1 / 43

Chaisung Lim College of Business, Konkuk University, Seoul, KR

Foreign R&D activities after the financial crisis in Korea. Industrial Technology Innovation: Global Research and Open Innovation on August 21st and 22nd, 2008, i n Taipei. Chaisung Lim College of Business, Konkuk University, Seoul, KR. 1. Globalisation of R&D activities.

aletha
Télécharger la présentation

Chaisung Lim College of Business, Konkuk University, Seoul, KR

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Foreign R&D activities after the financial crisis in Korea Industrial Technology Innovation: Global Research and Open Innovation on August 21st and 22nd, 2008, inTaipei. Chaisung Lim College of Business, Konkuk University, Seoul, KR

  2. 1. Globalisation of R&D activities Changing distribution of R&D sites Source: Doz and Winson (2006, 2)

  3. 1. Globalisation of R&D activities • In spite of globalisation of production and marketing activities of MNCs, R&D activities are concentrated in home countries (Patel and Pavitt 1991) • Science and technology as the source of competitiveness in home countries • Globalisation of R&D activities by early 1990s: concentrated in Triads (Elder, Meyer-Krahmer and Guido 2002) • Recent expansion of R&D centers in East Asia raises questions on previous arguments • MNC R&D activities are expanding beyond Triads to Asia • MNC R&D abroadis expanding (Chen[陳信宏] 2006; Gassmann and Zedtwitz 1999; Torbjorn Fredriksson 2006; UNCTAD 2005)

  4. 1. Globalisation of R&D activities • Possible reasons for expansion of FDI R&D centers in East Asia • Evolved global production network (Ernst 2002) • From production to design and R&D • Expansion of market due to high economic growth in East Asia • Asian students returning from the US: enhanced R&D capability • Collaboration among partners, remotely, through internet (Chen 2004) • More opportunities for division of labor in R&D or knowledge-intensive engineering between Western countries and East Asian countries • Competition among global firms for standards in ICT • Competition of global partnership for specific standards by major ICT firms • Mobile phone or X box example: East Asian country firms join in partnership with Western mobile phone standard leading companies by engaging in production and R&D of mobile phones of specific standards

  5. 2. Factors influencing global positioning of R&D • The factors influencing positioning of R&D centers in the world are complex (Reddy 2000) • MNC positioning of R&D activities across world depends on country environments (Archibugi and Michie, 1995; Archibugi 1999; Patel and Pavitt 1998) • Influential relevant market factors are: • Accessiblity to market and size (Beise and Belitz 1999; Dougherty et al. 2003; Kummerle 1999; Gao 2000), • Necessity to interact with market, localisation of products to local situation (Hiroda 1993; Florida 1996; Dobson 1999; Cornet and Rensman 2001;Hakanson 1992;Narula 2000; Kumar 2001)

  6. 2. Factors influencing global positioning of R&D • Human resources for scientific R&D and technical expertise in a specific area • In the case of science-intensive R&D activities, human resources in universities and research institutes are important for attracting MNCs • FDIR&D for access to knowledge through participation in communities of scientists (Chiesa 1995; Dambrine 1997; Voelker and Stead 1999; De Meyer and Mizushima 1989; Florida 1996; Kummar 2001) • The allocation of R&D to country with expertise in specific technological field (Beise and Heike 1999)

  7. 2. Factors influencing global positioning of R&D • Manufacturing • Production experience and capability (Fors and Zejan 1996; Gao 2001) • Proximity to supplier and manufacturing capacity (De Meyer and Mizushima 1989; Beise and Belitz 1999) • Existence of competitive industry • Positioning of R&D activities in a specific field in the country’s area of specialization: Cantwell and Harding(1997),Patel and Vega(1999) • Positioning R&D activities in a country where level of R&D is much more advanced (Cantwell and Janne 1999) • For utilizing externalities of intensely populated firms in a specific cluster (Cantwell and Piscitello 2002; Carrincazeaux, Lung and Rallet 2000)

  8. 2. Factors influencing global positioning of R&D

  9. 3. Expansion of FDI R&D activities in Korea over the last decade • Expansion of the number of FDIR&D centers (with more than 10% equity share) • number of new R&D centers (1998-2003) > number of R&D centers established before 1998. (Bok et al. 2006; Kim 2004) • Factors that suggest potential expansion of R&D activities in Korea • Human resources for manufacturing and product development (process engineering) in competitive export industries • Returning students who studied abroad : Korean students occupy one of the highest rankings in their share among all the foreign students in the US (Chen 2006). • Continuous market growth: ‘not-low’ economic growth • Technical expertise in ICT sector: a country specializing in ICT sector (one of the industries of high R&D globalisation) • Factors that suggest negative increase in FDI R&D activities in Korea • In spite of increase in number of FDI R&D centers, R&D activities may decline if FDIR&D centers emerge as a result of acquisition by foreign firms (UNCTAD 2005) • Deglobalisation of MNC R&D activities (Patel and Pavitt 1991)

  10. 4. The last decade in Korea- a good case • Radical policy shift and FDI rush after the financial crisis in 1997. • Rapid expansion of number of foreign R&D centers • Does increase in number of R&D centers reflect globalisation of R&D activities as ‘a world phenomenon’? • Anything new in FDI R&D activities over the decade?

  11. 5.Radical policy shift after the financial crisis • Background • Korea before financial crisis: had solid rate of accumulating technological capability at time of financial crisis in 1997 • After financial crisis: faltering a little, Korea continued accumulation of technological capability in the manufacturing sector Patenting trend of Korea in the US Source: USPTO web site on 6 November 2007

  12. 5.Radical policy shift after the financial crisis • Very radical policy shift to attract FDI among NIEs: from passive (Japanese model) to aggressive • Governmental policy shift: FDI as cushion against further financial crises • Governmental policy swing to attract FDI • the ForeignInvestment Promotion Act of 1998 : reduction in regulation of FDI, tax exemptions and incentivesfor foreign investment • free economic zones : 2003 Incheon, Busan andGwangyang. • Investor support center (later, Invest Korea) as a center for supportingFDI

  13. 5.Radical policy shift after the financial crisis • Inflow of FDI investment and increase in number of foreign R&D centers • Expansion of FDI • Four-year (1998-2002) influx of foreign investment, $35 billion in actual inflows • more than double amount received during previous 35 years • FDI for utilizing market opportunities and production capabilities Number of foreign R&D centers in Korea Source: MOST (2005)

  14. Inflow of FDI investment and increase in number of foreign R&D centers Expansion of FDI Four-year (1998-2002) influx of foreign investment, $35 billion in actual inflows more than double amount received during previous 35 years FDI for utilizing market opportunities and production capabilities 5.Radical policy shift after the financial crisis Increase in foreign direct investment 1962-2004 Source: MOCIE (2005)

  15. 5.Radical policy shift after the financial crisis • Policy drive for R&D hub for North East Asia(2003) : to attract foreign R&D centers by providing incentives through various ministerial attempts • Some company R&D centers as a result of governmental efforts including visits by top government officials: for example, Intel • Examples of new policies • cash grant to support personnel cost of FDI R&D centers (MOCIE) • matching R&D fund for R&D in ICT sector • KICOS (Korea Foundation for International Cooperation in Science and Technology) as an organisation to facilitate international cooperative research and attract foreign R&D centers (mainly public).

  16. 5.Radical policy shift after the financial crisis Foreign R&D centers as a result of governmental efforts Source: Chang et al (2006, p. 110)

  17. 5.1 Policy characteristic • Policy target: education and training, employment encouragement of R&D activities • No target group: FDIgroup in general • Main policy means: tax incentives, cash grants, R&D support • Various ministries involved

  18. 5.2 Policy details Supply of land for FDI firms • MOCIE’s cash grant for foreign R&D centers • For R&D centers with green field investment for new (expansion of) facility • Grants for employment & education expenses (personnel costs of R&D staff and dispatching costs for training), rents for land, construction costs, instruments and capital goods

  19. 5.2 Policy details • MOFE’s tax exemption for FDIfirms • MIC’s R&D support • Matching fund support for research classified as IT 839 (strategic research field) • MOST’s policy for attracting foreign non-profit R&D institutes • Research and operational costs for non-profit foreign R&D institutes

  20. 6. Current Status of Foreign R&D centers • More than half foreign R&D centers set up after financial crisis • 54% respondent firms with less than 10-year history: Bok et al.(2006) with 76 surveyed FDIR&D centers (with more than 10% equity share) are less than 10 years old (see also Slide 13 ) • R&D activities for domestic market • 65.8% manufacturing firms’ R&D results (out of 76 R&D centers) are for domestic market (Bok et al 2006) • No patent applications abroad : 78.0% of 150 FDIfirms surveyed in 2004 (Chang et al 2006) • No patent applications even in Korea : 33.3% of 150 FDI firms surveyed in 2004 (Chang et al 2006) • mainly R&D for components (50.0%) and materials (31.6%) out of 76 R&D centers by Bok et al. (2006)

