countries to catch-up and realize the latecomer
advantage. Not only they need to select the right technological direction, but also they
need to accumulate technology learning capabilities.
In order to solve difficulties at various levels and sources, host government should
adjust related technology transfer policy, select appropriate technologies as break
through point, and construct a sustainable national innovation system (NIS).
Summarily, the policy-making process should consider these factors more
comprehensively at all levels. In the following sections, these issues will be studied in
a detailed technology development framework.
6. Technology transfer policy

Based on the discussion of findings from the listed literatures, this section further
discusses the political issues and feasible guidance for the government to enact
technological policies and for enterprises to foster technology transfer activities in
China. As it would be difficult to separate the national strategies of the Chinese
government from those of the Chinese enterprise, one must add as motives the economic
and industrial aims of the state which consist of foreign exchange earnings, import
substitution, creation of new jobs, and improvement of industrial productivity, quality
and capacity (Farhang, 1997). Technology transfer and innovation in China has
been deeply influenced by macro policies implemented by the central government.
Since the government has the privilege on resources allocation, it can therefore establish
policy enforcement by legislation or offering incentives and favorable measures
to regulate and promote international technology transfer. The best use of these
measures can protect the interests of stakeholders, and promote their innovation
activities.
6.1 Policy framework of technology transfer in China Technology
Literature introduced a conceptual framework that addresses major determinants of transfer
technology development and transfer in China (Liu and Jiang, 2001). The determinants
include the economic system, government policy and initiative, and constraints and in China
impetus. There are a number of factors that affect technology development and transfer
in China. The authors claimed that the most important factor is the economic system.
However, all these factors are ultimately determined by the Chinese central government 137
(policy and ideology). The government itself has a direct impact on technology
development and transfer, as is the case in many Western developed countries.
The vital role of central government has also been confirmed by the findings of
other researchers (Farhang, 1997): in China, most decisions concerning co-operation
with foreign enterprises were made by the relevant national, provincial, or local
departments of the government which oversee the enterprise or guide foreign
economic relations. Domestic technology receivers usually report the progress of the
negotiations to the supervisory government agency and depending on the scale of the
project.
Literatures have identified the importance of governments management of resources
and related constraints and impetus. Base on a case study, Chinese scholars gave
suggestions on technology transfer activities related to university, which include:
collaboration with enterprises, technology transfer through collaboration with local
governments, establishment of high technology companies, and building-up a S&T
cooperation network of Chinese universities (Liu and Jiang, 2001). However, the authors
did not distinguish the notable difference between SOEs and SMEs. The paper also did
not consider the increasing influence of foreign companies, which have been argued in
many other literatures to have built extensive collaborations with local universities in
R&D. It is necessary to understand the innovation behaviors at the enterprise level or
industrial level, and to see what elements contribute to those innovative actions.
The purpose is to make sure that policy measures can produce practical value to the
industry.
By proposing the model of TDAID (Figure 2), Wang and Zhou (1999) suggests the
following: providing preferential treatment for large multinational enterprises (MNEs),
revising regulation on foreign investment to the countrys central and western regions,
selling of state-owned small enterprise to foreign investors, diversifying FDI to
promote competition among themselves, banning at all levels from collecting random
fees from foreign invested firms, and promoting outward FDI to attract up-to-date
technology. The authors further suggested radical measures to restructure the Chinese
R&D system, including: creating R&D centers within large enterprises, combining
research institutions with R&D units of enterprises and universities through structural
adjustment, transforming independent research institute into enterprises or scientific
research units for public service, creating incentive systems for innovation activities,
and training of engineers and managers. However, these suggestions were given at the
end of the paper, without any guarantee that they are feasible in reality. Some of these
measures may sound plausible, but the authors did not consider the various
constraints and interests among the stakeholders. For example, the authors argued
that if FDI is used to import technology China can acquire much of the technology
available in the world. This has been proved impossible in recent years because the
government tried to trade domestic market access for foreign technologies
JSTPC but not successful. This does not even count the fact that strict technology export
2,2 controls have been imposed to China by Western developed countries.
6.2 Foreign influence on technology policy

