innovation and development - meaning processing€¦ · from agriculture to industrial society...
TRANSCRIPT
© I. Tuomi 9.5. 2002 page: 1
Innovation and DevelopmentInnovation and Development
Strengths and Weaknesses in the Finnish InformationSociety
Ilkka [email protected]
© I. Tuomi 9.5. 2002 page: 2
AgendaAgenda• Sources of success: the roots of rapid socio-economic transformation in
Finland• Some personal observations on the history of the Finnish information
society• An important detail: case Nokia• New dynamics of innovation networks
• A few words on Internet-related innovations and the open sourcedevelopment model
• Challenges for the Finnish model and innovation policy
© I. Tuomi 9.5. 2002 page: 3
From Agriculture to Industrial SocietyFrom Agriculture to Industrial Society
Labor force in Finland, 1950-1995
0
500,000
1,000,000
1,500,000
2,000,000
2,500,000
1950 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995
Year
Num
ber o
f per
sons
46 % in broad agriculture in 1950
7 % in broad agriculture in 1995
Total employed
Agriculture, fishing, animal breeding, and forestry
© I. Tuomi 9.5. 2002 page: 4
From Agriculture to Industrial SocietyFrom Agriculture to Industrial SocietyLabor force in Finland, 1950-1995
0
500,000
1,000,000
1,500,000
2,000,000
2,500,000
1950 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995
Agriculture, fishing, animalbreeding, and forestryTotal employed labor force
46 % in broad agriculture1950
7% in broad agriculturein 1995
© I. Tuomi 9.5. 2002 page: 5
Nordic Welfare State in Finland,Nordic Welfare State in Finland,1965-19751965-1975
• Baby boom of 1945-1955• Expansion of the public sector• Increasing levels of education• Investment in regionally balanced university system, libraries, culture• Rapid urbanization• Shared experiences of war and relocation of people who lost their homes
Education
Life opportunities(work, identity,..)
Infrastructure fordevelopment
© I. Tuomi 9.5. 2002 page: 6
The baby boom in 1960sThe baby boom in 1960s(and the aging of the population)(and the aging of the population)
0200,000400,000600,000800,000
1,000,0001,200,0001,400,0001,600,000
1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020Year
Num
ber
of P
erso
ns
0-14 years65+ years
© I. Tuomi 9.5. 2002 page: 7
Characteristics of the Finnish Culture inCharacteristics of the Finnish Culture inthe 1980sthe 1980s
• Small cultural and economic differences• High social mobility through education• Low hierarchy and open communication culture• High trust culture
• Non-existent corruption• High trust on public services and institutions• Low crime rates
© I. Tuomi 9.5. 2002 page: 8
Crime in FinlandCrime in Finland
0
100000
200000
300000
400000
500000
600000
700000
800000
900000
1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 20010
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
Registered crimesSolved, %
0.10 crimes per capita1980
0.15 crimes per capita2000
© I. Tuomi 9.5. 2002 page: 9
Technical Infrastructure, 1980sTechnical Infrastructure, 1980s• 1978: The Finnish Technology Committee introduces the theme of
"Information Society" (inspired by Nora – Minc: L’Informatisation de la société)• 1980: Telset videotex service started (similar to Minitel, 1981)
• Computer networks• Public data network launched in 1983• Ministry of Education launches FUNET, the Finnish University Network,
1983• FUNET links the Finnish university computer centers, 1985• 1988: Finland gets access to NSFNET/Internet, in a joint effort by Nordic
countries (first countries to join the net: .ca, .sw, .dk, .no, .ic, .fi, .fr)• 1988: "General information network and the citizen's knowledge terminal"
-project. This leads to broad development of information services,commercial e-mail systems, electronic banking, etc. In 1988 it waspredicted that about 20 per cent of the Finnish population will be users ofthe information network by 2000.
• 1988: Online share trading starts in Finland
© I. Tuomi 9.5. 2002 page: 10
Technical Infrastructure, 1980sTechnical Infrastructure, 1980s• Telecommunications
• Nordic Mobile Telephone (NMT) system launched 1982• Competition starts in digital communications (X.25 packet-switched
networks), 1985• New telecommunications law, 1986• Ministry of Traffic and Communications orders the competing digital
networks to provide connections between the networks, 1989
© I. Tuomi 9.5. 2002 page: 11
Some Internet MilestonesSome Internet Milestones• 1988: Jarkko Oikarinen distributes IRC (Internet Relay Chat, University of
Oulu)• 1991: Linus Torvalds distributes the first version of Linux (University of
Helsinki)• 1992: First graphical WWW-browser developed (Erwise, Helsinki University of
Technology)• 1992: FUNET and Helsinki University of Technology launch the 5th and 8th
WWW –servers in the world,(first three are CERN, 4th is Dutch High-energy physics)
• 1993: The First "Information Society Strategy." Focus on information andcommunication technologies and related competencies (similar to NII).
