carlos gonzalo acevedo peña - diva portal851366/fulltext01.pdf · carlos gonzalo acevedo peña...

DEVELOPING INCLUSIVE INNOVATION PROCESSES AND CO-EVOLUTIONARY APPROACHES IN BOLIVIA

DE

VE

LOP

ING

INC

LUS

IVE

INN

OV

AT

ION

PR

OC

ES

SE

S

AN

D C

O-E

VO

LUT

ION

AR

Y A

PP

RO

AC

HE

S IN

BO

LIV

IA

Carlos Gonzalo Acevedo Peña

Blekinge Institute of Technology

Licentiate Dissertation Series No. 2015:05

Department of Technology and Aesthetics2015:05

ISSN 1650-2140

ISBN: 978-91-7295-312-3

ABSTRACT

The concept of National Innovation Systems (NIS) has been widely adopted in developing countries, particularly in Latin American countries, for the last two decades. The concept is used mainly as an ex-ante framework to organize and increase the dynamics of those institutions linked to sci-ence, technology and innovation, for catching-up processes of development. In the particular case of Bolivia, and after several decades of social and economic crisis, the promise of a national inno-vation system reconciles a framework for colla-boration between the university, the government and the socio-productive sectors. Dynamics of collaboration generated within NIS can be a use-ful tool for the pursuit of inclusive development ambitions.

This thesis is focused on inclusive innovation processes and the generation of co-evolutionary processes between university, government and socio-productive sectors. This is the result of 8 years of participatory action research influenced by Mode 2 knowledge-production and Technosci-entific approaches.

The study explores the policy paths the Bolivian government has followed in the last three decades in order to organize science, technology and inn-ovation. It reveals that Bolivia has an emerging na-tional innovation system, where its demand-pulled innovation model presents an inclusive approach. Innovation policy efforts in Bolivia are led by the Vice-Ministry of Science and Technology (VCyT). Moreover, NIS involves relational and collaborati-ve approaches between institutions, which imply structural and organizational challenges, particu-larly for public universities, as they concentrate

most of the research capabilities in the country. These universities are challenged to participate in NIS within contexts of weak demanding sectors.

This research focuses on the early empirical approaches and transformations at Universidad Mayor de San Simón (UMSS) in Cochabamba. The aim to strengthen internal innovation capa-bilities of the university and enhance the relevan-ce of research activities in society by supporting socio-economic development in the framework of innovation systems is led by the Technology Transfer Unit (UTT) at UMSS. UTT has become a recognized innovation facilitator unit, inside and outside the university, by proposing pro-active in-itiatives to support emerging innovation systems. Because of its complexity, the study focuses parti-cularly on cluster development promoted by UTT. Open clusters are based on linking mechanisms between the university research capabilities, the socio-productive actors and government. Cluster development has shown to be a practical mecha-nism for the university to meet the demanding sector (government and socio-productive actors) and to develop trust-based inclusive innovation processes. The experiences from cluster activities have inspired the development of new research policies at UMSS, with a strong orientation to fos-ter research activities towards an increased focus on socio-economic development. The experien-ces gained at UMSS are discussed and presented as a “developmental university” approach.

Inclusive innovation processes with co-evolutio-nary approaches seem to constitute an alternative path supporting achievement of inclusive develop-ment ambitions in Bolivia.

Carlos G

onzalo Acevedo Peña 2015:05

3



5

Blekinge Institute of Technology Licentiate Dissertation SeriesNo 2015:05

ISSN 1650-2140ISBN 978-91-7295-312-3

Faculty of ComputingDepartment of Technology and Aestetics

Blekinge Institute of Technology Sweden



6

Blekinge Institute of TechnologyBlekinge Institute of Technology, situated on the southeast coast of Sweden,

started in 1989 and in 1999 gained the right to run Ph.D programmes in technology.Research programmes have been started in the following areas:

Applied Signal ProcessingComputer Science

Computer Systems TechnologyDevelopment of Digital Games

Human Work Science with a special Focus on ITInteraction Design

Mechanical EngineeringSoftware Engineering

Spatial PlanningTechnosicence Studies

Telecommunication Systems

Research studies are carried out in faculties and about a third of the annual budget is dedicated to research.

Blekinge Institue of TechnologyS-371 79 Karlskrona, Sweden

www.bth.se

© Carlos Gonzalo Acevedo Peña 2015Faculty of ComputingDepartment of Technology and Aestetics Graphic Design and Typesettning: Mixiprint, OlofstromPublisher: Blekinge Institute of TechnologyPrinted by Lenanders Grafiska AB, Sweden 2015ISBN 978-91-7295-312-3 um:nbn:se:bth-10530

7

Este trabajo está dedicado a mi familia y mi país de los cuales me siento muy orgulloso de formar parte.

9

Contents

Acknowledgement

List of Figures

List of Abbrevations and Acronyms

Abstract

PART 1

Chapter 1 – INTRODUCTION

1.1Background

1.2ResearchProblem

1.3Objectives

1.4ResearchQuestions

1.5ExpectedOutputs

1.6Significance

Chapter 2 – CONCEPTUAL AND METHODOLOGICAL CONCIDERATIONS

2.1ConceptualFrameworks 2.1.1NationalInnovationSystems 2.1.2InclusiveInnovationSystems 2.1.3TripleHelixModelofInnovation 2.1.4DevelopmentalUniversity 2.1.5Model2KnowledgeProduction 2.1.6TechnoscientificApproach 2.1.7ClusterDevelopment

2.2MethodologyConsiderations

PART 2

Chapter 3 – PAPERS

3.1IntroductiontoPapers

3.2PaperI

3.3PaperII

3.4PaperIII

11

12

13

15

17

19

19

21

23

24

24

24

27

2727282930313232

33

35

37

37

39

53

73

10

PART 3

Chapter 4 – DISCUSSIONS AND CONCLUSIONS

4.1SummarizingCommentsofthePapers

4.2ConcludingRemarks

4.3ScientificContributionsandOriginality

4.4WayForward

References

89

91

91

92

94

94

97

11

AcknowledgementFirstofall,IwanttothankGodfortheblessingoflifeandopportunitiesofeveryday.Aspecialacknowledgementgoestomyfamily,inparticulartomyfatherandmother,CarlosandGioconda,forallthehumanvaluessharedwithme,andthepricelesssup-porttofollowmydreams.Andtomybrothers,AlvaroandCarlitos,fortheuncondi-tionalsupportgiven.

IwanttoexpressmygratitudetoEduardoZ.andLenaT.fortheopportunitytogetinvolvedinthisPhDprogramandalltheexperienceshared,orientingmyacademicformationatUMSSandBTH.

IamthankfultoCarolaR.,TomasK.,andBirgittaR.,myco-supervisors,fortheiracademic advising and friendly collaboration tomywork. Iwant to appreciatemyteamofworkatUTTfortheircommitmentwithourinnovationprogramandtheBoliviansociety.

MysincerethankstoSalimA.andallmyfriendsfortheirinspiringmotivationandactivesupport.

Lastlybutnotleast,IamverygratefultotheSwedishsocietyforthefinancialsupportthroughSidaandthealways-friendlywelcomeinKarlshamn.

12

List of Figures

Figure2.1: TheTripleHelixModelofUniversity-Industry-GovernmentRela- tions.


Figure3.2: BolivianGDPannualgrowthrate(%)1990-2014

Figure3.3: SectorsandinteractionsintheBolivianSystemofScience,Techno- logyandInnovation.

Figure3.4: InstitutionalrelationswithintheBolivianSystemofScience,Techno- logyandInnovation,synthetizedscheme.

Figure3.5: ResearchActivitiesinBolivia.


Figure3.7: Distributionofresearchers,researchunits,andresearchprojectsby universityfacultiesatUMSS.

Figure3.8: Researchfundsallocation(2012-2016)byfinancingsource.

Figure3.9: InnovationstructureadoptedbyTechnologyTransferUnit(UTT) atUniversidadMayordeSanSimón(UMSS),basedontheTriple Helixmodelofinnovation.

Figure3.10:EvolutionmembersintheFoodandLeatherClusters(2008-2014) bytypeoforganization.

Figure3.11:TheTripleHelixModelofUniversity-Industry-Governmentrela- tions.

Figure3.12:EvolutionofmembersintheFoodClustersCochabamba(2008- 2014)bytypeoforganization.

Figure3.13:ManufacturingproductionintheFoodClusterCochabamba.

Figure3.14:InstitutionalrelationswithintheBolivianSystemofScience,Tech nologyandInnovation,synthetizedscheme.

30

40

42

49

55

55

57

60

61

63

65

76

78

79

83

13

List of Abbreviations and Acronyms

AirBP BolivianEnterpriseofJetFuelDistributionBOB BolivianBoliviano(Currency)BTH BlekingeInstituteofTechnologyCADEPIA RegionalChamberofSmallEnterpriseandHandicraftProductionCartonBol BolivianCarboardCAPN FoodandNaturalProductsCentreCASA WaterandEnvironmentalSanitationCentreCBT BiotechnologyCentreCDC DepartmentalCommitteesforCompetitivenessCI ClusterInitiativeCIATEC CentreofAppliedInnovationandCompetitiveTechnologiesCIDI IndustryDevelopmentResearchCentreCIP ProductiveCentreforInnovationCPE PoliticalStateConstitutionCTA Agro-industrialTechnologyCentreCyTED Ibero-AmericanProgramforScience,TechnologyandDevelopmentDICyT DirectorateforScientificandTechnologicalResearchEBA BolivianEnterpriseofAlmondECEBOl BolivianEnterpriseofCementEMBATE TechnologyBasedEnterpriseIncubatorENTEL NationalEnterpriseofTelecommunicationsFDTA FoundationsforAgriculturalTechnologyDevelopmentGDP GrossDomesticProductGMP GoodManufacturingPracticeICT InformationandCommunicationsTechnologyIDH DirectHydrocarbonTaxesINE NationalInstituteofStatiticsINIAF NationalInstituteforAgriculturalandForestryInnovationLACTEOSBOL BolivianEnterpriseofDairyProductsMDPyEP MinistryofProductiveDevelopmentandPluralEconomyMDRyT MinistryofRuralDevelopmentandLandsMSME Micro,SmallandMediumsizedEnterpriseMSc MasterofScience

14

NIS NationalInnovationSystemOECD OrganisationforEconomicCo-operationandDevelopmentOTRI ResearchResultsTransferOfficePAPELBOL BolivianEnterpriseofPaperPDTF Manufacturing,andTechnologyDevelopmentProgramPhD DoctorofPhilosophyPNCTI NationalPlanofScienceTechnologyandInnovationPND NationalPlanofDevelopmentPOA AnnualWorkingPlanProBolivia PromotingBoliviaR&D ResearchandExperimentalDevelopmentRIS RegionalInnovationSystemSBI BolivianInnovationSystemSBPC BolivianSystemofProductivityandCompetitivenessSENASAG NationalServiceofAgriculturalSanitationandFoodSafetySIBTA BolivianAgriculturalTechnologySystemSICD ScandinavianInstituteofCollaborationandDevelopmentSida SwedishInternationalDevelopmentCooperationAgencySITAP TerritorialInformationSystemtoSupportProductionSME SmallandMediumEnterpriseS&T ScienceandTechnologyST&I ScienceTechnologyandInnovationSUB BolivianUniversitySystemUDAPRO ProductiveAnalysisUnitUMSS UniversidadMayordeSanSimónUSA UnitedSatesofAmericaUSD UnitedStatesDollar(Currency)UTT TechnologyTransferUnitUTTO UniversityTechnologyTransferOfficeVCyT Vice-MinistryofScienceandTecnologyYPFB BolivianEnterpriseofOilProsecutorsDeposits

15

Abstract

TheconceptofNationalInnovationSystems(NIS)hasbeenwidelyadoptedindevel-opingcountries,particularlyinLatinAmericancountries,forthelasttwodecades.Theconceptisusedmainlyasanex-anteframeworktoorganizeandincreasethedynamicsof those institutions linked to science, technology and innovation, for catching-upprocessesofdevelopment.IntheparticularcaseofBolivia,andafterseveraldecadesofsocialandeconomiccrisis,thepromiseofanationalinnovationsystemreconcilesaframeworkforcollaborationbetweentheuniversity,thegovernmentandthesocio-productivesectors.DynamicsofcollaborationgeneratedwithinNIScanbeausefultoolforthepursuitofinclusivedevelopmentambitions.

Thisthesisisfocusedoninclusiveinnovationprocessesandthegenerationofco-evolu-tionaryprocessesbetweenuniversity,governmentandsocio-productivesectors.Thisistheresultof8yearsofparticipatoryactionresearchinfluencedbyMode2knowledge-productionandTechnoscientificapproaches.

ThestudyexploresthepolicypathstheBoliviangovernmenthasfollowedinthelastthreedecadesinordertoorganizescience,technologyandinnovation.ItrevealsthatBoliviahasanemergingnationalinnovationsystem,whereitsdemand-pulledinno-vationmodelpresentsaninclusiveapproach.InnovationpolicyeffortsinBoliviaareledbytheVice-MinistryofScienceandTechnology(VCyT).Moreover,NISinvolvesrelationalandcollaborativeapproachesbetweeninstitutions,whichimplystructuralandorganizationalchallenges,particularlyforpublicuniversities,astheyconcentratemostoftheresearchcapabilities inthecountry.TheseuniversitiesarechallengedtoparticipateinNISwithincontextsofweakdemandingsectors.

ThisresearchfocusesontheearlyempiricalapproachesandtransformationsatUniver-sidadMayordeSanSimón(UMSS)inCochabamba.Theaimtostrengtheninternalinnovationcapabilitiesoftheuniversityandenhancetherelevanceofresearchactivitiesinsocietybysupportingsocio-economicdevelopmentintheframeworkofinnovationsystemsisledbytheTechnologyTransferUnit(UTT)atUMSS.UTThasbecomearecognizedinnovationfacilitatorunit,insideandoutsidetheuniversity,byproposingpro-activeinitiativestosupportemerginginnovationsystems.Becauseofitscomplex-ity,thestudyfocusesparticularlyonclusterdevelopmentpromotedbyUTT.Openclustersarebasedonlinkingmechanismsbetweentheuniversityresearchcapabilities,the socio-productiveactorsandgovernment.Clusterdevelopmenthas showntobeapracticalmechanismfortheuniversitytomeetthedemandingsector(governmentandsocio-productiveactors)andtodeveloptrust-basedinclusiveinnovationprocesses.Theexperiencesfromclusteractivitieshaveinspiredthedevelopmentofnewresearchpolicies atUMSS,with a strongorientation to foster research activities towards anincreasedfocusonsocio-economicdevelopment.TheexperiencesgainedatUMSSarediscussedandpresentedasa“developmentaluniversity”approach.

16

Inclusiveinnovationprocesseswithco-evolutionaryapproachesseemtoconstituteanalternativepathsupportingachievementof inclusivedevelopmentambitions inBo-livia.

Keywords:Bolivia,NationalInnovationSystems,InclusiveInnovation,Co-evolution,Developmental University, Cluster Development, Triple Helix, Mode 2, Techno-science.

17

Part 1

19

Chapter 1 - INTRODUCTION 1.1 Background Bolivia is a landlocked developing country with a population of about 10 millionpeople.Thisisamulti-ethniccountryorganizedgeographicallyinnineregions.OneoftheseregionsisCochabamba,wheretheexperiencespresentedinthisthesistookplace.TheBolivianeconomyhasbeentraditionallybasedonnaturalresourcesexploitation;naturalgas andmining represent87%of total earningsonexport.Morales (2014)explainedthatsince2006,theBolivianeconomyhasbeenhighlydependentonhy-drocarbonsexploitation,inhandsoffewlargecompanies,characterizingitasapointsourcefortaxesrevenues.Mining,ontheotherhand,isfocusedontheexploitationofsilver,tin,zing,andlead,whoseexploitationhasbeeninmainlychargeofsmallcom-paniesandcooperatives,with just fewmediumand largecompanies.Thedispersedproductionandfluctuatingincomesinthissector(highlydependentoninternationalprices),madeitdifficultforthegovernmenttogettaxesrevenues.However,thegoodinternationalpricesofhydrocarbonsandminerals in the lastdecade,has allowedagrowingtendencyintheBolivianeconomy,thehighestinthelast30years.

PolicyreformsinthelasttenyearsinBoliviahavebeenmarkedbytheseveresocio-economiccrisisleftbythedictatorship(1964-1982)andneoliberal(1982-2005)gov-ernments.MostLatinAmericancountrieslivedthesegovernmentaltendenciesalmostsimultaneously.Duringthedictatorshipperiod,Boliviaexperiencedanapparenteco-nomicprosperitybecauseofinternationalloansandgoodinternationalpricesforBo-livianexports,suchastinandoil.Nevertheless,thatsituationwasfollowedbyoneofthelargestforeigndebtcrisisinBolivianhistoryalongwithhyperinflationandstrongsocial repression. Panizza (2009) explains that in such context free market reforms

20

wereperceivedasthebestsolutionforproblemsoftheregion,thuswereadoptedthereformsproposedbythe“WashingtonConsensus”.ThesereformsledtheneoliberalperiodinBolivia.Katz(2001)pointedoutthatneoliberaleconomiesinLatinAmericaprioritizedopeningupofdomesticeconomiestoforeigncompetition,deregulationofavastarrayofmarkets,andprivatizationofpublic-sectorfirms.Atthebeginning,thesemeasureshelpedtocontrolthehyperinflationcrisisinBolivia.Nonetheless,Grugel,Riggirozzi,&Thirkell-White(2008)explainedthatduringthisperiod,theconsecutivegovernments inBoliviaconsistentlyfailedtoconstructanythingresemblingasocialconsensusoverthedirectionoftheeconomy;thecrisisofneoliberalismwasmanifestedinatendencytonationaldisintegration,alossofcontrolbyrulingelitesandaninabili-tyeventocrisis-managementbecauseoflackofeconomicresources.Thesemeasuresincreaseddramaticallypoverty,inequalityandunemploymentinthecountry.Finally,dissatisfiedpublicopinionaboutexportinghydrocarbonsviaChileanportstriggeredhugesocio-politicalprotests,whichendedexpulsingthethenpresidentandcallingtonewelectionsin2005.Inthiscontext,acentre-leftpartyrisestopowerinBolivialedbyMr.EvoMorales.Anewwaveofcentre-leftgovernmentsinseveralLatinAmericancountriesbroughtanewsetofreforms,policiesandsocialcommonsense.Thisnewperiodwasnamed“post-neoliberalism”.

Grugel&Riggirozzi (2012) elucidated thatpost-neoliberalism is a reactionagainstwhatcametobeseenasexcessivemarketizationattheendofthetwentiethcenturyandtheelitistandtechnocraticdemocraciesthataccompaniedmarketreforms.Thepoliticalprojectassociatedwithpost-neoliberalism,whichhassometimesbeenmis-takenforasimplereturntopopulism(Castañeda,2006),isbestunderstoodasacallfora“newformofsocialcontractbetweenthestateandthepeople”(Wylde,2011)andtheconstructionofasocialconsensusthatisrespectfulofthedemandsofgrowthandbusinessinterests,sensitivetothechallengesofpovertyandcitizenship.EvoMoraleswaselectedpresidentwithaspeechloadedwithissuessuchaspovertyandinequality,promisingtoimplementneweconomyanddevelopmentpoliciesensuringredistribu-tionofwealth.Morales (2014) listed themore importantmeasuresadoptedby thegovernmentas:“nationalization”ofnaturalresources;ceilingsandfloorsforinterestrates;wagesettingfortheprivatesector,whichisnotlimitedtotheminimumwage;establishmentofbarrierstoforeigntrade,althoughtheaverageimporttariffremainslow;andmaintenanceoffuelpricesat“artificially”lowlevels.

Oneofthekeyelementsofthatreformprogramwastobringforthanewpoliticalstateconstitution,whichwasapprovedin2009refundingBoliviaasthe“PlurinationalStateofBolivia”.Severalcountries inLatinAmericahaveadoptedsimilar strategieschangingortransformingsubstantiallytheirconstitutions.Schilling-Vacaflor(2011)highlightedthatthenewBolivianconstitutionstrengthensthemechanismsofpartici-patorydemocracy,incorporatesenhancedsocialrights,andaimstoestablishapluri-nationalandinterculturalstate.Oneimportantearlyoutcomeofthisprocesseswasanationalfeelingofdignityrecovered,alongwithrecognition,inclusionandrepresenta-tioninthepoliticalpowerfromthelargetraditionallyexcludedgroupsinsociety.

21

Redistributionmeasures,hitherto,hasbeenaccompaniedbyamoderatedecreaseofinequalityintermsofextremepoverty(SeeSeery&Arandar,2015).Thesemeasureshavebeen focusedonconditionedcash transferencesofmoney to families throughbonusandrents.Morales(2014)studiesaffirmedthatconditionedtransferenceshaveproventobeaneffectiveinitialtoolagainstextremepoverty.Infact,theGinicoef-ficientinBoliviashowedadecreasingtrendfrom56.9%in2006to46.6%by2012(“WorldDevelopment Indicators”2015).Nevertheless,besides the startingpositiveresultsobtained, there is still theneed to invest in long-term strategies for sustain-abledevelopment.Inthiscontext,ithasbeenwidelyrecognizedtheneedtogeneratenationalstrategiestofosterendogenoussourcesofscience,technologyandinnovation(ST&I),asapathfordevelopment.

Thenewconstitutionalsorecognizestheimportantroleofscience,technology,andinnovationindevelopmentprocesses.Itpointsouttheroleofinnovationasaprocessresultingfromdiverseinstitutionalinteractionwithinthecountry.Thenewconstitu-tionexplicitlystatesinitschapterVI,sectionIV,article103,partIII:

“The State, universities, productive firms and services both public and private, nations and peoples of indigenous origin; native nations and agrarian groups, will develop and coordinate processes of research, innovation, dissemination, application, and transfer of science and technology to strength-en the productive base and promote the overall development of society, according to the law”.

Intheseterms,importanteffortshavebeeninitiatedwithintheimplementationofthe“NationalPlanforDevelopment2006-2011”.Thisplanproposedpolicies,strategies,programsfordevelopment,andgaveahighprioritytoincreasingcapabilitiesinST&Itosupporttheproductivesector.Italsodefinedstrategicsectorsforproductivedeve-lopmentwithinasystemicapproachthroughthecreationoftheBolivianInnovationSystem (SBI), under the recently createdVice-Ministry of Science andTechnology(VCyT).Theplanalsoencouragedseveralministries,liketheMinistryofAgricultureandtheMinistryofPluralEconomy,topromotenationalsupportingprogramslinkedtoinnovationandcompetitivenessintheprioritizedproductivesectors.However,asidefromthoseprograms,coreactivitiesplannedbytheVCyTintheframeworkoftheSBIweredelayed,becauseoflackofallocationofresources.Themainprogressachievedtodate,wasdevelopingaparticipatoryprocessofplanningfortheSBIfinishedin2013,and starting activities such as creatingnational researchnetworks,national studentcontests,accesstoscientificdatabases,anddiagnosticsurveysmeasuringthenationalresearchcapabilities.

1.2 Research ProblemsAccordingtoYoguel,Lugones,&Sztulwark(2007),themaincharacteristicsofneo-liberalpoliciesonScienceandTechnology(S&T)were:first,ageneralperceptionthatpublicgoodsweredispensablebecauseknowledgecouldbeincorporatedthroughthepurchaseofcapitalgoods; second, the selectionofprioritized industrial sectorswasrejected,becauseitwasthemarketthatshouldleadtheselection;andthird,therewerenopoliciesthatpromotednetworks,exceptbyisolatedexperiencesthroughhorizontalpolices.

22

Thepost-neoliberalperiodinBoliviastartedin2006.Basedonpreviousnationalex-periencesandtheregionaltendenciesinLatinAmerica,reformsinthisperiodadoptedNationalInnovationSystem(NIS)asanex-anteconceptframeworktosupporttech-nology-baseddevelopmentstrategies.Nevertheless,hitherto,ithasbeenanincipientprogressintheallocationofresources,andpolicyregulationinST&I,whichpromoteinstitutionalinteractionsinthesystem.Oneofthemainlessonsleftbythecontempo-raryhistoryofBolivia,particularlyafterneoliberalpractices,was“to stop importing de-velopment policies”.Therefore,newdevelopmentpolicieshavebeenfocusedonfoster-ingparticipatoryprocesses,generationoflocalinstitutionalcompetencesandcreationofendogenousST&Icapabilities.Inthiscontext,thisresearchwilltrytomakeamo-destcontributionoverthreemainconcernssummarizedinthefollowingparagraphs.

Firstly,theadoptionofNISinBoliviahasbroughtmorequestionsthananswersespe-ciallywhenitcomestoeffectivestrategiesandpoliciesforthereductionofinequalityandpoverty.Thoseaimstogetherwithsocial inclusionareextremelysensitiveissuesinthesocio-economiccontextinBolivia.Uptonow,theVCyThaspresentedthreeversionsofaplanpromotinganationalinnovationsystemofST&I(2007,2010,and2013).Thelastonewasbuiltafterawideconsultingprocess.NISdynamicsinvolveinternalinstitutionaltransformationstowardsco-evolutionaryprocessesofinteraction.Therefore,itisneededtostudytheevolvingprocessofinnovationpoliciesgenerationanditsimplicationsfromdifferentinstitutionalperspectives.

• Puttingtheplaninasocio-politicalcontext,analysingitscomponentsanddynamicsproposed.

• Deliberatingwhetherornotnewnationalinnovationpoliciesdriveinstitutionalrela-tionsinBoliviaintoowndynamicsofinnovation.

• Pointingoutwhatthemainconsiderationsforpolicy-makersare,intermsofsystemiclearningandinnovationprocessesforinclusivedevelopmentambitions.

Secondly,theroleofuniversitieshasbeenincreasinglyrecognizedasakeyfactor inNISandinclusivedevelopmentstrategiesinlow-incomecountries(Arocena&Sutz,2014;Brundenius,Lundvall,&Sutz,2009;Trojer,Rydhagen,&Kjellqvist,2014).However,thenatureoftheirroleinregionaleconomicdevelopmentislesswellun-derstood than is oftenpresumed (Bramwell&Wolfe, 2008).This longdebatehasput focuson important conceptual approaches likeMode2knowledge-production(Gibbonsetal.,1994),EntrepreneurialUniversity(Etzkowitz,2008),DevelopmentalUniversity(Brundeniusetal.,2009),andTechnoscience(Haraway,1988;Trojeretal.,2014).The“NationalPlanofScienceTechnologyandInnovation(PNCTI)”(2013)recognized explicitly the key role of universities in knowledge generation processesorientedtosolvesocio-productivedemands.Particularlytheroleofpublicuniversities,wheretheyconcentrateaboutthe61%ofresearchersand74%oftheresearchcent-resinthecountryVCyT(2011).Notwithstanding,thediagnosispresentedbyVCyT(2013)delineatedsomecharacteristicsoftheuniversitysector:

23

• Itshowedsporadicinteractionswiththeproductivesectorslackofserviceoffers.

• Itsresearchactivitieshaveshownweakinternalcoordinationbetweenresearchcentres,highdispersion,duplicityofefforts,fragmentationofresearchfields,andlackofdiffu-sionofresearchresults.

