A Roadmap for Innovation Capacity in Developing Countries
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Literature Review
3. Methods
3.1. List of Determinants for Modeling the Innovation Capacity of a Country
3.2. Structural Self-Interaction Matrix (SSIM): Defining Contextual Linkages
- (1)
- V: if variable i influences variable j;
- (2)
- A: if variable i is led by variable j;
- (3)
- X: if both, variables i and j, influence each other;
- (4)
- O: if variables i and j have no association among them.
3.3. Initial Reachability Matrix (IRM)
- (a)
- If the SSIM pair-wise entry corresponds to V, the pair-wise (i, j) entry becomes 1 and the (j, i) becomes 0.
- (b)
- If the pair-wise (i, j) entry is an A, the pair-wise (i, j) entry becomes 0 and the pair-wise (j, i) becomes 1.
- (c)
- If the pair-wise (i, j) entry is an X, the pair-wise (i, j) entry becomes 1 and the pair-wise (j, i) becomes 1.
- (d)
- If the pair-wise (i, j) entry is an O, the pair-wise (i, j) entry becomes 0 and the pair-wise (j, i) becomes 0.
3.4. Final Reachability Matrix (FRM)
3.5. Level Partitions
3.6. ISM-Based Model
3.7. MICMAC Analysis
4. Results and Discussion
5. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Lee, S.M.; Olson, D.L.; Trimi, S. Co-innovation: Convergenomics, Collaboration, and Co-creation for Organizational Values. Manag. Decis. 2012, 50, 817–831. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lee, S.M.; Olson, D.L. Convergenomics: Strategic Innovation in the Convergence Era; Routledge: London, UK, 2016; ISBN 9781315574127. [Google Scholar]
- Hamidi, S.; Zandiatashbar, A.; Bonakdar, A. The Relationship between Regional Compactness and Regional Innovation Capacity (RIC): Empirical Evidence from a National Study. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change 2019, 142, 394–402. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Moser, P. Patents and Innovation in Economic History. Annu. Rev. Econom. 2016, 8, 241–258. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Salazar-Elena, J.C.; Sánchez, M.P.; Otamendi, F.J. A Non-Parametric Delphi Approach to Foster Innovation Policy Debate in Spain. Sustainability 2016, 8, 487. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Teece, D.J.; Pisano, G.; Shuen, A. Dynamic Capabilities and Strategic Management. Strateg. Manag. J. 1997, 18, 509–533. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Genc, E.; Dayan, M.; Genc, O.F. The Impact of SME Internationalization on Innovation: The Mediating Role of Market and Entrepreneurial Orientation. Ind. Mark. Manag. 2019, 82, 253–264. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- García-Álvarez de Perea, J.; Ramírez-García, C.; Del Cubo-Molina, A. Internationalization Business Models and Patterns of SMEs and MNEs: A Qualitative Multi-Case Study in the Agrifood Sector. Sustainability 2019, 11, 2755. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Novillo, S.; Haasis, H.D. Supply Chain Flexibility and SMEs Internationalization. A Conceptual Framework. Proc. Hambg. Int. Conf. Logist. 2017, 24, 191–208. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Seebode, D.; Jeanrenaud, S.; Bessant, J. Managing Innovation for Sustainability. R&D Manag. 2012, 42, 195–206. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Mendoza-Silva, A. Innovation Capability: A Systematic Literature Review. Eur. J. Innov. Manag. 2020, 24, 707–734. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chabbouh, H.; Boujelbene, Y. Open Innovation, Dynamic Organizational Capacities and Innovation Performance in SMEs: Empirical Evidence in the Tunisian Manufacturing Industry. Int. J. Entrep. Innov. 2022. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Breznik, L.; Hisrich, R.D. Dynamic Capabilities vs. Innovation Capability: Are They Related? J. Small Bus. Enterp. Dev. 2014, 21, 368–384. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yam, R.C.M.; Lo, W.; Tang, E.P.Y.; Lau, A.K.W. Analysis of Sources of Innovation, Technological Innovation Capabilities, and Performance: An Empirical Study of Hong Kong Manufacturing Industries. Res. Policy 2011, 40, 391–402. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- OECD/Euro-stat. Oslo Manual 2018: Guidelines for Collecting, Reporting and Using Data on Innovation, 4th ed.; The Measurement of Scientific, Technological and Innovation Activities; OECD Publishing: Luxembourg, 2018; ISBN 9789264304604. [Google Scholar]
- Dutta, S. The Global Innovation Index 2011 Accelerating Growth and Development; INSEAD: Fontainebleau, France, 2011. [Google Scholar]
