Knowledge-based Capital Research Articles

Bridging theory and practice through Work-Integrated Learning (WIL): critical perspectives on the conceptualisations of WIL at a university in Sweden

ABSTRACT In this article we interrogate how University of Sweden (UoS), the leading Work-integrated learning (WIL) university in Sweden, represents WIL publicly, discussing this in relation to higher education’s changing role within an increasingly knowledge-based capitalism, in which knowledge and research become subsumed under demands for market utility and student employability. Through analysis of WIL literature we distil a theory-practice ‘gap’ with spatial, institutional, epistemological and pedagogical dimensions that WIL as a field of educational practice tries to ‘bridge’. We use this conception to deconstruct how (UoS) presents WIL to potential students, partners, employers, and society at large. We find that while the university at the central level presents WIL as a synergistic and multi-dimensional activity that bridges the theory/practice divide to produce ‘advanced knowledge’ and employable students, the actual educational programs articulate WIL in a manner which privileges practical usability and employability over theoretical knowledge, in line with an academic capitalist focus on utility. Further, there is a significant difference in how vocational and academic programmes implement WIL. Whereas WIL components seem relatively easily integrated into professional programs present, academic programs must undertake advanced discursive manoeuvres to incorporate WIL’s principles into what would otherwise be quite theory-focused programs.

Impact of knowledge-based capital on firm productivity: The contingent effect of ownership

Using account data from an unbalanced panel of Chinese listed companies from 2013 to 2018, this study examines the productivity effect of knowledge-based capital (KBC) and its three subcategories, which include computerised information, innovative property, and economic competency, as well as the contingent effects of ownership. Our findings show that first KBC has a positive effect on firm productivity and that only computerised information and economic competency contribute significantly to firm productivity among the subcategories. Second, KBC's productivity gains are linked to firm ownership. KBC utilisation in SOEs is less efficient than in private firms, and computerised information only affects the productivity of SOEs. Third, across different samples, the most significant effect is generated by economic competency, which is primarily driven by organisational capital and brand equity, but this is not robust in SOEs. The findings highlight the importance of carefully assessing the productivity-enhancing effects of various KBC items.

The Smart Sustainable City concept: A system of indicators to assess the regional sustainability and development adaptability

Subject. This article discusses the issues related to the digital development of cities and regions. Objectives. The article aims to create a system of indicators to assess the capacity of smart resilience of Russian cities. Methods. To create such a system, we analyzed the standards developed by the International Organization for Standardization (ISO), International Telecommunication Union (ITU), and the European Telecommunications Standards Institute (ETSI). Results. The article proposes a system of indicators, including a large number of indicators, combined in seven blocks. The indicators can be supplemented and revised as part of public discussion. Conclusions. The Smart Sustainable City concept can be considered realized if the city knowledge-based social capital is formed and intelligent management is implemented.

Investment in Knowledge‐Based Capital and Productivity: Firm‐Level Evidence from a Small Open Economy†

This paper examines the responsiveness of firm productivity to investment in knowledge‐based capital (KBC) including a range of intangible assets such as research and development (R&D), intellectual property assets, computer software, organizational, and branding capital. A dynamic econometric model is estimated with micro‐data from Ireland over the period 2006–2012. Ceteris paribus, the estimated average elasticity of productivity with respect to investment in KBC per employee is 0.3. In comparison to previous empirical studies, this paper goes beyond the representative firm approach and accounts for the heterogeneous behavior of firms which differ by ownership, size, export participation, and sector of activity. Further, the analysis finds that investing simultaneously in multiple KBC assets has complementary as well as substitution effects on firm productivity, with different interdependence patterns for specific investment combinations across groups of firms and sectors.

Knowledge-Based Capital and Productivity Divergence

Understanding the causes of the slowdown in aggregate productivity growth is key to maintaining the competitiveness of advanced economies and ensuring long-term economic prosperity. This paper is the first to provide evidence that investment in Knowledge-Based Capital (KBC), despite having a positive effect on productivity at the micro level, is a driver of the weak productivity performance at the aggregate level, by accentuating divergence between a group of “frontier” firms and the rest of the economy. Using detailed firm-level administrative data for Germany, we find evidence that the effect of KBC on productivity is heterogeneous across firms within industries: this effect is 3 times larger for firms in the top quintile of the KBC distribution compared to firms in the bottom quintile of the KBC distribution. We document the existence of divergence in productivity growth between top KBC users and the rest of firms at the industry level, and find that industries where this gap is larger are also those industries where the heterogeneity in the effect of KBC is highest and where average productivity growth was lower. The evidence hence supports the view that the use of KBC plays a role in explaining weak productivity growth, by accentuating differences between firms.

R&D based knowledge capital and future firm growth: Evidence from China’s Growth Enterprise Market firms

Building upon a dynamic stochastic general equilibrium (DSGE) model, this paper examines the role of knowledge-based capital (KC) in improving firms’ future growth in productivity. Based on the analysis of Chinese listed firms from 2006 to 2017 in the Growth Enterprise Market (GEM), we find KC often generates endogenous movements in productivity and earnings over the business cycles, suggesting that the nature of KC is pro-cyclical. Moreover, investment in KC is often classified as a corporate expense and is thus deducted from the current year’s profits. Therefore, firms with high R&D investments have significantly higher future productivity growth but lower current profitability than do those with lower R&D investments. Given these characteristics, KC’s benefits to productivity and future earnings are thus not immediate. For faster growth in the long term, firms should continue investing in KC even if they may face a short-term fall in corporate earnings as a result of internal knowledge investment, especially for fast-growing GEM firms.

The Impact of Investment in Knowledge-Based Capital on Productivity: Firm-Level Evidence from Ireland

This paper examines the impact of investment in knowledge-based capital on firm productivity. The analysis is based on a dynamic econometric model estimated with micro-data from Ireland over the period 2006-2012. We use broad measures of investment in knowledge-based capital which include expenditures on R&D, and on non-R&D intangible assets such as computer software, copyrights, patents and licences, royalties and organisational capital. The results indicate that on average, over and above other factors, an increase in investment in knowledge-based capital of 10 per cent increases firm productivity by 2 per cent. The research results indicate that productivity gains linked to investment in KBC are larger for Irish-owned firms in comparison to foreign-owned firms. Further, the estimates indicate that firms’ productivity is more responsive to investment in R&D than to investment in non-R&D intangible assets.

Taxation of Knowledge-Based Capital: Some Additional Issues for Policymakers' Considerations

This paper extends the tax analysis of knowledge-based capital (KBC) in several dimensions. The paper analyses non-R&D KBC: computer software, architectural and engineering designs, and economic competencies that account for over 70% of total KBC. The paper analyses the tax treatment of internally-developed KBC which is used in production by the developer versus KBC sold to third-party producers. The current tax rules generally favor internally-developed KBC, which disadvantages many SMEs and start-up companies specializing in innovation. The analysis reports two average effective tax rates (ETRs) depending on investors’ considerations of their investment opportunities. When KBC is unique, earns excess returns due to market power, or involves financing-constraints, ETRs are high despite immediate expensing. The paper also analyses the effects of tax limitations, where many SMEs and start-up companies can’t benefit from tax credits and deductions until having sufficient tax liability.

R&D as an investment in knowledge based capital

It is well documented that knowledge based capital (KBC) is a driver of economic growth and development and that knowledge acquired through scientific research and development (R&D) is one important component of KBC. In this paper we examine the importance of R&D to a firm for exploring new business opportunities using information from the AEGIS database. We find that, among other things, human capital measured in terms of the educational background of the firm’s founders is a positive and statistically significant covariate with the importance of R&D. We conclude the paper with public policy recommendations for enhancing the educational component of the human capital resource base of firms.

A Jamesonian analysis of “flat world” imagery in education discourse

This article presents a discourse analysis of Kylene Beers’ presidential address to the 2009 conference of the National Council of Teachers of English (NCTE-USA). The address, titled “Sailing over the Edge: Navigating the Uncharted Waters of a World Gone Flat,” calls teachers to reject the standardized education of the industrial order and to harness the creativity at the heart of the “flat world” (i.e. global, knowledge-based capitalism). The discourse analysis focuses on the figure of the “flat world” – an increasingly common image in education research – and asks how the speech uses the figure of the “flat world” to reimagine the role of education under global capitalism. Mobilizing the ideas of Fredric Jameson, the Marxist literary critic, the article asks how the speech's story of education in the “flat world” offers “an imaginary resolution of a real contradiction” between industrial and knowledge-based capitalisms.

The Global Financial Crisis and a New Capitalism?

The 2008 global financial crisis was the consequence of the process (1) of financialization, or the creation of massive fictitious financial wealth, that began in the 1980s; and (2) the hegemony of a reactionary ideology — namely, neoliberalism — based on self-regulated and efficient markets. Although laissez-faire capitalism is intrinsically unstable, the lessons of the 1929 stock market crash of 1929 and the Great Depression of the 1930s were transformed into theories and institutions or regulations that led to the “30 glorious years of capitalism” (1948–77) and that could have helped avoid a financial crisis as profound as the present one. But it did not, because a coalition of rentiers and “financists” achieved hegemony and, while deregulating the existing financial operations, refused to regulate the financial innovations that made these markets even riskier. Neoclassical economics played the role of a meta-ideology as it legitimized, mathematically and “scientifically,” neoliberal ideology and deregulation. From this crisis a new democratic capitalist system will emerge, though its character is difficult to predict. It will not be financialized, but the glory years’ tendencies toward a global and knowledge-based capitalism in which professionals have more say than rentier capitalists, as well as the tendency to improve democracy by making it more social and participative, will be resumed.

