Science and Technology Systems in Less Developed Countries

Identifying a Threshold Level and Focusing in the Cases of India and Brazil
  • Eduardo da Motta e Albuquerque


Patent and scientific publication data offer useful information for the analysis of key features of national systems of innovation of less developed countries. However, the use of these statistics should be subjected to careful evaluation. This chapter uses data for 120 countries (patents, scientific papers, and GDP), investigating different patterns of interactions between science and technology according to different levels of development. Later this chapter focuses on the data for India and Brazil, investigating interactions between science and technology in three dimensions: inter-sectoral, inter-regional, and inter-temporal.


Scientific Paper Scientific Production Trade Mark International Position Absorptive Capability 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Aboites, J. (1996). Analysis of patenting activity in Mexico (Preliminary draft). Mexico (mimeo).Google Scholar
  2. Albuquerque, E. (2000). Domestic patents and developing countries: arguments for their study and data from Brazil (1980–1995). Research Policy, 29 (9), 1047–1060.Google Scholar
  3. Amsden, A.H. (2001). The rise of “the rest”: challenges to the West from late-industrializing economies. Oxford: Oxford University.Google Scholar
  4. Barro, R., Sala-I-Martin, X. (1995). Economic growth. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  5. Bernardes, A., Albuquerque, E. (2003). Cross-over, thresholds and the interactions between science and technology: lessons for less developed countries. Research Policy, 32 (5), 867–887.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Coe, D., Helpman, E., Hoffmaister, A. (1995). North-South R&D spillovers. Cambridge, MA: NBER Working Paper 5048.Google Scholar
  7. D’Costa, A.P. (2002). Uneven and combined development: understanding India’s software exports. World Development, 31 (1), 211–226.Google Scholar
  8. Dosi, G. (1988). Sources, procedures and microeconomic effects of innovation. Journal of Economic Literature, 27, Sept.Google Scholar
  9. Fagerberg, J. (1994). Technology and international differences in growth rates. Journal of Economic Literature, 32, September.Google Scholar
  10. Griliches, Z. (1990). Patent statistics as economic indicators: a survey. Journal of Economic Literature, 28, 1661–1707.Google Scholar
  11. Grupp, H. (1998). Foundations of the Economics of Innovation: theory, measurement and practice. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
  12. Lattimore, R., Revesz, J. (1996). Australian science: performance from published papers. Bureau of Industry Economics, Report 96/3, Canberra: Australian Government Printing Office.Google Scholar
  13. MIT/SOFTEX (2002). Indústria de software no Brasil: fortalecendo a economia do conhecimento. Campinas: SOFTEX.Google Scholar
  14. Observatoire des Sciences et des Téchniques (2000). Science & Technologie: indicateurs 2000. Paris: Economica.Google Scholar
  15. OECD (2002). Benchmarking industry-science relationships. Paris: OECD.Google Scholar
  16. Patel, P., Pavitt, K. (1995). Patterns of technological activity: their measurement and interpretation. In P. Stoneman (Ed.), Handbook of the Economics of Innovation and Technological Change. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  17. Pavitt, K. (1998). The social shape of the national science base. Research Policy, 27 (8), 793–805.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. RAJESWARI, A.R. (1996). Indian patent statistics — An analysis. Scientometrics, 36 (1), 109–130.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Sandelin, B., Sarafoglou, N. (2003). Language and scientific publication statistics: a note. Language problems and language planning (forthcoming).Google Scholar
  20. Silva, L. (2003). Padrões de interação entre ciência e tecnologia. Dissertação de Mestrado. Belo Horizonte: Cedeplar-UFMG.Google Scholar
  21. The Government of the Republic of South Africa (2002). South Africa’s national research and development strategy. Pretoria: The Government of the Republic of South Africa.Google Scholar
  22. Velho, L. (1987). The author and the beholder: how paradigm commitments can influence the interpretation of research results. Scientometrics, 11 (1–2), 59–70.Google Scholar
  23. Viotti, E., Macedo, M.M. (2003). Indicadores de ciência, tecnologia e inovação no Brasil. Campinas: Editora Unicamp.Google Scholar
  24. World Bank (2003). World Bank Indicators (available at Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  • Eduardo da Motta e Albuquerque
    • 1
  1. 1.CEDEPLARUniversidade Federal de Minas GeraisBelo HorizonteBrazil

Personalised recommendations