• Thewidemajorityofthemdonothavedevelopedresearchpoliciesorientedtoattendinggovernmentalandsocialneeds.

• Thereisadisconnectionatuniversitiesbetweenpre-graduateandpostgraduatetrainingprograms,withresearchingprograms.

Thereisaneedtodevelopinstitutionalcompetencesandlinkingmechanismsinpublicuniversitiestoenhancetheirrole ininnovationsystemsforregionalsocio-economicdevelopment,basedontheirowntheinstitutionalcapabilities.

Finally, demand-pulled models of innovation and inclusive innovation system ap-proaches require in practice contextualized mechanisms of interaction and partici-pation.Thesemechanismsmustallowgovernment,university,andsocio-productivesectorstomeetoneanother,inordertofaceandcreateoperativesharedagendasofcollaboration.Sincethesearebuiltbasedonlocalorganizations’capabilities,culturalfactors,andinteractionstructures,thereisaneedtodevelopownlocalexperiencesofinstitutionalcollaborationinemerginginnovationsystemsenhancingitsself-organiz-ingpropertieswithinco-evolutionaryapproaches.

1.3 Objectives

1.3.1 Main objective:

Themainobjectiveofthisresearchistodevelopknowledgeaboutinclusiveinnovationprocessesfocusingonthegenerationofco-evolutionaryprocessesbetweentheuniver-sity,governmentandsocio-productivesectorsinBolivia.

1.3.2 Specific objectives:

a.Toachievethemainobjective,theresearchhasthefollowingspecificobjectives:

b.TodescribeandanalysehownationalinnovationpolicesareevolvingintheframeworkoftheBolivianInnovationSystem.

c.TodevelopandanalyseuniversityapproachesinBoliviatoparticipateininnovationsys-temsdynamicstowardsco-evolutionaryprocesseswithsociety.

d.Todevelopandanalyselocalclusterapproachesfosteringinnovationforinclusivedevelop-mentinthepractice.

Thislicentiatethesisiscoveringaninitialresearchaboutinclusiveprocessesofinnova-tioninBoliviathatwillbedeeperstudiedinthePhDthesis.

24

1.4 Research QuestionsThemainresearchquestionsboardedinthisstudyare:

a.HowcanBolivianinnovationpoliciesevolvewithowndynamicsandcharacteristics?

b.HowcanpublicuniversitiesinBoliviadevelopinternalmechanismstoparticipateinin-novationsystems,fosteringco-evolutionaryprocessesbetweenscienceandsociety?

c.Basedonlocalexperiences,howcanclustersprocessesevolvetopromoteinnovationforinclusivedevelopmentaspirations?

1.5 Expected Outputs a.TheresearchprovidessomeusefulinsightsontheevolutionofinnovationpoliciesinthelastdecadesandexplainswhyinclusiveinnovationisprimarilyrelevantintheBo-liviancontext.Itdefinespolicyrecommendationstomakeinteractionsinthesystemmoredynamic,coordinatedandsociallyinclusive.

b.TheresearchrevealsanddevelopspracticesforpublicuniversitiesinBoliviaaimingtoin-creasetheincidenceoftheirresearchactivitiesinsociety.Italsocontributestotheresearchliteratureon“developmentaluniversity”approachesbyenhancingtheroleofuniversitytechnologytransferoffices.

c.Thisaction-drivenresearchdevelopslocalclusterexperiencesasausefulinteractingmecha-nismforpublicuniversities.Clusterdynamicslinkspecificresearchcapabilitieswiththede-mandingsocio-productivesectorbydevelopinginnovationprocessessupportinginclusivedevelopmentintheirregions.

d.Theresearchcontributestoperceivedifferentinstitutionalperspectivesandlevelsfosteringco-evolutionaryprocessesforinclusiveinnovationsystems.

1.6 Significance Asinnovationsystemsarehighlycontext-dependent,thisthesispresentslocalinitia-tivesthatmodestlycontributethe(localexperience-based)understandingofinnova-tionprocessesandinclusiveapproaches.Theresearchpresentsarobustconceptframe-workforpolicymakers,academicsandsocietyingeneral.Thisstudylinksconceptssuchas:NationalInnovationSystems,InclusiveDevelopment,TripleHelixmodelofinnovation,DevelopmentalUniversity,Mode2knowledgeproduction,Co-evolutionprocessesandTechnoscience.

The thesis is focused on a participatory-action research approach performed at the“UniversidadMayordeSanSimón(UMSS)”,aimingtoincreaseitsinstitutionalin-novationcapabilitiesandincidenceonthesocio-economicdevelopmentintheCocha-bambaregion.Inparticular,thoseactivitiesperformedattheuniversityTechnologyTransferUnit(UTT),whichinspiredseveralaspectsoftheuniversityresearchpolicyandthedevelopmentof thecurrentBolivian innovationpolicies.Theseexperiencescanbeusefultools,fosteringmoredynamicrelationsbetweentheacademicsectorat

25

UMSS,thedomesticdemandersofST&Iandthelocalandnationalgovernments.Theexperiencespresentedtrytograsphowsomemechanismscontributethedemocratiza-tionofknowledge,basedonpro-active institutional attitudes, to linkinguniversityresearchcapabilitieswiththesocio-productivesectors.Theseexperienceswerematuredfromwithinacontextoflackingdemandingdynamicsandlow-incomesocio-produc-tivesectors.

Theseexperiencespresentedcanenrichdiscussions inotherdevelopingcountries ingeneral and in particular in Latin America, where our institutional structures haveshapedourcapabilitytosurviveandinnovateinadverseconditions.

27

Chapter 2 – CONCEPTUAL AND METHODOLOGICAL CONSIDERATIONS

2.1 Conceptual FrameworkThisworkisguidedbyseveralconceptscomplementingoneanotherinthepractice.Theconceptualframeworkpresentedhelpedtheauthorsofthisstudytosimplify,de-scribe,andanalyseacomplexreality.

2.1.1 National Innovation Systems

Edquist&Hommen(1999)pointoutthattheoriesofinnovationprocesscanbeclas-sifiedasbeinglinearorsystems-oriented.Ontheonehand,linearviewsoftheinno-vationprocesssupportasupply-sideorientationininnovationpolicies.Ontheotherhand,systemsperspectivesoninnovationyieldamuchmorefruitfulperspectiveonthedemandside,intermsofboththeoreticalandpolicyrelevance.

TheconceptofNationalInnovationSystems(NIS)wasintroducedduringthe1980’sandearly1990’sbyauthorslikeChristopherFreeman,Bengt-ÅkeLundvall,andRi-chardNelson.Lundvall(2010)explainsthatthedevelopmentoftheconceptofNISwasmainlybasedontwoassumptions:First,itisassumedthatthemostfundamentalresource in themoderneconomy isknowledgeand,accordingly, that themost im-portantprocess is learning.Second,it isassumedthat learningispredominantlyaninteractiveand,therefore,asociallyembeddedprocess,whichcannotbeunderstoodwithouttakingintoconsiderationitsinstitutionalandculturalcontext.OnthesebasisLundvall,Vang,Joseph,&Chaminade(2009)proposethefollowingdefinition:

28

“The national innovation system is an open, evolving and complex system that encompasses re-lationships within and between organizations, institutions and socio-economic structures which determine the rate and direction of innovation and competence-building emanating from processes of science-based and experience-based learning.”

Arocena&Sutz(2003)analysingtheconceptfromtheperspectiveofunderdevelop-mentintheSouthhighlightedthefollowingaspects:

• NISisanex-postconcept,builtintheNorthonthebasisofempiricalfindings,al-thoughintheSouthitisanex-anteconcept.

• TheNISconceptcarriesanormativeweight.

• Theconceptisfundamentallyrelational.

• TheNISconcepthaspolicyimplications.

InthecaseofBolivia,itisanex-anteconceptframeworkusedtoinspirethecreationofinnovationpoliciesandpromoterelationshipsinthecontextofemerginginnova-tionsystems.Chaminade,Lundvall,Vang,&Joseph(2009)explainthatanemerginginnovationsystemisasystemwhereonlysomeofitsbuildingblocksareinplaceandwhere the interactionsbetween the elements are still in formation. In this context,innovation policies are crated to support development goals according to the theirspecificsocio-economicinstitutionalcontext.

2.1.2 Inclusive Innovation Systems

Theconceptof inclusiveness is related to socialequity,equalityofopportunityanddemocraticparticipation(Papaioannou,2014).Whenconsideringthelinkbetweenin-novationsystemsanddevelopingcountries,onecannotescapetheproblemsofpover-tyandinequalitysodeeplyembeddedinthesocio-economiccontextofthesecoun-tries(Cozzens&Kaplinsky,2009).InaLatinAmericancontextcharacterizedbytheabsenceofactiveproductredistributionpolicyandtransformationoffirms’absorptivecapacities,atraditionalinnovationapproachcouldresultintheincreaseinthepro-ductivitygapbetweensectorsandthusintheincreaseininequalitywithincountries(Bortagaray&Gras,2014).SocialinclusionaspectshavebeenrecentlyincorporatedexplicitlyindevelopmentagendasandaspartofinnovationpoliciesinseveralLatinAmericancountries.Thisactionrespondstohistoricalsocialclaimsofinclusion,whichwasaggravatedbythecrisisgeneratedduringtheneoliberalperiod.

IntheframeworkoftheNISdynamicsanditsrelationwithunderdevelopment,Aro-cena&Sutz(2012)explainedthathighinequalityimpliesthatimportantsocialneedsdonotexpress themselvesaseffectivedemandfor innovations; sincehigh inequalityconstrainstheavailablestockofcapabilities,italsoaffectsthesupplysideofinnova-tions.Furthermore,Cozzens&Kaplinsky(2009)pointoutthatinnovationandin-equalityco-evolvewithinnovationsometimesreinforcinginequalitiesandsometimesunderminingthem.TheseconditionsarehighlyevidentintheBoliviancontext,wherecriticalsocio-productivestructuralproblemshavecreatedweakinstitutionallinkagesbetweentheknowledgegeneratingsectorandawidedemandingsector,formednot

29

onlybytheproductivesectorbutwithothersocietyactorsaswell.Bortagaray&Gras(2014)highlightedthatthedistinctivecharacterofinclusiveinnovationsisthattheyaretriggeredbysocialdemandsorneeds,andthesocialobjectivesare,atleast,asim-portantastheeconomicones.

Foster&Heeks(2013)explainthatconventionalviewsofinnovation(oftenimplic-itly)understanddevelopmentasgeneralizedeconomicgrowth.Bycontrast,inclusiveinnovationexplicitlyconceivesdevelopmentintermsofactiveinclusionofthosewhoareexcludedfromthemainstreamofdevelopment.Differinginitsfoundationalviewof development, inclusive innovation therefore refers to the inclusion within someaspectofinnovationofgroupswhoarecurrentlymarginalized.Additionally,George,McGahan, & Prabhu (2012) defined inclusive innovation as the development andimplementationofnewideas,whichaspiretocreateopportunitiesthatenhancesocialandeconomicwellbeingfordisenfranchisedmembersofsociety.

Inclusiveinnovationapproachesareimportantelementsinthepathofahigheraim,whichisinclusivedevelopment.Johnson&Andersen(2012)defineinclusivedevelop-mentasfollow:

“Inclusive development is a process of structural change, which gives voice and power to the concerns and aspirations of otherwise excluded groups. It redistributes the incomes generated in both the for-mal and informal sectors in favour of these groups and it allows them to shape the future of society in interaction with other stakeholder groups.”

ThechallengeforLatinAmericangovernmentsistogeneratenationalinnovationsys-tems able to develop inclusive processes of innovation and learning. Bortagaray &Gras(2014)analysissuggestedthatthemainbarriertoimplementthistypeofsocialor inclusive innovation is the lack of a general framework fromwhich to establishwhatisthedemandorneed,howtoassessitandsatisfyit,howtoturnthatdemandintoasourceofopportunitiesforknowledgeproduction.Inthissense,othercomple-mentaryconceptswereneededinthisworktoexploretheprocessesandrelationshipsfromwhereinnovationandlearningtakeplace,particularlyfromtheperspectiveofinclusivity.

2.1.3 Triple Helix model of innovation

TheTripleHelixmodelofinnovationwasdevelopedbyHenrryEtzkowitzandLoetLeydesdorfinthe1990s.Thismodelisusedinthisstudyasafundamentalrelationalconfigurationneededtoconfigurecomplexinnovationandlearningprocessesindeve-lopingcountries.Etzkowitz(2008)explainsthatatriplehelixregimetypicallybeginsasuniversity,industry,andgovernmententerintoareciprocalrelationshipwitheachotherinwhicheachattemptstoenhancetheperformanceoftheother.

30

Figure 2.1: The Triple Helix Model of University-Industry-Government Relations Etzkowitz et al., (2000)

Sunitiyoso,Wicaksono, Utomo, Putro, & Mangkusubroto (2012) summarized thethreedimensionsdevelopedbyEtzkowitz to explain theevolutionof thedynamicssubjacenttothemodel:

• Thefirstdimensionofthetriplehelixmodelisinternaltransformationineachofthehelices,suchasthedevelopmentoflateraltiesamongcompaniesthroughstrategicalli-ancesoraneconomicdevelopmentmissionbyuniversities.

• Theseconddimensionistheinfluenceofonehelixuponanother.

• Thethirddimensionisthecreationofanewoverlayoftrilateralnetworksandorganiza-tionsfromtheinteractionamongthethreehelices.

TheTripleHelixmodelpresentsapracticalandusefulstructurethatallowsbuildingaconcreteframeworkofunderstandingforemerginginnovationsystemsindevelopingcountries,asisthecaseofBolivia.

2.1.4 Developmental University

TheroleofuniversitiesinnationalinnovationsystemsisstillindebateinLatinAmeri-cancountries,particularlywhenitcomestopublicuniversities,wheremostofthesecountrieshaveconcentratedasignificantsegmentoftheirresearchcapabilities.Sutz(2012) explained thatunderdevelopment canbeverypartiallybutnot inaccuratelycharacterisedasan“innovationaslearning”systemicfailure.Asystemicfailureisde-finedasthe inabilityofasystemof innovationtosupportthecreation,absorption,retention,useanddisseminationofeconomicallyusefulknowledgethroughinterac-tivelearningorin-houseR&Dinvestments(Chaminadeetal.,2009).Fromthiscon-text, especially looking intoLatinAmerican emergingnational innovation systems,thecontextof“developmentaluniversities”arises,thinkingofamoresociallyinclusiveknowledgeproductionatuniversities.Brundeniusetal.(2009)explainthattheterm“sociallyinclusiveknowledgeproduction”isusedtoemphasizethepurposefulactiontowardsproducingknowledgewiththeexplicitaimofsolvingsomeofthepressingproblems of those “being excluded from common facilities or benefits that othershave”.Thisaimcanbeextendedtothesupportofproduction,particularlyforsmall-andmedium-enterprisesthatfinditparticularlydifficulttobuyready-madesolutions

Academia

State Industry

Tri-lateral networks and Hybrid organizations

31

intheworldmarket,andcouldbenefitfromamore“tailor-made”approachtotheirknowledgeneeds.

Arocena,Göransson,&Sutz(2015)pointedoutthatdevelopmentaluniversitiesarethose involved inthepromotionofprocessesof learningand innovationfor foster-ing inclusivedevelopment.The ideaof a developmental university is an importantframeworkfortheBoliviancase,becauseitisusefulandrepresentsthecurrentcontextlinkedwith the institutional values in society.This conceptdraws challenges andavisionforuniversities,especiallyforpublicuniversities,byproposinginternaltrans-formations andproactive attitudes supporting localdevelopment issues.Arocena etal.(2015)remarkthatsuchuniversitiesarecommittedspecificallytosocialinclusionthroughknowledgeand,moregenerally,tothedemocratizationofknowledgealongthreemainavenues:democratizationofaccesstohighereducation,democratizationofresearchagendasanddemocratizationofknowledgediffusion.

2.1.5 Mode 2 Knowledge Production

Themixingofnormsandvaluesindifferentsegmentsofsocietyispartofadiffusionprocesswhichatthesametimefostersfurthercommunicationamongthembycreat-ingacommoncultureandlanguage(Gibbonsetal.,1994).Thedifferentapproachesdescribed above offer a good concept framework of the purpose, the components,andtherelationshipsneededtocreatedynamicinnovationandlearningprocessesinsociety.Nevertheless,whenitcomestothepracticeatthebottomofthepyramid,stillareneededdeeperapproachesonthequestionofhowknowledgeandinnovationaregeneratedtosolvespecificproblemsinsocietyinatransdisciplinarycontext.Nowotny,Scott,&Gibbons(2013)arguedthatchangesinscientificknowledgeproductionaswellasothersocio-economicandpolitico-cultural transformationsarecharacterizedbyco-evolutionaryprocesses.Theseprocessesconsistinrelationshipsthatareneithercausalnorlinear,butreflexiveandinteractive.

Gibbons(2000)explainedthatinMode1,problemsaresetandsolvedinacontextgovernedbythe,largelyacademic,interestsofaspecificcommunity.Bycontrast,inMode2,knowledgeisproducedinacontextofapplicationinvolvingamuchbroaderrangeofperspectives;Mode2istransdisciplinary,notonlydrawingondisciplinarycontributionsbutcansetupnewframeworksbeyondthem;itischaracterisedbyhete-rogeneityofskills,byapreferenceforflatterhierarchiesandorganisationalstructureswhicharetransient.ItismoresociallyaccountableandreflexivethanMode1.Mode1andMode2eachemployadifferenttypeofqualitycontrol.PeerreviewstillexistsinMode2butitincludesawider,moretemporaryandheterogeneoussetofpracti-tioners,collaboratingonaproblemdefinedinaspecificandlocalisedcontext.Thus,in comparisonwithMode1,Mode2 involves amuchexpanded systemofqualitycontrol.TheMode2knowledgeproductionconceptlooksforthecontextualizationoftheknowledgeproductionandstudiesitsprocessesofgenerationbasedonthecreationofasharedandwiderresearchagendawithinsociety.Thisconceptstudiestheprocessofdialoguebetween thedemanding sector anduserswith the traditionally isolatedacademicprocessesofknowledgegeneration.

32

2.1.6 Technoscientific approach

Close to the epistemological and practice-driven approach of Mode 2 is theTech-noscientificapproachdevelopedat theresearchdivisionofTechnosciencestudiesatBlekingeInstituteofTechnology(BTH).Citingthepaper“Inclusiveinnovationpro-cesses–experiencesfromUgandaandTanzania”Trojer,Rydhagen,Kjellqvist(2014)illustratedsomebasesoftheTechnoscientificapproach.

It is important to recognize that knowledge always is situated as it grows in specific contexts, as e.g. Haraway (1988) gives profound accounts of. Knowledge transfer is thus always difficult, and may be particularly so when people with scientific schooling, administrative drill and entrepreneurial skill move out of their habitual context to meet people in informal settings. Haraway’s proposal is to recognize and admit the localisation of ‘knowledges’ in bodies, including our own, to be aware of the symbolic meanings of the knowledge that we hold and that it might differ from others’ symbolic meanings. To live with and make use of the ‘situatedness’ “… we do need an earth-wide network of connections, including the ability to partially translate ‘knowledges’ among very different – and power-differentiated communities” (1988:580). If so, different ways of articulating a demand for knowledge might be recognized and acknowledged.Knowledge has been shown to spread in locally established clusters, where social bonds and trust through face-to-face interaction facilitate sharing of relevant and specific knowledge.

2.1.7 Cluster Development

TheMode2andTechnoscientificapproachesexplainthatthedeterminantsofapo-tential solution involve the integrationofdifferent skills in a frameworkof action.However,theconsensusmaybeonlytemporarydependingonhowwellitconformstotherequirementssetbythespecificcontextofapplication.Lookingatthe“notyet”dynamiccontextofrelationswithintheBolivianInnovationSystem,itisimperativetostartdevelopingstableplatformsofactionandconsensusbetweentheorganizationsinvolvedinconcreteinnovationandlearningprocesses.Theseplatformscatalyselink-ingprocesses, institutionaldialogue,networking,andtrustbuildingaroundspecificsocio-economicfields.

Onealternativecomes fromtheconceptofclusterwhichoriginallywasdefinedbyPorter(2000)as“geographicconcentrationsofinterconnectedcompanies,specializedsuppliers,serviceproviders,firmsinrelatedindustriesandassociatedinstitutions(e.g.universities,standardsagencies,tradeassociations)inaparticularfield,clusterfirmscompetebutalsocooperate”.

Nevertheless,whenitcomestotheprecariousconditionsoftheproductivesectorinLatinAmerica,Parrilli(2007)describestheemergenceofclustersformedbysmallandmediumenterprises(SME)so-called“survivalclusters”.Theseclustersareformedbymicroandsmallcraftfirms,workingwithobsoletetechnologyandmanualtechniquestoproduce,withnodivisionandspecialisationoflabour,low-qualitynon-standardisedgoodsforlow-incomeconsumersinlocalmarkets.

ThesearetheconditionsofmosttheBolivianSME’swheretheirrelevanceliesonthefactthat,likeinmostLatinAmericancountries,SME’scomprisesthelargestshareoffirms,employmentandgrossdomesticproducts.Additionally,basedonhisempirical

33

workinLatinAmericancountries,Parrilli(2007)suggestshowtoimproveSMEclus-terdevelopmentformulatingthe“stageandeclectic”approaches:

• The“stageapproach”islinkedtotheneedofidentifyingthecharacteristicsofeachclusteranditseffectivepotentialtogrow,whichcannotbeindependentfromthepresentdevelopmentstage.Targetingfeasibleandprogressivestagesofdevelopmentfordynamic“survivalclusters”canhelptheselocalproductionsystemsrespondtothenewchal-lengesrepresentedbyglobalisationandtofacethethreateningentryofnewcompetitiveproductionsystemsintheworldmarket.

• Theimportanceofan“eclecticapproach”isemphasisedandlinkedtotheneedofcon-sideringtherelevanceofseveraldifferentdeterminantsofdevelopment.Thesedetermi-nantsaretheonesthatthemainstreamsofliteratureonSMEclusterdevelopment(i.e.,“collectiveefficiency”,“socialembeddedness”and“policyinducement”)identifiedovertime.

Thisconceptoffersanoperativeframeworktobuilddialogueandconsensusforumstolinkthedemandingsocio-productivesectorsinBoliviawiththeacademicsector.Theseclustersallowmeltingalltheconceptsmentionedabovecongregatingtheactorsinatrustbuildingprocessandbottom-upcontributionstotheNIS’sdynamics.

2.2 Methodological considerationsThenecessityof involvement in thecontextof technologicaldevelopmentaswellasin the context of use is connected to the large-scale introduction of very complextechnologies thathave consequences for the sustenanceof lifeonourplanet (Ryd-hagen,2002).Mode2andTechnoscientificapproacheshaveinspiredmy8yearsprac-ticesintheTechnologyTransferUnit(UTT)attheUniversidadMayordeSanSimón(UMSS). During those years, UTT transformed its competences and encouragedUMSStoenhanceitsparticipationwithininnovationsystems.IworkedatUTTde-velopinginternalnetworkswithinUMSS,researchprojects,andclusterdevelopmentlinkingtheuniversitysourceswithgovernmentandproducers.Thus,Ichoseparticipa-toryactionresearchasmymainresearchmethod.McIntyre(2008),explainedthatthisapproachischaracterizedby:

• theactiveparticipationofresearchersandparticipants(inthiscasesocio-productiveac-tors,researchersandgovernmentofficers)intheconstructionofknowledge

• thepromotionofself-andcriticalawarenessthatleadstoindividual,collective,and/orsocialchange

• anemphasisonaco-learningprocesswhereresearchersandparticipantsplan,imple-ment,andestablishaprocessfordisseminatinginformationgatheredintheresearchproject.

Theresearch includedaprocessof literature reviewabout theconceptsmentionedabove,andinternationalexperiencesontheseissues.Thepaperspresentedarebasedonalocalpractice-drivenresearch,withspecificpersonalexperiencesasclusterfacilita-toroftheFoodClusterCochabambaatUTT(6years),co-facilitatorintheNationalResearch Food Network at the VCyT (2 years). These experiences included meet-

34

ings,workshops,activityplanning,projectsdesign,researchplanning,interviews,andprojectimplementation.Additionally,thestudyincludedareviewofofficialdocumentsaboutnationalpoliciesofinnovationinBoliviainthelast30years.Thesedocumentsincludedforexample,thelastNationalPlanofScience,TechnologyandInnovation,lawsandregulations,researchdatabases.Finally,co-authoringwithtworecognizedin-novationpractitionersinthecountryhasenrichedtwoofthepaperspresentedinthisthesis.Oneoftheco-authorsrepresentstothepolicy-makerperspectiveworkingcur-rentlyattheVCyTinchargeoftheBolivianInnovationSystemsecretariat.TheotheronecomesfromtheuniversitysidepromoteroftheTechnologyTransferUnitandtheInnovationProgramatUMSS,thusattemptingtoreflecttransdisciplinarydiscussionsalsoinmyresearchwork.

Myambitionwiththisstudyis,particularly,toreachBolivianpolicy-makersandaca-demics,inordertoenrichandinsomecasesopendebatesabouttheissuespresentedinthisstudy.Thisstudyseekstoinspireresearchersindevelopingcountries,linkingthedifferentconceptspresented,lookingatthemasdriversofinclusiveinnovationpur-poses.Additionally,thepaperspresentedinthisthesiswillbetranslatedintoSpanishtomaketheirdiffusioneasierintheLatinAmericancommunity.

35

Part 2

37

Chapter 3 – PAPERS

3.1 Introduction to the Papers Thislicentiatethesisisacompilationofthreepapersasoutlinedbelow.

Paper I:Acevedo,C.G.,Céspedes,W.M.H.,&Zambrana,J.E.(2015).Bolivian Innovation Policies: Building an Inclusive Innovation System.JournalofEntrepreneur-shipandInnovationManagement,Vol4,Issue1,June2015,pp.63–82.

Abstract:ThisstudyexploresthepolicypathstheBoliviangovernmenthasfollowedinthelastthreedecadestoorganizescience,technology,andinnovation.WepresentstrategiesproposedbythegovernmenttomakeitsNationalInnovationSystemmoredynamicandsociallyinclusive.WeanalysetheprocessandstrategiesfollowedunderthelightoftheTripleHelix(government-industry-university)modelofinnovation.

Keywords:NationalInnovationSystem;TripleHelix;InclusiveInnovation;DevelopingCountries;Bolivia.

Paper II:Acevedo,C.G.,Céspedes,W.M.H.,&Zambrana,J.E.(2015).“Develop-mental University” approaches in developing countries: Case of the Universidad Mayor de San Simón, Bolivia.

Abstract:ThispaperpresentsthecaseoftheUniversidadMayordeSanSimón(UMSS)wherepro-activeinstitutionaleffortshaveshapedcollaborativedynamicscategorized

38

asa“developmentaluniversity”approach.This studyoffers someempirical insightsabouttheroleofpublicuniversitiesinemerginginclusiveinnovationsystemswithinalackofdemandingcontext,inBolivia.Thisisaparticipatoryactionresearchperformedattheuniversitytechnologytransferoffice.Theseexperiencesdevelopednewinstitu-tionalcompetencesforthisuniversityunitasinnovationintermediaryandmanager,promotingco-evolutionaryprocessesofcollaborationbetweentheuniversitywiththedemandingsectorsofscience,technologyandinnovation.

Keywords: Developmental University; Inclusive Innovation Systems; TechnologyTransferOffice;Mode2;ClusterDevelopment;Bolivia

Paper III:Acevedo,C.G.(2015).Clusterinitiativesforinclusiveinnovationindevel-opingcountries:FoodClusterCochabamba,Bolivia.

Abstract:Thispaperpresents thecaseof theFoodClusterCochabamba,whichwascreatedbyapublicuniversityasamechanismtoincreasetherelevanceofitsresearchactivitiesinthecontextofadevelopingcountry.Thisexperienceenhancestheroleofuniversity technology transfer offices in emerging innovation systems; it moreover,explorestheroleofclustersasuniversitymechanismstodevelopinclusiveinnovationprocessesindevelopingcountries.

Keywords:ClusterDevelopment;InclusiveInnovation;DevelopmentalUniversity;In-novationSystems;Bolivia.

39

3.2 Paper IBolivian Innovation Policies: Building an Inclusive Innovation System

CarlosGonzaloAcevedoPeñaTechnology Transfer Unit, Universidad Mayor de San Simón, Bolivia;

Research Division Technoscience Studies, Blekinge Institute of Technology, Sweden.

WalterMauricioHernánCéspedesQuirogaBolivian Innovation System, Vice-Ministry of Science and Technology, Bolivia

JoséEduardoZambranaMontánTechnology Transfer Unit, Universidad Mayor de San Simón, Bolivia

1. Introduction

Bolivia,asmanyothercountriesinLatinAmerica,iscreatingpoliciesandinstitutionsandbuildingnetworkstostrengthenthedynamicsofitsNationalInnovationSystem(NIS).Thismoresystemicviewoftheinnovationprocessesexplicitlyrecognizesthepotentiallycomplexinterdependenciesandpossibilitiesformultiplekindsofinterac-tionsbetweenthevariouselementsoftheinnovationprocess(Edquistetal.,1999).TheBoliviangovernmentusesthissystemicapproachatthepolicyleveltounifystrate-giesandgathernational institutions toaddress socialpriorities suchaspovertyandinequalityreduction,foodsafety,andinteractivelocalproductionofknowledgeaswellastoincreaseindustrialcompetitiveness.

WestartthisstudybybrieflyintroducingtheconceptofNISanditsrelevanceforde-velopingcountriesfocusingonLatinAmerica.Thenwepresentanarrativedescriptionofthemainpoliciesandinstitutionalcontextpromotedtoorganizescience,techno-logy,andinnovationinBoliviasincetheendofthedictatorshipperiod.Finally,weanalysethe“NationalPlanofScience,TechnologyandInnovation”underthelightoftheTripleHelixmodelofinnovation,usedasatooltodiscussthecharacteristicsofthemodeladoptedinBolivia.

2. National Innovation Systems (NIS) 2.1 Concept framework

TheconceptofNationalInnovationSystem(NIS)enhancestheroleofinnovationandinteractive learning in economic growth anddevelopmentwithinnational borders.Lundvall et al., (2009)define thenational innovation systemasanopen,evolving,andcomplexsystemthatencompassesrelationshipswithinandbetweenorganizations,institutions,andsocio-economicstructures,whichdeterminetherateanddirectionofinnovationandcompetence-buildingemanatingfromprocessesofscience-basedandexperience-basedlearning.

Basedonthesuccessfulexperiencesindevelopedcountries,soonerratherthanlater,theNISconceptwasalsointroducedindevelopingcountriesasaconceptualframe-worktocreatenewpoliciesandstrategiestoorganizescienceandtechnologyaswell

40

astheproductionanddiffusionofknowledgefordevelopmentrespondingtourgentsocialneeds.Developingcountriesarelessdevelopedintermsofinstitutionalcompo-sition, sophisticationof scientificand technologicalactivities, and linkagesbetweenorganizationalunits(Kayal,2008),thusstrategiesthatcouldworkinsomecountriescoulddonotworkaswellinanother.Thereby-accordingwiththeinnovationsystemapproach-innovationisconsideredtobedeeplydependentonthelocalspecificitiesofsocial,political,andeconomicrelations,beingthereforedirectlyaffectedbybothhistoryandtheparticularinstitutionalcontextofcountriesorregionswhereitoccurs(Scerrietal.,2013).

WeuseinthisstudytheTripleHelixapproachdevelopedbyHenryEtzkowitzasastart-ingperspectivetounderstandanddiscussinteractionsbetweenthemaininstitutionsintheBolivianinnovationsystemdevelopmentprocess.Arocenaetal.(2000),citedbyEtzkowitzetal.,(2003),pointoutthattheTripleHelixexplainstheformationandconsolidationof learningsocieties,deeplyrootedinknowledgeproductionanddis-seminationandawell-articulatedrelationshipbetweenuniversity,industryandgovern-ment.Themodelhelpsexplainwhythethreesphereskeeprelativelyindependentanddistinctstatus,showswhereinteractionstakeplace,andexplainswhyadynamictriplehelixprocesscanbeformedwithgradationsbetweenindependenceandinterdepend-enceandconflictandconfluenceofinterest(Etzkowitz,2008).

Figure 3.1: The Triple Helix Model of University-Industry-Government Relations Etzkowitz et al., (2000)

This model can be used at different levels (macro-meso-micro) within a nation asanoperativeframeworktostrengtheninnovationpoliciesandmechanismsproposedaccordingtothelocalcontextandpriorities.TripleHelixstrategiesareespeciallyim-portanttoless-developedcountriesandinparticulartoLatinAmericancountrieswithscarceR&Dactivitiesundertakenbyfirms,andmostlyconcentratedatuniversitiesandresearchinstitutes(deMelloetal.,2008).

2.2 NIS in Latin America

Alcortaetal.,(1998)locatetheoriginsofnationalresearchcoordinatingorganizationsinLatinAmericancountriesinthe1950s,withthecreationofthefirstnationalcoun-cilsforscienceandtechnology(theNationalInstituteforScientificResearch-Mexico,

Academia

State Industry


41

1950;theBrazilianNationalResearchCouncil-Brazil,1951;andtheNationalCoun-cilforScienceandTechnology–Argentina,1958).Duringthe1960sand1970s,asignificant number of Latin American countries established some form of systemicpolicythinkingtodevelopscienceandtechnology(S&T)organizationalstructures.Themerecreationofsuchinstitutions,however,didnotmakethemoperationalordynamic,andinsomeofthecountries(Bolivia,Paraguay,andNicaragua)S&Tplansaswellastheso-calledS&Tfundsexistedonpaperonly(Velho,2004).

In1964,awaveofmilitarycoups(thatbeganwiththeBraziliancoup)startedinLatinAmerican’sgovernments,andlasteduntilthefirsthalfofthe1980s.Therelationshipinthisperiodbetweenthestateandtheindustrialsectorwasimportant,butitwasnotfocusedoninnovation(Arocenaetal.,2000).Influential thinkers inLatinAmericaarguedthatthewayinwhichtheresearchcouncilswereoperatedwas“marginalising”localsciencefromlocalneeds.Theyassociatedthiswiththecharacteroftheindustri-alizationmodeladopted–definedbyitsrelianceontechnologytransfer–whichdidnotrequirelocalR&Dactivitiesbutonlytheaccumulationofspecificcapabilitiestooperatetechnologydevelopedelsewhere(Velho,2004).

Theendofthedictatorshipperiodwasfollowedbyademocratictransition-socalledneo-liberalism-proposingmacroeconomicpolicyandeconomic reformshighly in-fluencedbytheWashingtonConsensus.Thismodelprioritizestheopeningupofdo-mesticeconomiestoforeigncompetition,thederegulationofavastarrayofmarkets,andtheprivatizationofpublic-sectorfirms(Katz,2001).Allofthesemeasures,butprimarilythelatter,wereimplementedwithwideoppositionfromsocialmovements.Yogueletal.,(2007)describethreemaincharacteristicsofS&Tpoliciesofthattime:first,ageneralperceptionthatpublicgoodsweredispensablebecauseknowledgecouldbeincorporatedthroughthepurchaseofcapitalgoods;second,theselectionofpri-oritizedindustrialsectorswasrejected,becauseitwasthemarketthatshouldleadtheselection;andthird,therewerenopoliciesthatpromotednetworks,exceptbyisolatedexperiencesthroughhorizontalpolices.

Eventually,politicalandeconomicbreakdownsinVenezuelaafter1998andinArgen-tinaafter2001andwidespreadsocialprotestsinEcuadorandBoliviaintheearlyyearsof the twentieth century culminated in the election of governments committed totheintroductionofcounter-cyclicalpolicies,programmesofnational(andsometimesregional)economic investment,and theextensionof socialpolicycoverage (Grugeletal.,2012).TheseeventsopenedthescenariouptoanewattempttobuildamoredemocraticandsociallyorientedeconomicmodelinLatinAmericacalledpost-neo-liberalism(findmorein“Contemporary Latin America: development and democracy be-yond the Washington Consensus” byPanizza, 2009).Grugel et al., (2012) assert thatpost-neoliberalismisnotsomuchanattempttoreturntostatecapitalismasitisanattempttorefashiontheidentityofthestate,redefinethenatureofcollectiverespon-sibilities,build state capacity, and rethinkwhonationaldevelopment is for. In thiscontext,arenewedsetofstrategies fordevelopmenthasemergedinLatinAmerica.Post-neoliberalgovernmentslookatNISasatooltoorientscience,technology,and

42

productivestructurestoachievesustainablenationaldevelopment.Underthesecondi-tions,theconceptofinclusiveinnovationhasbeenenhancedatthetimethatgovern-mentsstrengthennationalinnovationsystemsinvolvingsocialactorsinthedecision-makingprocess.

3. Bolivian innovation policies

3.1 Background

TheBolivianGDPincreased6.8%and5.4%in2013and2014respectivelyfollow-ingapositivetendencyinthelastdecade.Therateofgrowthin2013wasthehighestin the last thirty-eight years (Central Bank of Bolivia, 2013). The main economicactivitiesthatcontributedtothisgrowthwere:crudeoilandnaturalgasexploitation,financialservices,chargesforbankservices,andinternalrevenue(INE,2014).Thisperformance follows thepositive tendency in theLatinAmericanregion in the lastyearsandexposesthehighdependenceonnaturalresourcesexploitation.

Figure 3.2: Bolivian GDP annual growth rate (%) 1990-2014 (World Bank, 2015).

Duringthelastthirtyyears,theBoliviangovernmenthascreatedinstitutionsandes-tablishedcouncilsatthenationalandregionallevelsasanattempttoorganizeS&T.Afterthedictatorshipperiodendedin1982,Boliviafounditselfinaninstabletran-sition to democracy. At the beginning, Bolivia experienced an apparent economicprosperitybecauseof international loansandgood internationalprices forBolivianexports,suchastinandoil.Nevertheless,thatsituationwasfollowedbyoneofthelargestforeigndebtscrisisinBolivianhistory,alongwithhyperinflationthatdestroyedthepurchasingpowerofthepopulation.

GD

PG

row

thra

te(%

)

Years

43

Duringthe1990s,likemanycountriesinLatinAmerica,Boliviafollowedseveraleco-nomicreformsincludinganextensiveprivatizationofthestateenterprisesandreducedspendinginsocialservices.Arriarán,(2007)considersthatthetransitiontodemocracyinBoliviaseemedtobecharacterizedbyakindofdivorcebetweentheeconomicandthepolitical.Theeconomywas,infact,stabilized(stoppinghyperinflation).However,itwasdonebasedonamodelthatparadoxicallywidenedsocialgapsandneglecteddistributionalandequityaspects.

In2000,theBolivianAgriculturalTechnologySystem(SIBTA)wascreatedundertheMinistryofAgricultureasafundingandtechnologydiffusionmechanismtosupporttheagriculturalsector.TheSIBTAsupportedagriculturalresearchandextension,cre-atingfourregionalsemiautonomousfoundations(FDTAs):highlands, valleys, tropical, semiarid lowlands(Chaco).TheevaluationofHartwichetal.,(2007)ofthisexperiencesuggestedthat to fosterefficientagricultural innovationprocesses inadecentralizedfundingschemesuchastheSIBTA’sapproach,thegovernmentneedstoactivelyes-tablishpriorities,assurethatothersparticipate,guaranteetransparencyandaccounta-bility,maintainresponsivenesstothedemandsofusers,focusonimpact,delegatead-ministrativeresponsibilitiestolocalagenciesthatareclosertothefarmers,strengthenlinkagesamongthevariousinnovatingagents,andprovideastrategicvision.

TheMinistryofPlanningofDevelopmentcreatedothersystemicinitiativesin2001withtheBolivianSystemofProductivityandCompetitiveness(SBPC).Thisinitiativeintroducedanewunderstandingoftheindustrialsectorsasregionalproductivechainsandproposedmechanismstoorganizeinstitutionssuchasuniversities,industry,andpublicbodiesaroundthisperspective.Attheregionallevel,DepartmentalCommit-teesforCompetitiveness(CDC)werecreatedin2004asoperativetoolsforthesys-tem.Theyweresupportedbyinternationalcooperation,promotingagreementswithregional institutions suchasuniversitiesand suggesting regional strategiesbasedonstudiesoflocalproductivechains.Therewere18productivechainsstudied,generat-ingimportantinformationbutmostlyproposingstrategiesdifficulttoreplicateintheunstableBoliviancontext.Eventually,theCDCsbecamemoredecentralizedfromtheSBPC,focusingonsupportingthemedium-largeprivateindustriesattheregionallev-el.ThegeneralreflectionsofHartwichetal.,(2007)abouttheBoliviansystemicapp-roachesduringtheneoliberalismperiodstatethatgovernanceininnovationsystemsislessaboutexecutingresearchandadministeringextensionservicesandmoreaboutguiding diverse actors involved in complex innovation processes through the rulesandincentivesthatfosterthecreation,application,anddiffusionofknowledgeandtechnologies.

3.2 Plans, reforms and support structures 2006 – 2014

AnewgovernmentwaselectedinDecemberof2005withastrongindigenousrhetoricand brought significant social stability by increasing the political participation andpowerofthetraditionallyexcludedindigenousgroupsandothersocialmovements.Therecoveryofthesocialandindigenousesteemwasanearlyeffectofthesemeasures

44

involvinganimportantparticipationofsocialandindigenousmovementsinconsulta-tionandgovernanceprocesses.Thenewgovernmentenjoyedawidemajorityintheparliament,whichallowedittopushforwardlargerreformprocesseswiththemaingoalofcreatinganewpoliticalstateconstitution(CPE),whichwasapprovedin2008bytheCongressoftheNation.

WiththenewCPE,Boliviaadoptedanewpluraleconomicmodel,so-called“national-productive”model(García,2008).Thismodelrecognizesseveralformsofeconomicorganizations-community,state,private,andsocialcooperative-andismainlyfo-cusedonanactiveparticipationofthegovernmentineconomy,theindustrializationofnaturalresources,afocusonsocialneeds,andtheredistributionofwealth.

Thegovernmentstartedthereformswiththenationalizationofkeyindustries,reach-ing19firmsby2014:(e.g.:YPFB(hydrocarbons),2006;Huanuni(mining),2006;EN-TEL(telecommunication),2007;Vinto(smelter),2007;AirBP(jet fuel),2009;Corani(electricity),2010).Anotherearlymeasureimplementedwastoreducethepresident’ssalary, which implies by law that no other public servant can earn more than thepresident.AccordingtotheMinistryofEconomyandFinance,thepresident’ssalarywas18,800BOBpermonthby2014,orabout2,845USD.Thisausteritymeasurelimitsthepossibilityofeconomicallyincentivizingtheresearchcommunity(atpublicuniversities)thatincreasetheircurrentactivities(researchingandteaching)bypartici-patinginfutureinitiativesthatencouragecollaborationwithproductiveactorsandthegovernment.

In2006,theMinistryofPlanningandDevelopmentpresentedthe“National Plan for Development 2006-2011”(PND),laterapprovedbyasupremedecreein2007.Thisplan was important for the new political reforms, because it was used as referenceforfollowingactionsatthenationalandregionallevels.Theplanproposedpolicies,strategies,programsfordevelopment,andgaveahighprioritytoincreasingcapacitiesin science, technology, and innovation to support theproductive sector. It alsode-finedstrategicareasforproductivedevelopmentwithasystemicandsociallyinclusiveapproach through the creation of the Bolivian Innovation System (SBI). The planorientedBoliviangovernmental institutions to face the challengesof gathering andorganizing all the actorsof the system inorder tofind technology-based solutions,whilerecognizingandincludingancientindigenous(non-academic)knowledgeintheprocessofinnovationaswell.

The responsibility of the SBI lies in the Vice-Ministry of Science andTechnology(VCyT),createdin2006undertheMinistryofPlanningandDevelopment.In2007,theVCyTpresentedaproposaltoestablishtheSBI,whichschematizesinstitutionalcomplexity and relationsbetween the actors, and identifies15geographical sub-re-gionsbasedonproductiveandculturalsimilaritiestoincreasethescopeoftheactions(Carvajaletal.,2007).In2009,theVCyTwasmovedtotheMinistryofEducation,butremainedinchargeofpromotingtheSBI.TheVCyTpreparedanewplanningdraft in2009,andafteranextendedparticipatoryconsultingprocess,publishedanofficialversion in2013.Thisplan is focusedon long-termstrategies for theperiod

45

2014-2025.Itseeksthedevelopmentofhumanandinstitutionalcapacitiesundertherhetoricofsovereigntyinscienceandtechnologywiththeperspectiveofsocialinclu-sivity.Wewilldiscuss thestrategiespresented intheplan inmoredetail inthefol-lowingsection.Meanwhile,wementionother initiativescarriedbyotherministriesaccordingtotheframeworkoftheBolivianInnovationSystempresentedinthePND,butindependentlyfromtheVCyT’sproposal.

In 2008, the National Institute for Agricultural and Forestry Innovation (INIAF)wascreatedundertheMinistryofRuralDevelopmentandLands(MDRyT).Itwasformed following the PND guidelines as a component of the Bolivian InnovationSystem(SBI).Itisadecentralizedinstitutionwiththeaimofestablishingguidelines,implementingpolicies,andgenerating technologies foragriculturaland forestry in-novation.This institution replaced the functionsof the formerSIBTA.The INIAFsupportsfarmersandseedsupplierstoincreasetheproductivityonprioritizedsectors(wheat,potatoes,corn,rice,vegetables,livestockandforage,quinoa,forestsandsugar-cane).TheINIAFseekstoincreasethescopeandimpactoftheformerexperiencesbyusingparticipatoryand inclusivemechanisms tobuildconsultingplatformsat fourlevels:national,regional,local,andbyproduct.Theseplatformsinvolveresearchers,localproducers,institutions(private,publicandmixed),andagentsfromthegovern-mentatalllevels.

On theotherhand, theMinistryofProductiveDevelopment andPluralEconomy(MDPyEP) implemented three strategies to strengthen theproductive sectoraccor-dingtothePNDguidelines.In2008,theMDPyEPcreatedthreedecentralizeddeve-lopmentagencies–ProBolivia, Insumos Bolivia,andPromueve Bolivia-withtheaimofchangingtheproductivematrixandsupportingcompetitivenessinthemanufacturingsector.Atthesametime,anewnormwasapprovedthatallowstheseagenciestoexe-cutepublic-public andpublic-privatefinancial transfers. In thisway, in2012 theseagenciesstartedpromotingcontestsasastrategytomotivatepublic-privateaswellasacademicandnon-academicpartnershipforinnovationprojectsinprioritizedsectors(food,leather,wood,metal-mechanic,textile,andhandicrafts).Asecondstrategywasthecreationof“productivecomplexes”(regionalclusters)supportedbytheregionalgovernments based on the capacity of the local productive chains. The productiveclusterswillbetechnicallystrengthenedbyproductivecentresforinnovation(CIP)incollaborationwithpublicuniversitiesandregionalgovernments.Thethirdstrategytochangetheproductivematrixwasthecreationofstateenterprisesinstrategicnationalpriorityareas(inadditiontothoseonesnationalized).Bynow,fivenewstateenterpriseshavebeenbuilt(LacteosBol(dairy products),2007;PapelBol(paper),2007;CartonBol(cardboard), 2010; EceBol (cement), 2008; and Eba (almond), 2009), but there aremanyotherspending.Inordertomanagethisprocess,theDevelopmentServiceforStateEnterprises(SEDEM)wascreated.Thesestateenterprisesseektoensurethesupp-lyofbasicproductsforthepopulationandtheindustry,butalotofcontroversywasgeneratedaroundunfaircompetitionfromthestatewiththelocal-privateindustries.Anyhow,itispartofthestrategyadoptedbythegovernmenttomobilizeresourcesandstrengthenthenationaleconomy.Mostofthesestrategiesareintheveryfirstphases

46

ofimplementation.Follow-upstudieswillcompleteanalysisandwilldeterminetheirimpactonthesociety.

In2012,theMinistryofthePresidencystartedawideconsultingprocesstocreatealong-termroadmapfornationaldevelopmentso-called“The Patriotic Agenda: Bolivia towards 2025.”Thisdocumentwaspresentedin2014withtheaimofcontinuingthereformprocessstartedwiththeNationalPlanforDevelopment(PND).ThePatrioticAgenda was built based on 13 core guidelines, identifying science and technologyexplicitly in the4th guideline as “sovereignty over identity and development of science and technology.”Inthatsection,innovationislocatedinthecoreoftheproposalandisconsideredaresultofaprocessofsystemicconvergencethatinvolvestheacademicsector,thegovernment,theproductivesector,andthenative-indigenoussector(bothasknowledge-generatorsandusersofscienceandtechnology)asmainactors.

3.3 General Comments

TheBoliviangovernmentpromotesseveralinitiativesaroundthesystemicvisionofin-novationfordevelopment,lookingforacloserpartnershipbetweentheacademic,theproductive,andthegovernmentalsectorstoreducepoverty.

Wehaveconsideredthe initiativespresentedbytheVCyTasacoreelement inthesystem,whichisinchargeoforganizinginstitutionsforinnovationtogiveaconcep-tualframeworkandpromotingpoliciestomakeitmoredynamic.However,wearguethatthedimensionofthecurrentBolivianInnovationSystemexceedsthescopeoftheSystemofInnovationundertheVCyT,whichrespondsmainlytotheMinistryofEdu-cation’sconcerns,butiscomplementedmainlybytheinitiativesoftheMinistryofAg-ricultureandtheMinistryofProductiveDevelopment.Weexpectintheshort-termthePatrioticAgendaanditsexecutingorganismstocoordinate(atthehighestlevel)allthesystemicinitiativestopromoteinnovationforsustainablesocialdevelopment.

4. National Plan for Science, Technology and Innovation (PNCTI)

4.1 Main components of the PNCTI

In2013,theVCyTpresentedaNationalPlanforScience,Technology,andInnova-tion(PNCTI).Itwastheresultofagraduatedconsultingprocessthatinvolved940representativesofthethreemainsectorsidentifiedinthesystem(667academic,141social-productive,and132government).Inthisplan,theVCyTdefinestheBolivianSystemforScience,Technology,andInnovation(ST&I)asfollows:

“The set of interrelated and complementary actors, using science, technology, and innovation in a coordinated and constructive form that generates integral solutions for productive, social, and environmental problems, with a focus on participatory equitable and sustainable development.” (VCyT, 2013)

Theplan is organized in twophases of implementation; thefirst one (2014-2019)looks to strengthen the system, and the secondone (2020-2025) looks to consoli-datethesystemaccordingtothechallengesproposedinthe“Patriotic Agenda: Bolivia through 2025.”

47

ThePNCTIpresentseightprioritizedsectorstobefortified:health;agriculturaldeve-lopment; industrial and manufacturing transformation; local and ancient non-aca-demicknowledge;naturalresources,environmentandbiodiversity;energy;andmin-ing.

TheBolivianSystemofST&Iwaspresented in termsof the interactions (demand-pulled)betweenthreemainsectors:theknowledge-generatingsector,thescienceandtechnologydemandingsector,andthegovernmentsector.TheVCyTpresentsaTripleHelixapproachformedbybilateralrelationsamongthegovernment,theknowledge-generatingsector,andthesectorthatdemandsscience,technology,andinnovation.ThesesectorsaredefinedinthePNCTIasfollow:

• The governmental sectorinvolvesalltheentitieswiththecapacitytogenerate,regulate,promoteandimplementpoliciesrelatedtoscienceandthetechnologicaldevelopmentofthenation.ThemainrepresentativesofthissectoraretheMinistryofEducation,theVice-MinistryofScienceandTechnology(VCyT),andinstitutionsyettobecreatedtosupportthesystemaccordingwiththeplan.

• The knowledge-generating sectorinvolvesuniversities,publicandprivateresearchcentres,andthelocalandancientnon-academicknowledgedevelopedbyindigenousgroups.Theroleofthissectorincludesactivitiesofhumantrainingskillsforresearch,technol-ogydevelopment,technologytransfer,andprofessionalmanagementoftheproductivesector.

• The sector that demands science, technology, and innovationisrepresentedbythesocio-productivesectorthatencompassesthesociety(ingeneral),agriculturalproducers,indigenousgroups,andtheindustrialsector(public,private,small,medium,andlargeenterprises).

Inthismodel,socialactorsandindigenousgroupsareexplicitlyincludedandrecog-nizedasknowledgeproducersaswellasusersofscience,technology,andinnovation.This approach responds to the claimof inclusionof the traditionally excluded seg-mentsofthepopulationasdynamicactorsininnovationprocessesanddevelopmentstrategies.

ThechallengefortheBoliviangovernmentinademand-pulledmodelofinnovationisthatthismodelneedsadynamicdemandingsectorabletomobilizeandorganizeinter-nalresourcesintoalong-termproductivevisionthatinvolvessectorialleadershipsthatwouldbeabletofacilitatecollaborationwithotherinstitutionsinthesystemandlookforcommongoalsratherthaninstitutionalclaims.TheBolivianeconomyisstillhighlydependentonnatural resources, andmostof thepopulationworks ina lowaddedvaluesectors.Thiscontextcouldinfluencetheperformanceofademand-pulledmodelofinnovation.Sometimesinnon-dynamicsectors,financialprogramsofcooperationareexploitedforthetraditionallybest-positionedcompaniesandorganizations,whichasaresultcontributestomaintaininginequalities.Infact,Benavente(2005)andYo-gueletal.(2007)presentevidencefromChileandArgentinarespectivelypointingoutthattheexperiencesofhorizontalfinancialagenciesshowedatendencytoconcentratesupporting resources for the productive sector in a reduced number of firms, pro-bablythosemostdynamicintheirsectors,butnotcontributetoreducinginequalityasexpected.

48

4.2 PNCTI first phase of implementation (2014-2019)

ThisphaseofthePNCTIisfocusedonthepassageofanewLawofScience,Techno-logy,andInnovationanditsregulation.ItwillcreateadecentralizedunittoexecutethePNCTIandanothertomanagethefinancialsofthesocial-productiveandacademicsectors(bothundertheVCyT).