- Forsman, H. Innovation Capacity and Innovation Development in Small Enterprises. A Comparison between the Manufacturing and Service Sectors. Res. Policy 2011, 40, 739–750. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kocher, P.-Y.; Kaudela-Baum, S.; Wolf, P. Enhancing Organisational Innovation Capability Through Systemic Action Research: A Case of a Swiss SME in the Food Industry. Syst. Pract. Action Res. 2011, 24, 17–44. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Demircioglu, M.A.; Audretsch, D.B. Conditions for Innovation in Public Sector Organizations. Res. Policy 2017, 46, 1681–1691. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Clausen, T.H.; Demircioglu, M.A.; Alsos, G.A. Intensity of Innovation in Public Sector Organizations: The Role of Push and Pull Factors. Public Adm. 2020, 98, 159–176. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Lewis, J.M.; Ricard, L.M.; Klijn, E.H. How Innovation Drivers, Networking and Leadership Shape Public Sector Innovation Capacity. Int. Rev. Adm. Sci. 2018, 84, 288–307. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Martínez-Román, J.A.; Gamero, J.; Tamayo, J.A. Analysis of Innovation in SMEs Using an Innovative Capability-Based Non-Linear Model: A Study in the Province of Seville (Spain). Technovation 2011, 31, 459–475. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Furman, J.L.; Porter, M.E.; Stern, S. The Determinants of National Innovative Capacity. Res. Policy 2002, 31, 899–933. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Hu, M.C.; Mathews, J.A. National Innovative Capacity in East Asia. Res. Policy 2005, 34, 1322–1349. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Khedhaouria, A.; Thurik, R. Configurational Conditions of National Innovation Capability: A Fuzzy Set Analysis Approach. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change 2017, 120, 48–58. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dutta, S.; Caulkim, S. The World’s Top Innovators; World Business: London, UK, 2007; pp. 26–37. [Google Scholar]
- Sala-i-Martin, X.; Artadi, E.V. The Global Competitiveness Index; World Economic Forum; Oxford University Press: New York, NY, USA, 2004. [Google Scholar]
- Hollanders, H. European Innovation Scoreboard 2021. Main Report; European Union: Luxembourg, 2021. [Google Scholar]
- Adikari, A.M.; Liu, H.; Marasinghe, M.M.S.A. Inward Foreign Direct Investment-Induced Technological Innovation in Sri Lanka? Empirical Evidence Using ARDL Approach. Sustainability 2021, 13, 7334. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mazzucchelli, A.; Chierici, R.; Tortora, D.; Fontana, S. Innovation Capability in Geographically Dispersed R&D Teams: The Role of Social Capital and IT Support. J. Bus. Res. 2019, 128, 742–751. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Agrawal, A. University-to-Industry Knowledge Transfer: Literature Review and Unanswered Questions. Int. J. Manag. Rev. 2001, 3, 285–302. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Beaudry, C.; Kananian, R. Follow the (Industry) Money—The Impact of Science Networks and Industry-to-University Contracts on Academic Patenting in Nanotechnology and Biotechnology. Ind. Innov. 2013, 20, 241–260. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Choi, K.; Narasimhan, R.; Kim, S.W. Opening the Technological Innovation Black Box: The Case of the Electronics Industry in Korea. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 2016, 250, 192–203. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, W.; Liu, Y. Community-Level Characteristics and Member Firms’ Invention: Evidence from University-Industry Innovation Community in China. Scientometrics 2021, 126, 8913–8934. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yoon, J. The Evolution of South Korea’s Innovation System: Moving towards the Triple Helix Model? Scientometrics 2015, 104, 265–293. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Koo, Y.; Cho, K. The Relationship between Patents, Technology Transfer and Desorptive Capacity in Korean Universities. Sustainability 2021, 13, 5253. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Menna, A.; Walsh, P.R.; Ekhtari, H. Identifying Enablers of Innovation in Developed Economies: A National Innovation Systems Approach. J. Innov. Manag. 2019, 7, 108–128. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Meijer, A. Public Innovation Capacity: Developing and Testing a Self-Assessment Survey Instrument. Int. J. Public Adm. 2019, 42, 617–627. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dutta, S.; Lanvin, B.; Rivera León, L.; Wunsch-Vincent, S. Global Innovation Index 2021; WIPO: Genova, Switzerland, 2021. [Google Scholar]
- World Bank. Innovation Policy: A Guide for Developing Countries; Aubert, J.-E., Ed.; World Bank: Washington, DC, USA, 2010. [Google Scholar]
- Schwab, K. The Global Competitiveness Report 2019; World Economic Forum: Geneva, Switzerland, 2019. [Google Scholar]
- Schwab, K. Insight Report The Global Competitiveness Report 2018; World Economic Forum: Geneva, Switzerland, 2018. [Google Scholar]
- Novillo-Villegas, S.M.; Ayala Andrade, R.; Garzon, M.; Lopez Cox, J.P.; Marin, M.; Salazar, J. (Dataset) innovation capability determinants: Literature review base. Mendeley Data 2022, 2, 1–4. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Novillo-Villegas, S.M.; Marin, A.; Garzón, M.; Cruz, C.; Proaño, C.; Palacios Alvarez, M.; Freire-Gallegos, J.M. (Dataset) innovation capability: Determinants relationships. Mendeley Data 2022, 2, 1–5. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Torres Barreto, M.L.; Mendez-Duron, R.; Hernandez Perlines, F. Technological Impact of R&D Grants on Utility Models. SSRN Electron. J. 2016, 46, 537–551. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, Q.; Zhang, M.; Wang, W. Analysis of the Impact of Foreign Direct Investment on Urbanization in China from the Perspective of “Circular Economy”. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2021, 28, 22380–22391. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhu, Z.; Zhu, Z.; Xu, P.; Xue, D. Exploring the Impact of Government Subsidy and R&D Investment on Financial Competitiveness of China’s New Energy Listed Companies: An Empirical Study. Energy Rep. 2019, 5, 919–925. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Smith, N.; Thomas, E. Regional Conditions and Innovation in Russia: The Impact of Foreign Direct Investment and Absorptive Capacity. Reg. Stud. 2016, 51, 1412–1428. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Xu, K.; Geng, C.; Wei, X.; Jiang, H. Financing Development, Financing Constraint and R&D Investment of Strategic Emerging Industries in China. J. Bus. Econ. Manag. 2020, 21, 1010–1034. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Allard, G.; Williams, C. National-Level Innovation in Africa. Res. Policy 2020, 49, 104074. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fabrizi, A.; Guarini, G.; Meliciani, V. Public Knowledge Partnerships in European Research Projects and Knowledge Creation across R&D Institutional Sectors. Technol. Anal. Strateg. Manag. 2016, 28, 1056–1072. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Giarratana, M.S.; Torrisi, S. Foreign Entry and Survival in a Knowledge-Intensive Market: Emerging Economy Countries’ International Linkages, Technology Competences, and Firm Experience. Strateg. Entrep. J. 2010, 4, 85–104. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kowalski, P.; Rabaioli, D.; Vallejo, S. International Technology Transfer Measures in an Interconnected World: Lessons and Policy Implications; OECD Trade Policy Papers; OECD Publishing: Paris, France, 2017. [Google Scholar]
- Ng, P.Y.; Hamilton, R.T. Experiences of High-Growth Technology Firms in Malaysia and New Zealand. Technol. Anal. Strateg. Manag. 2016, 28, 901–915. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Park, T.; Kim, J. Innovation Policy in Asia; Asian Development Bank: Mandaluyong City, Philippines, 2020. [Google Scholar]
- Barona-Zuluaga, B.; Rivera-Godoy, J.A.; Aguilera-Cifuentes, C.I.; Garizado-Román, P.A. Financiación de La Innovación En Colombia. Entramado 2015, 11, 80–93. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chen, H.L. Board Capital, CEO Power and R&D Investment in Electronics Firms. Corp. Gov. An Int. Rev. 2014, 22, 422–436. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Giunta, A.; Pericoli, F.M.; Pierucci, E. University–Industry Collaboration in the Biopharmaceuticals: The Italian Case. J. Technol. Transf. 2015, 41, 818–840. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Guo, D.; Huang, H.; Jiang, K.; Xu, C. Disruptive Innovation and R&D Ownership Structures. Public Choice 2021, 187, 143–163. [Google Scholar]
- Jain, R.; Krishnapriya, V.S. Effect of Innovation on Corporate Social Responsibility: Does Ownership Matter? Evidence from Indian Manufacturing Firms. Econ. Innov. New Technol. 2020, 1–22. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nhemachena, C.R.; Kirsten, J.F.; Muchara, B. The Effects of Plant Breeders’ Rights on Wheat Productivity and Varietal Improvement in South African Agriculture. Sustainability 2019, 11, 3378. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Tseng, F.C.F.-C.; Huang, M.H.M.-H.; Chen, D.-Z.D.Z. Factors of University–Industry Collaboration Affecting University Innovation Performance. J. Technol. Transf. 2020, 45, 560–577. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zastempowski, M. What Shapes Innovation Capability in Micro-Enterprises? New-to-the-Market Product and Process Perspective. J. Open Innov. Technol. Mark. Complex. 2022, 8, 59. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hong, S.; Oxley, L.; McCann, P.; Le, T. Why Firm Size Matters: Investigating the Drivers of Innovation and Economic Performance in New Zealand Using the Business Operations Survey. Appl. Econ. 2016, 48, 5379–5395. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kim, J.-H.; Lee, Y.-G. Factors of Collaboration Affecting the Performance of Alternative Energy Patents in South Korea from 2010 to 2017. Sustainability 2021, 13, 10208. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lee, S.; Kim, D.H. Knowledge Stocks, Government R&D, Institutional Factors and Innovation: Evidence from Biotechnology Patent Data. Innov. Dev. 2021, 1–19. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ciriaci, D. Intangible Resources: The Relevance of Training for European Firms’ Innovative Performance. Econ. Polit. 2017, 34, 31–54. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fang, L.; Guo, X. The Impact of Technological Innovation on the Development of Intelligent Industry System: Evidence from Henan, China. J. Intell. Fuzzy Syst. 2020, 38, 6905–6909. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Furman, J.L.; MacGarvie, M. Academic Collaboration and Organizational Innovation: The Development of Research Capabilities in the US Pharmaceutical Industry, 1927–1946. Ind. Corp. Chang. 2009, 18, 929–961. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Gao, Y.; Hafsi, T. R&D Spending among Chinese SMEs: The Role of Business Owners’ Characteristics. Manag. Decis. 2015, 53, 1714–1735. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ivanov, D. Human Capital and Knowledge-Intensive Industries Location: Evidence from Soviet Legacy in Russia. J. Econ. Hist. 2016, 76, 736–768. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Ketonen-Oksi, S. Creating a Shared Narrative: The Use of Causal Layered Analysis to Explore Value Co-Creation in a Novel Service Ecosystem. Eur. J. Futur. Res. 2018, 6, 5. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Khalimova, S.R.; Yusupova, A.T. Influence of Regional Conditions on the Development of High-Tech Companies in Russia. Reg. Res. Russ. 2020, 10, 308–317. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lee, P. Transcending the Tacit Dimension: Patents, Relationships, and Organizational Integration in Technology Transfer. Calif. Law Rev. 2012, 100, 1503–1572. [Google Scholar]