  21. 6. Current Status of Foreign R&D centers • R&D activities by Koreans utilizing Korean manufacturing capability • R&D activities of FDIs in Korea taken from report on 168 FDIfirms (KOITA 2007) • Utilization of manufacturing and development capability: • development of products and technogy(75.0%), improvement of existing products(16.1%) • 85.7 % own manufacturing factory Type of R&D activities Major role of F. R&D center

  22. Reliant on Korean R&D staff Foreign R&D centers with foreign R&D staff 27.4%, average number of foreign R&D staffs 3.3 Major role of FDIR&D center : independent research 34.5%, research in collaboration with headquarters 38.7%, localisation of R&D results developed from headquarters (10.1%), technical support or partial role for R&D of headquarters (12.5%) R&D of FDIs for sales oriented, shorter R&D R&D of Korean multinationals for applied research to pure research, longer research (Cho et al. 2003) Most active FDI R&D activities are in industry where Korea’s competitiveness is High the top 25 FDIfirms (with more than 50% equity), in terms of patent applications (1990-2005), which account for 90.0% (27,558 out of 30,622) of total FDIs Mainly (21 out of 25 firms) from transportation equipment (automobiles) and electronics (Lim 2007) 6. Current Status of Foreign R&D centers

  23. 7 Patenting trends over the last decade • Enhancement of FDIfirms’ R&D activities after the crisis? • Not supportive Patents filed in Korea by FDI(>50% F. Share): 1990-2005 • Almost stable growth pattern: • 0.6% increase : (2005 patents filed/1998 patents filed) in annual patent application (1999 data reflect the crisis of 1997-1998)

  24. 7 Patenting trends over the last decade Patents granted to inventors residing in Korea, Taiwan, Singapore, China and India owned by foreign owners Source : US PTO (http://www.uspto.gov) • US Patents of Eat Asian countries increased. • Korea’s patents increased at slower pace than other countries

  25. 7.1 FDIwith increasing R&D trends FDIwithincreasing patent trends with more than 5 US patents

  26. 7.1 FDIwith increasing R&D trends FDIwithincreasing patent trends with less than 5 US patents

  27. 7.1 FDIwith increasing R&D trends -Toray Saehan Inc -Samsung Corning Precision Glass Co., Ltd -Dongwoo fine-chem Co., Ltd. Samsung Electronics LG Electronics -Mando Corporation -Halla Climate Control Corp -Siemens Automotive Systems Corp -Daesung Eletric -Duckyang Ind. Co., Ltd. Hyundai Automobile Kia Automobile -Korea Delphi Automotive Systems Corporation GM DAT

  28. 7.2 FDIwith decreasing R&D trends FDIwith decreasing R&D trends Delphi Automotive Systems Sungwoo Corp

  29. 7.2 FDIwith decreasing R&D trends • R&D center for firms manufacturing goods for domestic market (Otis, Fuji, Honeywell) • Automobile subcontractor (Delphi automotive systems Sungwoo) • ICT subcontractor (Molex) • Construction equipment for export (Volvo) • Semiconductor firm acquired by a Chinese firm (Boe Hydis) • Previous division of Samsung acquired by Fairchild (Fairchild Korea)

  30. 8 Case : Toray Saehan • Saehan, formerly part of Jeil Hapseom (Samsung Chaebol group) • Saehan produces display film for LCD and PDP as a first-tier subcontractor to Samsung Electronics • In 1999 Japanese company Toray acquires Saehan, creating Toray Saehan in order to have manufacturing basis in Korea. • Saehan’s R&D institute was abolished because Toray Saehan was not supposed to have R&D function • With continuous success of Samsung Electronics’ LCD and PDP TV in world market, Toray Saehan was under pressure to react to constantly changing specifications with high quality from Samsung Electronics

  31. 8 Case : Toray Saehan • Order sizes expanded and the size of production line in 2007 has increased to 6 times that of 1999. • Demand for high quality with constantly changing specificationsneed for local R&D for close speedy interaction between Samsung Electronics and Toraydemand became high Toray did not have technological capability to meeet demand from Samsung Electronicslocal R&D • For example, demand to reduce number of display films to increase film brightnessdemanded R&D for luminosity, population of film molecule, morphology (related to status of molecule’s movement) • R&D institute was established by absorbing some of film manufacturing human resources (2002). • With the successful performance of development activities, R&D activities expanded. R&D staff increased from 19 (2002) to 47 (2007) • All Koreans