ThestartingactionsperformedinthelastyearsbytheVCyTasafoundationforthesystemwere:

• Establishmentof12scientificandtechnologicalresearchnetworksinprioritizedfields,gatheringmorethan400scientists.Thesenetworksofferscenariostodiscusssocio-productiveneedsandtoapplyforresourcesbyproposingprojectsbasedontrans-disci-plinarycollaboration.

• Facilitationoffreeaccessto19internationaldatabaseslinkingnationalscientisttoover3000ScientificJournals.

• Presentationof2editions(2009and2011)ofsurveysabouttheBolivianscienceandtechnologypotential.Thesereportsputanendtoadecadewithoutsimilarstudiesper-formedatthenationallevel.

• Yearlypromotionof“scientific olympics”(nationalcontest)aspartofaprogramforthepopularizationofscience.Thiscontesthasthepurposeofincreasingscientificandtech-nologicalcapabilitiesforhigh-schoolstudentsthroughcompetitionsinmathematics,chemistry,biology,informatics,androbotics.Inmorethanfouryears,morethanahalfmillionstudentsfromalloverthecountryhaveparticipatedintheolympics.

• Organizationoftailor-madeworkshopsforpublic,private,andacademicpartnersinor-dertospreadtheconceptofinnovationsystems,understandtheroleofkeystakeholders,andusethisconceptasapolicytoolintheBoliviancontext.

Thisphaseseekstoconsolidatetheseinitiativesandallocateresourcestomakethemsustainable in the time. 75% of the Bolivian capacities (infrastructure and humanresources) in science and technology lie in public universities (VCyT, 2011). Thistendency is repeated inmostLatinAmerican countries. In this context, theVCyTidentifiesuniversitiesaskey institutions for initialmobilizingactivities. Inadditiontothestartedactionsmentionedabove,theVCyTproposestheimplementationofaNational Program for Developing Human Talentinstrategicscientificandtechnologi-calareas-food,biodiversity,mining,andenergy-aswellaslookingforthesupportofexistingresearchinfrastructuresatuniversitiesincollaborationwiththesocio-pro-ductivesector.Thefirstphasealsostipulatesinitialactivitiesthroughthecreationofseveralmechanismstofacilitatelinkagesbetweentheactorsandimplementsupportprograms.Nevertheless,theimplementationofmostofthemwillbeclarifiedindetailinfollowingplanningdocumentstobeelaboratedforthesecondphase(2020-2025).Meanwhile,thePNCTIpresentsaschemeofthebilateralrelationsinthesystemin-cludingtheseorganizationsandinstitutionstobecreated:

49

Figure 3.3: Sectors and interactions in the Bolivian System of Science, Technology, and Innovation (VCyT, 2013).

Thesecondphase(2020-2025)oftheplansuggestsaconsolidationofthefunctionsofthemechanismstobestartedduringthefirstphase,directingthemtowardsobjectivestobepresentedinthe“Patriotic Agenda: Bolivia towards 2025.”Inthisphase,thereisexpectedtobeanincreasedscopeofactivitiesoftheUnitofExecutionandfortheFinancingProgram,promotingthe implementationofnewmechanisms(organismstotransferresearchresults,scientificparks,incubators,andsoon).Atthesametime,thetrainingprogramsareinitiallysupposedtofocusonmasterdegreeprogramsthatcouldbecontinuedbyPhDprogramstoenrichthecriticalmassofresearchers.Thenitcomestothechallengeofcreatingstrategiesforincorporationofnewprofessionals,notonlyintheacademicsector,butalsointheproductivesector.Finally,thephaseincludesplanstotransformthemonitoringsystemofscienceandtechnologyintoanobservatoryofscienceandtechnologythatalsoincludesprospectsstudiesindifferentsectors.

4.3 General Comments

ThePNCTIpresentedproposesthecreationofnewinstitutionsandseveralnewex-periencesoforganizationswhereBoliviahasfewornosuccessfulexperiencesyet(in-dustrialparks,incubators,innovationplatforms,andorganismsfortechnologytrans-

50

fer).Toachievetheproposedgoals,theplanalsodemandsbuildinginnovativecultureamongtheinvolvedactors,creatingasolidlawforS&Tandreliableplatformstocreatetrustandnetworking,aswellasbreakinginstitutionalbarriersforcollaborationandensuringinclusivity.RecentexperiencesatthepublicUniversityofSanSimoncrea-tingthefirstuniversityTechnologyTransferOfficehaveshownthatthesekindunitscansupportthearticulationofregionalinnovationsystems.Thepublicuniversitycanworkasarelativelyneutralandreliableplatformfordialogueinordertosupportin-novationprocessesandreinforcetrustafterdecadesofdeterioratedrelationsamongtheactors.

5. Concluding remarks

TheTripleHelixmodelofinnovationcanbeusedasanex-anteconceptandasastra-tegictooltoopenuproadsforacatch-upprocesswithanultimategoalofcreatingalearningsociety(Etzkowitzetal.,2003).ThiscanbethecaseinBolivia,whereaTripleHelixapproachhasbeenadaptedandexpandedtobemoresociallyinclusive,recog-nizingindigenousgroupsandothersocialmovementsasimportantactorsinthepro-ductionanduseofknowledgeintermsofST&I.Atthesametime,itisnecessarytogiveonemorestepinPNCTIbreakinglinearmodelsofinteractionsandstarttofocusonnon-linearrelationsinordertoestablishnewrolesinthetraditionalinstitutionsinthesystem.Thiscanincreasethecohesionbetweenactorstocreatebettersynergiesemerging also frombottom-up initiatives in the system.TripleHelixprocesses canenrichthecurrentpracticesdenotingnotonlytherelationshipsofuniversity,industry,andgovernment,butalsointernaltransformationwithineachofthesespheres(Etz-kowitzetal.,2000).

Currently,severalgovernmentalbodiespromotediverseinitiativesfocusedonfoster-ing innovationculturebasedonTriple-Helixpartnerships tocontribute tonationaldevelopmentbyrespondingtosocio-productiveneeds.Since2006,Boliviahashadarelativelystablesocio-politicalenvironment.Thissituationallowsfortheconstructionandimplementationoflong-termstrategiesandreformstoachievesocialgoals.TheVCyTpromotionoftheBolivianInnovationSystemsince2007hasdriventhedeve-lopmentofamedium-termplantostrengththeNationalSystemofScienceTechnol-ogyandInnovation(2015-2019).Thisproposal,complementedbyinitiativesofotherministries,needsanationalcoordinatorbodyinordertomakeanefficientuseofthelimited resources available. The long-term plan, so-called “Patriotic Agenda: Bolivia towards 2025”,willorienteffortsofallthegovernmentalbodiespromotinginnova-tionfordevelopmenttowardsacommongoalandamoreefficientuseofthenationalresourcesallocated.

Wemustbeconsciousofthefactthatdemand-basedstrategiesinnon-dynamicsocio-productive sectors need strong leaderships from the sectors and strategies to createcross-boundaryorganizationstocatalyseprocessesofnetworkingatnationalandsub-nationallevels,ensuringtheinclusivityatseverallevelsofthemoreneededpopulationtoreachthesocialimpact.ThereflectionsofCozzensetal.,(2009)basedonstudies

51

ofdevelopingcountriesexplainhowinnovationandinequalityco-evolvewithinnova-tion,sometimesreinforcinginequalitiesandsometimesunderminingthem.

ThesuccessofNISrestsonthedegreeofintegrationandmatchingefficiencybetweenthevariousdriversandcomponentsofthesystem(Kayal,2008).Thecreationofna-tionalresearchnetworksbecameanimportantscenariotorecoverandopennewbridgeswiththeresearchcommunitytodiscussnationalpolicies,diffuseresearchresults,andsharebottom-upinitiativescontributingtothesystem.Sincemostoftheresearchandhigh-level training capacities are concentrated in few public universities, this givesthemakeyroleintheBolivianInnovationSystem.Thissocialresponsibilityforthenationaldevelopmentistransformingthetraditionalmissionsofuniversities.Theyareevolving fromprovidinghigher education and scientific knowledge into constantlyencounteringclaimsfromsocietyandgovernmenttotranscendinstitutionalspheresintheknowledgeproductionprocess.Thisisdonebypromotinginstitutionaldialogueandinvolvingsocialactorsassourcesofknowledgeandusers.

Finally,nooneoftheseimportanteffortswillbecompleteifthenationalgovernmentdoesnotconsidersubstantialreformstomarketpolicytopromoteandsupportthelocalindustry(private-public)andentrepreneurs.Thisissuehasbeenaconstantde-mandinallthedialogueplatforms.Boliviaispartofaregionalpolicylearningprocesslookingatthenationalinnovationsystemconceptasanalternativefordevelopmentandcompetencebuilding.TheBolivianpolicies for innovationmeansonestepfor-ward focusing efforts also on the legitimacy of science, technology and innovationbyincludingtheindigenousgroupsandsocietyingeneralasimportantactorsinthecreationofknowledgeincollaborationwiththetraditionalinstitutionsmentionedintheTriple Helix model of innovation (university-government-industry). We expectthat further studies can determine the impact of these policies in the evolutionaryprocesses.Theexperiencesgainedcancontributetotheperspectiveofsocialinclusiveinnovationsystems,butwiderperspectiveofinclusionisneededtofacenationalchal-lengesofdevelopmentasproposedinthe“Patriotic Agenda towards 2025.”

ReferencesAlcorta,L.,&Peres,W.(1998).InnovationsystemsandtechnologicalspecializationinLatin

AmericaandtheCaribbean.Research Policy,26(7–8),857–881.Arocena,R.,&Sutz,J.(2000).LookingatNationalSystemsofInnovationfromtheSouth.Indus-

try and Innovation,7(1),55–75.Arriarán,S.(2007).La derrota del neoliberalismo en Bolivia.EditorialTorresAsociados.Benavente,J.M.(2005).InnovacióntecnológicaenChile:Dóndeestamosyquésepuedehacer.

Economía Chilena,8(1),53–77.INE,(2014).Bolivia:Global Index of Economic Activity. (2014).http://www.ine.gob.bo/indice/gen-

eral.aspx?codigo=40221,(Access:02.025.2015).Carvajal,R.,&Albarracín,M.(2007).SistemaBolivianodeInnovación.Vice-MinistryofScience

andTechnology.LaPaz,Bolivia.CentralBankofBolivia.(2013).Memoria2013.https://www.bcb.gob.bo/?q=pub_memorias-

institucionales,(Access:09.03.2014).

52

Cozzens,S.E.,&Kaplinsky,R.(2009).Innovation,povertyandinequality:cause,coincidence,orco-evolution?Handbook of Innovation Systems and Developing Countries,57–82.EdwardElgar.

DeMello,J.M.C.,&Etzkowitz,H.(2008).NewdirectionsinLatinAmericanuniversity-indus-try-governmentinteractions.International Journal of Technology Management & Sustainable Development,7(3),193–204.

Edquist,C.,&Hommen,L.(1999).Systemsofinnovation:theoryandpolicyforthedemandside.Technology in Society,21(1),63–79.

Etzkowitz,H.(2008).The Triple Helix: University–Industry–Government Innovation in Action. Engineering.Routledge.

Etzkowitz,H.,&DeMello,J.M.C.(2003).Theriseofatriplehelixculture.International Journal of Technology Management & Sustainable Development,2(3),159–171.

Etzkowitz,H.,&Leydesdorff,L.(2000).Thedynamicsofinnovation:fromNationalSystemsand“Mode2”toaTripleHelixofuniversity–industry–governmentrelations.Research Policy,29(2),109–123.

García,A.(2008).ElNuevoModeloEconómicoNacionalProductivo.Revista de Análisis: Reflex-iones sobre la coyuntura,2,18.LaPaz,Bolivia.

Grugel,J.,&Riggirozzi,P.(2012).Post‐NeoliberalisminLatinAmerica:RebuildingandReclaim-ingtheStateafterCrisis.Development and Change,43(1),1–21.

Hartwich,F.,&Jansen,H.-G.(2007).The role of government in agricultural innovation: Lessons from Bolivia.InternationalFoodPolicyResearchInstitute(IFPRI).ResearchBrief,8.

Katz,J.(2001).Structuralreformsandtechnologicalbehaviour:Thesourcesandnatureoftechno-logicalchangeinLatinAmericainthe1990s.Research Policy,30(1),1–19.

Kayal,A.a.(2008).Nationalinnovationsystemsaproposedframeworkfordevelopingcountries.International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Innovation Management,8(1),74.

Lundvall,B.-Å.,Vang,J.,Joseph,K.J.,&Chaminade,C.(2009).Innovationsystemresearchanddevelopingcountries.Handbook of Innovation Systems and Developing Countries. Building Domestic Capabilities in a Global Setting,1–30.EdwardElgar.

Panizza,F.(2009).Contemporary Latin America: development and democracy beyond the Washington consensus.London-NewYork:ZedBooks

Scerri,M.,SoaresCouto,M.,Maharajh,R.(2013).TheCo-evolutionofInnovationandInequal-ity.Inequality and Development Challenges,1–18.Routledge.

Velho,L.(2004).ScienceandTechnologyinLatinAmericaandtheCarribbean:AnOverview,INTECHDiscussionPaperSeries,Maastricht:UnitedNationsUniversity.

VCyT,(2013).Plan Nacional de Ciencia, Technología e Innovación.LaPaz,Bolivia.VCyT,(2011).Potencial Científico y Tecnológico Boliviano 2011(2daEdición).LaPaz,Bolivia.WorldBank,(2015).WorldDevelopmentIndicators,Bolivia.http://data.worldbank.org/country/

bolivia,(Access:25.03.2015).Yoguel,G.,Lugones,M.,&Sztulwark,S.(2007).Lapolíticacientíficaytecnológicaargentinaen

lasúltimasdécadas:algunasconsideracionesdesdelaperspectivadeldesarrollodeprocesosdeaprendizaje.CEPAL, manual de Políticas Públicas Ciencia y Tecnología para el Desarrollo, 43.http://www.cepal.org/iyd/noticias/paginas/5/31425/yoguellugonesysztulwark.pdf,(Access:10.10.2014).

53

3.3 Paper II

“Developmental University” approaches in developing countries: Case of the Univer-sidad Mayor de San Simón, Bolivia

Carlos Gonzalo Acevedo PeñaTechnologyTransferUnit,UniversidadMayordeSanSimón,Bolivia;

ResearchDivisionTechnoscienceStudies,BlekingeInstituteofTechnology,Sweden.

Walter Mauricio Hernán Céspedes QuirogaBolivianInnovationSystem,Vice-MinistryofScienceandTechnology,Bolivia

José Eduardo Zambrana MontánTechnologyTransferUnit,UniversidadMayordeSanSimón,Bolivia

1. Introduction1.1 The Universidad Mayor de San Simón

TheUniversidadMayordeSanSimón(UMSS)wascreatedin1832,intheregionofCochabamba,Bolivia.Itisapublicuniversity,declaredasanautonomousuniversityin1931.ItisalsopartoftheBolivianUniversitySystem(SUB)andcurrentlyisthesecondlargestuniversityinBoliviaintermsofstudentpopulation,withapproximate-ly65,000studentsby2014.Publicuniversitiesprovideunder-graduateeducationto76%ofallstudentsinthecountry.

ThemainactivitiesatUMSSarefocusedonundergraduateeducation.Teachingactivi-tiesarespreadoverarangeofabout82undergraduatecoursesofferedbyelevenfacul-tiesandone technical school.Graduateprograms,mostly specializationandmasterprograms,areprimarilyorientedat trainingprofessionals for the localandnationalmarkets.Studentsintheseprogramsareusuallypeoplealreadyholdingajob,wishingto improvetheir skills inorder toenhancetheirperformanceatwork,and increasetheirchanceswhencompeting in the labourmarket.Unlikeunder-graduateeduca-tion,which is fully fundedby the government, graduate training requires studentstopay for their full tuition.Onlygraduateprograms(researchbased) implementedwiththesupportofinternationalcooperationofferscholarshipsorsomeotherspecialtreatment.

ResearchisoneofthethreecorefunctionsofUMSS,togetherwitheducation(trainingofprofessionals),and(community)outreach.TheDirectorateforScientificandTech-nologicalResearch(DICyT)istheuniversitybodyinchargeofmanagingandorgan-izingtheresearchsystematUMSS.TheresearchcapabilitiesatUMSSareformedby42researchunits,and219researchers(Rectorado-Vicerrectorado,2012).AccordingtoDICyT(2012a),before2000,themainfeaturesoftheresearchactivitiesatUMSSwere:i)heterogeneity,intermsofunevensupporttoresearchunitsandthenumberandqualityofprojectsundertaken; ii)volunteering-likeresearch, sinceprojectsun-dertakencame from individual initiatives,disarticulated, foreach researchunit setsitsownobjectivesonitsownor,sometimes,coordinatingwiththeirpartners;iii)and

54

precarious,sinceresearchunitswithoutsustainableconditionsappearedandvanishedand,often,researcherswerenotgrantedanyjobstability.

Hitherto,R&DactivitiesatUMSShavebeenfinanced(exceptbyresearcherssalaries)mainlybytheinternationalcooperation.Inthelastdecade,themostprominentcoo-peratingorganizationscamefromSweden,Belgium,Holland,Switzerland,Germany,SpainandCanada.After2005,anothersourceofresearchfundswereallocatedderivedfromtheDirectHydrocarbonTaxes(IDH)collectedbythecentralgovernment.Be-sideslimitedresourcesallocated,remarkableisolatedeffortshavebeenperformedintheresearchcentrestoaccumulateandimprovetheirresearchcapabilities.However,inorder tohavean institutional impact in society, it isneeded todevelopeffectivelinkingmechanismswiththelocaldemandingsectors.ThemorerelevantinstitutionalapproachestoreorientresearchactivitieswerepromotedbytheTechnologyTransferUnit(UTT).ThisunitwascreatedatUMSSin2004,locatedintheFacultyofScienceandTechnology.UTTintroducedtheperspectiveofinnovationsystemsatUMSStodeveloplinkingmechanismsbetweentheuniversity,thegovernmentbodiesandthesocio-productiveactors.Themainexperiencesgainedinthisprocessarepresentedinthispaper.

1.2 The Bolivian Innovation System

Recentreformsstartedin2006,establishedtheneedtocreateaNationalInnovationSystem(NIS).ThisproposalfollowedtothediscontinuedinitiativesoftheBolivianSystemofAgrarianTechnology(SIBTA)andtheBolivianSystemofProductivityandCompetitiveness (SBPC).TheNISwas thoughtof as a toolof theNationalDeve-lopmentPlan(2006-2011),tostrengthenthenationalresearchcapabilitiesandlink-ageswiththeproductivesectors.ThepromotionoftheBolivianInnovationSystem(SBI)wasinchargeoftherecentlycreatedVice-MinistryofScienceandTechnology(VCyT),whichiscurrentlyundertheMinistryofEducation.

ThecomplexitytooperatizetheconceptandthelackofallocationofresourcesattheVCyThaveheldtheprogramspresented(2007-2010)intheplanningstage,noneofthemwithsignificantadvancesintermsoftheirexecution.However,afterawidepar-ticipativeprocess(2012-2013),aqualitativeadvancewasmadethrough“National Plan of Science Technology and Innovation 2014-2025”.Thisplanofferedamorecontextua-lized frameworkanda long-termvision toorganizenational institutionsproposingdemand-sideorientedinnovationpolicies.Theplanorganizedinstitutionsinthesys-temintermsofbilateralandtrilateralrelationsbetweenthreemainsectorsidentified:i) the government sector; ii) the knowledge-generating sector; iii) and the deman-ding sectorofST&I.Complementarily to the traditional institutions thatconformthelasttwosectorsaforementioned(suchasuniversitiesandindustriesrespectively),thisplanincludesexplicitlyindigenousgroupsandsocialgrassrootsorganizationstoplayarole inbothsides,asknowledgegeneratorsandasdemandersofST&I.Thisapproachaimedtobemoreparticipativeandsocialinclusivebyrecognizingacademicandnon-academic(ancestral)knowledgeasasourcefordemand-orientedinnovation(SeeAcevedo,Céspedes,&Zambrana,2015).

55

Figure 3.4: Institutional relations within the Bolivian System of Science, Technology and Innovation, synthetized scheme.

InBolivia,mostresearchcapabilitiesarelocatedinpublicuniversities.Infact,60%outofallresearchersand72%outofallresearchcentresarelocatedinpublicuniversities(VCyT,2011).Asper the typeof researchactivitiesperformed innational researchcentres,thefollowingfigureshowstheirproportions.

Figure 3.5: Research Activities in Bolivia, based on (VCyT, 2011).

Thesurveywasdevelopedby (VCyT,2011) following theFrascatiManual classifi-cations (OECD, 2002) including additionally categories such results transfer, localknowledge,andtechnologytransfer.Thesurveyrevealedthatanimportantproportion

Knowledge Generating

Sector

ST&I Demanding

Sector

Governmental Sector

56

oftheresearchcapabilities(68%)areorientedtobasicresearchandappliedresearch,correspondingmainlytotheactivitiesperformedinuniversityresearchcentres.Ontheotherside,4%inexperimentaldevelopmentcanbelinkedtotwomainreasons.Ontheonehand,reducedresearchcapabilitiesintheindustrialsector.Ontheotherhand,lackoflinkagesbetweenacademicresearchactivitiesorientedtosupporttheindustrialsectors.Thisseparationbetweentheuniversityandtheindustrialsectorisinparttheresultofimportsubstitutionpolicies,whichconsequentlyhasdirectrepercussionsontheinnovationcapabilityinthecountry.Sutz(2014)lookingatsimilartendenciesforthecaseofUruguaycallstothereflexionsofRodrik(2008)explainingthat:

“…Innovation in the developing world is constrained not on the supply side but on the demand side. That is, it is not the lack of trained scientists and engineers, absence of R&D labs, or inadequate protection of intellectual property that restricts the innovations that are needed to restructure low-income economies. Innovation is undercut instead by lack of demand from potential users in the real economy-the entrepreneurs. And the demand for innovation is low in turn because entrepreneurs perceive new activities to be of low profitability.”

Then,fromthepublicuniversityperspectiveinBolivia,whatistheroleofuniversi-tiesinemergingnationalinnovationsystemwithinnon-dynamicdemandingsectors?.Thereisastrongneedtogenerateanenvironment(normative,financial,institutional)thatfacilitatesinteractivedynamicsofcollaborationbetweentheuniversity,thegovern-ment,andthesocio-productivesector.Ontheotherside,whenthequestioncomestothepublicuniversityandgivenitsautonomouscondition,thereisaneedalsotopromoteinternalreformstoreorientitsresearchcapabilities.

Thestudywasbasedoneightyearsofparticipatoryactionresearchperformedbytheauthors.TheexperiencesgainedatUMSSpresentlocaleffortsfromtheuniversitysidetoparticipateininnovationsystemdynamics,whichcanbeusefulforacademicsandpolicymakers.Additionally,thetransdisciplinaryperspectiveoftheauthorsenrichedthis paper.Two of them worked from the academic side at theTechnologyTrans-ferenceUnitandClusterdevelopmentatUMSSandthethirdfromthepolicy-makingsideworkingattheNationalInnovationSystemsecretariatintheVCyT.

2. Theoretical Framework2.1 National Innovation Systems (NIS)

The concept of national innovation system (NIS) has been widely used by policy-makers and studied by academics in the last decades. Lundvall, Vang, Joseph, &Chaminade (2009)defined thenational systemof innovationas anopen, evolvingandcomplexsystemthatencompassesrelationshipswithinandbetweenorganizations,institutionsandsocio-economicstructures,whichdeterminetherateanddirectionofinnovationandcompetence-buildingemanatingfromprocessesofscience-basedandexperience-basedlearning.

InthecaseofdevelopingcountriesespeciallyinLatinAmerica,theconceptofNIShasbeenusedasaconceptframeworktocreatepoliciesandstrategiessoastosupportdevelopmentgoals,butthedebateisstillunfinishedwhenitcomestothequestionofmakingitoperativeinaspecificcontext.Edquist&Hommen(1999)explainedthat

57

thesystemicapproachoftheinnovationprocessesexplicitlyrecognizesthepotentiallycomplexinterdependenciesandpossibilitiesformultiplekindsofinteractionsbetweenthevariouselementsofinnovationprocesses.Complementarily,manyempiricalstu-diesrecognizedthatuniversity-government-industryinteractionsarekeyelementsinsystemicprocessesofinnovation.TheinstitutionalstructureswithintheserelationshipswerebetterexplainedbylookingattheTripleHelix(university-government-industry)modelofinnovation(SeeEtzkowitz,2008).TheTripleHelixmodelofuniversity–in-dustry–governmentrelationstriestocapturethedynamicsofbothcommunicationandorganizationbyintroducingthenotionofanoverlayofexchangerelationsthatfeedsbackontheinstitutionalarrangements(Leydesdorff&Meyer,2003:196).

Figure 3.6: The Triple Helix Model of University-Industry-Government Relations (Etzkowitz & Leydesdorff, 2000)

Etzkowitz (2003) explained that in thismodel, industry operateswithin theTripleHelixcontextasthelocusofproduction;governmentasthesourceofcontractualrela-tionsguaranteeingstableinteractionsandexchange;theuniversityasasourceofnewknowledgeandtechnology,thegenerativeprincipleofknowledge-basedeconomies.

AccordingtoLundvall (2010)theNISconcept isbasedontwomainassumptions:i) themost fundamental resource inmodern society isknowledgeand,accordinglythatthemostimportantprocessislearning;ii)itwasassumedthatlearningispre-dominantlyaninteractiveand,therefore,asociallyembeddedprocesswhichcannotbeunderstoodwithouttakingintoconsiderationitsinstitutionalandculturalcontext.Complementarily,whenthediscussionreachedtotheissueofunderdevelopment,Sutz(2012)calledtothereflectionexplainingthatthisissuecanbeverypartiallybutnotinaccuratelycharacterisedasan“innovationaslearning”systemicfailure.Shearguedthatitisafailurenotonlyduetotherelativeweaknessofinnovationprocessesindeve-lopingcountries,butalsoduetothelackofopportunitiestolearnthroughsuchpro-cesses.Thisfailureissystemicbecauseitisbuilt-inintheproductivespecializationofmostdevelopingcountries,wherethelearningcontentofproductiveactivitiesisweak.

Inthoseterms,itismorethanobviousthatuniversitiesplayakeyroleinlearningandinnovationprocesses.However,nowadaysthereisnoconsensusabouttheroleofuni-versityinNISanditsmechanismsofinteractionparticularlyfordevelopingcountries,becauseNISdynamicsarecontextdependent.

Academia

State Industry


58

2.2 Universities in National Innovation Systems

LatinAmericanuniversitiesareinstitutionsthatconcentratearelativeimportantpro-portionoftheresearchcapabilitiesintheircountries.Nowadays,however,theirinsti-tutionalrelevanceinsocietyisquestionedintermsofanincreasedclaimfororientingmoreeffectivelytheirresearchactivitiestowardssupportinglocalsocioeconomicde-velopment.Onthisissue,Vaccarezza(2011)pointedoutthatcurrentLatinAmericanresearch,suffersfromadoubleperipherystatus:firstly,regardingitsrelativelymarginalpositionfromtheinternationalscientificcommunity;secondly,regardingitscapacitytointegrateintothe“contextofapplication”markedbyinnovationandproductionflowofinternationalcapital.ThissituationbecomesevenmorecriticalintheBoliviancase,whereaccordingtotheVCyT(2011)about90%oftheresearchcapabilitiesinthecountryare locatedatuniversities,mainly inpublicuniversities (infrastructure,equipmentandresearchers). Inspiredby thesegeneral concerns, in the last twode-cades,academicdiscussionshavebeenpayingattentiontoseveralconceptsandmecha-nismslinkedtotheNISdynamicstoenhancetheparticipationofuniversitiesasactiveactorinsocio-economicdevelopment.