- Ma, B.; Yu, D. Research on the Influence of R&D Human Resources on Innovation Capability—Empirical Research on GEM-Listed Enterprises of China. Manag. Decis. Econ. 2021, 42, 751–761. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mohan, A.V. Human Resource Management and Coordination for Innovation Activities: Gleanings from Malaysian Cases. Asian J. Technol. Innov. 2017, 25, 246–267. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Turpin, T.; Woolley, R.; Marceau, J. Scientists across the Boundaries: National and Global Dimensions of Scientific and Technical Human Capital (STHC) and Policy Implications for Australia. Asian Pacific Migr. J. 2010, 19, 65–86. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nathai-Balkissoon, M.; Maharaj, C.; Guerrero, R.; Mahabir, R.; Dialsingh, I. Pilot Development of Innovation Scales for Beverage Manufacturing Companies in a Developing Country. Cogent Bus. Manag. 2017, 4, 1379214. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Korkeamäki, T.; Takalo, T. Valuation of Innovation and Intellectual Property: The Case of IPhone. Eur. Manag. Rev. 2013, 10, 197–210. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Orlando, B.; Ballestra, L.V.; Magni, D.; Ciampi, F. Open Innovation and Patenting Activity in Health Care. J. Intellect. Cap. 2020, 22, 384–402. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sharma, G.; Kumar, H. Exploring the Possibilities of Utility Models Patent Regime for Grassroots Innovations in India. J. Intellect. Prop. Rights 2018, 23, 119–130. [Google Scholar]
- Acosta, M.; Coronado, D.; León, M.D.; Moreno, P.J. The Production of Academic Technological Knowledge: An Exploration at the Research Group Level. J. Knowl. Econ. 2020, 11, 1003–1025. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Almeida, F.L. Insights and Perspectives from a Literature Review on University Spin-Offs. Manag. Res. Pract. 2018, 10, 27–40. [Google Scholar]
- Aruzhan, S.; Farida, A.; Alibekova, G.; Tleppayev, A.; Medeni, T. Econometric Evidence of the Effectiveness of Different R&D Funding Sources. Int. J. Econ. Perspect. 2016, 10, 317–330. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hu, A.G.Z.; Zhang, P.; Zhao, L. China as Number One? Evidence from China’s Most Recent Patenting Surge. J. Dev. Econ. 2017, 124, 107–119. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wen, J.; Feng, G.F.; Chang, C.P.; Feng, Z.Z. Stock Liquidity and Enterprise Innovation: New Evidence from China. Eur. J. Financ. 2018, 24, 683–713. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhang, Y.; Chen, K.; Fu, X. Scientific Effects of Triple Helix Interactions among Research Institutes, Industries and Universities. Technovation 2019, 86–87, 33–47. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Belderbos, R.; Gilsing, V.A.; Suzuki, S. Direct and Mediated Ties to Universities: “Scientific” Absorptive Capacity and Innovation Performance of Pharmaceutical Firms. Strateg. Organ. 2016, 14, 32–52. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Fischer, B.B.; Schaeffer, P.R.; Vonortas, N.S.; Queiroz, S. Quality Comes First: University-Industry Collaboration as a Source of Academic Entrepreneurship in a Developing Country. J. Technol. Transf. 2018, 43, 263–284. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gao, X.; Guo, X.; Guan, J. An Analysis of the Patenting Activities and Collaboration among Industry-University-Research Institutes in the Chinese ICT Sector. Scientometrics 2014, 98, 247–263. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Greco, M.; Locatelli, G.; Lisi, S. Open Innovation in the Power & Energy Sector: Bringing Together Government Policies, Companies’ Interests, and Academic Essence. Energy Policy 2017, 104, 316–324. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Kurdve, M.; Bird, A.; Laage-Hellman, J. Establishing SME–University Collaboration through Innovation Support Programmes. J. Manuf. Technol. Manag. 2020, 31, 1583–1604. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Messeni Petruzzelli, A.; Murgia, G. University–Industry Collaborations and International Knowledge Spillovers: A Joint-Patent Investigation. J. Technol. Transf. 2020, 45, 958–983. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Patra, S.K.; Muchie, M. Research and Innovation in South African Universities: From the Triple Helix’s Perspective. Scientometrics 2018, 116, 51–76. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Petruzzelli, A.M. The Impact of Technological Relatedness, Prior Ties, and Geographical Distance on University–Industry Collaborations: A Joint-Patent Analysis. Technovation 2011, 31, 309–319. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Li, X.; Niu, W. Support Potential of Elite Civil Universities for China’s Space Industry: Higher Educational Mobilization Capacity for China’s Space Ambition. PLoS ONE 2020, 15, e0243456. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Peercy, C.; Svenson, N. Rethinking Higher Education Investment in Developing Countries. Int. Perspect. Educ. Soc. 2018, 34, 39–47. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Phale, K.; Fanglin, L.; Mensah, I.A.; Omari-Sasu, A.Y.; Musah, M. Knowledge-Based Economy Capacity Building for Developing Countries: A Panel Analysis in Southern African Development Community. Sustainability 2021, 13, 2890. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dobrota, M.; Bulajic, M.; Bornmann, L.; Jeremic, V. A New Approach to the QS University Ranking Using the Composite I-Distance Indicator: Uncertainty and Sensitivity Analyses. J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol. 2016, 67, 200–211. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jabjaimoh, P.; Samart, K.; Jansakul, N.; Jibenja, N. Optimization for Better World University Rank. J. Scientometr. Res. 2019, 8, 18–20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hillman, J.R.; Baydoun, E. Quality Assurance and Relevance in Academia: A Review. Major Chall. Facing High. Educ. Arab World Qual. Assur. Relev. 2019, 13–68. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nassa, A.K.; Arora, J. Revisiting Ranking of Academic Institutions: An Overview. DESIDOC J. Libr. Inf. Technol. 2021, 41, 5–19. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dani, M.V.; Gandhi, A.V. Understanding the Drivers of Innovation in an Organization: A Literature Review. Int. J. Innov. Sci. 2021, ahead-of-print. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Guan, J.; Zhao, Q. The Impact of University–Industry Collaboration Networks on Innovation in Nanobiopharmaceuticals. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 2013, 80, 1271–1286. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hossain, M.D.; Moon, J.; Kang, H.G.; Lee, S.C.; Choe, Y.C. Mapping the Dynamics of Knowledge Base of Innovations of R&D in Bangladesh: Triple Helix Perspective. Scientometrics 2012, 90, 57–83. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tambosi, S.S.V.; Gomes, G.; Amal, M. Organisational Learning Capability and Innovation: Study on Companies Located in Regional Cluster. Int. J. Innov. Manag. 2019, 24, 2050057. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Reay, P.; Seddighi, H.R. An Empirical Evaluation of Management and Operational Capabilities for Innovation via Co-Creation. Eur. J. Innov. Manag. 2012, 15, 259–275. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ngugi, I.K.; Johnsen, R.E.; Erdélyi, P. Relational Capabilities for Value Co-Creation and Innovation in SMEs. J. Small Bus. Enterp. Dev. 2010, 17, 260–278. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Charterina, J.; Araujo, A. Value and Barriers in the Creation of Intellectual Property in Advanced Manufacturing: A Country Comparison. J. Bus. Ind. Mark. 2019, 34, 651–663. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wong, C.Y.; Ng, B.K.; Azizan, S.A.; Hasbullah, M. Knowledge Structures of City Innovation Systems: Singapore and Hong Kong. J. Urban Technol. 2018, 25, 47–73. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Vivas, C. Commercializing Technological Research and Skills: Drivers from European Technology Institutes. Innov. Manag. Policy Pract. 2016, 18, 389–410. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Alam, M.A. R&D Investment and Capital Markets: Evidence from Emerging Markets; University of York: Heslington, UK, 2015. [Google Scholar]
- Dutta, S.; Lanvin, B.; Wunsch-Vincent, S. The Global Innovation Index 2014 The Human Factor in Innovation; WIPO: Genova, Switzerland, 2014. [Google Scholar]
- Huang, J.; Liu, Q.; Cai, X.; Hao, Y.; Lei, H. The Effect of Technological Factors on China’s Carbon Intensity: New Evidence from a Panel Threshold Model. Energy Policy 2018, 115, 32–42. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Patterson, F.; Kerrin, M. Characteristics and Behaviours Associated with Innovative People in Small-and Medium-Sized Enterprises. In Handbook of Research on Small Business and Entrepreneurship; University of Cambridge, Department of Psychology: Cambridge, UK, 2014; pp. 187–206. ISBN 9781849809245. [Google Scholar]
- Holmes, R.M.; Li, H.; Hitt, M.A.; DeGhetto, K.; Sutton, T. The Effects of Location and MNC Attributes on MNCs’ Establishment of Foreign R&D Centers: Evidence from China. Long Range Plann. 2016, 49, 594–613. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dutta, S. The Global Innovation Index 2012 Stronger Innovation Linkages for Global Growth; INSEAD: Fontainebleau, France, 2012. [Google Scholar]
- da Fonseca, L.S.; Leitão Russo, S.; Fabris, J.P.; Camargo, M.E. Holt-Winters Forecasting Investigation in Brazil Patent Deposits. Bus. Manag. Dyn. 2016, 5, 22–32. [Google Scholar]
- Quacquarelli Symonds (QS) World University Rankings QS Universities Rankings—Top Global Universities & Colleges | Top Universities. Available online: https://www.topuniversities.com/university-rankings (accessed on 2 May 2022).
- Scimago Institutions Ranking Scimago Journal & Country Rank. Available online: https://www.scimagojr.com/ (accessed on 2 May 2022).