The Western countries have their influence on Chinas technology transfer policies.
For example, EU has the aim to improve the investment environment for European
138 companies in China. Bruun and Bennett (2002) identified two areas in which policies
and initiatives at the EU level could protect the interests of European firms. These are
protection of intellectual property and Chinese trade liberalization. Literature found two
challenging aspects for the Swedish companies while negotiating technology transfer
deals with the Chinese side (Farhang, 1997): the bureaucratic nature of decision making
due to involvement of government agencies and the lengthy process of learning while
negotiating. The authors argued that that transferring technology to China is an
extremely arduous and exhaustive process which may draw heavily on the Western
technology-supplying firms technical and managerial resources. The problems appear
not only in different stages of the transfer process but also at different levels, which may
include the technology level, the enterprise level and the national level. The legacy of a
centralized system, a poor infrastructure, a distinct culture and foreigners lack of access
to adequate information on the Chinese technology receiving enterprises and their
environment complicate the situation (Farhang, 1997). The construction of a sound and
transparent regulatory framework for investment and a better enforcement of Chinese
regulations on intellectual property rights are prime examples to solve the problems
(Bruun and Bennett, 2002).
Chinas entry into the WTO in 2001 marked a new era in technology development.
However, literature found that the WTO agreements do not encompass conditions
imposed on foreign investors (such as requirements to transfer technology and form JVs
with local partners in some sectors) or incentives and subsidies for investors (Bruun and
Bennett, 2002). It is likely that China and other emerging countries will continue to
impose restrictive conditions or regulations on foreign investors. Multinationals may
have to comply with such conditions imposed if they fear loss of market shares to other
competitors who are willing to comply with the conditions. Meanwhile, MNCs may tend
to inhibit technology spillovers even at the lower tiers of the supply hierarchy within the
emerging economy context (Hatani, 2009). Therefore, there is a necessity at the national
level to give better transparency in policy making, especially regulative measures for
foreign companies.
7. Implications on innovation policy

Based on the above discussion of obstacles and challenges related to technology
transfer into China, as well as issues in policy making, this section will try to clarify the
policy implications at various levels.
7.1 Balancing international technology transfer and innovation

Although international technology transfer is a fast track in technology development, it
may not naturally result in long-term innovation, or sustainable innovation. China needs
to establish effective macro-level technology policy to coordinate technology transfer,
innovation activities, and resource allocation. As the latecomer approaches the
technological frontier, so its strategies have to shift from imitation to innovation
(Kim, 1997). This has been the case for many of the successful East Asian Tiger Technology
economies for Japan first, then for Taiwan, Korea, and Singapore and now for China. transfer
A common question is: is it likely to stay stuck in catch-up mode as a perpetual imitator,
or can it build its absorptive capacity to the point that it can sustain genuine innovation in China
(Hu and Mathews, 2008)? To fit the challenges of globalization, multinational companies
from developed countries are trying to utilize more dispersive innovation
resources through establishing strategic alliances with companies in developing 139
countries. Indigenous innovation is a strategy with bright prospect for China, but the
real question is how to balance international technology transfer with other innovation
strategies, i.e. imitative innovation and collaborative innovation, to build up the
innovation capacity for long-term success.
7.2 Leveraging national and local resources