• 1993: A "drivers license" for information networks (consists of seven modules)• August 1998: Finland is the first country where mobile phone penetration
exceeds 50% of the population
© I. Tuomi 9.5. 2002 page: 12
Mobile Phone PenetrationMobile Phone Penetration
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999
Finland 3 2 2 1 3 3 1 1 1 1
Sweden 1 1 1 2 1 1 3 3 3 4
Norway 2 3 3 3 2 2 2 2 2 2
Island 4 4 4 5 6 6 6 7 4 3
USA 7 6 5 6 5 5 8 9 14 16
Source: OECD, 2000
© I. Tuomi 9.5. 2002 page: 13
Evolution of Linux Source CodeEvolution of Linux Source CodeKernel distribution size (compressed)
0
5
10
15
20
25
7-May-90 19-Sep-91 31-Jan-93 15-Jun-94 28-Oct-95 11-Mar-97 24-Jul-98 6-Dec-99 19-Apr-01
Mill
ions
of b
ytes
© I. Tuomi 9.5. 2002 page: 14
Electronic Banking in Finland:Electronic Banking in Finland:customer transactions in 1998customer transactions in 1998
91
37
6 0.7
ChecksATM cardsTransfersDirect debiting
1982: Telephone banking1988: Online share trading1992: Banking by mobile phone1996: Internet banking
Great Britain 1997:over 30 % checks
30.5
31.1
19.6
18.7
© I. Tuomi 9.5. 2002 page: 15
Electronic Banking in Finland (2)Electronic Banking in Finland (2)• 82 % of transactions were paperless in 1998• Within EU, the amount of cash in circulation was the lowest in Finland: 2.35
per cent of GDP (in Spain 10.7, average EU 5.2)• On-line invoicing 1998
• You buy through the net, get a bill as a web form, accept it, and your bank accountis debited by the amount transferred:
• both the payee and payer are verified through the bank; (today you can also do thisusing your mobile phone)
• At the beginning of 1999, the biggest bank in Finland had about 600,000online customers; this was the biggest customer population in the world, inabsolute numbers.
• To compare: US has 50 times bigger population than Finland
© I. Tuomi 9.5. 2002 page: 16
Why Finland Became a Leader inWhy Finland Became a Leader inElectronic Banking?Electronic Banking?
• In Finland, work is expensive (heavy taxation)• Wide use of computer applications to support bank operations and customer
service (1970s- )• High return on investment in ATMs (Automatic Teller Machines; 1980s- )
• Reliable telecommunications infrastructure• Digitalized networks widely available
• Competition in banking• Cost competition• No monopolies
• Close ties between Finnish ICT manufacturers and banks• Good knowledge of ICTs potential (1970s - 1980s)
• In Finland, money is information• transfers widely used in 1970s• everyone has one or more bank account• reliable institutions (no need for physical money)
© I. Tuomi 9.5. 2002 page: 17
End-User Costs for Internet AccessEnd-User Costs for Internet Access
Source: Petrazzini & Kibati:Communications of the ACM, June 1999Vol.42 (6), p.31-6.
© I. Tuomi 9.5. 2002 page: 18
Recession and Safety NetsRecession and Safety Nets“The Finnish Trampoline”“The Finnish Trampoline”
Change in employment
-8-6-4-202468
10
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997
annu
al c
hang
e, %
All sectors Information sector
Between 1990-1994 household income dropped 18 % in Finland;due to income transfers, however, the usable income dropped only 10 %
© I. Tuomi 9.5. 2002 page: 19
Some Drivers in the FinnishSome Drivers in the Finnish ISoc ISoc• Culture
• common interest in technological opportunitiesIn Finland you don’t survive the winter without planning
– Finland had its first telecom operator 3 years after Bell invented thephone
• open communication culture, effective communicationPeople don’t talk much; when they do, they mean what they say
• high level of education• low hierarchy• homogeneous culture• shared expectations
© I. Tuomi 9.5. 2002 page: 20
Some More DriversSome More Drivers• Institutions
• Deregulation of telecom (started 10 years before the EU)• Acute need for change
Disappearing USSRAt the beginning of 90’s, deregulation of financial markets created a
“bubble economy”• Nordic countries are egalitarian and emphasize social responsibility
Heavy investments in the educational systemWell developed library system (over 80 % of public libraries offer free
internet access)Non-existent illiteracy (in Finland newspaper circulation is 473 per
1000, in the US the number is 228)
© I. Tuomi 9.5. 2002 page: 21
Newspaper circulationNewspaper circulationper 1000 inhabitantsper 1000 inhabitants
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
UK
Spai
n
Irla
nd
Ital
y
Fran
ce
Swed
en
Finl
and
19901998
© I. