Examining the Effective Variables of the Scientific and Technological Power and Presenting an Assessment Model of Scientific and Technological Power of Countries

Document Type : مقالات علمی -پژوهشی

Authors

• Seyed javad Mosavi
• seyed hadi zarghani
• hadi azami

Ferdowsi University of Mashhad

https://doi.org/10.22067/pg.v3i3.60424

Abstract

Extended Abstract
1. Introduction
Science and technology play a geopolitical role in the global geography of power which is called the power of science and technology. In this regard, statesmen emphasize on science and technology as a key source for the promotion of geopolitical prestige as well as a fundamental tool for improving their people’s standard of living. In other words, science and technology are not only considered as one of the main factors of national power, but also play fundamental role in strengthening other dimensions of national power such as economic, military, territorial, political, cultural power, and so on. Therefore, the study of indicators and variables demonstrating the power of science and technology is very important in terms of evaluating the scientific and technological power of countries and comparing them to each other, as well as analyzing the function and influence of scientific and technological power on other dimensions of national power, such as territorial, military, political, economic, cultural dimension, and so on. This study intends to explore and recognize the most important variables and indicators shaping the scientific and technological power of countries and describe it in a conceptual model.
2. Theoretical Framework
Although power is one of the terms that there is no general consensus about its meaning, it can be defined simply as the dominant ability of the individual, society and government over the opinions and actions of others. However, this phenomenon has the special place in the political geography literature, particularly in geopolitics. The scholars in geopolitics and international relations fields along with the statesmen have always concerned about the components and factors of national power and actually indicators can accurately reflect the nature of national power. Generally, national power is considered as a combination of the material and spiritual capacities of a country. More precisely, the national power of countries is arisen from the diverse sources such as land and geography space, human resources, military, scientific and cultural capabilities. Meanwhile, science and technology in the opinion of most scholars is one of the main components of national power. In this framework, if science, on its general concept, refers to any kind of consciousness about objects, phenomena and relationships; and technology is defined as the systematic use of scientific information and other systematic consciousness for practical purposes; and also, innovation is considered as the equivalent of putting creative ideas into a new product or service, power of science and technology will be defined as a power of human which is appeared by the ability for knowledge generation, knowledge application, innovation and skilled human resource training. Obviously, variables and indicators of scientific and technological power have a fundamental impact on other dimensions of power such as economic, military, territorial, political, and social power.
3. Methodology
This study has been carried out with the reference to materials of library and fieldworks in descriptive-analytical method. First, in the library step, the most important variables and indicators influencing on scientific and technological power of countries in 102 indicators was gathered referring to reliable sources. In the next step, these indicators were classified in terms of their nature and function in six factors including human resources, financial and economic factors, mediator, information and communication technology (ICT), academic output and performance in strategic sciences. Then, in fieldwork part, the importance of the indicators of each factor, as well as the prioritization of the six factors of the scientific and technological power were determined in fieldwork approach and a questionnaire was prepared by domestic and foreign experts. Accordingly, a researcher-made questionnaire consisted of 108 questions was designed in both Farsi and English based on the Likert scale. Then, regarding the interdisciplinary nature of the research, professors and experts in various fields of political geography, international relations, science and technology policy, economics with an emphasis on economic development, strategic management, management and strategic planning were asked to fill out the questionnaire. Finally, more than 300 questionnaires were provided to internal and external experts and field analysis was based on the filled out questionnaires.
4. Findings and Discussion
The results of this research in two parts of the library and fieldwork show that the phenomenon of the power of science and technology, like national power, has a mixed nature; in other words, since this concept is influenced by the various fields including human resources, financial resources and information technology, it requires a combination of operational indicators to define itself and consequently, assess the power of science and technology. Accordingly, the combinative model of the power of science and technology is proposed as the result of research in the form of six conceptual factors on the priority importance order (economic factors, human resources, scientific output and innovation, information technology, performance in strategic sciences and mediator) with 44 operating indicators.

