Topic
Technological paradigm
About: Technological paradigm is a research topic. Over the lifetime, 408 publications have been published within this topic receiving 12214 citations.
Papers published on a yearly basis
Papers
More filters
••
TL;DR: In this article, the authors propose a model to account for both continuous changes and discontinuities in technological innovation, and define the process of selection of new technological paradigms among a greater set of notionally possible ones.
5,460 citations
•
TL;DR: In this article, the authors set forth a model of knowledge-based regional development conceived as a set of multi-linear dynamics, based on alternative technological paradigms, and identified four stages of development: Inception, Implementation, Consolidation and Renewal.
Abstract: This paper sets forth a model of knowledge-based regional development conceived as a set of multi-linear dynamics, based on alternative technological paradigms. Utilizing longitudinal data from a Swedish region, and international comparisons, four stages of development are identified: Inception, Implementation, Consolidation and Renewal. Innovation policy is created 'bottom-up' as an outcome of 'collective entrepreneurship' through collaboration among business, government and academic actors - the 'triple helix'. The key event is the creation of an entrepreneurial university, whether from an existing academic base or a new foundation, which takes initiatives together with government and industry to create a support structure for firm formation and regional growth. The result of these initiatives is a self-sustaining dynamic in which the role of academia and government appears to recede as industrial actors come to the fore and a lineage of firms is created. Nevertheless, as one technological paradigm is exhausted and another one is needed as the base for new economic activity, the role of academia and government comes to the fore again in creating the conditions for the next wave of innovation.
478 citations
••
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors argue that good practice in psychiatry primarily involves engagement with the non-technical dimensions of our work such as relationships, meanings and values, and that particular skills are needed to practice a "medicine of the mind".
Abstract: What makes a good psychiatrist? What particular skills are needed to practice a ‘medicine of the mind’? Although it is impossible to answer such questions fully we believe that there is mounting evidence that good practice in psychiatry primarily involves engagement with the non-technical dimensions of our work such as relationships, meanings and values. Psychiatry has thus far been guided by a technological paradigm that, although not ignoring these aspects of our work, has kept them as secondary concerns. The dominance of this paradigm can be seen in the importance we have attached to classification systems, causal models of understanding mental distress and the framing of psychiatric care as a series of discrete interventions that can be analysed and measured independent of context. 1 In recent years this Journal has published a series of editorials arguing that the profession should adopt an even more technological and biomedical identity, and that psychiatrists should focus on their mastery of technology to allow progress in the development of brain research, genetics, pharmacology and neuroradiology. 2–4 These resonate with calls in North
393 citations
••
TL;DR: In this article, the authors set forth a model of knowledge-based regional development conceived as a set of multi-linear dynamics, based on alternative technological paradigms, and identified four stages of development: Inception, Implementation, Consolidation and Renewal.
Abstract: This paper sets forth a model of knowledge-based regional development conceived as a set of multi-linear dynamics, based on alternative technological paradigms. Utilizing longitudinal data from a Swedish region, and international comparisons, four stages of development are identified: Inception, Implementation, Consolidation and Renewal. Innovation policy is created ‘bottom-up’ as an outcome of ‘collective entrepreneurship’ through collaboration among business, government and academic actors – the ‘triple helix’. The key event is the creation of an entrepreneurial university, whether from an existing academic base or a new foundation, which takes initiatives together with government and industry to create a support structure for firm formation and regional growth. The result of these initiatives is a self-sustaining dynamic in which the role of academia and government appears to recede as industrial actors come to the fore and a lineage of firms is created. Nevertheless, as one technological paradigm is exhausted and another one is needed as the base for new economic activity, the role of academia and government comes to the fore again in creating the conditions for the next wave of innovation.
375 citations
••
TL;DR: In this paper, a critical assessment of both the theory and the empirical evidence on the role of appropriability and in particular of Intellectual Property Rights (IPRs) as incentives for technological innovation is presented.
303 citations