论文部分内容阅读
技术创新与生物学创新演化进程的同一性与相似性,要求我们用一种“创新达尔文主义”、“普适达尔文主义”或叫做“觅母主义”的方法来理解技术创新。本文批判了新的制度经济学,也就是诺斯、纳尔逊与温特、弗里曼等人所代表的伪拉马克演化经济学学派。伪拉马克式的(以“行使意志”为定义的)演化是在“达尔文主义”的基础上(如专门目的性和人为选择)进行的解释与分析,熊彼特对于创造性和模仿性创新的定义也是如此。本文的研究数据取自1999年对瑞典公营和私营企业的调研。数据表明,相对于“拉马克主义”战略与竞争理论,“达尔文主义”关于厂商和用户(客户)的交互协同演化学说才是创造性IT创新的必要条件,并有着更为深远的影响。
The identity and similarity of the evolutionary process of technological innovation and biological innovation require us to understand the technology in a way that is “innovative Darwinism,” “permanent Darwinism,” or “matrixism.” Innovation. This article criticizes the new institutional economics, namely the pseudo-Lama-Marx evolutionary economics represented by North, Nelson and Winter, and Freeman. Pseudo-Lamarckian (defined by “exercise will”) evolution is based on the interpretation and analysis of Darwinism (such as special purpose and artificial selection), Schumpeter for creativity and The same is true of the definition of imitation innovation. The research data in this article was taken from a survey of public and private enterprises in Sweden in 1999. The data shows that, compared to Lamarckism’s strategy and competition theory, Darwinism’s interactive collaborative chemistry theory on manufacturers and users (customers) is a necessary condition for creative IT innovation, and it has far-reaching implications. influences.