The 2008 financial crisis and neoclassical economics

The 2008 global financial crisis was the consequence of the process of financialization, or the creation of massive fictitious financial wealth, that began in the 1980s, and of the hegemony of a reactionary ideology, namely, neoliberalism, based on self-regulated and efficient markets. Although capitalism is intrinsically unstable, the lessons from the stock-market crash of 1929 and the Great Depression of the 1930s were transformed into theories and institutions or regulations that led to the "30 glorious years of capitalism" (1948-1977) and that could have avoided a financial crisis as profound as the present one. It did not because a coalition of rentiers and "financists" achieved hegemony and, while deregulating the existing financial operations, refused to regulate the financial innovations that made these markets even more risky. Neoclassical economics played the role of a meta-ideology as it legitimized, mathematically and "scientifically", neoliberal ideology and deregulation. From this crisis a new capitalism will emerge, though its character is difficult to predict. It will not be financialized but the tendencies present in the 30 glorious years toward global and knowledge-based capitalism, where professionals will have more say than rentier capitalists, as well as the tendency to improve democracy by making it more social and participative, will b e resumed.

A crise financeira global e depois: um novo capitalismo?

A crise financeira global de 2008 foi conseqüência do processo de financeirização, a criação maciça de riqueza financeira fictícia iniciada da década de 1980, e da hegemonia de uma ideologia reacionária, o neoliberalismo, baseada em mercados auto-regulados e eficientes. Dessa crise emergirá um novo capitalismo, embora sua natureza seja de difícil previsão. Não será financeirizado, mas serão retomadas as tendências presentes nos trinta anos dourados em direção ao capitalismo global e baseado no conhecimento, além da tendência de expansão da democracia, tornando-a mais social e participativa.

The global financial crisis, neoclassical economics, and the neoliberal years of capitalism

The 2008 global financial crisis was the consequence of financialization or the creation of massive fictitious financial wealth, and of the hegemony of a reactionary ideology, namely, neoliberalism, based on the self-regulated and efficient markets.Although laissez faire capitalism is intrinsically unstable, the lessons from the stock-market crash of 1929 and the Great Depression of the 1930s were transformed into theories and institutions that led to the “30 glorious years of capitalism”. Yet, after the late-1970s, a coalition of rentiers and “financists” achieved hegemony, deliberately promoted deregulation and created financial innovations that made these markets even more risky. These were the “neoliberal years of capitalism”. Neoclassical economics played the role of a meta-ideology as it legitimized, mathematically and “scientifically”, neoliberal ideology and deregulation. From this crisis a new democratic capitalist system will emerge, though its character is difficult to predict. It will not be so financialized, and probably the tendencies present in the 30 glorious years toward global and knowledge-based capitalism, as well as the tendency to improve democracy by making it more social and participatory, will be resumed.

Knowledge Grab: Corporate Appropriation and Exploitation of Academic Geographers

When this article is published, we will no longer control the copyright of it. In fact, we “willingly” signed away our copyright as a condition for publication in this journal. Our “work” has now been sold by the publisher of this journal to you or to the institution with which you are affiliated. Although we are paid by our universities to produce work such as this, the publisher neither paid us nor our universities for the labour we provided or the knowledge we produced. Participating in the accumulation of capital in the hands of corporations without benefiting from it amounts, in our eyes, to exploitation. Worse, we have been collectively compliant with this practice throughout our careers. Rarely have we chosen outlets for our work that enable our work to circulate freely or permit us to control where it might be reprinted in the future. Ironically, there is widespread belief that the role of academics and the universities is not capital accumulation but knowledge production and distribution. In this light, the practice of publishing in corporate journals should be highly problematic. In this intervention we reflect on academic publication practice. Our colleagues have long documented—typically in corporate journals—the ongoing trend of corporatization of academia at a time when the university is part of a knowledge-based capitalist reproduction process (eg Castree 2006; Mitchell 1999; Paasi 2005; Smith 2000). In this context, the knowledge produced and published by academics occupies a strategic position. It provides the contents on which knowledge-based society and capitalism feed. Academic geographers,

Building wealth: the new rules for individuals, companies, and nations in a knowledge-based economy