- Katzy, B.; Turgut, E.; Holzmann, T.; Sailer, K. Innovation Intermediaries: A Process View on Open Innovation Coordination. Technol. Anal. Strateg. Manag. 2013, 25, 295–309. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Herz, B.; Mejer, M. Effects of the European Union Trademark: Lessons for the Harmonization of Intellectual Property Systems. Res. Policy 2019, 48, 1841–1854. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Teece, D.J. Explicating Dynamic Capabilities: The Nature and Microfoundations of (Sustainable) Enterprise Performance. Strateg. Manag. J. 2007, 28, 1319–1350. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Attri, R.; Dev, N.; Sharma, V. Interpretive Structural Modelling (ISM) Approach: An Overview. Res. J. Manag. Sci. 2013, 2, 3–8. [Google Scholar]
- Mohammad, I.S.; Oduoza, C.F. Interactions of Lean Enablers in Manufacturing SMEs Using Interpretive Structural Modelling Approach—A Case Study of KRI. Procedia Manuf. 2019, 38, 900–907. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sage, A.P. Interpretive Structural Modeling: Methodology for Large-Scale Systems; McGraw-Hill: New York, NY, USA, 1977; pp. 91–164. [Google Scholar]
- Warfield, J.N. Developing Interconnection Matrices in Structural Modeling. IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern. 1974, SMC-4, 81–87. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Kumar, P.; Shankar, R.; Yadav, S.S. Flexibility in Global Supply Chain: Modeling the Enablers. J. Model. Manag. 2008, 3, 277–297. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sharma, A.; Abbas, H.; Siddiqui, M.Q. Modelling the Inhibitors of Cold Supply Chain Using Fuzzy Interpretive Structural Modeling and Fuzzy MICMAC Analysis. PLoS ONE 2021, 16, e0249046. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shibin, K.T.; Gunasekaran, A.; Papadopoulos, T.; Dubey, R.; Singh, M.; Wamba, S.F. Enablers and Barriers of Flexible Green Supply Chain Management: A Total Interpretive Structural Modeling Approach. Glob. J. Flex. Syst. Manag. 2016, 17, 171–188. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mathiyazhagan, K.; Govindan, K.; NoorulHaq, A.; Geng, Y. An ISM Approach for the Barrier Analysis in Implementing Green Supply Chain Management. J. Clean. Prod. 2013, 47, 283–297. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Janssen, M.; Rana, N.P.; Slade, E.L.; Dwivedi, Y.K. Trustworthiness of Digital Government Services: Deriving a Comprehensive Theory through Interpretive Structural Modelling. Public Manag. Rev. 2018, 20, 647–671. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Shen, L.; Song, X.; Wu, Y.; Liao, S.; Zhang, X. Interpretive Structural Modeling Based Factor Analysis on the Implementation of Emission Trading System in the Chinese Building Sector. J. Clean. Prod. 2016, 127, 214–227. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lal, R.; Haleem, A. A Structural Modelling for E-Governance Service Delivery in Rural India. Int. J. Electron. Gov. 2009, 2, 3–21. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dwivedi, Y.K.; Janssen, M.; Slade, E.L.; Rana, N.P.; Weerakkody, V.; Millard, J.; Hidders, J.; Snijders, D. Driving Innovation through Big Open Linked Data (BOLD): Exploring Antecedents Using Interpretive Structural Modelling. Inf. Syst. Front. 2016, 19, 197–212. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Kim, I.; Watada, J. Decision Making with an Interpretive Structural Modeling Method Using a DNA-Based Algorithm. IEEE Trans. Nanobioscience 2009, 8, 181–191. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kumar, R.; Goel, P. Exploring the Domain of Interpretive Structural Modelling (ISM) for Sustainable Future Panorama: A Bibliometric and Content Analysis. Arch. Comput. Methods Eng. 2021, 27, 1–30. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gholami, H.; Bachok, M.F.; Saman, M.Z.M.; Streimikiene, D.; Sharif, S.; Zakuan, N. An ISM Approach for the Barrier Analysis in Implementing Green Campus Operations: Towards Higher Education Sustainability. Sustainability 2020, 12, 363. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Bux, H.; Zhang, Z.; Ahmad, N. Promoting Sustainability through Corporate Social Responsibility Implementation in the Manufacturing Industry: An Empirical Analysis of Barriers Using the ISM-MICMAC Approach. Corp. Soc. Responsib. Environ. Manag. 2020, 27, 1729–1748. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Seth, D.; Rehman, M.A.A.; Shrivastava, R.L. Green Manufacturing Drivers and Their Relationships for Small and Medium(SME) and Large Industries. J. Clean. Prod. 2018, 198, 1381–1405. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sindhwani, R.; Malhotra, V. Modelling and Analysis of Agile Manufacturing System by ISM and MICMAC Analysis. Int. J. Syst. Assur. Eng. Manag. 2016, 8, 253–263. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Thirupathi, R.M.; Vinodh, S. Application of Interpretive Structural Modelling and Structural Equation Modelling for Analysis of Sustainable Manufacturing Factors in Indian Automotive Component Sector. Int. J. Prod. Res. 2016, 54, 6661–6682. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Novillo-Villegas, S.M.; Anzules-Falcones, W.; Cruz-Boada, C.; Herrería, É. National Innovation Capability—Experts Interviews (Industry and Academia). Mendeley Data 2021, 1, 1–44. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lee, B.; Cho, H.H.; Shin, J. The Relationship between Inbound Open Innovation Patents and Financial Performance: Evidence from Global Information Technology Companies. Asian J. Technol. Innov. 2016, 23, 289–303. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gao, X.R.; Hu, X.J.; Zhang, W. Human Capital as a Long-Term Driving Force for the National Independent Innovation: Evidence from Japanese Innovation Transformation. In Proceedings of the 2014 International Conference on Management Science & Engineering 21th Annual Conference Proceedings, Helsinki, Finland, 17–19 August 2014; pp. 1031–1040. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Godet, M. Introduction to La Prospective: Seven Key Ideas and One Scenario Method. Futures 1986, 18, 134–157. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mandal, A.; Deshmukh, S.G. Vendor Selection Using Interpretive Structural Modelling (ISM). Int. J. Oper. Prod. Manag. 1994, 14, 52–59. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Méndez-Beltrán, J.A.; Rivera-Rodríguez, H.A. Relación Entre Gobierno Corporativo y Posicionamiento Organizacional: Instituciones de Educación Superior En América Latina. Educ. Educ. 2015, 18, 435–455. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Piazza, M.; Mazzola, E.; Abbate, L.; Perrone, G. Network Position and Innovation Capability in the Regional Innovation Network. Eur. Plan. Stud. 2019, 27, 1857–1878. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pietrobelli, C.; Rabellotti, R. Upgrading to Compete: Global Value Chains, Clusters, and SME’s in Latin America; Inter-American Development Bank: Washingtong, DC, USA, 2007; Volume 86, ISBN 1597820326. [Google Scholar]
- Zhu, W.; Bai, D. Analysis on the Current Situation of Patent Cooperation between School and Enterprise. In Proceedings of the 2019 International Conference on Economic Management and Model Engineering, ICEMME 2019, Malacca, Malaysia, 6–8 December 2019; pp. 8–11. [Google Scholar]
- Kittilaksanawong, W.; Ren, Z. Innovation Capability Building through Intermediary Organizations: Cases of Manufacturing Small- and Medium-Sized Enterprises from China’s Zhejiang Province. Asian J. Technol. Innov. 2013, 21, 62–79. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gorane, S.J.; Kant, R. Modelling the SCM Enablers: An Integrated ISM-Fuzzy MICMAC Approach. Asia Pacific J. Mark. Logist. 2013, 25, 263–286. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Singh, R.K.; Garg, S.K.; Deshmukh, S.G. Interpretive Structural Modelling of Factors for Improving Competitiveness of SMEs. Int. J. Product. Qual. Manag. 2007, 2, 423–440. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Branzei, O.; Vertinsky, I. Strategic Pathways to Product Innovation Capabilities in SMEs. J. Bus. Ventur. 2006, 21, 75–105. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- McCuaig-Johnston, M. Canadian Technology Joint Ventures in China; China Institute–Univeristy of Alberta: Alberta, Canada, 2020. [Google Scholar]
- Pham, H.S.T.; Nguyen, A.N.; Johnston, A. Economic Policies and Technological Development of Vietnam’s Electronics Industry. J. Asia Pacific Econ. 2020, 27, 248–269. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chen, C.-Y.; Lin, Y.-L.; Chu, P.-Y. Facilitators of National Innovation Policy in a SME-Dominated Country: A Case Study of Taiwan. Innov. Manag. Policy Pract. 2013, 15, 405–415. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Li, Y.; Arora, S.; Youtie, J.; Shapira, P. Using Web Mining to Explore Triple Helix Influences on Growth in Small and Mid-Size Firms. Technovation 2018, 76–77, 3–14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhuang, T.; Zhao, S.; Zheng, M.; Chu, J. Triple Helix Relationship Research on China’s Regional University–Industry–Government Collaborative Innovation: Based on Provincial Patent Data. Growth Chang. 2021, 52, 1361–1386. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Code | Indicator | Description | References |
---|---|---|---|
D1 | Openness | Corresponds to the impact of international trade (e.g., high-tech exports, ICT imports) and investment (e.g., FDI, venture capital, market capitalization) on the innovation capacity of a country. This includes the extent to which regulations, policy, and tariffs stimulate, facilitate, or prevent international trade or investment from affecting the R&D in a country. | [23,29,33,39,45,46,47,48,49,50,51,52,53,54,55] |
D2 | GERD private industry | Refers to R&D expenditures funded and performed by private industry and businesses. | [5,14,17,23,31,32,39,56,57,58,59,60,61,62,63,64,65,66] |
D3 | Full-time R&D personnel | Refers to the full-time R&D engineers, scientists, and professionals engaged in the creation and conception of new knowledge in all sectors. R&D professionals develop, enhance, and research theories, models, methodologies, software, instrumentation, or operational techniques. | [11,22,23,39,51,54,63,67,68,69,70,71,72,73,74,75,76,77,78] |
D4 | Promotion & protection for innovation/IP | Alludes to the strength and extent to which a country promotes and protects intellectual property (IP). This includes the policy framework promoting and protecting IP rights, as well as innovation. | [23,41,48,61,79,80,81] |
D5 | R&D performed by universities | Includes all expenditures funded and performed by universities to R&D activities. | [23,31,32,56,62,82,83,84] |
D6 | Utility models | Refers to a special form of patent right. To grant a utility model, there are slightly different conditions and terms from those for regular patents. The terms include a briefer period for protection and less rigid patentability requirements. | [39,45,48,74,81,85] |
D7 | Gross expenditure on R&D | Consists of both public and private capital and current expenses for R&D work performed systematically to advance knowledge and its usage for new applications. Hence, GERD refers to the “total domestic intramural expenditure on R&D during a given period as a percentage of GDP”. “Intramural R&D expenditure” is all expenditure for R&D funded within a sector of the economy or statistical unit during a particular period, without considering the source of funding [39] (p. 186). | [14,23,29,32,39,48,49,51,54,62,66,70,84,86,87] |
D8 | Multi-stakeholder R&D collaboration | Refers to the extent to which universities and businesses perform R&D activities in collaboration. Includes the sharing efforts to develop new ideas, models, concepts, theories, and methods. | [11,14,20,31,36,39,41,51,58,62,63,65,69,78,82,88,89,90,91,92,93,94,95] |