  32. 8 Case : Toray Saehan Annual Patent Application of Toray Saehan

  33. 8 Case : Toray Saehan Inventor resident population owned by ‘Toray’ in the US • Source: accessed in May 2007

  34. Toray Industries, Inc Samsung Electronics Toray Saehan Inc demand Related industry Export demand TPA,EG (Organic compounds) Internal demand 8 Case : Toray Saehan R&D activity model of Toray Saehan Development know- ledge from Korea Source Tech Improved products Pressure for quality Specification Delivery

  35. 9. Case : GM DAT • Daewoo automobile formed in 1983 as an acquisition from Sinjin Automobile by Daewoo Chaebol group. • In 2002, became GM DAT as an result of acquisition by GM • GM’s strategy : GM DAT specializing in small and medium car • R&D center turned into FDIR&D center • Export expansion due to continued success of previously developed small car model (Matiz and its derivative model) and newly developed car models (Tosca and Winstorm in 2005) • high productivity and low cost : production line producing multiple car models in a single line and automated automobile component production system • GM DAT became headquarters for development of the platform for small cars (2005) and platform for compact car (2006) • GM Strategy: architecture for the world by spacialised org. or (subsidiary) of GM • GM DAT develop its own models • GM Strategy: GM at a region or a nation develops its own models on the basis of the architecture supplied for the world

  36. 9. Case : GM DAT Annual Patent applications from GM DAT filed in Korea Source: KIPRIS

  37. Firm strategy, Rivalry Headquarters Competition for small & medium car market among Korean and foreign carmakers Factor condition R&D personnel & work- force with rich ex- perience of dev&mfg foreign firm R&D centeractivity GRI Infra Other factors Related industry demand 1st subcontractor, 2nd subcontractor (some from China) Export demand R&D funds Tax incentives Internal demand 9. Case : GM DAT R&D activity model of GM DAT • Successful performance of export of GM DAT cars: majority of products exported • Expanded R&D for architecture of small cars, car models and components.

  38. 10 Conclusions • What happens after the policy shift in the financial crisis? • The evidence does not show that Korea has grabbed opportunities provided by ‘globalization of R&D activities’ (expansion of R&D activities of FDIs in Korea) • In spite of FDI rush, the increasing rate of FDI R&D activities remains minimal • the increasing rate <the increasing rate of domestic firms • the majority is R&D for local market not for international market • Very few companies involved in ‘new to the world’ R&D activities • Any new pattern over a decade? • Emergence of FDI R&D centers which carry out ‘new to the world’ R&D in specialized field with increased R&D trend • Dynamic companies: The first-tier company in supply relationship with Korean MNC as world class manufacturer • Cases of entry of green field investment in setting up R&D centers as a branch of R&D organisation’s headquarters after initiation of R&D hub policy: Siemens, Intel (withrawn later) • Traditional model : Korean firm acquired by foreign firm • carries out R&D for manufacturing either independently or through communication with headquarters • R&D for domestic market

  39. 5 Conclusions • Further improvements in policy approach needed • Systemic environments for foreign R&D center R&D activities in the strategic area of Government’s main policy

  40. 10 Conclusions • R&D activities of FDIs and the characteristics of NSI. • Findings support the view that multinationals tend to concentrate major R&D activities in home country (Pavitt and Patel 1991; Patel 1996) • R&D abroad confined to peripheral activities or activities for utilizing local capabilities • Shorter R&D • decline after foreigners’ acquisition • Multinationals behave in accordance with characteristics of the NSI in which they are investing (Archibugi and Michie, 1995)

  41. 10 Conclusions • Human resources and market as main factor attracting foreign R&D centers? • Korean FDI R&D centers for utilizing manufacturing human resources for local market  Not active R&D activities in Korea • What can be expected for other countries’ foreign R&D centers? Quality of Human resource Size of local market

  42. 10 Conclusions Are the policy means appropriate means? Cost related governmental policy means : tax incentives, cash grants… Not influential factor for positioning R&D centers Discrimination against domestic firms’ R&D centers Mismatch between governmental policy means and the factor influencing R&D positioning: government emphasizes provision of incentives, FDIneeds human resources Conflicts between policy objective and factor influencing positioning of foreign R&D centers Government wants spillovers with little cost  FDI does not want spillover without benefits

  43. Thank you !! foot@konkuk.ac.kr

More Related