Universitiesarewellrecognizedinsocietybytheirtraditionaltwomissionsofteachingandresearching.Brundenius,Lundvall,&Sutz(2009)arguethatthenotionofthe“third mission”ofuniversitiesisrelatedtodifferentwaysofconceivingtherelationshipsofuniversitiesandthesocietytowhichtheybelong.Similarly,theconceptof“Mode 2 science-production”complementsthesenotionsbyexplaininghowknowledgeispro-ducedbasedonfluiddialoguebetweentheacademyandothersocietyactors.Gibbons(2000)formulatesthatinMode 1,problemsaresetandsolvedinacontextgovernedby the, largely academic, interestsof a specific community.Bycontrast, inMode 2 knowledgeisproducedinacontextofapplicationinvolvingamuchbroaderrangeofperspectives;Mode2istransdisciplinaryandnotonlydrawsondisciplinarycontribu-tionsbutalsoonnewframeworksbeyondthem;itischaracterisedbyheterogeneityofskills,byapreferenceforflatterhierarchiesandorganisationalstructures,whicharetransient.ItismoresociallyaccountableandreflexivethanMode1.

InBolivia,mostpolicymakers still regarduniversities (especiallypublicuniversities)as potential “knowledge generators” to contribute socioeconomic development bytransferring research results, technologyand innovation.Bramwell&Wolfe (2008)explainedthat thismechanisticviewof theway inwhichbasicscientificresearch istransformed into commercial products, demonstrates a misconception of the com-mercializationprocessitself,aswellastheroleuniversitiescanandshouldplayinthatprocess.Theflowofknowledgedoesdriveinnovation,butknowledgetransferfromuniversitiestoindustryisafluid,complexandinteractiveprocessinvolvingmanydif-ferentactors.Brundeniusetal.(2009)arguethatlinkinguniversitiesclosertousersisfundamentalforenhancingtheirroleinrelationtoeconomicdevelopment.Especiallyincountries,whereasignificantproportionoftheresearcheffortislocatedatuniversi-ties,itisimportanttofindwaystoenhancetheinteractionbetweentheuniversityandindustryaswellaswithotherusersinsociety.

59

Thisnon-isolatedorself-sufficientunderstandingoftheroleofuniversitiesrepresentsbasicfoundationsofnewemergingconcepts.Etzkowitz(2008)lookingatsomeexpe-riencesinCalifornia(USA)proposedtheconceptofthe“entrepreneurial university”.Hearguedthatthe“capitalizationofknowledge”istheheartofanewmissionfortheuniversity,linkinguniversitiestousersofknowledgemoretightlyandestablishingtheuniversityasaneconomicactorinitsownright.ThismodelisimpracticalintheBoli-viancontext since,besides the factofautonomousconditionofpublicuniversities,public university values are strongly linked to social concerns and the social com-monsensecannotsharesuchinstitutionalbehaviour.Additionally,researchactivitiesinBoliviaareperformedinacontextwithalmostnon-existentinstitutionalorpublicnormativestructuresaboutintellectualpropertyandtechnologytransferprocedures.

Ontheotherhand,newperceptionsemergedsuchasthe“developmentaluniversity”,whichwasconceivedfromdevelopingcountries.Thisconceptagreesinabetterway,withtheBoliviancontextandneeds.Brundeniusetal.(2009)explainedthatthede-velopmentaluniversityisopenandinteractswithdifferentgroupsinsociety,includ-ingindustrialists,butitdoesnotoperateaccordingtothelogicofmakingprofit.Itsmajoraimistocontributetosocialandeconomicdevelopmentwhileatthesametimesafeguardingacertaindegreeofautonomy.FocusedontheLatinAmericancontext,Arocena,Göransson,&Sutz(2015)wentfurther,arguingthatsuchuniversitiesarecommittedspecificallytosocialinclusionthroughknowledgeand,moregenerally,tothedemocratizationofknowledge,alongthreemainavenues:democratizationofac-cesstohighereducation,democratizationofresearchagendas,anddemocratizationofknowledgediffusion.Additionally,theypointoutthatdevelopmentaluniversitiesarethoseinvolvedintheproductionofprocessesoflearningandinnovationforfosteringinclusivedevelopment.

Thisconceptionoftheroleofuniversitiescontributeswidelytoimprovingthewayinwhichdifferentuniversitybodiesinteractandcontributetosociety.Atthesametime,itcanbeusedasaframeworktoadaptingandcreatingnewmechanismsfromtheuni-versitysidetosupportNISstrategies,andingeneraltosocietyaims,lookingformorerelevantresultsorientedtothelocalcontext.Underthisumbrella,universitybodieslike technology transfer offices (UTTOs) can play crucial role leading institutionaltransformationsandlinkingtheuniversityresearchdynamicswiththesocio-produc-tivedemands.Wahab,Rose,&Osman(2012)calledto(Maskus,2004)arguingthatthetechnologytransferconceptisnotonlyconcernaboutthetransferoftechnologicalknowledgeorinformationbutalsothetechnologyrecipient’scapabilitytolearnandabsorbtechnologyintotheproductionandfunction.RecentlyauthorssuchasCodner,Baudry, & Becerra, 2013; O’Kane, Mangematin, Geoghegan, & Fitzgerald (2014)arguedthatthemainroleofUTTOsistobuildlegitimacyofuniversityactionsinso-ciety.TheyexplainedlegitimacyintermsofSuchman(1995),defininglegitimacyasageneralizedperceptionorassumptionthattheactionsofanentityaredesirable,proper,orappropriatewithinsomesociallyconstructedsystemofnorms,values,beliefs,anddefinitions.

60

3. The Case of Universidad Mayor de San Simón (UMSS)

3.1 Research activities background

ThedevelopmentofresearchcapacitiesatUMSShasbeenhistoricallyassociatedtointernationalcooperation.Thissupporthasallowedthecreationofscientificcompe-tences,physical infrastructure, and the acquisitionofmodern scientific equipment.However,theabsenceofinstitutionalstrategiesandprioritiestosupportresearchre-sulted in a scattered landscape of research atUMSS.The research communitywaschallengedtoconfronttwomaindrivingforces.Ontheonehand,fromsociety,anincreasingclaimtolinkresearchactivitieswith“reallife”needsintheregion.Ontheotherhand,followingrigorousstandardsofquality,influencedbytheglobaltrends,tryingtobuildapresenceintheinternationalresearchcommunity.

According to the report“Universidad en Cifras 2012”, theUMSShave42 researchunitsand219researchers,where18%holdaPhDdegree,35%MSc,and47%aregraduates.Thefollowingfigureexplainshowbothresearchersandresearchunitsaredistributedthroughoutthedifferentfaculties.

Figure 3.7: Distribution of researchers, research units, and research projects by university faculties at UMSS, based on the report published by (Rectorado - Vicerrectorado, 2012)

Additionally,thereareresearchersundergoingtraininginsideofcurrentresearchpro-gramsatUMSS(2MSc,25PhD,and3Postdoctoral),whoafterfinishingthetrainingprocesseswillbeincorporatedaspermanentstaffinresearchcentres.Theaccumulationofresearchresourcesalongthedifferentfacultieshasadirectrelationshipwiththepri-oritizedfieldsfromtheinternationalresearchcooperation.Wecanobservethatmore

61

than50%ofresearchresourcesandactivitiesatUMSSarecentredintheFacultiesofScienceandTechnology,andAgronomy.Intermsofresearchfundingplannedfortheperiods2012to2016,researchsalariesarefullycoveredbyownuniversityfunds,butotherresearchactivitiesarefinancedfullybyexternalsourcesasisshowninthefol-lowingfigure.

Figure 3.8: Research funds allocation (2012-2016) by financing source, based on (DICyT, 2012b)

The Swedish cooperation supports mainly PhD training programs (carried 50% atUMSSresearchcentresand50%inSwedishpartneruniversities).Itissupportedaswell: equipment acquisition, infrastructure, R&D management, as well as supportto local post-graduate programs, innovation management, ICT, and access to elec-tronicscientificjournals.Since2005,UMSSwasbenefitedfromIDHshares,whichhasbeenusedtosupportmainlyequipmentacquisitionandR&Dmanagement.Asmallportionofboth,SidaandIDHsources,wereallocatedtocompetitivebasisforresearch-related activities open to all of the scientific community at UMSS, underspecificthematicguidelines.OtherinternationalagenciessupportmainlyR&Dma-nagement local post-graduate programs, and international PhD training programs.AllthefinancialresourcesallocatedtoresearchcentresfollowaproceduredevelopedbyDICyTforpromptlyandtransparentlyselectingandfinancingresearchproposals,followinginternationalstandards:applyingtheprincipleofprogramming,complyingwith institutionalpriorities,opencallsandcompetition,promotingteamworkandcollaborations,subjecttoexternalassessment.TheproceduresdevelopedandputintopracticeatUMSShavebeenwellrecognizedbyotheruniversitiesinthecountry,asamodeltoreplicate.

Besidestherelativelyimportantresourcesaccumulated,comparedwithotherpublicandprivateuniversities,recenteffortsatUMSShasbeenfocusedonchangingthevol-unteer-orientedresearchactivities,intoamoreinstitutionallyorganizedmultidiscip-linaryresearch,inordertoincreasetheirimpactonsocietalneeds.

3.2 University Technology Transfer Unit (UTT)

TheTechnologyTransferUnit(UTT)wascreatedin2004atUMSSintheFacultyofScienceandTechnology(FCyT).ItwascreatedfollowingthemodelofaResearch

62

ResultsTransferOffice(OTRI),influencedbylinearmodelsofinteractionunderanoffer-pusheddynamicsparadigm.UTTstarteditsfunctionsgeneratingadatabaseofthe installed research resources at FCyT (equipment, laboratories, services, humanresources).Itwasthoughtasacontactpointwiththeindustrialsectorwhereitmightbenefitfromhiringservicesofferedattheresearchcentres.Afteracoupleofyearsoffunctioningandpromoting,hardlyanyfirmapproachedUTT,whileclaimsaskingforahigherparticipationofuniversitysolvingsocialneedswereincreasing.Thefewvisitsto theofficecorresponded tomediumsizefirmsexpressingnon-specific supportingrequirements,orproblemstobesolvedinashortperiodoftime,butwithalmostnobudget to invest.Therefore, theUTT’s logicofworkingproved tobenotpracticalintheBoliviancontext.Duringthisperiod,severalmeetingswithandinterviewstoindustrialrepresentativesconfirmed:

• Self-sufficientattitudecomingfromthelargefirmsintermsofseekinguniversitycol-laboration;

• Mediumsizefirmsshowedmoreinterestincollaboratingwithuniversityresearchcen-tres,butlackedthefundingtoinvestinresearchactivities,andexpressedconcernaboutintellectualpropertyissues;

• Smallandmicrofirmswereinterestedingettingsupportfromtheuniversity.Never-theless,theywerecharacterizedbynocleardemands(asindividualfirmsandasSMEassociations)intermsofresearchactivities,lackoffunding,lowleveloftraining,shorttermvisionfocusedalmostcompletelyonmarketing,andlowlevelofcollaborationwithotherinstitutionsdueageneralizedattitudeofdistrust.

Therefore,in2006UTTadoptedanewapproachforinteractionprocesses.ItwasthushighlightedtheneedtoenhancetheincidenceofUMSS’researchactivities inlocalsocio-economicdevelopmentbylinkingtheinnovationsystemapproachwithUTT’sinitiatives.UnderthisvisionUTTcreatedanInnovationProgramatUMSS,whichenjoysofSidasupportingfunds(2007-2017),mainlyformobilizationandtrainingactivities.WithintheSwedishcooperationframework,theprogramgotthepartner-shipoftheScandinavianInstituteofCompetitivenessandDevelopment(SICD)attheBlekingeInstituteofTechnology(pleasevisit:www.sicd.se).Thispartnershipcontri-butedtoenrichtheinternaldebateabouttheparticipationoftheuniversityinsocio-economicdevelopment,andhowinnovationprocessesareoperatized.Theseprocesseswereunderstoodasco-evolutionaryprocessesofnon-isolatedinstitutionsindynamicrelations. In termsofTrojer (2014), innovationprocessesareco-evolvingprocesses,where relevanceandcontextofapplicationand implicationconstituteessential ele-ments.

TheseprocesseswerestructuredintermsoftheTripleHelix(government-university-industry)modelofinnovation,becauseitwaseasiertobuildacommonunderstand-ing frameworkalso innon-academiccontexts.However, thequestionofhowtheseco-evolvingprocessesarecarriedoutwasbetteransweredbytheconceptofMode2knowledge production. Both conceptsTriple Helix and Mode 2 research processeswere explainedearlier in thispaper.Furthermore,Trojer (2014)highlights that co-evolutionisnotonlyahandinhandprocessbetweenactorswithinandoutsideuni-

63

versities.ItisanintegratingprocessbetweenMode2researchersandpredominantlyMode1researchersandpartnersinsociety.

Figure 3.9: Innovation structure adopted by Technology Transfer Unit (UTT) at Universidad Mayor de San Simón (UMSS), based on the Triple Helix model of innovation (Etzkowitz, 2008).

TheInnovationProgrampromotedbyUTTaimedto develop at UMSS institutional competences and capabilities for studying, promoting and actively participating in systems and processes of innovation at the local, regional and national levels(UTT,2006).ThisobjectivehadimplicationsontheactivitiesperformedbyUTTinsideandoutsidetheuniversity.Ontheonehand,buildinginnovationcultureandcapabilitiesatUMSS,sensitizingresearchactivitiestowardssocio-productivedemands,inspiredbyMode2knowledgeproductionparadigm.Ontheotherhand,linkingresearchresourceswiththedemandingsocio-productivesectorbypromotingclusterdevelopmentgeneratinganinnovationsystemenvironmentbasedontheTripleHelixmodelofinnovation.

AccordingtoUTT(2015)themainactionspromotedbyUTTareorientedto:devel-opinganefficientsystemofinnovationmanagementatUMSS;makingtheacademiccommunity(professorsandresearchers)moredynamic,participatinginactivitiesre-latedwithinnovationsystems(regionalandnational);developinginformationsystemsandstandardproceduresforcontractswithexternalactors,takingintoaccountintel-lectualpropertyaspects;researchinginnovationsystemsandclusterdevelopment(2PhDstudentsatUTT);promotingclusterdevelopmentintheCochabambaregion,supportinginnovationsystemdynamics;andgeneratingcapabilitiestoinfluencein-novationpoliciesattheregionalandnationallevels.

3.3 Systemic interaction approach: Cluster development

Clusterdevelopmentwas adoptedbyUTTas apermanentplatformof interactionwhereconcretedemands(fromgovernmentsandsocio-productiveactors)canbede-velopedormadevisible.Itwasaimedtoorientmultidisciplinaryresearchactivitiesandfindsynergieswithotherinstitutionstomeetthosedemands.Afteranempiricalcon-textdiagnosis,UTTchosetostartclusteractivitieswithinthediversefoodsectorin

Governmental

Sector (National – Regional)

UMSS Research centres Faculties-Careers Students-Teachers

Infrastructure

Socio-productive Sector

(Regional-National)

UTT

64

Cochabamba.MainlybecauseUMSShasinstalledalreadyrelativeimportantresearchcapabilitiesrelatedtothissector,namelyinthefacultiesofS&TandAgronomy;andalsobecauseCochabambaenjoysalongtraditionrelatedwiththefoodindustryanditisaprioritizedsectoringovernmentdevelopmentplans.

UTTstartedaprocessofsensitizationin2007characterizedbyvisiting,informing,andinvitingthemaininstitutionsintheregiontobepartoftheclusteringprocesses(e.g.:regionalgovernment,SMEs,firmchambers,financialagencies,andothersup-portingagencies).DuringthemeetingstheresearchcapabilitiescumulatedatUMSSwerehighlighted,andthesignificanceofinteractionwithininnovationprocesseswasexplained.Theaimwastogatheracriticalmassofinstitutionsandpeoplecommittedtoparticipatingwithinclusterinitiatives.

The“FoodClusterCochabamba”byUTT,waslaunchedin2008.ItwascreatedopentoanySMEandgovernmentbodies(regionalandlocal)withactivitieslinkedtothefoodsector.Fromtheuniversityside,severalresearchcentresandlaboratoriesofser-viceslocatedintheFacultyofS&Twereinvolved,asastartingpoint:

• FoodandNaturalProductsCentre(CAPN).

• Agro-industrialTechnologyCentre(CTA).

• BiotechnologyCentre(CBT).

• Manufacturing,andTechnologyDevelopmentProgram(PDTF).

• WaterandEnvironmentalSanitationCentre(CASA).

• IndustryDevelopmentResearchCentre(CIDI)

InspiredbytheFoodClusterinitiative,andrespondingtotheexplicitrequestexpressedbytheleatherproductivesector,the“LeatherClusterCochabamba”wascreatedinlate2008;aimingtosupportenvironmentalissueslinkingresearchcentressuchasCASA,CTA,CIDIandPDTF.Bothsectors(FoodandLeather)enjoyalongindustrialtradi-tionintheCochabambaregionandhavebeenprioritizedindevelopmentprogramsfor the region.The InnovationProgramatUTTallocated resources for organizingperiodicalplanningworkshopsforeachcluster(twiceayear).Theseworkshopsweredialogueforumstogenerateasharedlong-termvision,andopenlydesignshort-termcommonagendasforcollaboration.Annualagendaswerebuiltbasedonmakingvi-siblecommondemandsandstrengthsexpressedfromtheproductivesectors,aswellaspresentingresearchresultsandservicesavailableinresearchcentres.Complementarily,inordertofacilitatethegenerationofideasofcollaboration,bothclustersorganizedannualguided tours touniversity researchcentres, explainingabout theequipmentandmain functionsperformedby these.Bilateralmeetingswere alsoorganizedbe-tweenresearcherswithproductiveactors,andgovernmentagentstodiscusstechnicalissues for new proposals for cluster initiatives. Activities prioritized by each clusterwerediscussedindetailbyanadvisoryboard,composedbyvolunteerandcommittedclustermemberswhoshowedparticularinterestonimplementingspecificclusterini-tiatives.A“clusterfacilitator”providedbyUTThassupportedeachcluster.Thisper-

65

sonwasinchargeoforganizingtheallocationofresources,projectsmanagementandnetworking,whilefosteringtrustbuildinganddynamicdialoguearenas.Interactionswithinclustersdynamicswereopenandmostlyinformal.ThereforeestimateannuallyasclustermembersthoseorganizationsthatparticipatedinanyclusterinitiativeDu-ringtheyear.Inthefollowingfigurewepresentthegrowingtendencyoforganizationunits(productiveunits,firms,researchunits,governmentbodies,sectorialsupportinginstitutions)involvedinclusterinitiatives2008-2014.

Figure 3.10: Evolution of members in the Food and Leather Clusters Cochabamba (2008-2014) by type of organization, based on (UTT, 2015).

According to UTT (2015), by 2014, the Food and Leather clusters initiatives hadgatheredabout120productiveunitsandfirms,15governmentbodies,21researchunitsatUMSS,and9sectorialinstitutions.Approximately800peoplefromthemainthreesectorshavebeeninvolveddirectlyindiverseFoodandLeatherclusterinitiatives.Additionally, UTT has mobilized more than 500 pre-graduate students to supportdifferentclusterinitiativeslinkingthemtotheiracademicactivities(researchprojects,shortstudies,surveys,industrialpractices,trainingcourses,andlocalproductivefairs).

66

Duringthefirstyears,theincorporationofproductiveunitsandfirmsinclustershadbeenlinkedtotheinterestsof localassociationsandSME’schamberstoparticipateinclusterdynamics.Nevertheless,clusterforumshavebeenfocusedongivingavoicemainly toproductiveunits andfirms.Representatives fromassociationsandSME’schambershadtheirownagendasandclaims,competingoneanotherforsectorialleader-ship. This context, at the beginning, made processes of demand identification andtrustbuildingmoredifficult.However,associationsandSME’schambershavebeengoodpartnersmobilizingentrepreneurs,supportingdefinedactivities,andinvolvingclustermembersintheirownsupportingprograms.InthecaseoftheFoodClusterCochabamba, the more dynamic entrepreneurs and producers in cluster initiativeshavebeenthoseweaklyornonelinkedtoassociationsorSMEchambers.

Lookingatgovernmentbodies,aninstablepoliticalcontextandcontinuouschangingofpublicofficialsattheregionallevelhavecomplicatedthestructuringoflong-termsupportingprograms;howeverithasbeenpossibletoincludeclusterdevelopmentintheAnnualWorkingPlan(POA)oftheregionalSecretariatofProductiveDevelop-ment.Ontheotherside,themorestablesituationofthecentralgovernmentallowedestablishingamoredynamicrelationship,inparticularwiththeVice-MinistryofScien-ce andTechnology (VCyT), which has been able to link some international train-ingprogramstoclusterinitiatives(e.g.CyTEDandSur-Surinternationalsupportingprograms)andhasusedtheUTTinfrastructureandclusternetworksasregionalrefe-rencesforoperatizingsectorialsupportingprograms.

Fromtheuniversityside,thedynamicsofclustersenhancedtheroleofUTTatUMSSandinsociety.Thusin2010,thevice-chancellorofUMSSformallyacknowledgedtheUTTasauniversityunitintheFacultyofS&T,withacross-facultativescopeofope-ration.ThisrecognitionallowedUTTtoinvolveresearchcentresfromotherfaculties(e.g.Agronomy,Economy,BiochemistryandSociology)intotheinnovationprogrampromoted.ResearchcentresatUMSShaveshownahighmotivationtoparticipateinclusterinitiativesandwithininnovationsystems.Nevertheless,theactiveparticipationofresearchcentresinclusterinitiativeswaslimitedbythelowS&Tdemandsandthelackofavailabilityoffundsfosteringuniversitycollaborationtotheproductivesectors(justabout6researchprojectsfinancedmainlywithuniversitysources,sofar).How-ever,UTTcoordinatedthesatisfactionofmostlowtechnologydemands(intermsofknowledgegeneration, laboratory tests, andpilotpractices)by linkingpre-graduatestudentsthesissupervisedbyresearchers,andworkingbetweenresearchcentresinfra-structuresandtheproductiveinfrastructures.

Mostofinitiativesinbothclusterswereorientedonthebasisoffivemainguidelinesdescribed by Sölvell, Lindqvist, & Ketels (2003): Research and networking; policyaction;innovationandtechnology;commercialcooperation;andeducationandtrain-ing.Thefollowingpointssummarizesomeeffortsperformedsofar:

67

• TheFoodClusterCochabambadevelopedapermanentsupportingprogramforfirmsandproducers,obtainingthefoodsafetycertification.ThiswasasharedeffortbetweentheSMEchamber(CADEPIA),thenationalfood-regulatingagency(SENASAG),andthefoodresearchcentreCAPNatUMSS.Uptonow,theprogramsupported30firmstogetorrevalidatethecertification,whichallowsthemtoselltheirproductsinthelocalmarket.Studentshelpedfirmstoenforcetheregulations(infrastructure,processes,docu-mentation),anduniversitylaboratoriesanalysedabout850parameters(reducedprice)betweenmicrobiologicandphysicochemical.

• TheLeatherClusterCochabambawasconsideredbytheVCyTasanationalnodetoexecuteatrainingprogramsupportedbytheCentreofAppliedInnovationandCom-petitiveTechnologies(CIATEC-Mexico).TrainingactivitiestookplaceattheUTT’sinfrastructure.Thisprogrammadepossibletoenhancetechnicalandresearchcapabili-tiesformorethan100leatherSMErepresentativesanduniversityresearchersbothfromBoliviaandMexico.Additionally,thistrainingprogramtrustedtheLeatherClustertoopenlyselectdelegationsofBolivianentrepreneurstoparticipateintrainingcoursesinMexico.

• Bothclustershavebeenabletoattractfinancialresources(universityandgovernment)andlinkdifferentresearchcentrestodesignandbuildsemi-industrialequipmentprototypesaccordingthespecificationsoftheclustermembers(pneumaticbrakeshoes,automatizedbakeryoven,andanautomatizedlyophilizerforthedairyindustry).Ad-ditionally,universityresearchfundswereallocatedtobuycomplementaryspecializedequipmentandlaboratoryreagentsinordertotheenhancelaboratoryservicesandstudentsresearch.

• Bothclusters,supportedbyUTT,havedevelopedmorethan40shortcourses,and70short-termresearchprojects(betweenproductionprocessimprovement,newproductsdevelopment,equipmentdesign,marketingstudies,management,andlogistic)basedonspecificissuesdemandedbyfirmsandproducers,mostofthemlinkedtomarketingprocesses.

Ithasbeendifficulttomeasurespecificaspectsontheimpactclusterinitiativeshaveinfirms,however,ithasbeenpossibletorecognizetherelativeimportantorientationofuniversityresourcestowardsclustercauses,aswellasthedevelopmentofnewdialoguechannelswhichinfluenceresearchagendasatUMSS.

3.4 Mode 2 and innovation culture: UMSS research community

Basedontheinitialgroupofresearcherslinkedtoclusterdevelopment,in2012theUTTofficiallycreatedamultidisciplinaryteamofresearchersacrossuniversityfacul-tiesnamed“UMSS Innovation Team”.ItwascreatedwiththeaimofmakingamoredynamicresearchcommunityatUMSS,fosteringbothinnovationcultureandMode2practicesinstitutionally.Thisteamhasannualmeetingswhereinitiativesofcollabo-rationarediscussed,supportedandpromotedinordertocontributetothedevelop-mentofthenationalandregionalinnovationsystemfromwithintheuniversity.Manyofthemarealsolinkedtonationalandinternationalresearchnetworkswithintheirdisciplines.

TheUMSS Innovation Teamcurrentlycomprisesaround35researchersbelongingtodiversedisciplinesandabout20universityresearchunits.Allofthemgatheredwith

68

theaimofpermanentlysharingbestpracticesofcollaborationandparticipatingonmultidisciplinary projects to attend to socio-productive issues from the universitymechanisms.TheresearchersinvolvedcomefromseveralfacultiesatUMSS:e.g.sci-enceandtechnology,agronomy,biochemistry,economy,sociology,andlaw.Thisteamis thesupportingbasis forclusterdevelopmentandotheradditional initiativespro-motedtofindnewmechanismsofinteractionwithgovernmentandsocio-productiveactors.

Ontheotherside, in2010theUTTstartedanewinitiative,thetechnologybasedenterpriseincubator(EMBATE).Thisprogramaimedtogeneratinginnovationandentrepreneurship culture among students, involving the research centres located intheFacultyofS&T.ThisinitiativeinterpretedtherelativeimportantconcentrationofresearchcentresintheFacultyofS&Taspotentialdecentralizedincubatorinfrastruc-turestosupportselectedtechnology-basedbusinessideasfromstudents.Currently,theprogramlinks15researchcentresinitsdynamics.Theprogramthenstartedorganizingseveralcontests(2010,2011,2013)totrainstudentsonhowtogenerateproposalsonentrepreneurialideas.Theprogramhasachievedthegenerationofaround200projectprofilessofar.TheseactivitiesweredevelopedincollaborationbetweentheFacultyofEconomy,theFacultyofS&T,andregionalinstitutionssupportingcompetitiveness.Thebestideasgeneratedinthecontestswillbeincorporatedanddevelopedindifferentresearchcentres,onceadditionalfundingresourcesareallocated.

EMBATEwasearlylinkedtotheBolivianstart-upnetworkundertheVCyT,andin2012,itsupportedtheVCyTastoorganizelocaltrainingactivitiesforitsincubatorsnetworkusingtheUTT’sinfrastructure.Theseactivitiesconsistedintransferringentre-preneurship and start-up models developed by “Instituto Politécnico Nacional deMexico”Start-upUnit,to12Bolivianuniversities includingUMSS.EMBATEwasrecognizedbythenationalgovernmentasausefulnodefornationalandinternationaluniversitieslinkedtoitsnetwork.Morerecently,in2015,thisnationalrecognitionin-volvedtoEMBATEwithinaregionalproposalforLatin-Americanstart-upssupportedbyCYTED,whichisaplatformthatpromotesandsupportsmultilateralcooperationinscienceandtechnology(Seewww.cyted.org).

3.5 Transformation of the Research Policy at UMSS

Thanks to the Swedish cooperation at UMSS, in 2002 was presented first institu-tionwideresearchpolicydocument.Thismilestoneachievedallowed,alongtheyears,gradually implementconsiderable improvements in thequantityandqualityof theresearch community, enhancing a number of research facilities, strengthening themanagement of research, the overall execution of research activities and creating apositiveresearchenvironmentandculturebytheadoptionofappropriateroutinesandpractices.Asecondmomentumwasachievedduring2012and2013,whereUMSSworkedoutanewinstitutional-wideresearchpolicydocument.Thisdocumentwasgeneratedthroughinternalworkshops,basedontheownempiricalexperiencesgainedintheresearchcentresandthesystemicapproachdevelopedatUTT.Complementa-rily,discussionsincludedseveralinputslike:TheNationalDevelopmentPlan;Energy

69

DevelopmentPlan;PlanforScience,TechnologyandInnovation;DepartmentalDe-velopmentPlan;andananalysisofUMSScapabilities.Theoutcomewasadocumentwiththe“UMSSResearchConceptFramework2013-2022”,whichisfocusedonaninstitutionalcommitmenttomakeresearchatUMSSarelevantinstrumentfordeve-lopment.AccordingtoDICyT(2012a)theinstitutionalobjectiveofresearchactivi-ties,asasubstantivefunctionoftheuniversitywasstatedasfollows:

“Research at UMSS is a significant activity aimed primarily at contributing to the regional and national development processes, through the generation of useful knowledge and analytical capacity. This activity also intends to contribute to the universal progress of scientific knowledge” (DICyT, 2012a).

Atthesametime,inordertoguidetheachievementoftheobjectivestated,UMSShasincorporatedinthesamedocument,thefollowingspecificobjectivestoachieve:

• Highqualityresearchofregionalandnationalinterestiscarriedoutbyarobust,mo-tivatedandhighlytrainedcommunityofscientists;theiroutcomearewellrecognizedbytheirpeersatthenationalandinternationalscientificarena,andareroutinelypassedontoeconomicandsocialactorsthroughwell-establishedmechanismsfortransferandinnovation.

• Ascience,technologyandinnovationsupportiveenvironmentprevailsatUMSSassistedbyanefficientmanagementsystem.

Inthiscontext, it is intendedthatsomeresearchprogramsalreadyunderway,withsupportoftheinternationalcooperationfunds,canbegivencontinuitywithgreateremphasisandcareofsocio-productiveaspects.Whileitisalsoexpectedthatnewre-searchfieldswillbecomecontributionstotheconstructionofnewprograms,whichfromthebeginningwouldbefocussedontheirsocialpurposeandgiverisetoconti-nuousandcumulativeprocessesinthesamefield.Therefore,sixwideresearchfieldshavebeenestablished togiveanumbrella forall researchactivities atUMSS.Theyhavebeenchosenasaresultofaprospectivestudyofthesocialneeds.Theseresearchfieldsare:

• Sovereigntyandsafetyoverfoodproduction.

• Technology,production,andindustrialdevelopment.

• Protectionandimprovementofhealth.

• Production,distribution,andrationaluseofenergyresources.

• Habitatandhumansettlements.

• Socialdevelopmentandcitizenparticipation.

Additionally,inordertogainfundsforresearchprojects,eithercomingfromIDHortheinternationalcooperationagencies,bynorm,tobeconsideredeligibleinanyoftheresearchfields, theresearchproposalspresentedmust involvesocio-productivepart-nersorattendtospecificsocialneedswithidentifiedbeneficiaries.Nevertheless,asidefrom the institutional effortsdescribed,most research centres still operate as singleunitslookingforpartnersinsocietytodeveloptheirresearchagendas.Onthisissue,thepilotpracticesdevelopedatUTThasbeenusefulexperiencestomeetthedemandside,butmoreeffortsinsidetheuniversityareneeded,aswellasfromtheotheractorsinemerginginnovationsystemdynamics.

70

TheNationalandregionalgovernmentbodieshaverecognizedalltheinstitutionalwillandeffortsfromtheUMSS’researchsystem(empiric,volunteer,action-driven,nor-mative,andresourceorienting)towardssupportinginnovationsystemdynamics.Uni-versityauthoritieshavebeeninvitedseveraltimestosharetheexperiencesgeneratedindiscussiontablesandworkshopsaimedtobuildinginnovationpoliciesanddevelop-mentprograms.Particularly,thecoordinatoroftheInnovationProgramwasinvitedbytheVCyTtobekeynotespeakerintheconstructionofthe“Patriotic Agenda Bolivia towards 2025”ontheissueof“sovereigntyandidentityoverscienceandtechnology”.In that context, UTT experiences and cluster development were taken as concreteexamplesaboutcollaborationdynamicsneededtofosteremerginginnovationsystems.

AccordingtoArocenaetal.(2015)developmentaluniversitiesarecharacterizedasuni-versitiesthatprovideeffectiveincentivestoincludeintheirresearchagendasproblemswhosesolutionscanleadtothedemocratizationofknowledge.UMSSisstillfarfromthoseambitions,butitseffortsareinthatdirection,thusweproposeanex-postcate-gorizationofUMSSexperiencesasa“developmentaluniversity”approach.Develop-mentaluniversityapproacheshaveaplaceinemerginginnovationsystemsinBolivia,playingakeyroleforthedemocratizationofknowledgeandinclusivedevelopmentambitions.

4. Conclusions and Remarks

TheempiricalpracticesandreformsadoptedbyUMSSwereex-postcategorized inthispaperasa“developmentaluniversity”approach.ThroughtheseexperiencesUMSSdevelopedowninstitutionalcompetencesandmechanismstoimproveitsincidenceinnationalsocio-economicdevelopment.

Theexperiencegainedbythetechnologytransferunit(UTT)atUMSShasdemon-strated that offer-pushed models of interaction failed in a context of non-dynamicsocio-productivesystemsinBolivia.Thus,systemicapproachesofinteractionadoptedsince2007byUTTfosteredmoredynamicinteractionsbetweentheuniversity,thegovernmentandthesocio-productiveactors.TheseinitiativesshapedadualroleforUTTpromotinginnovationsystemdynamicsinsideandoutsidetheuniversityper-meatingtheinstitutionalborders.UTTprovedinpracticethattheconceptframeworkgivenbyMode2scienceproduction,TripleHelixmodelofinnovation,andinnova-tion systems were effective to generate open environments of interaction and trustbuilding.Theselocalexperiencesshared,presentusefulinsightsaboutapro-activerolethatpublicuniversitiescanadoptundertheperspectiveofemerginginnovationsystemdynamicsinBolivia.

Fromthegovernmentside,in2013theVCyThasproposeddemand-pulledinnova-tionmodelintheframeworkofanemergingBolivianInnovationSystem.Thismodelrecognizedboth,thekeyroleofuniversitieswithininteractinginnovationprocessfo-cusedon the localdemands, and theneed to enhance local knowledgeproductionprocessesbymakingthemtransdisciplinary,participatory,andsocialinclusive.Inthisgeneralcontext,particularlypublicuniversitiesarechallengedtodevelopmoreopencollaborationdynamicswithsocio-productiveactors.

71

ClusterdevelopmentstrategyatUMSShasallowedthecreationofdialogueforumswherethesocio-productivedemandsbecamemorevisibleforacademicandgovern-mentactors,soastobuildcommonagendasofcollaboration.Hitherto,thetechno-logygapbetweentheresearchcentresandtheabsorptivecapabilityintheproductivesectorhaslimitedthedynamicofthecollaborationprogramsimplemented,buthelpedfirmstosurvive,improvingtheircurrentproductiveprocesses,inaccordancetosecto-rialregulations.Opendialoguearenasgaveimportantinputstobuildmoredemocraticresearch agendas in universities. Inclusive research agendas are result of closer andlong-termrelationshipswiththedemandingsectors.

TheintermediateroleofUTTmanaginginnovationprocesseshasbeenrecognizedbygovernmentbodiesbecauseitsnetworkingcapabilitiestoidentifyresearcherscapabletoattendsocialneeds,tounderstandproductivesectordynamicsandtobeabletoex-changecriteriawithpolicymakers(nationalandregionallevel)whileworkingonST&Iresearchandpolicyproposals.UTTalsoplayedaroleinthemanagementoffundingresourcesgivinganinstitutionalumbrellaforclusterinitiatives,whicharetrustbasedandinvolvesmostlyinformalrelationships.UTTpromotedco-evolutionaryprocessesofinteractionwithininnovationprocesseswhereinstitutionalbarriersarepermeatedandcommonarenasofdialogueareshaped.Itsactionscontributeaswellthelegitima-tionofuniversityactivitiesinsociety,givingachancetomakethemmoreparticipativeanddemocratic.However,ithasbeenevidentthatmoreresourcesmustbeallocatedonissuesaimedtoimprovetheabsorptivecapabilitiesoftheproductivesectorsallowinganeffectiveuseoftheuniversityresearcheffortstoattendsocio-productivedemands.Linkedtotheuseofresearchresultsitisalsoneededtocreateinstitutionalandnationalintellectualpropertyregulations,notinthesenseofcapitalizingknowledge,butinthelogicoffosteringthedemocratizationofknowledgeandprivilegeendogenousknow-ledgeproductionaimedtoattendinclusivedevelopmentambitions.

ReferencesAcevedo,C.,Céspedes,M.,&Zambrana,E.(2015).NationalPoliciesofInnovation:Buildingan

InclusiveSystemofInnovation.Journal of Entrepreneurship and Innovation Management,4(1),63–82.

Arocena,R.,Göransson,B.,&Sutz,J.(2015).Knowledgepoliciesanduniversitiesindevelopingcountries:Inclusivedevelopmentandthe“developmentaluniversity.”Technology in Society,41(0),10–20.

Bramwell,A.,&Wolfe,D.A.(2008).Universitiesandregionaleconomicdevelopment:Theentre-preneurialUniversityofWaterloo.Research Policy,37(8),1175–1187.

Brundenius,C.,Lundvall,B.-Å.,&Sutz,J.(2009).TheRoleofUniversitiesinInnovationSystemsinDevelopingCountries:DevelopmentalUniversitySystems–Empirical,AnalyticalandNormativePerspectives.Handbook of Innovation Systems and Developing Countries: Building Domestic Capabilities in a Global Setting,311–333.

Codner,D.,Baudry,G.,&Becerra,P.(2013).Lasoficinasdetransferenciadeconocimientocomoinstrumentodelasuniversidadesparasuinteracciónconelentorno.Universidades,58.

DICyT.(2012a).Concept note: Research Cooperation between SIDA and UMSS 2013-2022.Cochabamba-Bolivia.

72

DICyT.(2012b).Marco Conceptual: La Investigación en la Universidad Mayor de San Simón 2012-2021.Cochabamba-Bolivia.


Etzkowitz,H.(2003).InnovationinInnovation:TheTripleHelixofUniversity-Industry-Govern-mentRelations.Social Science Information,42(3),293–337.

Etzkowitz,H.(2008).The Triple Helix: University–Industry–Government Innovation in Action. Engi-neering (Vol.42).Routledge.


Gibbons,M.(2000).Mode2societyandtheemergenceofcontext-sensitivescience.Science and Public Policy, 27(3),159–163.

Leydesdorff,L.,&Meyer,M.(2003).Triple Helix of university-industry-government relations.Springer.

Lundvall,B.-Å.(2010).National systems of innovation: Toward a theory of innovation and interactive learning(Vol.2).AnthemPress.

Lundvall,B.-Å.,Vang,J.,Joseph,K.J.,&Chaminade,C.(2009).Innovationsystemresearchanddevelopingcountries.Handbook of Innovation Systems and Developing Countries. Building Domestic Capabilities in a Global Setting,1–30.

Maskus,K.E.(2004).Encouraging international technology transfer (Vol.7).InternationalCentreforTradeandSustainableDevelopmentGeneva.

O’Kane,C.,Mangematin,V.,Geoghegan,W.,&Fitzgerald,C.(2014).Universitytechnologytransferoffices:Thesearchforidentitytobuildlegitimacy.Research Policy,(0).

OECD,F.M.(2002).ProposedStandardPracticeforSurveysonResearchandExperimentalDe-velopment.The Measurement of Scientific and Technological Activities Series.Paris.

Rectorado-Vicerrectorado.(2012).Universidad en Cifras 2012.Cochabamba-Bolivia.Rodrik,D.(2008).One economics, many recipes: globalization, institutions, and economic growth.

PrincetonUniversityPress.Sölvell,Ö.,Lindqvist,G.,&Ketels,C.(2003).The Cluster Initiative Greenbook.IvoryTower

Stockholm.Suchman,M.C.(1995).Managinglegitimacy:Strategicandinstitutionalapproaches.Academy of

Management Review,20(3),571–610.Sutz,J.(2012).Measuringinnovationindevelopingcountries:somesuggestionstoachievemore

accurateandusefulindicators.International Journal of Technological Learning, Innovation and Development,5(1-2),40–57.

Sutz,J.(2014).Calidadyrelevanciaenlainvestigaciónuniversitaria:apuntesparaavanzarhaciasuconvergenciaQualityandrelevanceinacademicresearch.Notestomovetowardconvergence.Revista Iberoamericana de Ciencia, Tecnologia Y Sociedad,9(27),63–83.

Trojer,L.(2014).Whensocietyspeaksback.Relevanceissuesforresearchinclustercontextsinlow-incomecountries.InB.Rydhagen&L.Trojer(Eds.),The Role of Universities in Inclusive Innovation: Cluster Development in East Africa(pp.47–57).NelsonMandelaAfricanInstituteforScienceandTechnology,Arusha,Tanzania.

UTT.(2006).Innovation Program and Technology Transfer: Program Proposal 2006.Cochabamba-Bolivia.

UTT.(2015).Innovation Program and Technology Transfer: Annual Report 2014.Cochabamba-Bolivia.

Vaccarezza,L.S.(2011).Ciencia,tecnologíaysociedad:elestadodelacuestiónenAméricaLatina.Ciencia & Tecnología Social,1(1).

VCyT.(2011).Potencial Científico y Tecnológico Boliviano 2011(2nded.).LaPaz,Bolivia.VCyT.(2013).Plan Nacional de Ciencia Tecnología e Innovación (PNCTI).LaPaz,Bolivia.Wahab,S.A.,Rose,R.C.,&Osman,S.I.W.(2012).DefiningtheConceptsofTechnologyand

TechnologyTransfer:ALiteratureAnalysis.International Business Research,5(1),p61

73

3.4 Paper IIICluster initiatives for inclusive innovation in developing countries:

Food Cluster Cochabamba, Bolivia

Carlos Gonzalo Acevedo PeñaTechnologyTransferUnit,UniversidadMayordeSanSimón,Bolivia;

ResearchDivisionTechnoscienceStudies,BlekingeInstituteofTechnology,Sweden

1. Introduction

In2008,theTechnologyTransferUnit(UTT)atUniversidadMayordeSanSimón(UMSS)createdtheFoodClusterCochabamba.Itwascreatedintheframeworkofan innovation program at UTT in partnership with the Scandinavian Institute ofCollaboration and Development (please visit www.sicd.se) supported by the Swed-ishcooperationagency(Sida).ClusterdevelopmentatUMSSemergedasanadop-tionandcontextualizationofthegloballypromotedclusterconceptandexperiencesdeeplystudiedduringthelasttwodecades.Rocha(2004)explainedthatthisincreasedinterest inclusters is thepresumedimpactofclusteronfirmperformance, regionaleconomicdevelopment,andcountrycompetitiveness.

ClusterdevelopmentwasadoptedatUTTasaninteractingmechanismtoincreasetheincidenceoftheresearchactivitiesatUMSSinthelocalsocio-economicdevelopment.ThisproposalwasbasedontheexperiencegainedatUTTbetween2004and2006im-plementingoffer-pushedmodelsofinteraction,afterwhichbecameevidentthepassivenatureofthelocalindustry,intermsitswilltocollaborateinresearchactivitieswiththepublicuniversity.Acevedo,Céspedes,&Zambrana(2015)explainedthatseveralmeetingswithandinterviewstoindustrialrepresentativesrevealed:

• Self-sufficientattitudecomingfromthelargefirmsintermsofseekinguniversitycol-laboration;

• Mediumsizefirmsmoreinterestedincollaboratingwithuniversityresearchcentres,butlackedthefundingtoinvestinresearchactivities,andexpressedconcernaboutintel-lectualpropertyissues;

• Smallandmicrofirmswereinterestedingettingsupportfromtheuniversity.Never-theless,theywerecharacterizedbynocleardemands(asindividualfirmsandasSMEassociations)intermsofresearchneeds,lackoffunding,lowleveloftraining,shorttermvisionfocusedalmostcompletelyonmarketing,andlowlevelofcollaborationwithotherinstitutionsdueageneralizedattitudeofdistrust.

Thus,basedonempiricalexperiences,UTTlaunchedaclusterdevelopmentprojectasapilotplatformatUMSStodevelopnon-linearcollaborationapproachesincorporat-ingtheconceptofinnovationsystemsbothinsideandoutsidetheuniversity.ThefoodsectorwaschosentobethefirstclusterexperienceatUMSSbecausetherelativehighconcentrationofuniversityresearchresourcesorientedtothefoodfield,alongfoodindustrytraditioninCochabambaandtheprioritizationofthefoodsectorinregionaldevelopmentagenda.AccordingtoSITAP-UDAPRO(2015),lookingatthemanufac-

74

turingindustryintheCochabambaregion,thefoodandbeveragesectorinvolvesthe19%ofalltheeconomicunits,isthesecondlargesectorinthoseterms.Thissectorisformedby1%largesizedenterprises,4%smallandmediumenterprises(SME),and95%Microenterprises.

ThispaperpresentstheexperienceoftheFoodClusterCochabambapromotedfromatechnologytransferunitinapublicuniversityinBolivia.Theexperiencewasanalysedfromtheperspectiveofadevelopmentaluniversityapproachforemerginginnovationsystemswithinclusiveaspirations.Thisisaparticipatoryactionresearchbasedoneightyears of practical experience of the author on cluster development atUTT (2007-2014)andfiveyearsexperienceasClusterFacilitatorintheFoodClusterCochabamba(2008-2012).

Intermsof(McIntyre,2008),participatoryactionresearchischaracterizedbytheac-tiveparticipationofresearchersandparticipants(inthiscaseentrepreneurs,universityresearchers,andgovernmentservants)intheconstructionofknowledge;thepromo-tionof self- andcritical awareness that leads to individual, collective, and/or socialchange;andanemphasisonaco-learningprocesswhereresearchersandparticipantsplan,implement,andestablishaprocessfordisseminatinginformationgatheredintheresearchproject.

2. Concept Framework

2.1 National and Regional Innovation Systems

TheconceptofNationalInnovationSystems(NIS)hasbecomeverypopularinde-velopingcountriesasanex-anteconceptframeworktofoster innovationpolicies indevelopmentagendas.Theconcepthasbeenconstantlyevolvinginthelastdecades.Thisstudyadoptsthefollowingdefinition:

“The national innovation system is an open, evolving and complex system that encompasses re-lationships within and between organizations, institutions and socio-economic structures which determine the rate and direction of innovation and competence-building emanating from processes of science-based and experience-based learning.”(Lundvall, Vang, Joseph, & Chaminade, 2009)

MostofLatinAmericancountriesarecurrentlyinprocessofdesigningandimplemen-tationof strategies to increase thedynamismof theiremerging innovationsystems.Thinkingaboutcountriesinthesouth,authorslike(Arocena&Sutz,2003;Cozzens&Kaplinsky,2009)highlightedtherelevanceofinequalityandpovertyreductionis-suesassociatedwiththedynamicsinNIS.Infact,theyrecommended,inordertoapositiveimpactofST&Ipracticesoverinequalityandextremepovertyreduction,thatinnovationand learningprocessesmustbereinforcedbymore inclusiveanddemo-craticpracticesfordevelopment.Inthiscontext,theconceptofinclusivedevelopmentenrichesinnovationandlearningprocessesbygivingattention(explicitly)totheother-wisemarginalizedgroupsineconomicgrowthanddevelopment.Johnson&Andersen(2012)definedinclusivedevelopmentasaprocessofstructuralchange,whichgivesvoiceandpowertotheconcernsandaspirationsofotherwiseexcludedgroups.Itre-distributestheincomesgeneratedinboththeformalandinformalsectorsinfavour

75

ofthesegroups,anditallowsthemtoshapethefutureofsocietyininteractionwithotherstakeholdergroups.Lookingattheimplementationofthenationalinnovationstrategies,theyarehighlylinked with the regional dimension, mainly following the organizational structures(geographical andpolitical)within thecountryborders.Therefore, specific regionalinstitutionalcapabilitiesareconsideredasintegralcomponentsofstrategiesdevelopedintheframeworkofemergingNIS.Herliana(2015)consideredthatinrealizingNISeffectiveandproductive,andsignificantlycontributetonationaleconomicgrowth,isnecessarytostrengthenRegionalInnovationSystems(RIS).Onthatissue,Asheim&Coenen(2005)arguedthatRIScanbethoughtofastheinstitutionalinfrastructuresupporting innovationwithin theproduction structureof a region.TheydescribedfunctionalRISintermsofinteractivelearningpracticesbetween:

• Theregionalproductionstructureorknowledgeexploitationsubsystem,whichconsistsmainlyoffirms,oftendisplayingclusteringtendencies.

• Theregionalsupportiveinfrastructureorknowledgegenerationsubsystemwhichconsistsofpublicandprivateresearchlaboratories,universitiesandcolleges,technologytransferagencies,vocationaltrainingorganizations,etc.

Looking to developing countries, Cimoli, Primi, & Pugno (2006) highlighted theincidenceof the informalsector intheLatinAmericaneconomy.Theyargued, thissectoremergedasarefugeorsubsistencestrategyforthemarginalizedgroups,butitcontributedtoreinforce,orgenerate,theexclusionandsocialtensions.Theinformalsectorischaracterizedbylowproductivity,useofobsoletetechnologies,non-qualifiedwork,andenterprisesofreducedsize.

TheempiricalstudiesofCooke(2008)highlightedthatRISarenot“implemented”bypolicybutrathertheyevolvethroughprocessesofincrementalandsometimesevenquite“disruptive”institutionalchangebymarketsandtheinstitutionalsupportsys-tem.

2.2 Clusters development

AccordingtoPorter(2000)“clusters are geographic concentrations of interconnected com-panies, specialized suppliers, service providers, firms in related industries, and associated institutions (e.g., universities, standards agencies, trade associations) in a particular field that compete but also cooperate.”B.Asheim,Cooke,&Martin,(2006)calledtoPorter’sstudiesexplainingthatthereareanumberofadvantagestobegainedwithrespecttothekeyactivityofinnovationbyoperatinginacluster.

• Theyallowrapidperceptionofnewbuyerneeds.

• Theyconcentrateknowledgeandinformation.

• Theyallowtherapidassimilationofnewtechnologicalpossibilities.

• Theyprovidericherinsightsintonewmanagementpractices.

• Theyfacilitateon-goingrelationshipswithotherinstitutionsincludinguniversities.

• Theknowledge-basedeconomyismostsuccessfulwhenknowledgeresourcesarelocal-ized.

76

Altenburg & Meyer-Stamer (1999) studying Latin American experiences elucidatethatclusteringseemstoenablefirms,especiallysmallandmedium-sizedenterprises(SMEs),togrowandupgradeeasily.Nevertheless,Bas,Amoros,&Kunc(2008)high-lighted the difficulty with the cluster concept is to define which organizations areinvolved,basedonwhat they share,howthey influenceoneanotherandhowtheygive a group of dissimilar actors some interactive, systemic characteristics. On thisquestion,theUTTatUMSSstartedclusteringprocessesusingtheTripleHelixmodelofinnovation(university-industry-government)asanessentialworkingframeworkforsystemic interaction approaches. Leydesdorff & Meyer (2003) explained theTripleHelixmodelofuniversity–industry–governmentrelationstriestocapturethedynamicsofbothcommunicationandorganizationbyintroducingthenotionofanoverlayofexchangerelationsthatfeedsbackontheinstitutionalarrangements.

Figure 3.11: The Triple Helix Model of University-Industry-Government Relations (Etzkowitz & Ley-desdorff, 2000)

UTTpromotedthetriplehelixinclusterdevelopmentbecauseiteasilygeneratedaframeworkofunderstandingwithnon-academicpartners.Theconcept alsoofferedrelationshipswithinanequalitarianbalancebetweenthethreemainactors involvedinClusterInitiatives.Sölvell,Lindqvist,&Ketels(2003)definedClusterInitiatives(CIs)asorganizedeffortstoincreasethegrowthandcompetitivenessofclusterswithinaregion,involvingclusterfirms,governmentand/ortheresearchcommunity.Clustersconceivedunderthisinstitutionalframeworkcanbeabletodiscussandtobuildclosercollaborationalongtheclusterlifecycle.Andersson,Schwaag-Serger,Sörvik,&Wise(2004)on“Cluster Policies Whitebook”describedcluster’slifecycleintermsitsorgani-zationinlong-termevolvingrelationships:i)agglomeration,ii)emergingcluster,iii)developingcluster,iv)thematurecluster,v)transformation.

Despitethedeepstudiesperformedhighlightingtherelevanceofclustersonregionaleconomicgrowth,whenitcomestothequestionofthecontributionofclustersoninclusivedevelopment thedebate is justbeginning.Trojer,Rydhagen,&Kjellqvistt(2014) based on their empirical experiences in Africa suggested that cluster basedlearningcouldimprovethepositionoffirmsandfarmersinvaluechainsofdifferentreach(local,national,continentalorglobal),which,ifconsciouslydone,couldaddressincomegapsandreducethenumberofpeoplelivinginabsolutepoverty.