D9 | Expenditure on education | Corresponds to all the share of GDP expenditure on higher education, including secondary and tertiary education. It comprises spending financed from abroad sources to the government. | [23,29,39,50,66,96,97,98] |
D10 | University/research institution prominence | Refers to the standing and prominence of public and private research institutes, universities, corporative entities, and government agencies. | [25,39,41,88,99,100,101,102,103] |
D11 | State of cluster development | Alludes to the extent to which innovation clusters are widespread. It includes the degree of development and deep clusters (i.e., geographic concentration of producers of services and products, suppliers, firms, and institutions in a specialized field). Moreover, considers the relationship between government, industry, and universities to enhance innovation and creativity. | [17,21,22,31,32,38,39,41,58,64,65,71,72,78,88,89,90,91,95,104,105,106] |
D12 | Co-inventions | Refers to the patent family applications with co-creators located overseas. | [32,35,39,41,58,69,72,88,105,107,108] |
D13 | Scientific and technical patents/articles | Includes patents and citation of patents registered by the industry or universities, as well as in collaboration between them both. It also includes citations of patents in scientific articles. | [31,32,39,41,51,58,69,74,82,85,88,89,90,93,104,109,110] |
D14 | Trademarks applications | Owners of particular products or providers of particular services create a sign to distinguish their products and/or services from those of the competition. A trademark may include images, names, logos, slogans, figures, words, numbers, moving images, and sounds, which can stand by themselves or in combination. To register a trademark, owners are subject to the procedures and legislation of regional and national IP offices. The rights of a trademark are limited to the IP office jurisdiction where it was registered. To register a trademark, the owner can file an international application through the Madrid System or at the national or regional office. | [39,41,52,79,111] |
Determinants i | Innovation Determinants j | ||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
D14 | D13 | D12 | D11 | D10 | D09 | D08 | D07 | D06 | D05 | D04 | D03 | D02 | |
D01 | V | O | V | V | O | O | O | X | V | V | A | V | V |
D02 | V | V | V | V | O | X | X | A | V | V | A | V | |
D03 | V | V | V | V | V | A | O | A | V | A | O | ||
D04 | V | V | V | V | O | O | O | V | V | O | |||
D05 | O | V | O | V | V | A | A | A | V | ||||
D06 | O | V | X | O | O | O | O | A | |||||
D07 | O | V | V | V | V | V | V | ||||||
D08 | O | V | V | V | V | O | |||||||
D09 | O | V | O | V | V | ||||||||
D10 | O | A | A | A | |||||||||
D11 | O | V | V | ||||||||||
D12 | V | V | |||||||||||
D13 | V |
Determinants | D1 | D2 | D3 | D4 | D5 | D6 | D7 | D8 | D9 | D10 | D11 | D12 | D13 | D14 | DRP |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
D1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 * | 1 * | 1 * | 1 | 1 | 1 * | 1 | 13 |
D2 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 * | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 11 |
D3 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 7 |
D4 | 1 | 1 | 1 * | 1 | 1 * | 1 | 1 | 1 * | 1 * | 1 * | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 14 |
D5 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 * | 1 | 1 * | 8 |
D6 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 * | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 * | 5 |
D7 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 * | 13 |
D8 | 0 | 1 | 1 * | 0 | 1 | 1 * | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 * | 10 |
D9 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 * | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 * | 1 | 1 * | 10 |
D10 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
D11 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 * | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 * | 6 |
D12 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 5 |
D13 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 3 |
D14 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
DNP | 3 | 6 | 8 | 1 | 7 | 11 | 3 | 5 | 5 | 13 | 9 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 107 |
Determinants | Reachability Set | Antecedent Set | Intersection Set | Levels |
---|---|---|---|---|
D10 | 10 | 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13 | 10 | I |
D14 | 14 | 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,11,12,13,14 | 14 | I |
D13 | 13 | 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,11,12,13 | 13 | II |
D6 | 6,12 | 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,11,12 | 6,12 | III |
D12 | 6,12 | 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,11,12 | 6,12 | III |
D11 | 11 | 1,2,3,4,5,7,8,9,11 | 11 | IV |
D3 | 3 | 1,2,3,4,5,7,8,9 | 3 | V |
D5 | 5 | 1,2,4,5,7,8,9 | 5 | VI |
D2 | 2,8,9 | 1,2,4,7,8,9 | 2,8,9 | VII |
D8 | 2,8 | 1,2,4,7,8 | 2,8 | VII |
D9 | 2,9 | 1,2,4,7,9 | 2,9 | VII |
D1 | 1,7 | 1,2,4,7 | 1,7 | VIII |
D7 | 1,7 | 1,2,4,7 | 1,7 | VIII |
D4 | 4 | 4 | 4 | IX |
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. |
© 2022 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Novillo-Villegas, S.; Ayala-Andrade, R.; Lopez-Cox, J.P.; Salazar-Oyaneder, J.; Acosta-Vargas, P. A Roadmap for Innovation Capacity in Developing Countries. Sustainability 2022, 14, 6686. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14116686
Novillo-Villegas S, Ayala-Andrade R, Lopez-Cox JP, Salazar-Oyaneder J, Acosta-Vargas P. A Roadmap for Innovation Capacity in Developing Countries. Sustainability. 2022; 14(11):6686. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14116686
Chicago/Turabian StyleNovillo-Villegas, Sylvia, Ricardo Ayala-Andrade, Juan Pablo Lopez-Cox, Javier Salazar-Oyaneder, and Patricia Acosta-Vargas. 2022. "A Roadmap for Innovation Capacity in Developing Countries" Sustainability 14, no. 11: 6686. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14116686