科技競爭力是經濟持續成長的動力，而政府、企業與國家之整體科技能量為發展科技經濟的重要支柱。於全球科技經濟的持續發展之下，研發（R&D）的投入、創新（Innovation）的擴散，並逐漸在以知識（Knowledge）作為競爭基礎的全球化社會與網際網路時代中日益重要，而在此趨勢之下，企業除了應積極規劃產業轉型，政府創新政策（Innovation Policy）的支持更是不可或缺的條件，各國家莫不體認到「創新能力」是現代國家競爭力的重要關鍵。
美國在甘乃迪總統時代，便將「創新政策（Innovation Policy）」視為政府產業科技政策中非常重要的一環，其目的在獎勵新興產業中之科技創新，因其能符合國家的需求及達到改善經濟情勢的目標，但由於私人企業的資源有限，無法在有限的時間及預算內開發出符合社會大眾需求的產品。所以，甘乃迪主張政府應負責主導產業科技創新發展的方向，同時政府應提供企業界財力及其它資源上的補助。
創新相關的概念逐步發展，到晚近十多年，西歐幾個國家包括丹麥、瑞典和英國的產業經濟與政策研究學者，開始提倡「國家創新系統（National Innovation System）」的概念。過去，人們直接將科學系統（Science system）視為唯一的創新指標（Innovation indicator），科學投入（Science input，如R&D預算）的增加直接助長創新及科技的發展。這個以科技推力為主的簡單線性關係模型的觀念已被「系統式模式（Systemic approaches）」所取代。
亦即創新為研究、發展、行銷、擴散（Research, development, marketing, diffusion）每一階段交互作用的成果，而非單單是R&D的投入面而已，也就是說創新活動來自創新系統（Innovation system）中每一成員（如政府、大學、私人企業）及每一步驟（研究、發展、行銷、擴散）的交互作用等，而不只是學術界與R&D的事而已。
歐州近年來針對創新政策相關議題多所著墨，而自2000年開始，荷蘭、比利時是歐洲中於國家競爭力上有卓越表現的國家，而基於版圖規模和經濟特質，在科技產業之推動與創新政策之發展上，以上各國顯然有許多值得臺灣借鏡與學習的地方，本研究期望對荷蘭、比利時二國創新政策做深入淺出的剖析，並以國家創新系統為依歸，歸納出對正努力邁向知識密集、附加價值的臺灣一個值得參考之啟示與學習典範。 / Technological competitive strength is the power for the continuous growth of the economy. And the technological power of the government, enterprises and the country is the critical mainstay of the development of technological economy. Under the continuous development of the world economy, the investment on R&D and the spread of innovation become more important in the competition with the knowledge base in the global world and internet era. Under this trend, besides planning the transform of the products, the enterprise needs the government's Innovation Policy as a necessary factor. All the countries realize that Innovation is the key to the modern nations' competitive strength.
During the Kennedy period, the U.S. regards Innovation Policy as a most important part of the government's high-technology industry. The aim is to encourage the technological innovation in the new industry, because it conforms to the country's needs and may improve the economic condition. However, as the private enterprises have limited power and cannot produce the products conforming with people's needs during a time limit. Therefore, Kennedy advocates that government should be responsible to lead the industrial technology, and provides some monetary and other aids.
Concepts relating to innovation are gradually developing. In the recent ten years, theory studying scholars from western European countries, including Denmark, Sweden and U.K., begin to advocate National Innovation System. In the past, people regard Science system as the only Innovation indicator, thinking that the growth of Science input will directly foster innovation and the development of technology. This simple linar model has already been replaced by Systemic approaches; that is, innovation is not the result by R&D but the result of the co-operation of research, development, marketing, diffusion. It can also be interpreted that innovation comes from every single member (such as the government, university, private enterprise) and every step, not just the academic circles and R&D.
In the recent years, Europe has a lot of works on innovation policy. Since 2000, Netherlands and Belgium are marvelous countries. As for the domain size and the economy quality, Taiwan needs to learn from the above countries on the development of technology industry and innovation policy. The research expects deep analysis on the innovation policies of this three countries; in the meantime, arranges a valuable example for Taiwan on the way to knowledge-intensive and value added.
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:CHENGCHI/G0093359017 |
| Creators | 蘇柏鈞 |
| Publisher | 國立政治大學 |
| Source Sets | National Chengchi University Libraries |
| Language | 中文 |
| Detected Language | English |
| Type | text |
| Rights | Copyright © nccu library on behalf of the copyright holders |
Page generated in 0.0022 seconds