Academia

State Industry


77

3. Food Cluster Cochabamba

3.1 Background

TheFoodClusterCochabambaemergedas apro-activemechanism fromUTTdi-rectedtothedemandingactorsofthefoodandbeveragesectorintheCochabambaregion.Theclusterwas focusedonmicro, small andmediumenterprises (MSME),which according to SITAP-UDAPRO (2015) represent 95%of themanufacturingeconomicunits in that sector.Cluster activitieshavebeenfinancedby theSwedishcooperation(Sida)intheframeworktheInnova-UMSSprogram,approvedsince2007atUTT.Thisfundingallowedthemobilizingofhumanresources,organizingtrainingactivities,equippinganauditorium,andofficefacilitiesatUTT,astheclustermeetingpoint.

Atthebeginning,theUTTdirector’sexperienceonlocaldevelopingprojectsallowedidentifyingandsettinganinitialcontactwiththemaininstitutionsinthefoodsector(outsideoftheuniversity).Atthesametime,hispositionintheuniversitymadepos-sibletogatherandsensitizeastartinggroupofresearcherstowardsnewdynamicsandnon-isolatedmechanismsofcollaborationwithinthefoodcluster.

Theclusterstarteditsfunctionsbyorganizingafirstwideworkshopwhereacriticalmassofsectorialrepresentativesdiscussedandgeneratedasharedvisionoftheclusterandbuiltasixmonthsagendaofcollaboration.Thisgroupwascomposedby:MSME,publicservants,researchersfromUMSS,representativesofregulatoryinstitutionsinthe food sector, and local chambers of MSME. The vision generated for the FoodClusterCochabambawasstatedasfollow:

“To become the Food Cluster of reference in the region, generating and applying technical knowledge to create added value through innovation, improving the competitiveness of firms in the region by trilateral and responsible collaboration based on trust between university, industry and government benefitting society and environment” (UTT, 2008).

TheactivitiesintheFoodClusterCochabambacoordinatedbya“clusterfacilitator”and supportedby amanagement teamatUTT.Workshopswere repeatedperiodi-cally,twiceayear,foridentifyingdemandsfromtheproductivesectorsandproposingalternativesofcollaboration,influencedbythedynamicchangingpoliticalcontextinBolivia.Themainactorsinvolvedinthefoodclusterare:

• ProductiveunitsandMSMEfromthefoodandbeverage-manufacturingsector.TheirproductionismainlyfocusedonAndeancerealsbasedproducts,bakingprocesses,dairyproducts,processedfruits,functionalfood,andnon-alcoholicdrinks.

• Academicunits(UMSS)suchasresearchcentres,laboratoriesofservices,pilotplants,researchers,scientificstudentscommunities,andpre-graduateprograms.

• Governmentbodiesatthenationalandregionallevels.Theseentitieswerefocusedonpromotingthenationalinnovationsystem,supportingprogramstothemanufacturingsectoringeneralandthefoodandbeveragesectorintheregion.

• Regionalinstitutionsinchargetoregulatethelocalsellingoffoodproducts,ONGs,chambersandassociationsofMSMEproducers.

78

Theclusterwasopeninitsconception,toanyactorinterestedincollaboratingwithinclusterdynamics,mainlynotcreatinganybarriersforthelargenumberofinformalmicro-enterprises in the sector. In this context, cluster relations were mostly trust-basedbetween theuniversityandfirms,andsomeagreementswere signedbetweentheUTTandgovernmentbodies,ifneeded.ThenumberofactorsinvolvedinCIshasbeengrowingintime.Therefore,inordertohaveanannualapproachofthistendency,clustermembersallthoseorganizationswereconsideredparticipantsofanyCI,asitisshowninthefollowingfigure.

Figure 3.12: Evolution of members in the Food Cluster Cochabamba (2008-2014) by type of organization, based on (UTT, 2015)

Inaddition,periodicaltransdisciplinarymeetingswereorganizedatUTTinordertodiscussandoperatizetheshort-termagendaandCIsprioritizedthesearchforsyner-gies(designingprojects,organizingtrainingprograms,findingadditionalresources).The“cluster facilitator”wasinchargetopromotingdialoguewithinatransdisciplinarycontext,sometimestranslatingtheneedsoftheproductivesectorintoresearchprob-lems,seekingforthegovernmentparticipationinCIs.TheUTT’steamsupportedthemanagementofCIsbothinsideandoutsideoftheuniversity.

Uptonow,CIsintheFoodClusterCochabambahavebeenorganizedaccordingtheguidelinespresentedinthesurveydevelopedbySölvelletal.(2003),wheretheCIsstudiedwerelinkedtosixmainobjectives:researchandnetworking,innovationandtechnology,policyaction,commercialcooperation,educationandtraining,andclus-terexpansion.

3.2 MSME in the Food Cluster Cochabamba

TheFoodClusterCochabambawasmainlyorientedtosupportingmicro-smallandmedium-sizedenterprises(MSME)ofthefoodsectorwithintheCochabambaregion.According toUTT (2015), the groupoffirmswhichparticipated in cluster initia-tives in2014werecomposedby74%micro-sizefirms(1-9employees),22%smallfirms(10-49employees),and4%medium-sizefirms(50-249employees).Thesefirms

79

were characterized by their heterogeneity within their manufacturing activities andinformality, consistent with the descriptions offered by Parrilli (2007) about SMEclustersinLatinAmerica.Hedescribedthosefirmsasmicroandsmallcraftworkingwithobsoletetechnologyandmanualtechniquesofproduction,withnodivisionandspecializationoflabourandlow-qualitynon-standardizedgoodsforlow-incomecon-sumersinlocalmarkets.Thefollowingfigureshowsthemanufacturingdistributionofclusterfirmsaccordingtheclassificationofproduction,publishedbythenationalfoodregulatingentitySENASAG(2003):

Figure 3.13: Manufacturing production in the Food Cluster Cochabamba, based on (UTT, 2015).

FirmsintheclusterrepresentthediversityoffoodproductioninCochabambaregion.MostofthemprocessAndeancereals(suchasquinoa,amaranth,andcañahua)usingthemwithinbakingprocessesbasedonmixedflours.Other clusterfirmsprocess alargevarietyoffruitsfromthetropicalregion(mainlymarmalades,driedfruits,andpulps).Themilkanddairysub-sectorappearsinsixthplace;neverthelessitisimpor-tanttopointoutitsrelevanceinthecluster,becausethesefirmswereinneedofarela-tivehigherinvestmentanduseoftechnology,additionallytheclusterislinkedtothelargestmilkassociationinvolvingaboutof1,400producers.

ClusterfirmsandproducersaretheengineoftheFoodClusterCochabamba.Con-tingentupontheabilityoftheseactors,withthesupportofUTTanditsclusterfa-cilitator,theclustershallbeusedasaconsensusarena,thusdefiningandmakingtheircommon demands visible for other institutions (government-university), then newClusterInitiatives(CIs)canbediscussedwiththeotherinstitutions.Universityandgovernmentbodiesintheclusterprioritizeactions(intermsofresourcesallocation)forthoseCIsthatarerelevantorareabletoinvolvemorefirmsandproducers.Therefore,clusterfirmsandproducersareencouragedtocollaboratingoneanother.Acevedoetal.

80

(2015)pointedoutduringthefirstyearsofclusterdevelopmentproductiveunitsandfirm’sparticipationwashighlylinkedtotheinterestoflocalassociationsandSME’schamberstoparticipateinclusterdynamics.However,clusterforumswerefocusedongivingavoicemainlytoproductiveunitsandfirms,becauseassociationandcham-bers compete eachother for a sectorial leadership collaborating their ownagendas.However,theyhaveprovedtobegoodpartnersinspecificCIsemergingfromopendiscussionsbetweenproducersandfirms(e.g.foodsafetyandmarketingsupportingprograms).

EachCIswaspromotedbyan“advisory board”integratedbyvoluntaryentrepreneursandproducers,wholedthediscussionswithotherinstitutions.AlltheseactivitiesweresupportedbyUTT (infrastructure, office facilities, assistants andprofessional staff)andmoderatedbytheclusterfacilitator.

Inthiscontext,ithasbeenpossibletoestablishapermanent“FoodSafetyCertificationProgram”which supportsfirmsgathering several institutional efforts (UMSS,SMEchamber,producerassociations,SENASAG).Itincluded20%reducedcostsforlabo-ratoryanalysis,technicaladvising,auditoriumanddeskfacilities,andpre-graduatestu-dents’assistance,trainingcoursesonGoodManufacturingPractice(GMP),administ-rativesupport.AccordingtoUTT(2014),upuntilthen,30firmshadbeencertifi-cated;850parameterswereanalysedintheuniversitylaboratories,11trainingcourseslinkedtoGMPweregiven,andwerelikedabout65studentstosupportcertificationprocessinsidethefirms.

Astoinnovationandresearchactivities,withtheassistanceofUTT,firmshavebeenable to attract research funding for threeprojects so far, twoof them fully fundedthroughuniversityresearchcontestsandoneco-financedbetweengovernmentbody(ProBolivia) and university. These projects were developed based on the firms’ de-mands,withinaconstantdialoguebetweenentrepreneursandresearchers,bothvisit-ingeachother.Additionally,clusterfirmshavebeenabletodevelop43exclusiveshortresearchprojectsmobilizingabout260pre-graduatedstudentssupervisedbyresearch-ersinresearchcentres.Studentsdevelopedtheseprojectstogetherwiththeentrepre-neurswithpracticesbouncingbetweentheproductiveinfrastructuresandtheresearchcentresatUMSS.Mostoftheseprojectswerefocusedonmarketingstudiesfornewproducts,equipmentdesignandimprovementofproductionprocesses.Nevertheless,theweakabsorptiveandinvestingcapabilitieshavelimitedtheeffectiveuseofmostofthesestudies.

IthasbeenevidentduringthattheseinteractingprocessesinthefoodclusterallowedMSMEandproductiveactorstoshareinformationwithoneanotherandwithotherinstitutions involved, increasing theirorganizationalnetworks.TheyhaveexpandedtheiraccesstoresearchresourcesatUMSS(infrastructures,equipment,laboratories,researchers,pre-graduatestudents),commondemandsnowareconsideredinresearchprojectsandhaveaccesstogetfullfundingfromtheuniversity,whileindividualneedsreceivesspecialtreatmentinresearchcentressupportedbypre-graduatestudents.Ontheotherhand,MSMEandproducersareabletogenerateconcretedemandsandcon-

81

veythesedirectlytoresearchersandgovernmentservantsatdifferentlevels.Clusterfirmsandproducers,throughtheUTTasanintermediateagent,havebeenproperlyinformedandpreparedtotakeadvantageofgovernmentsupportingprogramstofosterinnovation,entrepreneurship,andcompetitiveness.

3.3 UMSS research units in the Food Cluster Cochabamba

TheFoodClusterCochabambaemergedasapilotmechanismofinteraction,broughtaboutbythetechnologytransferunitatUMSS.By2014,thisexperiencehadbeenabletoinvolveresearchersandpre-graduatestudentsfrom14differentresearchunitsfromthefacultiesofS&TandAgronomylinkingaround30researchersand400pre-graduatestudentsafter7yearsofcollaboration.ClusterInitiativeshavebeenpracticalandconcrete arenas todevelopTripleHelix approachesof interactionandMode2processesofknowledgeproduction.Theseexperienceswerethefoundationforthecre-ationatUMSSofamultidisciplinarycross-facultyteamofresearchersnamed“UMSS Innovation Team”,whereuniversity researchexperiencesare sharedanddiscussed inrelationtoemerginginnovationsystemsinBolivia.TheseexperiencesalonguniversityresearchpolicytransformationatUMSSweredescribedandcharacterizedbyAcevedoet al. (2015) as a “developmental university” approach.Arocena,Göransson,&Sutz(2015)pointedoutdevelopmental universities are characterized as universities thatprovideeffectiveincentivestoincludeintheirresearchagendas,problemswhosesolu-tionscanleadtothedemocratizationofknowledge.

Twocoreinstitutionalresearchguidelines,“sovereignty and safety over food production”and“technology, production, and industrial development”,havelegitimizedfoodclusteractivitiesbylinkingthemtootherinstitutionaleffortsorientedtosupportobjectivesnationaldevelopmentgoals. In this context thepossibility toallocateuniversity re-searchresourcesinCIsincreases.Ithasbeenpossible,sofar,tosupportthreeresearchprojects(twofullyfunded,andoneco-fundedwithagovernmentbody),aswellastoallocatesupportingequipmentinsixresearchcentresinordertoenhancelaboratoryandtechnicalservicestoMSME.

TheFoodClusterCochabamba, as apermanent interactionplatform foruniversityresearcherswithMSMEaswellaswithgovernmentservants,hashadanimpactonthe research agenda.Thus, ithasbeenpossible to incorporate cluster activities andnewservicesforMSMEintoannualactivityplansintheresearchcentres.Therefore,clusterentrepreneurshavebeenopenlywelcometovisitrepeatedlytheuniversityre-searchcentreslinkedtotheclusterandobtainavailablerelevantinformation,aswellasdiscusstechnicalissueswithresearchers.AlltheseactivitiescoordinatedbytheclusterfacilitatoratUTT.

Aside fromthesemodest efforts,mostlyvolunteer-likeand lackof allocationof re-sources,UMSShasnotbeenabletoguaranteetheuseofresearchcontributionswhereitisimportantthatfindinstitutionalsynergiesintheregiontoimprovetheabsorptivecapabilityof theMSMEin thecluster.Theseexperiencesdevelopedatapilot levelreflecttheanalysisofSutz(2012)suggestingthatunderdevelopmentcanbeverypar-tiallybutnotinaccuratelycharacterisedasan“innovationaslearning”systemicfailure.

82

Therefore,tocoordinateasystemicresponsetotheproblembecomesaneed,takingintoaccountthatotherthanitsgoodwill,UMSShaslotoflimitations.

3.4 Government bodies linked to the Food Cluster Cochabamba

Afteradramaticperiodofsocio-politicalcrisis,inthelasttenyearsBoliviahasbeenstartedareformingprocessorientedtothereductionofextremepovertyandtoin-crease the participation of the traditionally excluded social sectors in the decision-makingprocesses.Thisprocesshasbeencharacterizedbythereformspromotedbythecentralgovernment,suchasanewpoliticalconstitution,nationalizationofkeyindu-striesontheexploitationofnaturalresources,labourregulations,andthegenerationoflong-termdevelopmentagendas.Atregionalandlocallevels,governmentshavebeencharacterizedbytheirlackofresourcesallocationforproductionsupportingprograms,internal labour instability at operative level, and reducedorganizational scope.TheFoodClusterCochabambahasbeenabletotranscendandmanagethepoliticalfluc-tuationsmainlybecauseitwashostedattheUMSS.Publicuniversitiesarerelativelymorestable institutions,whichprevail inthe long-term.Becauseof its longhistoryalong social claims, UMSS was perceived as politically neutral or pro-social claimsinstitution.Therefore,UTThasbeenabletogeneratearelaxeddialogueatmospherefordiscussionsbetweentheclustermembers.

TheFoodClusterCochabambastartedbyinvitingseveralsecretariatsfromthelocalmunicipalityandtheregionalgovernment,alloftheminvolvedinfoodregulationandsupportingprogramstoincreasethecompetitivenessofthesector.Theirparticipationin cluster activities reduced the ambiguity in sectorial regulations needed for com-mercializing food products in the local market. Their collaboration allowed clusterfirmstoparticipateinseveralfairspromotingthelocalmanufacturingproduction.In2010,clusteractivitieswereincludedintheannualactivityplanofsomesecretariatsatthelocalmunicipalityandregionalgovernment.Thatdispositionallowedgovernmentservantstoparticipatefrequentlyinclustermeetingsbutdidnotincludefundingal-locationtosupportclusteractivities.Recentregionalstrategiesofdevelopmenthaveincludedclusterdevelopment,named“ComplejosProductivos”,asacorestrategytosupportprioritizedproductivesectorsinCochabamba.Thisstrategyrespondstosys-temicapproachesproposedbythecentralgovernmentintheframeworkofalong-termdevelopmentagendaandemergingnationalinnovationsystems.RegionalgovernmentbodieshaveacknowledgedpilotclusterexperiencesatUTTasrelevantlocalreferencesfordialogueprocessesandparticipativeknowledgeproduction,linkinguniversityre-searchunitswithsocio-productiveactors.

Lookingatthecentralgovernmentlevel,theFoodClusterCochabambahasbeenabletobuildamoredynamicrelationshipwiththeVice-MinistryofScienceTechnology(VCyT)intheframeworkoftheemergingnationalinnovationsystem.TheVCyTisthegovernmentbodyinchargetodesignandimplementthestrategiestomakethesystemmoredynamic.Acevedo,Céspedes,&Zambrana(2015)characterizedthena-tionalinnovationpolicies,publishedin2013,asdemand-pulledsystemwithinclusiveambitions,resultingfromawideparticipatoryprocessofconstruction.

83

Figure 3.14: Institutional relations within the Bolivian System of Science, Technology and Innovation, synthetized scheme from (Acevedo et al., 2015)

Theplanrecognizesprotagonistroleofuniversities inprocessesofknowledgegene-ration.However,additionallyproposesan inclusiveapproach,where the roleof in-digenousgroupsandother socialmovements ishighlighted inboth,demandingofST&I and knowledge generating sectors. The VCyT recognized the Food ClusterCochabambaasregionalreferenceforsystemicapproachesofcollaboration.TheFoodClusterCochabambahasbeen in theNationalResearchNetworkpromotedby theVCyT,whereaccordingtoVCyT(2012)arelinkedaround35researchersfromdiverseresearch centres linked to the food sector in thewhole country. Since2012, ithasbeenpossibletoincludefiveMSMEfromthefoodclusterintheannualmeetingofthenationalresearchnetwork,wherefirmsareabletomaketheirdemandsvisibleforthenationalresearchcommunitylookingforexpandtheirnetworksofcollaboration.Additionally, international agreements managed by theVCyT have allowed clustermembersaccesstofinancialresourcestosendrepresentativestoparticipateofinterna-tionalconferencesorganizedbyCyTEDIberoekalinkingthemwithotherresearchesandentrepreneursinotherLatinAmericancountries.

OtherimportantcontributionscomefromProBolivia,adecentralizedagencyoftheMinistryofProductiveDevelopment,whichrecentlyestablishedsupportingprogramsforinnovationaimedtocreatefundingcontests,innovationcentres,andproductivecomplexes(clusters).TheFoodClusterCochabambaisabletoparticipateactivelyinthoseprogramsthroughtheUTTatUMSS.In2013,theFoodClustergainedfund-ingresources to strengthenthecapabilitiesofoneresearchcentre inbuildingsemi-industrialequipmentforthefoodsector.Thisprojectaimstorespondtheclaimsoftheentrepreneursintheclusterabouttheoversizedandexpensiveequipmentavailableinthemarket.Therefore,theprojectlinks3researchcentresandabout15entrepre-neursforthedesignandbuildoftwoprototypes,anautomatizedovenforthebakeryindustry, and a lyophilisation equipment for the dairy industry in the cluster. Theimplementationoftheprojectimpliedseveraladministrativechallengesbecauseoftheheavynormativestructuresof thegovernmentandtheuniversity.Nevertheless, thisexperienceopenedthepathforcomingfinancingcollaborationsforresearchactivitiesfromanypublicdecentralizedagencytoUMSS.

Knowledge Generating

Sector

ST&I Demanding

Sector

Governmental Sector

84

3.5 Intermediary Agent

TheTechnologyTransferUnit(UTT)isanoperativeunitwhereoneofitsmainfunc-tionsisto develop at UMSS institutional competences and capacities for studying, promot-ing and actively participate in systems and processes of innovation at the local, regional and national levels.TheUTTplaystheroleofintermediaryagentintheFoodClusterCochabamba.Trojeretal.(2014)highlightedtheroleofintermediaryagentssupport-ingclusterdevelopmentforinclusivedevelopmentinAfrica.Theyexplainedthatlink-ingactorsisnotenoughwithininnovationprocesses.Intermediaryagentsoftenneedtotranslatebetweentheactorstomatchsupplyanddemand,aswellasspreadingin-formationandmediatinginconflictswhileplaysneutralroleintheinnovationsystem.

TheroleofUTTasintermediaryintheFoodClusterhasbeenessentialfortheclus-ter survival.UTTprovidedbasicfinancial resources to the cluster formobilizationandorganizationthroughitsinnovationprogram.Itwasinchargeofmanagingandspreadinginformationacrosstheclustermembers.Itsinfrastructurefacilitiesofferedaneutralatmospherefordialoguebetweentheproducers,entrepreneurs,researchersandgovernmentservants.TheUTThassupportedclustermemberstotransformationcon-creteproductivedemandsintoresearchprojectslookingforfundingresourcesinsideandoutsidetheuniversity.Becausetheclusterisbasedmostlyoninformalrelationstrust-based,UTTgivestoclusteraformalrepresentationwhenitcomestoapplyforresourcesandsubscribingagreementsbetweentheorganizationsinvolved.Thisformalrepresentationalsocontributestotheclusterbemoreinclusive,becauseanimportantpartofmicroandsmallentrepreneursandproducersintheregionarenotyetpartoftheformalbusinesssector.Clusteractivitieshelpinformalentrepreneurstoregularizethatconditionbyorientingandofferingreducedcostsinlaboratoryanalysisoftheirproducts.Inthatcontext,UTTalsosupportsthemanagementoffinancialresourcesthroughtheuniversityadministrativesystem.Finally,UTTmanagesknowledgepro-ductionanditsdiffusionemergingfromclusterinitiativesaccordingtothevagueuni-versityregulation.

3.6 Cluster Facilitator

Ingstrup&Damgaard(2013:7)defineclusterfacilitatorsasindividualsorateamofindividuals,who are seated in a formal cluster secretariatwithin a cluster, facilitat-ingandcoordinatingclusterdevelopmentthroughtrustbuildinginordertopromotecooperationandsharingofactivitiesandresourcesamongtheparticipatingactorsofthecluster.TheClusterFacilitatoroftheFoodClusterCochabambawasprovidedbyUTT.AftermyearlyexperiencedevelopingonthestrategicguidelinesofUTT,Iwasinvitedtobeclusterfacilitator.IworkedasclusterfacilitatoroftheFoodClustersince2008to2013,andmyfollowingcommentscomefromthatspecificperspective.

Onemymainchallengesastheclusterfacilitatorwastobecomeacentralnodeintheclusternetwork,wholinksallclustermembersatthepersonallevel.Asclusterfacilita-tor,Iwasinchargetolisteninginthedebates,understandingthedifferentperspectivesemergingfromtransdisciplinaryprocessesofinteraction,andguidingthemintocrea-

85

tivealternativesforcollaborativesolutions.Thistaskrequiresahighsenseofempathytounderstandthepersonalperspectiveofeachmemberandahighmotivationtowardsthecollectivewelfare,asthedynamicsofinteractionbetweentheactorsshapetheclus-teridentity.Itwasalsopartofmytasks,tokeeptheclusteropenfornewmembers,andlookfornewrelevantmembersforon-goingclusterinitiatives(CIs).

Theclusterfacilitatorisinchargeofinformationmanaging,makinginformationac-cessibleforclustermembers(contacts,activities,projects,supportingprograms,busi-nessopportunities,andresults).Furthermore,Iwasinchargetofollowtheproceduresneededtoensuretheallocationofresources(financial,goods,andservices),committedbytheinstitutions(university,government,producers,etc)fortheexecutionofCIs.Thistask,inanenvironmentofmostlyinformalrelations,requirestrustbuildingwith-inclusterrelations,enhancingthecompetitiveatmospherebetweensocio-productiveactors.Infact,accordingto(Mesquita,2007)trustinthefacilitator,inturn,affectstrustingbeliefsofSMEleaderstowardeachother,sincesuchtrustactsasasubstitutefortheinitiallackoftrustbetweenparties.Facilitatorsarenotouttomediatedistrustfromtheentire relationship; rather, theyhelp leadclusteredfirms in thepursuitofjointcollectiveefficienciesindemarcatedbusinessareasandhelpthemachievegreaterlevelsofcompetitiveness.Additionally,myexperiencesaysthattrustbuildingisalsoaboutsharinghumanvaluesbetweentheclustermembers.Accordingly,itwasmyroletospreadtheclustervaluesexplicitlyandtakecareoftheirrespectinthebehaviourofclustermembers.

Finally,anotherimportantroleasclusterfacilitatorwastopromotemode2practicesinCIsandknowledgeproduction,particularlypromotingpro-activeandconstantin-teractionbetweenresearchersandsocio-productiveactors.Theopenattitudeofthere-searchesmadeiteasiertobreakinitialinstitutionalbarriers,allowingentrepreneursfeelconfortablewhenvisitingtheuniversityresearchcentresandviceversa.Nevertheless,thescarceresourcesavailableindevelopingcountriesrepresentachallengeforinnova-tionandlearningprocesses.Thismeansthatclusterfacilitatorshavetobeextremelycreativelookingforothernetworkscollaborationtoachievethegoalsproposed.

ClusterfacilitatingfunctionsaspartoftheTechnologyTransferUnit(UTT)atUMSS,enhancesboththeinternaldevelopmentaluniversityapproachanditsroleinclusterdevelopmentinemergingregionalinnovationsystem.

4. Concluding remarks

TheFoodClusterCochabambaemergedasapilotexperiencepromotedbytheUniver-sidadMayordeSanSimon(UMSS),Bolivia.Itwascreatedasanon-linearapproachtoorientresearchactivitiesatUMSSintoinnovationsystemsdynamicsforsupportingsocio-economicdevelopment.Clusterdevelopmentofferedimportantinsightsforre-formsintheuniversityresearchpolicywithina“developmentaluniversity”approach.Thisexperiencehasbeenabletogatheraninitialcriticalmassofsmallsocio-productiveactorsshowinginitialpositiveresults.Triplehelixbasedinteractionhasbeenabletomakesocio-productivedemandsvisible foruniversityandgovernmentactors inthe

86

cluster. Cluster initiativesmobilized resourcesmainly from theuniversity but alsofromotherpartner in the cluster (government, entrepreneurs, institutions) towardssolvingcommondemands.Despite,governmentbodieswerenotbeenabletoallocatefinancialresourcestotheFoodClusterinitiatives,newnationalreformsandsupport-ing programs are emerging under the framework of a National Innovation Systemlinkedtoalong-termdevelopmentagenda(PatrioticAgendaBoliviatowards2025).Both,universityresearchpoliciesandgovernmentinnovationpoliciesprioritizeinclu-sivedevelopmentambitions.

Traditionally,clustershavebeenthoughtoftocreatecompetitiveadvantageofsomeindustrialgroupsoverothers,basedoncollaborationtoupgradetheirtechnologicalandinnovationcapabilities.However,whenitcomestotheuseofpublicresourcesindevelopingcountries,povertyandinequalityreductionarepriorities.Therefore,basedontheearlyexperienceoftheFoodClusterCochabamba,thisstudyproposestoview-ingclustersasamechanismwhere innovationand learningprocesses seek inclusivedevelopmentambitions.

Clusterdevelopmentcanbeusedbyapublicuniversitytosupportsignificantlypover-tyandinequalityreductionasmechanismforthedemocratizationofknowledge,bycontributing to reduce knowledge gaps in specific productive sectors. Clusters canbeusedasopenmechanismsexpandingtheaccessandopportunitiesforlow-incomesocio-productiveactorsinaregion.

• Accessto:knowledge,technology,researchresources,relevantinformation,fundingresources,networking,supportprograms,technologybasedsolutions,etc.

• Opportunitiesto:expresstheirdemands,survive,collaborate,learn,innovate,partner-ship,developingofspecializedskills,generatingaddedvalue,incrementingcompetitive-ness,increaseabsorptivecapacity,createsustainability,etc.

Cluster for inclusive development can be a practical alternative to collaborate andmakeefficientuseofthescarceresourcesavailableinuniversitiesandgovernmentpro-grams,inthecontextofdevelopingcountries.

ReferencesAcevedo,C.,Céspedes,M.,&Zambrana,E.(2015).“Developmental University” aproaches in Devel-

oping Countries: Case of the Universidad Mayor de San Simón, Bolivia.Cochabamba-Bolivia.AcevedoPeña,C.,Céspedes,M.,&Zambrana,E.(2015).NationalPoliciesofInnovation:Build-

inganInclusiveSystemofInnovation.Journal of Entrepreneurship and Innovation Manage-ment,4(1),63–82.

Altenburg,T.,&Meyer-Stamer,J.(1999).Howtopromoteclusters:policyexperiencesfromLatinAmerica.World Development,27(9),1693–1713.

Andersson,T.,Schwaag-Serger,S.,Sörvik,J.,&Wise,E.(2004).Cluster Policies Whitebook.IKED-InternationalOrganisationforKnowledgeEconomyandEnterpriseDevelopment.

Arocena,R.,Göransson,B.,&Sutz,J.(2015).Knowledgepoliciesanduniversitiesindevelopingcountries:Inclusivedevelopmentandthe“developmentaluniversity.”Technology in Society,41(0),10–20.

87

Arocena,R.,&Sutz,J.(2003).InequalityandinnovationasseenfromtheSouth.Technology in Society,25(2),171–182.

Asheim,B.,Cooke,P.,&Martin,R.(2006).Clustersandregionaldevelopment:Criticalreflec-tionsandexplorations.(B.Asheim,P.Cooke,&R.Martin,Eds.)Economic Geography (Vol.84).Taylor&Francise-Library.

Asheim,B.T.,&Coenen,L.(2005).Knowledgebasesandregionalinnovationsystems:Compar-ingNordicclusters.Research Policy,34(8),1173–1190.

Bas,T.G.,Amoros,E.,&Kunc,M.(2008).Innovation,entrepreneurshipandclustersinLatinAmericanaturalresource:implicationandfuturechallenges.Journal of Technology Manage-ment & Innovation,3(4),52–65.

Cimoli,M.,Primi,A.,&Pugno,M.(2006).Unmodelodebajocrecimiento:lainformalidad.Revista de La CEPAL,88,89–107.

Cooke,P.(2008).RegionalInnovationSystems,CleanTechnology&JacobianCluster‐PlatformPolicies.Regional Science Policy & Practice,1(1),23–45.

Cozzens,S.E.,&Kaplinsky,R.(2009).Innovation,povertyandinequality:cause,coincidence,orco-evolution?Handbook of Innovation Systems and Developing Countries,57–82.


Herliana,S.(2015).RegionalInnovationClusterforSmallandMediumEnterprises(SME):ATri-pleHelixConcept.Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences,169(0),151–160.Ingstrup,M.B.,&Damgaard,T.(2013).Clusterfacilitationfromaclusterlifecycleperspective.European Planning Studies,21(4),556–574.

Johnson,B.,&Andersen,A.D.(2012).Learning, Innovation and Inclusive Development: New per-spectives on economic development strategy and development aid.AalborgUniversitetsforlag.

Leydesdorff,L.,&Meyer,M.(2003).Triple Helix of university-industry-government relations.Springer.


McIntyre,A.(2008).Participatory action research(Vol.52).Sage.Mesquita,L.F.(2007).Startingoverwhenthebickeringneverends:rebuildingaggregatetrust

amongclusteredfirmsthroughtrustfacilitators.Academy of Management Review,32(1),72–91.

Parrilli,M.D.(2007).SME Cluster Development.PalgraveMacmillan.Porter,M.E.(2000).Location,competition,andeconomicdevelopment:Localclustersinaglobal

economy.Economic Development Quarterly,14(1),15–34.Rocha,H.(2004).EntrepreneurshipandDevelopment:TheRoleofClusters.Small Business

Economics,23(5),363–400.SENASAG.(2003).Reglamento Registro Sanitario de Empresas del Rubro Alimenticio (No.040/2003).Bolivia.

SITAP-UDAPRO.(2015).ATLAS Potencialidades Productivas en Bolivia.LaPaz,Bolivia.Retrievedfromhttp://siip.produccion.gob.bo/repSIIP2/atlas.php

Sölvell,Ö.,Lindqvist,G.,&Ketels,C.(2003).The Cluster Initiative Greenbook.IvoryTowerStockholm.

Sutz,J.(2012).Measuringinnovationindevelopingcountries:somesuggestionstoachievemoreaccurateandusefulindicators.International Journal of Technological Learning, Innovation and Development,5(1-2),40–57.

Trojer,L.,Rydhagen,B.,&Kjellqvist,T.(2014).Inclusiveinnovationprocesses–experiencesfromUgandaandTanzania.African Journal of Science, Technology, Innovation and Development,6(5),425–438.

88

UTT.(2006).Innovation Program and Technology Transfer: Program Proposal 2006.Cochabamba-Bolivia.




VCyT.(2012).Redes Nacionales de Investigación Científica y Tecnológica.LaPaz,Bolivia.

89

Part 3

91

Chapter 4 - DISCUSSIONS AND CONCLUSIONS 4.1 Summarizing comments of the papersPaper IpresentsageneralconceptreviewaboutnationalinnovationsystemsandtheTri-pleHelixmodelofinnovation.ThispaperstarteditsdiscussionsbysummarizingsomefactsoftheinterlinkedLatinAmericanhistoryduringthesecondhalfoftheTwentiethCenturypresentingsomecharacteristicsonscience,technologyandinnovationpoli-cies,implementedduringthedictatorshipandneoliberalgovernments.Thisway,thereaderisplacedintheBoliviancontext,revealingthepolicypathfollowedinthelast30years,whereseveralgovernmentalprogramswerelinkedtofosterscience,techno-logy,competitivenessandinnovationwithdevelopmentaims.Thestudyrevealedboththemainpolicyprogressandthelessonslearnedafterthedifferentpoliticalregimes,sofar.Itwaspointedoutthehighrelevanceofattendingthehistoricalclaimsaboutsocialinclusionandextremepovertyreduction.RecentplanningeffortsoftheVice-MinistryofScienceandTechnology(VCyT)presentedinthe“NationalPlanofScienceTech-nologyandInnovation(PNCTI)”(2013)wereanalysedasfoundationsoftheemer-ginginnovationsysteminBolivia.Finally,thispaperdiscussedtheprocessbyusingtheTripleHelixconceptframeworkasareference,lookingforowncharacteristicsinthemodelaccordingtotheBoliviancontext.

Paper IIpresentedrecenteffortsdevelopedbytheUniversidadMayordeSanSimónorganizing and allocating research resources towards increasing its incidence in re-gionalsocio-economicdevelopment.TheseeffortswereenhancedbythecreationoftheTechnologyTransferUnit(UTT)locatedattheFacultyofScienceandTechnology.Innovation systemandMode2 concept approaches inspired thepractices atUTT.

92

OneimportantsociallyorientedinitiativeperformedwastheconformationofpilotclustersusingtheTripleHelixmodelofinnovationasaninstitutionalframeworkofin-teraction(university,government,socio-productiveactors).ThemainresearchpolicyguidelinesandpracticestofosteraninnovationcultureatUMSSwerepresentedasanex-post“developmentaluniversity”approach.Itsanalysisanddiscussionspointedoutsocialorientedapproaches,drivinginnovationpracticesatUMSStowardssupportingemerginginnovationsystemsinBolivia.

Paper IIIpresentedthecaseoftheFoodClusterCochabamba,whichwascreatedatUniversidadMayordeSanSimón(UMSS).ItwasaninitiativepromotedbytheTech-nologyTransferUnit(UTT)todeveloplinkingmechanismsbetweentheuniversity,government, and food industry sector in the region of Cochabamba, Bolivia. Thisstudystartedbydescribingtheroleofthemainactorsgatheredinclusterinitiatives.Thediscussionsinthepaperwentaroundtheclustermembers,theirorganizationandthemainactivitiesperformed.Asidefromthedifficultiestoquantifytheimpactoftheactivitiesperformedinthisearlystageoftheclusterdevelopmentwithinacontextofinformalrelationships,ithasbeenpossibletoobserveanimportantqualitativeadvanceintermsoforganizationandorientationandavailabilityofresearchresourcestosup-portthefoodsector.Finalreflectionssuggestedthinkingaboutclusterinitiatives,asdriversofinnovationforinclusivedevelopmentpurposes.

4.2 Concluding RemarksThisstudystartedbydrawingageneraloverviewoftheinnovationpolicyframeworkinBolivia,whichreflectsanddiscussesthepoliticalintentionandthedifferentinsti-tutionalchallengesforthecomingyears.Therefore,basedonlocalexperiences,itwasdiscussed the role of publicuniversity and clusterdevelopment,having todowithemerginginnovationsystemsinBolivia.

TherearerecentinnovationpoliciesinBolivia,whichareshapinganemergingNatio-nalInnovationSystem(NIS)withsocially inclusiveapproaches.Thesepoliciespro-motetheformationofademand-pulledinnovationsystemcharacterizedbyinterac-tions between three main sectors: i) the government; ii) the knowledge-generatingsector;iii)andthedemandingsectorofScienceTechnologyandInnovation(ST&I).Aparticularcharacteristicofthismodelwasthatindigenousgroupsandgrassrootssocialorganizations were recognized as important agents within both sectors knowledge-generatinganddemandingofST&I.TheVice-MinistryofScienceandTechnology(VCyT),undertheMinistryofEducationisofficiallyinchargeoftheimplementationoftheNISprograminBolivia.Simultaneously,otherMinistries(e.g.AgricultureandProductive Development) are developing and executing important supporting pro-gramsundertheNIS’sumbrella,attendingtoparticularconcerns,butwithoutadirectcoordinationwiththeVCyT,howeverrespondingtoanationaldevelopmentagenda.Therefore,basedonanempiricalanalysis,itwasproposedthecontinuityofthediffer-entsupportinginnovationprogramswithineachministry,butincorporatingtheNISmodelputforwardbytheVCyT.Itcanbeusedasacrossministriesoperativeframe-

93

workfornationaldevelopmentaims,expressedandcoordinatedfromthe“PatrioticAgendaBolivia2025”executingbodies.

Ontheotherhand,emerginginclusiveinnovationpoliciesweretheresultofparticipa-torypracticesof indigenousanddiversegrassrootssocialorganizationsindecision-makingprocesses.Theybroughtthehistoricalclaimsofsocialinclusionintoinnova-tionpolicies.Thisconstitutesabottom-upapproachofsocialdignityrecoveryintheinnovationstructuresinthecountry.Itwaspointedouttoanotheraspectofsocialin-clusion,whichinvolvesthedriversofknowledgegenerationandinnovationprocesses,focusingnowonlocalsocio-productivedemandsandneeds.Thissocio-politicalcon-textrepresentsabigchallengeforthewholeuniversitysysteminBolivia,whichneedsto re-think its role anddevelopnew competences in socio-economicdevelopment.Universitiesarestillrecognizedasthemaininstitutionintheknowledge-generatingsector,particularlypublicuniversities,whichconcentratemostoftheresearchcapabili-tiesinthecountry.

Interactive initiatives and research reforms developed at the Universidad Mayor deSanSimón(UMSS)inthelast10yearscanmakeevidentimportantinsightsonthementionedconcerns,especiallyforthecaseofpublicuniversitiesintheBoliviancon-text. ItsTechnologyTransfer Unit (UTT) created in 2004, as an offering office ofuniversityservices,experiencedthepassiveattitudeandlackofconcretedemandsfromtheindustrialsector.FrequentmeetingsbetweentheUTTandregionalgovernmentsecretariatsandmunicipalityhaveshownlackofsupportingprogramsandvision,andaddressedtotheneedofgenerationoflocalknowledgeforthesolutionofproblemsintheproductivesector.

Inthiscontext,conceptssuchasinnovationsystems,TripleHelixmodelofinnovation,Mode2knowledgeproduction, and clusterdevelopment,wereuseful ex-ante con-cepts,inspiringthepro-activeinitiativesproposedbyUTT,bothinsideandoutsidetheuniversity.Asidefromthelimitationstomeasurethesocio-economicimpactonthesocio-productivesectorslinkedtoclusterinitiatives,ithasbeenpossibletomakesomequalitativeapproaches,highlightingthenewresearchpolicy,socialorientedre-searchprogramsandtherelativeimportantallocationofuniversityresearchresourcesinclustersinitiatives(researchers,pre-graduatestudents,researchcentrescapabilities,laboratoryservices,accesstoresearchresults,accesstocollaborativefunding,etc.).Alltheseeffortswereex-postcharacterizedinthisthesisasa“developmentaluniversity”approach,whichelucidatesomehowthepathwheretheroleofpublicuniversitiescanaddressed in supporting emerging inclusive innovation systems. Additionally, openclusterdynamicspromotedfrompublicuniversities,haveshowntobeneutralarenasto generate shared agendas of collaboration, focused on university research efforts,aswell aspromotingnon-linear interactionsand facilitating trustbuildingbetweenuniversity,governmentandsocio-productivesectors.Therefore,inthiscontext,itwaspossibletoaffirmthatthiskindofclusterscanbepotentiallyoperativemechanismstopromoteinnovationandknowledgedemocratizationforinclusivedevelopmentambi-tions.

94

Theexperiencessharedinthisstudysupporttherelevanceofbuildingco-evolutionaryprocessesinBoliviawheretheboundariesbetweenscienceandsocietybecomeincrea-singlytransgressive.Co-evolutionaryprocessesintransdisciplinaryinteraction,wheresciencepermeatessocietyandsocietypermeatesscience,areidealconditionstofacili-tateboththedevelopmentofusefulknowledge.Butitisextremelyneededtoorientmoreeffortsandfindsynergiesonthegenerationofabsorptivecapabilitiesforlearninginthesocio-productivesectors.ThisprocessmustbesupportedbyIPRandmarketregulations,whichpromote endogenousknowledgegeneration,diffusionasuse forthedomesticneeds.

InthecontextofpublicuniversitiesinLatinAmericaandparticularlyinBolivia,co-evolutionaryprocess can also enhance the legitimacyof theuniversity autonomousconditionbycreatingopendialoguearenasforbuildingnon-isolatedagendasofcol-laborationbetweenthesectors.

4.3 Scientific Contributions and Originality Thepublicationofthepaper“BolivianInnovationPolicies:BuildinganInclusiveIn-novationSystem” in the Journal ofEntrepreneurship and InnovationManagement(JEIM),Volume4,Issue1inJune2015.Furthermore,thisthesispresentstwounpub-lishedoriginalpaperscurrentlyunderevaluationininternationalscientificjournals.

The author and the professional staff at UTT have developed institutional linkingmechanisms,whichhaveshownbeingrelevantfortheuniversityresearchcommunityatUMSS.Asresult,thefirstinstitutionalinnovationteamofresearchesinthecountrywascreated.ThisteamatUMSSdiscussesandparticipatesinsystemicinnovationpro-cessesinspiredbyMode2knowledgeproductionandTripleHelixinteractionstruc-turesindevelopmentaluniversityapproaches.

Theresearchisdeveloping,inpractice,theroleofclusterdevelopmentasanopenuni-versitymechanismtopromoteinclusiveinnovationprocessesandthedemocratizationofknowledgeintheCochabambaregion.

4.4 Way Forward Innovationsystemsdynamicsareconstantlyevolving.Nevertheless,therelevanceofinnovationandlearningindevelopmentprocessesareundeniable.Top-downstrate-giespresentedbythecentralgovernment,startedbeingimplementedwithmanygapsintheprocessthatstillneedtobefilled.Atthesametimebottom-upinitiativespre-sentsusefulinsightsthatcanbereplicatedinotherregionsinthecountry.Supportingprogramsneedtobemeasuredintermsoftheirimpact,particularlyintermsoftheireffectivenessforinclusivedevelopment.

Thenextstepinthestudyistoperformdeeperparticipatoryactionresearch,inordertounderstandactivelythedevelopmentofinnovationandlearningprocesses.Forth-

95

comingstudiesaimtofocuscloselyontheco-evolutionprocessesbetweeninnovationpolicies,universityeffortstocontributesocio-economicdevelopmentandclusterde-velopmenteffectivenessintheframeworksofinnovationsystems.

97

ReferencesArocena,R.,Göransson,B.,&Sutz,J.(2015).Knowledgepoliciesanduniversitiesindeveloping

countries:Inclusivedevelopmentandthe“developmentaluniversity.”Technology in Society,41(0),10–20.

Arocena,R.,&Sutz,J.(2003).InequalityandinnovationasseenfromtheSouth.Technology in Society, 25(2),171–182.

Arocena,R.,&Sutz,J.(2012).Researchandinnovationpoliciesforsocialinclusion:anopportu-nityfordevelopingcountries.Innovation and Development,2(1),147–158.

Arocena,R.,&Sutz,J.(2014).Innovationanddemocratisationofknowledgeasacontributiontoinclusivedevelopment.Chapters,15–33.

Bortagaray,I.,&Gras,N.(2014).Science,Technology,andInnovationPoliciesforInclusiveDe-velopment:ShiftingTrendsinSouthAmerica.InScience,Technology and Innovation Policies for Development(pp.255–285).Springer.

Bramwell,A.,&Wolfe,D.A.(2008).Universitiesandregionaleconomicdevelopment:Theentre-preneurialUniversityofWaterloo.Research Policy,37(8),1175–1187.

Brundenius,C.,Lundvall,B.-Å.,&Sutz,J.(2009).TheRoleofUniversitiesinInnovationSystemsinDevelopingCountries:DevelopmentalUniversitySystems–Empirical,AnalyticalandNormativePerspectives. Handbook of Innovation Systems and Developing Countries: Building Domestic Capabilities in a Global Setting,311–333.

Castañeda,J.G.(2006).LatinAmerica’sleftturn.FOREIGN AFFAIRS-NEW YORK-,85(3),28.Chaminade,C.,Lundvall,B.-Å.,Vang,J.,&Joseph,K.J.(2009).DesigningInnovationPolicies

forDevelopment:TowardsaSystemicExperimentation-basedApproach.Handbook of In-novation Systems and Developing Countries: Building Domestic Capabilities in a Global Setting,360–379.

Cozzens,S.E.,&Kaplinsky,R.(2009).Innovation,povertyandinequality:cause,coincidence,orco-evolution?Handbook of Innovation Systems and Developing Countries,57–82.


Etzkowitz,H.(2008).The Triple Helix: University–Industry–Government Innovation in Action. Engi-neering(Vol.42).Routledge.


Foster,C.,&Heeks,R.(2013).Conceptualisinginclusiveinnovation:Modifyingsystemsofin-novationframeworkstounderstanddiffusionofnewtechnologytolow-incomeconsumers.European Journal of Development Research,25(3),333–355.

George,G.,McGahan,A.M.,&Prabhu,J.(2012).Innovationforinclusivegrowth:towardsatheoreticalframeworkandaresearchagenda.Journal of Management Studies,49(4),661–683.

Gibbons,M.(2000).Mode2societyandtheemergenceofcontext-sensitivescience.Science and Public Policy,27(3),159–163.

Gibbons,M.,Limoges,C.,Nowotny,H.,Schwartzman,S.,Scott,P.,&Trow,M.(1994).The new production of knowledge: The dynamics of science and research in contemporary societies.Sage.

Grugel,J.,&Riggirozzi,P.(2012).Post‐neoliberalisminLatinAmerica:RebuildingandReclaim-ingtheStateafterCrisis.Development and Change,43(1),1–21.

Grugel,J.,Riggirozzi,P.,&Thirkell-White,B.(2008).BeyondtheWashingtonConsensus?AsiaandLatinAmericainsearchofmoreautonomousdevelopment.International Affairs,84(3),499–517.

Haraway,D.(1988).Situatedknowledges:Thesciencequestioninfeminismandtheprivilegeofpartialperspective.FeministStudies,575–599.

98

Johnson,B.,&Andersen,A.D.(2012).Learning, Innovation and Inclusive Development: New per-spectives on economic development strategy and development aid.AalborgUniversitetsforlag.

Katz,J.(2001).Structuralreformsandtechnologicalbehaviour:Thesourcesandnatureoftechno-logicalchangeinLatinAmericainthe1990s.Research Policy,30(1),1–19.

Lundvall,B.-Å.(2010).National systems of innovation: Toward a theory of innovation and interactive learning (Vol.2).AnthemPress.


McIntyre,A.(2008).Participatory action research(Vol.52).Sage.Morales,J.A.(2014).Laeconomíabolivianadelosúltimoscincuentaaños:reflexionessobreel

desarrollodelargoplazo.Revista Ciencia Y Cultura,18(33),107–135.Nowotny,H.,Scott,P.,&Gibbons,M.T.(2013).Re-thinking science: knowledge and the public in

an age of uncertainty.JohnWiley&Sons.Panizza,F.(2009).Contemporary Latin America: development and democracy beyond the Washington

consensus.ZedBooks.Papaioannou,T.(2014).Howinclusivecaninnovationanddevelopmentbeinthetwenty-first

century?Innovation and Development,4(2),187–202.Parrilli,M.D.(2007).SME Cluster Development.PalgraveMacmillan.Porter,M.E.(2000).Location,competition,andeconomicdevelopment:Localclustersinaglobal

economy.Economic Development Quarterly,14(1),15–34.Rydhagen,B.(2002).Feminist sanitary engineering as a participatory alternative in South Africa and

Sweden.BlekingeInstituteofTechnologyKarlskrona.Schilling-Vacaflor,A.(2011).Bolivia’snewconstitution:Towardsparticipatorydemocracyand

politicalpluralism?European Review of Latin American and Caribbean Studies/Revista Europea de Estudios Latinoamericanos Y Del Caribe,3–22.

Seery,E.,&Arandar,A.(2015).Iguales.Acabemosconladesigualdadextrema.Eshoradecambiarlasreglas.Oxford:OxfamInternational.

Sunitiyoso,Y.,Wicaksono,A.,Utomo,D.S.,Putro,U.S.,&Mangkusubroto,K.(2012).Devel-opingStrategicInitiativesthroughTripleHelixInteractions:SystemsModellingforPolicyDevelopment.Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences,52(0),140–149.

Sutz,J.(2012).Measuringinnovationindevelopingcountries:somesuggestionstoachievemoreaccurateandusefulindicators.International Journal of Technological Learning, Innovation and Development,5(1-2),40–57.

Trojer,L.,Rydhagen,B.,&Kjellqvist,T.(2014).Inclusiveinnovationprocesses–experiencesfromUgandaandTanzania.African Journal of Science, Technology, Innovation and Development, 6(5),425–438.

VCyT.(2011). Potencial Científico y Tecnológico Boliviano 2011 (2nded.).LaPaz,Bolivia.VCyT.(2013).Plan Nacional de Ciencia Tecnología e Innovación (PNCTI).LaPaz,Bolivia.WorldDevelopmentIndicators.(2015).RetrievedJuly15,2015,fromhttp://data.worldbank.org/

indicator/SI.POV.GINIWylde,C.(2011).State,societyandmarketsinArgentina:Thepoliticaleconomyofneodesarrollis-

mounderNéstorKirchner,2003–2007.Bulletin of Latin American Research,30(4),436–452.Yoguel,G.,Lugones,M.,&Sztulwark,S.(2007).Lapolíticacientíficaytecnológicaargentinaen

lasúltimasdécadas:algunasconsideracionesdesdelaperspectivadeldesarrollodeprocesosdeaprendizaje.CEPAL, Buenos Aires, Argentina.,(ManualdePolíticasPúblicasCienciayTec-nologíaparaelDesarrollo[consultado12Jul2010].),43.Retrievedfromhttp://www.cepal.org/iyd/noticias/paginas/5/31425/yoguellugonesysztulwark.pdf


DE

VE

LOP

ING

INC

LUS

IVE

INN

OV

AT

ION

PR

OC

ES

SE

S

AN

D C

O-E

VO

LUT

ION

AR

Y A

PP

RO

AC

HE

S IN

BO

LIV

IA


Blekinge Institute of Technology

Licentiate Dissertation Series No. 2015:05

Department of Technology and Aesthetics2015:05

ISSN 1650-2140

ISBN: 978-91-7295-312-3

ABSTRACT

The concept of National Innovation Systems (NIS) has been widely adopted in developing countries, particularly in Latin American countries, for the last two decades. The concept is used mainly as an ex-ante framework to organize and increase the dynamics of those institutions linked to sci-ence, technology and innovation, for catching-up processes of development. In the particular case of Bolivia, and after several decades of social and economic crisis, the promise of a national inno-vation system reconciles a framework for colla-boration between the university, the government and the socio-productive sectors. Dynamics of collaboration generated within NIS can be a use-ful tool for the pursuit of inclusive development ambitions.

This thesis is focused on inclusive innovation processes and the generation of co-evolutionary processes between university, government and socio-productive sectors. This is the result of 8 years of participatory action research influenced by Mode 2 knowledge-production and Technosci-entific approaches.

The study explores the policy paths the Bolivian government has followed in the last three decades in order to organize science, technology and inn-ovation. It reveals that Bolivia has an emerging na-tional innovation system, where its demand-pulled innovation model presents an inclusive approach. Innovation policy efforts in Bolivia are led by the Vice-Ministry of Science and Technology (VCyT). Moreover, NIS involves relational and collaborati-ve approaches between institutions, which imply structural and organizational challenges, particu-larly for public universities, as they concentrate

most of the research capabilities in the country. These universities are challenged to participate in NIS within contexts of weak demanding sectors.

This research focuses on the early empirical approaches and transformations at Universidad Mayor de San Simón (UMSS) in Cochabamba. The aim to strengthen internal innovation capa-bilities of the university and enhance the relevan-ce of research activities in society by supporting socio-economic development in the framework of innovation systems is led by the Technology Transfer Unit (UTT) at UMSS. UTT has become a recognized innovation facilitator unit, inside and outside the university, by proposing pro-active in-itiatives to support emerging innovation systems. Because of its complexity, the study focuses parti-cularly on cluster development promoted by UTT. Open clusters are based on linking mechanisms between the university research capabilities, the socio-productive actors and government. Cluster development has shown to be a practical mecha-nism for the university to meet the demanding sector (government and socio-productive actors) and to develop trust-based inclusive innovation processes. The experiences from cluster activities have inspired the development of new research policies at UMSS, with a strong orientation to fos-ter research activities towards an increased focus on socio-economic development. The experien-ces gained at UMSS are discussed and presented as a “developmental university” approach.

Inclusive innovation processes with co-evolutio-nary approaches seem to constitute an alternative path supporting achievement of inclusive develop-ment ambitions in Bolivia.

Carlos G

onzalo Acevedo Peña 2015:05

carlos gonzalo acevedo peña - diva portal851366/fulltext01.pdf · carlos gonzalo acevedo peña...

Documents