Keywords

• National power
• Scientific and technological
• Evaluation
• Innovation

References

1. (2004). "Modeling power system in Africa." Geographical Research Quarterly, No.75, 106-128. [In Persian].

2. Abulhamd, A. (1997). "Principles of policy", Volume I, Tehran: Toss Publications. [In Persian]

3. Alam, A. R. (2011). "Foundation of politics", Vol.22, Tehran: Ney publications. [In Persian]

4. Alimohammadi, D. (2013). "Comparison and evaluation of university ranking systems." Lyzna news website, {article}, Recovery on: 7 February 2013

5. Asef, R. (2005). "Operations and Psychological warfare (2)", Guards intelligence divsion of the Joint Staff of Army School of Information and Cultural Department and Advertising defense Armed Forces General Staff, Summer. [In Persian]

6. Bagheri, S. (2007)."The impact of strategic knowledge on the position of the Islamic Republic of Iran". Institute of Islamic Studies, Hasoun Magazine. No.11, 18-41. [In Persian]

7. Blake, E. (2007). Innovation Cycle: who is innovator?Business line.Vol.23, No.1.pp.32-40

8. Collinson,S. (2000).Knowledge networks for innovation in small Scottish software firms, Entrepreneurship & Regional Development,Vol.12,No.3, pp.217-244.

9. Cornell University, INSEAD, and the World Intellectual Property Organization(2014).The Global Innovation Index,Stronger Innovation Linkages for Global Growth,Somitra Dutta.Available at: www.Globalinnovationindex.org

10. Emami, S. H. (2007). "The power of science". Hamshari Newspaper. 16 September 2007. [In Persian]

11. Ezzati, E. (2002). "The geopolitics of the twenty-first century", Tehran: Samt Publications. [In Persian]

12. Fathiyan, M. & Mahdavi Noor, H. (2008), "Principles and IT management." Tehran: University of Science and Industry Press. [In Persian]

13. Forghany, A. (2009). "Assessment of Technology Development in Iran to fulfill the vision 1404", Institute for Technology Development, No.3, (SID). [In Persian]

14. Freeman, C. & Soete, L. (1997).The Economics of Industrial Innovation, Cambridge: MIT Press.

15. Godin,B. (2004).The New Economy: what the Concept Owes to the OECD, Research policy,No.33,pp.90-679,

16. Hafeznia, M. R. & Aazami, H. & Mojtahedzade, P. &Ahmadi Pour, Z.

17. Hafeznia, M. R. (2000). "Principles of Political-Social Studies". Volume II, Qom: Organization and schools and seminaries abroad Publications. [In Persian]

18. Hafeznia, M. R. (2011). "Principles and concepts of geopolitics", Vol.2, Mashhad: Papli Publications. [In Persian].

19. Hafeznia, M. R. (2013). "Research methods in social sciences", Vol.19, Tehran: Samt Publications. [In Persian].

20. Hasan Zade, M. (2012). "Popularization of Science from Theory to Practice", Tehran: Science Policy Research Center. [In Persian].

21. indicators/?utm_source=false&utm_medium=false&utm_campaign=false

22. International Telecommunication Union. (2015). ICT Development Index 2015

23. Jalalabadi, A. & Taheri, A. (2004). "Important indicators research of Iran and the world". Rahyaft Journal, No.33, [In Persian]

24. Kalil, A. (2001). The role of social science in walfare reform.Analysis of sochial issues and public policy.vol.1,No.1,pp.183-185

25. Kazemi, A. A. (1995). "International Relations in Theory and Practice" Tehran: Ghomes Publication. [In Persian]

26. King, A. (1997). "Science and technology evolution after World War II." Translator: Fazel Larijani, Rahyaft Journal, No.13, 29-39, autumn. [In Persian]

27. Klofsten,M. & Evans,D.J. (2000).Comparing Academic Entrepreneurship in Europe –The Case of Sweden and Ireland, Small Business Economics.vol 14,pp.200-309.