From the Publisher: MIT Economist, Lester C. Thurow's fascinating look at who will win — and why The rise of knowledge-based industries — microelectronics, biotechnology, telecommunications, robotics, and computers — has improved the lives of millions and brought great riches to individuals, companies, and nations. Yet amidst the new prosperity there is great anxiety. In Building Wealth: The New Rules For Individuals, Companies and Nations In A Knowledge-Based Economy MIT economist and bestselling author Lester C. Thurow provides thorough explanations of the causes of the current anxieties and offers solid economic solutions for the future. Focusing on the critical issue of wealth creation, he shows that great wealth is built from economic disequilibrium and that society itself is being reorganized by the changes wrought by the knowledge economy. While the new technologies allow costs to fall faster than prices, creating a new class of billionaires, these great profits undermine traditional economic stability of the majority — the upper-middle and lower-middle classes. Radical technological advances leading to the development of entirely new industries (like biotechnology) and the transformation of old ones (retailing and banking, for example), the blurring of national borders, and the globalization of companies have all played a role in the creation of this economic disequilibrium and in the rise of national, corporate, and personal anxieties. Addressing the vital question of individuals, businesses, and societies generate new wealth when what worked in the twentieth century won't work in the twenty-first, Thurow delineates the building blocks essential to creating and maintaining broad-based prosperity: a stable yet flexible social organization; a business climate that rewards entrepreneurs; the acquisition of basic knowledge and practical skills by the entire workforce; investment in tools that create wealth; and the recognition that technological advances augment, rather than destroy, the environment and natural resources. In-depth discussions of the strengths and weaknesses of the major players in the global economy bring his points to life. For example, America stands out in today's economically unstable world because we, unlike Japan and Europe, have and revere entrepreneurs, the change agents of capitalism, and are willing to close down businesses, which are not part of the new economy. Our failure to adequately train a large portion of the workforce, however, remains a serious flaw in our social and economic fabric. Arguing that part of the world, just by accident, has all the ingredients necessary to build a 21st century wealth pyramid, Thurow outlines the tasks — both general and specific — America, Europe, Japan, and the Third World must undertake in order to survive and thrive in the future. His provocative insights and pace-setting rules for forward-thinking nations, companies, and individuals include: Successful companies must be willing to cannibalize themselves to save themselves. They must be willing to destroy the old while it is still successful if they wish to build the new before it is successful. Humans have discovered how to operate successful economies in the midst of modest inflation, but not in the midst of even mild deflation. Given the choice between the same rate of inflation or deflation, take inflation every time. Knowledge-based capitalism isn't going to work without a new system for determining who owns or controls intellectual property rights. Capitalism requires clear, easy-to-enforce ownership rights. The biggest unknown for the individual in a knowledge-based economy is how to have a career in a system where there are no careers. To get wealthy, luck is necessary. Talent, drive, and persistence by themselves aren't enough. The economic payoff from more social investment in basic research is as clear as anything is ever going to be in economics. The transition to a knowledge-based economy will require the re-evaluation — and sometimes radical modification — of government policies and spending, business practices, workforce training and compensation, and even cultural patterns and beliefs. Building Wealth is a bracing look at how the economic game will be played in the future, from the skills and resources necessary for sustaining a competitive advantage to who will emerge as winners. About the Author: Lester C. Thurow is Lemelson Professor of Management and Economics at MIT's Sloan School of Management in Cambridge, Massachusetts. One of the world's leading economists, he is the author of four New York Times bestsellers, including the classic, The Zero-Sum Society, Head to Head and The Future of Capitalism.

Learning and regional development

There is growing awareness that knowledge in general, and learning (or the capability to learn) in particular may be critical to the competitive advantage of firms, regions and nations. In this respect, much has been written on the interactive and institutional bases of learning and knowledge creation. Lundvall (1988), for example, claims that firms learn and adapt to 'best practice' through interaction with other firms and organizations. Instead of outcomes of independent actions of isolated actors, innovations are more often the result of interaction and co-operation between actors within the firm (e.g., between RD Storper, 1997). In general, there is a growing interest in the social foundations of economic development (Fukuyama 1995), which have long been ignored by mainstream economists (Boschma, 1999a). The notion of 'social capital' has been introduced to underline this, which may be illustrated by the definition provided by Putnam (1993, p. 167.): "trust, norms and networks that improve the efficiency of society by facilitating coordinated action". Apart from lowering transaction costs and improving institutional performance, social capital facilitates the transmission and exchange of information and knowledge, especially noncodified or tacit knowledge, which is, by nature, much more difficult to communicate. Where there is a high rate of trust, communication proceeds relatively smoothly, which may boost interactive learning (Maskell and Malmberg, 1999). Some claim that a new (post-Fordist) era of 'flexible specialization' in capitalist countries has emerged (Piore and Sabel, 1984; Best, 1990). Gregersen and Johnson (1997; p. 48 1 ) state that a modern learning economy has emerged in which the new ICT's "... have dramatically reduced the costs of storing, handling, moving and combining information, and have made different kinds of networking possible". Florida (2000) talks about 'a new age of global, knowledgebased capitalism', which is characterized by, among other things, new forms of relations between firms based on cooperation, trust and the sharing of knowledge for mutual benefit.