The development of high-tech industries suggests that it is necessary but difficult to find
balance between local and global, internal and external innovation (Tidd, 2007). Tylecote
(2006) argued that dual innovation systems co-exist in transitional China. One is an
upper level innovation system which mimics its counterpart in developed economies and
focuses on the development of advanced technology. The other is a lower level
innovation system which has its roots in locally embedded industries. From a macro
perspective, the upper level focus more on research and innovation, while the lower level
focus on exploitation, technology transfer, and dissemination. Li (2009) suggests that
during the catch-up or transition process, overall economic and innovation performance
depends largely on how China coordinates the two system levels. There are relatively
few literatures linking innovation systems at both macro and micro level to how an
improvement in them could result in raising national innovation capacity (Carlsson,
2006). As the innovation systems are becoming more globalized, it is necessary to
identify the influencing factors and construct a framework to get a proper balance.
Chinas NIS is still fast evolving and has caused much complexity in administrative
management. Although the central government has taken initiatives to facilitate
interactions among various innovation players through many national technology
programs, policy actions concerning innovation system reforms which aimed at
improving innovation performance and efficiency are still very limited. There are
many coordination obstacles among the innovation systems at different administrative
regions because local governments tend to consider more of their own interests.
As identified by literatures, the bureaucratic nature of decision making due to
involvement of government agencies has deterred the efficiency of technological
cooperation among innovators. Technology development and strategic planning
directed by local governments should follow the main theme of national technology
planning. This is to minimize any conflicts between national and regional technology
goals. In China, either developed regions or less developed regions claim that high-tech
industries are the pillars for economic development. Many local governments therefore
request the central governments to increase investments on local innovation resources.
However, much of these inputs are not successful because of unbalanced economic
development and insufficient industrial support. For example, 54 high-tech zones or
industrial parks have been established one after another in various cities across China,
but only very few are successful, and the general innovation performance is
unsatisfactory.
JSTPC 7.3 Focusing on an enterprise-centered NIS
2,2 China is shifting from a central-planned system to a socialist market economy, and
its NIS is undergoing a transitional process. However, the legacy of the central-planned
economy has left China a relatively stronger SOE system but a weaker private sector.
According to statistical report in 2010, the revenue of top 500 private Chinese
companies combined cannot win over that of the top two state-owned companies.
140 The business sector should be the mainstay of technological innovation, but Chinese
enterprises are far from capable to become the center of the innovation systems.
Literature reveals that most of Chinese firms prefer to enlarge their productivity and
mass production by importing equipment and apparatus, with limited intention to
develop innovative products. Due to intense market competition, they acquire and
transfer technologies which focus on short-term revenue and financial performance
(Guan et al., 2006). In general, the ratio of R&D investments to sales revenue of the
Chinese enterprises is much lower than that of multinational companies. The direct
result is fewer patents applications and less IPR ownership. Many domestic companies
rely heavily on technology import and transfer from foreign countries. Moreover, these
enterprises lack innovation capability and accumulated technological know how to
absorb imported technology. Consequently, some domestic companies are deeply
trapped in a technology transfer cycle. Government intervention and regulatory
changes should serve to promote business R&D and innovation. Technology policies
should balance interests of various actors, and offer incentives to encourage innovation
at the enterprise level. Government should also focus on improving innovation
environment for the enterprises, so that transferred technologies from foreign
innovation sources can contribute to sustainable innovation.
7.4 Formulating policies to improve innovation capabilities

Promoting the innovation capability and performance of the R&D system has been one
of the most critical challenges. Literatures suggest that some basic conditions regarding
capacities and incentives are not enough. The governments investment on higher
education system needs to keep up with rapidly growing demand. The need for high
quality scientists and engineers arise from both industry and research institutes.
Due to higher salaries in foreign companies, many domestic enterprises, especially
private companies cannot recruit qualified R&D staff. Similar problems also happed to
PRIs and universities. Throughout the recent years of structural reform, there has been a
scope to urge for returns and stimulate for commercial outputs from university labs and
PRIs. However, these commercialization activities and market-led innovation have
notably weakened basic research. Effective policy measures are very necessary in
steering and funding of basic research in a market environment. The loose connections
within the R&D system need to be fastened. Many key R&D programs may be carried
out repeatedly among different innovators, which is inefficient in consolidating
resources. Increased collaboration among industry, universities, and PRIs may help ease
these problems. The division of labor should be optimized at national level when
carrying out basic and pre-competitive research. A more appropriate institutional
framework should be developed to enhance the multilateral cooperation in Chinas R&D
system.
Another notable problem in Chinas NIS is the weak linkage between research and
industry. Technology policy should try to facilitate the relationships between private
companies and public enterprises; between research institutes and industry; between Technology
domestic SMEs and foreign MNCs. Chinas economy is still going through the catch-up transfer
stage, and thus need to import technology and benefit from the late development
advantage (Chang and Shih, 2004). For domestic SOEs, they should at one hand focus in China
on independent R&D improvement, while on the other hand seeking supplement
foreign innovation resources. The path of industrial development can be shortened and
accelerated by international technology transfer and acquisition. For domestic SMEs, 141
which cannot afford to do so, should increase early-stage technology collaborations
by sharing R&D resources, and consolidating upstream/downstream resources.
8. Conclusions and future research

Even though there are still many difficulties in Chinas industrial policy regarding to
international technology transfer, this literature review and discussion provide new
insight for policy making for technology development and innovation. As a major
channel for catching up and leapfrogging, technology transfer from developed countries
should be strengthened at various levels. Due to the fact that Chinas NIS is still rapidly
evolving from a centrally-planned system to a market-orientated system, technology
policies should be revised at a dynamic manner to keep promoting international
technology transfer and collaborations between domestic and foreign stakeholders. It
would be crucial for government level to emphasize the nurturing of indigenous
innovation capacities so as to sustain the countrys technological advancement. The
review of recent literatures also highlighted some important hints for future research in
the area of technology transfer in China. New theories and models should be developed
and tested to reflect changes in environmental settings. Research focus of technology
transfer to China may include the challenges brought by globalization of industries and
internationalization of the emerging Chinese multinationals.
References
Asakawa, K. and Som, A. (2008), Internationalization of R&D in China and India: conventional
wisdom versus reality, Asia Pacific Journal of Management, Vol. 25, pp. 375-94.
Barkema, H.G., Bell, J. and Pennings, J.M. (1996), Foreign entry, cultural barriers, and learning,
Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 17, pp. 151-66.
Benedetto, C.A.D., Calantone, R.J. and Zhang, C. (2003), International technology transfer: model
and exploratory study in the Peoples Republic of China, International Marketing Review,
Vol. 20, pp. 446-62.
Bin, G. (2008), Technology acquisition channels and industry performance: an industry-level
analysis of Chinese large- and medium-size manufacturing enterprises, Research Policy,
Vol. 37, pp. 194-209.
Bruun, P. and Bennett, D. (2002), Transfer of technology to China: a Scandinavian and European
perspective, European Management Journal, Vol. 20, pp. 98-106.
Carlsson, B. (2006), Internationalization of innovation systems: a survey of the literature,
Research Policy, Vol. 35, pp. 56-67.
Chang, P.L. and Shih, H.Y. (2004), The innovation systems of Taiwan and China: a comparative
analysis, Technovation, Vol. 24, pp. 529-39.
Chen, D., Newburry, W. and Park, S.H. (2009), Improving sustainability: an international
evolutionary framework, Journal of International Management, Vol. 15, pp. 317-27.
JSTPC Chen, K. and Kenney, M. (2007), Universities/research institutes and regional innovation
systems: the cases of Beijing and Shenzhen, World Development, Vol. 35, pp. 1056-74.
2,2
Chen, X. and Reger, G. (2006), The role of technology in the investment of German firms in
China, Technovation, Vol. 26, pp. 407-15.
Chen, X. and Sun, C. (2000), Technology transfer to China: alliances of Chinese enterprises with
western technology exporters, Technovation, Vol. 20, pp. 353-62.
142 Corsten, H. (1987), Technology transfer from universities to small and medium-sized
enterprises an empirical survey from the standpoint of such enterprises, Technovation,
Vol. 6, pp. 57-68.
Duanmu, J. and Fai, F.M. (2007), A processual analysis of knowledge transfer: from foreign
MNEs to Chinese suppliers, International Business Review, Vol. 16, pp. 449-73.
Ernst, D. and Kim, L. (2002), Global production networks, knowledge diffusion and local
capability formation, Research Policy, Vol. 31, pp. 1417-29.
Fan, J.P.H., Morck, R., Xu, L.C. and Yeung, B. (2009), Institutions and foreign direct investment:
China versus the rest of the world, World Development, Vol. 37, pp. 852-65.
Fan, P. (2006), Catching up through developing innovation capability: evidence from Chinas
telecom-equipment industry, Technovation, Vol. 26, pp. 359-68.
Farhang, M. (1997), Managing technology transfer to China, International Marketing Review,
Vol. 14, pp. 92-106.
Fisher-Vanden, K. and Jefferson, G.H. (2008), Technology diversity and development: evidence
from Chinas industrial enterprises, Journal of Comparative Economics, Vol. 36, pp. 658-72.
Gao, X., Zhang, P. and Liu, X. (2007), Competing with MNEs: developing
manufacturing capabilities or innovation capabilities, Journal of Technology Transfer,
Vol. 32, pp. 87-107.
Ge, Y. (2009), Globalization and industry agglomeration in China, World Development, Vol. 37,
pp. 550-9.
Girma, S. and Gong, Y.D. (2008a), FDI, linkages and the efficiency of state-owned enterprises in
China, Journal of Development Studies, Vol. 44, pp. 728-49.
Girma, S. and Gong, Y.D. (2008b), Putting people first? Chinese state-owned enterprises
adjustment to globalisation, International Journal of Industrial Organization, Vol. 26,
pp. 573-85.
Girma, S., Gong, Y. and Gorg, H. (2009), What determines innovation activity in Chinese
state-owned enterprises? The role of foreign direct investment, World Development,
Vol. 37, pp. 866-73.
Guan, J.C. (2002), Comparison study on industrial innovation between China and some
European countries, Production & Inventory Management Journal, Vol. 43, pp. 30-46.
Guan, J.C., Yam, R.C.M., Tang, E.P.Y. and Lau, A.K.W. (2009), Innovation strategy and
performance during economic transition: evidences in Beijing, China, Research Policy,
Vol. 38, pp. 802-12.
Guan, J.C., Mok, C.K., Yam, R.C.M., Chin, K.S. and Pun, K.F. (2006), Technology transfer and
innovation performance: evidence from Chinese firms, Technological Forecasting and
Social Change, Vol. 73, pp. 666-78.
Hatani, F. (2009), The logic of spillover interception: the impact of global supply chains in
China, Journal of World Business, Vol. 44, pp. 158-66.
Hobday, M. (1995), Innovation in East Asia: The Challenge to Japan, Edward Elgar, Cheltenham.
Hong, W. (2008), Decline of the center: the decentralizing process of knowledge transfer of Technology
Chinese universities from 1985 to 2004, Research Policy, Vol. 37, pp. 580-95.
transfer
Hu, A.G.Z. (2007), Technology parks and regional economic growth in China, Research Policy,
Vol. 36, pp. 76-87. in China
Hu, M.C. and Mathews, J.A. (2008), Chinas national innovative capacity, Research Policy,
Vol. 37, pp. 1465-79.
Huang, C. and Sharif, N. (2009), Manufacturing dynamics and spillovers: the case of Guangdong 143
Province and Hong Kong, Macau, and Taiwan (HKMT), Research Policy, Vol. 38,
pp. 813-28.
Hutschenreiter, G. and Zhang, G. (2007), Chinas quest for innovation-driven growth the policy
dimension, Journal of Industry Competition and Trade, Vol. 7, pp. 245-54.
Jefferson, G.H., Bai, H., Guan, X. and Yu, X. (2006), R&D performance in Chinese industry,
Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Vol. 15, pp. 345-66.
Kim, J.Y. and Zhang, L.Y. (2008), Formation of foreign direct investment clustering a new path
to local economic development? The case of Qingdao, Regional Studies, Vol. 42, pp. 265-80.
Kim, L. (1997), Imitation to Innovation: The Dynamics of Koreas Technological Learning,
Harvard Business School Press, Cambridge, MA.
Kiyota, K., Matsuura, T., Urata, S. and Wei, Y. (2008), Reconsidering the backward vertical
linkages of foreign affiliates: evidence from Japanese multinationals, World Development,
Vol. 36, pp. 1398-414.
Kroll, H. and Liefner, I. (2008), Spin-off enterprises as a means of technology commercialisation
in a transforming economy evidence from three universities in China, Technovation,
Vol. 28, pp. 298-313.
Kumar, V., Kumar, U. and Persaud, A. (1999), Building technological capability through
importing technology: the case of Indonesian manufacturing industry, The Journal of
Technology Transfer, Vol. 24, pp. 81-96.
Lee, C.K. (2009), How does a cluster relocate across the border? The case of information
technology cluster in the Taiwan-Suzhou region, Technological Forecasting and Social
Change, Vol. 76, pp. 371-81.
Lee, K. (2005), Making a technological catch-up: barriers and opportunities, Asian Journal of
Technology Innovation, Vol. 13, pp. 97-131.
Lee, K. and Lim, C. (2001), Technological regimes, catching-up and leapfrogging: the findings
from the Korean industries, Research Policy, Vol. 30, pp. 459-83.
Leonard-Barton, D. (1995), Wellspring of Knowledge Building and Sustaining the Sources of
Innovation, Harvard Business School Press, Cambridge, MA.
Li, X.B. (2009), Chinas regional innovation capacity in transition: an empirical approach,
Research Policy, Vol. 38, pp. 338-57.
Liu, H. and Jiang, Y. (2001), Technology transfer from higher education institutions to industry
in China: nature and implications, Technovation, Vol. 21, pp. 175-88.
Liu, X. and Buck, T. (2007), Innovation performance and channels for international technology
spillovers: evidence from Chinese high-tech industries, Research Policy, Vol. 36, pp. 355-66.
Liu, X. and Zou, H. (2008), The impact of greenfield FDI and mergers and acquisitions on
innovation in Chinese high-tech industries, Journal of World Business, Vol. 43, pp. 352-64.
Mathews, J.A. (2001), National system of economic learning: the case of technology diffusion
management in East Asia, International Journal of Technology Management, Vol. 22,
pp. 455-79.
JSTPC Meyer, A.D. (2001), Technology transfer into China: preparing for a new era, European
Management Journal, Vol. 19, pp. 140-4.
2,2 Motohashi, K. and Yun, X. (2007), Chinas innovation system reform and growing industry and
science linkages, Research Policy, Vol. 36, pp. 1251-60.
OECD (2002), China in the world economy: the domestic policy challenges, OECD Synthesis
Report, Organization for Economic Co-Operation and Development, Guangdong.
144 OECD (2008), Reviews of Innovation Policy, Organization for Economic Co-Operation and
Development, Guangdong.
Siu, W.S., Lin, T.L., Fang, W.C. and Liu, Z.C. (2006), An institutional analysis of the new product
development process of small and medium enterprises (SMEs) in China, Hong Kong and
Taiwan, Industrial Marketing Management, Vol. 35, pp. 323-35.
Swan, K.S. and Allred, B.B. (2009), Does the China Option influence subsidiary technology
sourcing strategy, Journal of International Management, Vol. 15, pp. 169-80.
Tidd, J. (2007), Challenges of innovation, globalization and development,
The 5th International Symposium on Management of Technology (ISMOT07),

Hangzhou, China, pp. 3-15.
Tylecote, A. (2006), Twin innovation systems, intermediate technology and economic development:
history and prospect for China, Innovation: Management, Policy & Practice, Vol. 8, pp. 62-83.
Walter, J. (2000), Technological adaptation and learning by cooperation: a case study of a
successful onshore technology transfer in Tierra del Fuego, Journal of Technology
Transfer, Vol. 25, pp. 3-22.
Wang, X.M. and Zhou, X. (1999), A new strategy of technology transfer to China, International
Journal of Operations & Production Management, Vol. 19, pp. 527-37.
Wei, Y.H.D., Lu, Y.Q. and Chen, W. (2009), Globalizing regional development in Sunan, China:
does Suzhou Industrial Park fit a neo-Marshallian district model?, Regional Studies,
Vol. 43, pp. 409-27.
Wu, J. and Pangarkar, N. (2006), Rising to the global challenge: strategies for firms in emerging
markets, Long Range Planning, Vol. 39, pp. 295-313.
Ying, L.G. (2008), The shape of ideas production function in transition and developing economies:
evidence from China, International Regional Science Review, Vol. 31, pp. 185-206.
Zheng, J., Bigsten, A. and Hu, A. (2009), Can Chinas growth be sustained? A productivity
perspective, World Development, Vol. 37, pp. 874-88.
Zhong, X. and Yang, X. (2007), Science and technology policy reform and its impact on Chinas
national innovation system, Technology in Society, Vol. 29, pp. 317-25.
Zhou, Y. (2008), Synchronizing export orientation with import substitution: creating competitive
indigenous high-tech companies in China, World Development, Vol. 36, pp. 2353-70.
About the authors

Leong Chan is a Doctoral Student in the Department of Engineering and Technology
Management at Portland State University, USA. He holds a Master of Science degree from the
same department. His current research interests are in the areas of technology transfer,
technology foresight, R&D management, and innovation policy.
Tugrul U. Daim is an Associate Professor and PhD Program Director in the Department of
Engineering and Technology Management at Portland State University. Prior to joining PSU, he
had worked at Intel Corporation for over a decade in varying management roles. His recent focus
has been in the energy sector where he has been helping regional agencies develop technology
roadmaps for their future investments. He is also a Visiting Professor with the Northern Institute
of Technology at Technical University of Hamburg, Harburg. He has been recently appointed as Technology
Extraordinary Professor at the Graduate School of Technology Management at University of
Pretoria. He has published over 100 refereed papers in journals and conference proceedings. His transfer
papers appeared in Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Technovation, Technology in China
Analysis and Strategic Management, Computers and Industrial Engineering, Energy, Energy
Policy, and many others. He has coauthored four books of readings and several proceedings. He is
the Editor-in-Chief of International Journal of Innovation and Technology Management and
North American Editor of Technological Forecasting and Social Change. He received his BS in 145
Mechanical Engineering from Bogazici University in Turkey, MS in Mechanical Engineering
from Lehigh University in Pennsylvania, MS in Engineering Management from Portland State
University, and PhD in Systems Science: Engineering Management from Portland State
University in Portland Oregon. Tugrul U. Daim is the corresponding author and can be contacted
at: tugrul@etm.pdx.edu
To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: reprints@emeraldinsight.com

Or visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints
This article has been cited by:
1. Piret Tnurist. 2015. Framework for analysing the role of state owned enterprises in innovation policy
management: The case of energy technologies and Eesti Energia. Technovation 38, 1-14. [CrossRef]
2. Yuanyuan Yu State Key Laboratory of Quality Research in Chinese Medicine, Institute of Chinese
Medical Sciences, University of Macau, Macau, China Zhiqiao Ma State Key Laboratory of Quality
Research in Chinese Medicine, Institute of Chinese Medical Sciences, University of Macau, Macau, China
Hao Hu State Key Laboratory of Quality Research in Chinese Medicine, Institute of Chinese Medical
Sciences, University of Macau, Macau, China Yitao Wang State Key Laboratory of Quality Research in
Chinese Medicine, Institute of Chinese Medical Sciences, University of Macau, Macau, China . 2014.
Local government policies and pharmaceutical clusters in China. Journal of Science and Technology Policy
Management 5:1, 41-58. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
3. Munirul Nabin, Xuan Nguyen, Pasquale Sgro. 2013. On the Relationship Between Technology Transfer
and Economic Growth in Asian Economies. The World Economy 36, 935-946. [CrossRef]
4. Dominique JollySKEMA Business School, Sophia Antipolis, France Fuquan ZhuSKEMA Business School
China Center, Suzhou City, China. 2012. Chinese S&T parks: the emergence of a new model. Journal
of Business Strategy 33:5, 4-13. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
5. Jiang Yu. 2011. From 3G to 4G: technology evolution and path dynamics in China's mobile
telecommunication sector. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management 23, 1079-1093. [CrossRef]

Technology Transfer in China - Literature Review and Policy Implications

Diunggah oleh

Informasi Dokumen

Hak Cipta

Format Tersedia

Bagikan dokumen Ini

Bagikan atau Tanam Dokumen

Opsi Berbagi

Apakah menurut Anda dokumen ini bermanfaat?

Apakah konten ini tidak pantas?

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

Technology Transfer in China - Literature Review and Policy Implications

Diunggah oleh

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

Journal of Science and Technology Policy in China

Technology transfer in China: literature review and policy implications

to better understand the trends of international technology transfer and develop

2. Innovation and technology transfer

2.1 Technology development models

Figure 3. Localization Product Novel product

3. Different interests between domestic and foreign companies on

3.1 Foreign companies interests

3.2 Chinese companies interests

3.3 Interests balance

4. Issues of stakeholders and innovators

characteristics of each participants, or innovators, in the transaction process. It is

4.1 Higher education institutions

Author (Year) Innovators studied Brief summary

technology transfer and

Author (Year) Innovators studied Brief summary

Author (Year) Innovators studied Brief summary

4.2 Public research institutes

market-oriented reforms, the impacts of such technology policies still need to be

4.3 State-owned enterprises

4.4 Small- to medium-sized enterprises

4.5 Joint ventures

4.6 MNCs and foreign R&D centers

international technology transfer. Technology management techniques can be applied

6. Technology transfer policy

6.2 Foreign influence on technology policy

7. Implications on innovation policy

7.1 Balancing international technology transfer and innovation

7.2 Leveraging national and local resources

7.4 Formulating policies to improve innovation capabilities

8. Conclusions and future research

The 5th International Symposium on Management of Technology (ISMOT07),

About the authors

To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: reprints@emeraldinsight.com

Anda mungkin juga menyukai