28. Legenhausen, M. (2005). "Imperatives of Research and Evaluation», 2 specialized Journal in the research, before the first No., Autunm. [In Persian]

29. Lund, L. (2007). Innovation Processes and challenges. Innovation Survey. Vol. 34, No.10, pp. 87-93

30. Mansury, M.A. & James, H.L. (2008). Innovation Producctivity and Growth in Us Business Services, Tec novation, Vol 28, pp.52-62. [In Persian]

31. Merriam Webster Dictionary. (2007).Entry: Science.

32. Mousavi, M. F. (2004), "Iran is exploring the possibility of promotion to ten producing countries of the science world." Rahyaft Journal, No.30, summer. [In Persian]

33. Movahedi, F. (2009). "Quantitative indicators of technology and Iran's position in international comparisons" Central Bank of Economic Research, Department of economic analysis and policy. [In Persian]

34. Nasehi, A. (2006). "Look at the state of science and technology (human resource indicators)". Journal of Library and Information Science, Volume 9, No.3, autumn. [In Persian]

35. Nasierowski, W. & Arcelus, F.J. (1999).Interrelation ship among the elements of national innovation systems: A statistical evaluation, European Journal of Operational Research, Volume 119.Issue 2.

36. Noori, M. & Tahoori, H. R. & Jalili, P. (2012). "Compare the situation of science and technology with countries in the region using selected indicators." Rahyaft Journal, No.52, autumn. [In Persian]

37. Noroozi Chakoli, A. & Hasan Zadeh, M. & Noor Mohammadi, H. A. (2009). "Assessment of Science, Technology and Innovation (Concepts and international indicators)" Tehran: Science Policy Research Center. [In Persian]

38. OECD. (1996).THE KNOWLEDGE-BASED ECONOMY, Paris: OECD press.

39. OECD. (2002).Dynamiting National Innovation Systems, Paris: OECD press.

40. OECD. (2003).Science, Technology and Industry Scoreboard, Paris: OECD press.

41. Orbach.R. (2005).Using science as a competitive tool.R& D executive.

42. Oxford Dictionary. (1997). Definition Technology, Oxford University press.

43. Pakzad, M. & Afshari, M. (2013). "Investigation and analysis of science and technology in the field of information technology of Iran and regional countries in the Vision". Rahyaft Journal, No.54, 19-29, spring and summer. [In Persian]

44. Porter, M.E. (2003).Building the Microeconomic Foundation of Competitiveness in the Global, Competitiveness Report 2002-2003, World Economic Forum.New Yourk: Oxford University press.

45. Rashnoo, N. (2003). Geopolitical elite. Tehran: Kavir Publications. [In Persian].

46. Riahi, M. I. (1995)"Science indicators Survey, Comparative evaluation of activities Publications and impressive references in 32 countries” Rahyaft Journal of science policy and research, No.8, spring, 80-70. [In Persian]

47. Saboury, A. A. (2003). "Science and Research: Standardization of scientific journals and Evaluation criteria of ISI Journals." Rahyaft Journal, No.29, 81-88, spring. [In Persian]

48. Shahabadi, A. & Sarigol, S. (2013), "Comparative study of the impact of innovation on income inequality OPEC countries and developed countries." Journal of technological development, Ninth year, No.35, 2-14. Summer. [In Persian]

49. Shahnazi, R. (2012). "Effective factors on industrial production with High technology in knowledge-based economy." Journal of technological development, No.33, 2-12, winter. [In Persian]

50. Tabatabaeian, S. H. A. & Naghizadeh, R. & Khaled, A. & Naghizadeh, M. (2010). "Composite index Technological Capability Monitoring: Check the status of Iran's ability and 69 countries around the world." Journal of Science and Technology Policy, Second year, No.4, spring and summer. [In Persian]

51. Tabatabaeian, S. H.A. & Naghizadeh, R. &Naghizadeh, M. (2011), "The Methodology of creating a composite indicator assessing innovation along Islamic and Iranian model of progress ", Journal of Ma'rifat Eghtesadi, Vol.2. No.2, 107-126, Spring & Summer. [In Persian]

52. Tellis, A. & Bially, J. & Layne, C. & Mcpherson, M. (2000).Measurning National Power in The Postindustrial Age, New York: RAND Press.

53. The Committee cultural monitoring and scientific evaluation (2004). "History of Science and Technology Evaluation and the emergence of scientific indicators with an emphasis on America " autumn. [In Persian]Available at: www.msrt.ir

54. The Committee cultural monitoring and scientific evaluation of Supreme Council for Cultural Revolution (2003)."The first major assessment of science and technology in the Islamic Republic of Iran" Tehran: Supreme Council of Cultural Revolution Press. [In Persian]

55. The Committee on Development and Intellectual Property. (2013). Study on Intellectual Property and Brain Drain - A Mapping Exercise, prepared by the Secretariat and peer-reviewed by Prof. Francesco Lissoni, GREThA Universite Bordeaux IV, Publication Date:Oct 3, 2013, Available at: www.wipo.int/meetings/en/doc_details.jsp?doc_id=252189

56. The Community Research and Development Information Service of European (2003). Science and Technology Indicators for the European Research Area. Available at: www. cordis.europa.eu/indicators/sitemap.htm

57. UNCTAD. (2003). Information and Commnunication Technology Development Indices.NewYork; Geneva: United Nations.

58. UNCTAD. (2008).World Investment Report: Transnational Corporations and the Infrastrucure Challenge; New York and Geneva.

59. UNDP. (2007).Human Development Report. Making New Technologies Work for Human Development, New York: Oxford University press.Available at:www.undp.org

60. UNESCO Institute for Statistics (2008).Questionnaire on statistics of science and technology (S&T): Data for the year 2007 and prior. [online].Available at: www.uis.unesco.org/template/pdf/s&t/survey 2008/

61. UNIDO. (2002).Industrial Development Report 2002-2003;competing through Innovation and Learning,Vienna,2002.Available at:www.Unido.org

62. United Nations (2016). UN E-Government Survey 2016.Available at: www. publicadministration.un.org/egovkb/en-us/Reports/UN-E-Government-Survey-2016

63. Vago, S. (1993)."An Introduction to Theories and models of Social change", translated by Ahmad Reza Qa'ravi zade, Tehran:Jahad daneshgahi Publication (SID) [In Persian]

64. Walker, D.M. (2008).How Key national indicators can improve policy making and strengthen democracy? In Statistics, Knowledge and policy 2007, OECD publishing.

65. World Bank Institute (2010). Science & Technology and Education Indicatores. Available at: www.data.worldbank/topic/science-and-technology

66. World Bank Institute. (2009). World Development Indicator, Washington, DC. Available at: www.worldbank.org

67. World Economic Forun (WEF). (2012).The Global Competitveness Report 2012-2013

68. World Economic Forun (WEF). (2016). Networked Readiness Index.Report 2016. Available at: www.reports.weforum.org/global-information-technology-report-2016/networked-readiness-index/

69. www.ipscience.thomsonreuters.com/product/essential-science-

70. www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/lists/countries.html

71. www.scimagojr.com

72. www.timeshighereducation.com/student/news/best-universities-world-revealed-world-university-rankings-2015-2016

73. Zarghani, S. H. (2009). "Introduction to national power, foundations, functions, calculation and evaluation." Tehran: Institute for Strategic Studies Publications. [In Persian].

74. Zolfigol, M. A. & Bakhtiari Kiani, A. (2008). "Examples of science: the selected criteria and selection of indicators." Journal of science production. No.6, spring. [In Persian]

75. Zolfigol, M. A. (2004). "The Popularization of Science to produce a wealth of knowledge." Rahyaft Journal, No.33, 16-24. [In Persian].