Marketing positioning of countries in the field of innovations: questions and answers

Tamara P Danko,Lyubov A Chaykovskaya,Pavel A Smelov,Vladimir M Kiselev,Anna E Gorokhova

doi:10.9770/jesi.2020.7.4(18)

Abstract

This article addresses the issues of the marketing positioning of countries in the field of innovations. To date, the level of development and dynamism of the sphere form the basis for the country's sustainable economic growth. The concept of innovation is closely related to the concepts of novation, invention, and discovery, which are the products of creativity. The paper examines some of the basic marketing characteristics of such countries as Japan, China, South Korea, India, and Russia. The authors hypothesize and prove that if a country chooses to focus on education and high technologies in its development, it can ensure high development of the national information and communication technologies. They also selected and evaluated the indicators of innovative development for these countries. Based on the correlation-regression analysis, the initial hypothesis was confirmed.

Highlights

IntroductionThe successful functioning of the national innovation system depends on advanced science and education and on the entire complex of other institutional conditions: a competitive business sector as the major generator of innovation (Hirschhorn, 1988; Carayannis & Grigoroudis, 2014; Salamzadeh et al, 2016; Zemlickiene & Maditinos, 2012); integration into the global innovation sphere as the most important condition for the development of the national high-tech industries; priority of state policy in the development of education, science, and technology, creating a favorable institutional environment for innovation-based growth (Sweet, 2001; Cohen & Zysman, 1987; Zhang & Yang, 2013; Sekerin et l., 2015; Tvaronavičienė 2019; Girdzijauskaite et al 2019).According to the well-known Chinese scientist and economist Hu Angang, the constant increase in the technical and technological level of production in the formation of the national innovation system is the most important factor in the state’s transition from an extensive to intensive growth
It has long been argued that only those countries that adhere to the "right" liberal-democratic course in politics and market priorities in the economy have a monopoly on progress and intensive development (Zhang & Yang, 2013; Zemlickiene & Maditinos, 2012; Kanter, 2001; Zeibote et al 2019)
South Korea is the undisputed leader among the five countries in most of the above indicators

Summary

Introduction

The successful functioning of the national innovation system depends on advanced science and education and on the entire complex of other institutional conditions: a competitive business sector as the major generator of innovation (Hirschhorn, 1988; Carayannis & Grigoroudis, 2014; Salamzadeh et al, 2016; Zemlickiene & Maditinos, 2012); integration into the global innovation sphere as the most important condition for the development of the national high-tech industries; priority of state policy in the development of education, science, and technology, creating a favorable institutional environment for innovation-based growth (Sweet, 2001; Cohen & Zysman, 1987; Zhang & Yang, 2013; Sekerin et l., 2015; Tvaronavičienė 2019; Girdzijauskaite et al 2019).According to the well-known Chinese scientist and economist Hu Angang, the constant increase in the technical and technological level of production in the formation of the national innovation system is the most important factor in the state’s transition from an extensive to intensive growth. Creation of an innovative economy is a process that involves the actual field of economics and science (Onetti et al, 2012). It is much bigger and covers the areas of state-building, education, and culture. Creation of an innovative economy is a process that involves the actual field of economics and science. It has long been argued that only those countries that adhere to the "right" liberal-democratic course in politics and market priorities in the economy have a monopoly on progress and intensive development (Zhang & Yang, 2013; Zemlickiene & Maditinos, 2012; Kanter, 2001; Zeibote et al 2019)

Methods

Results

Conclusion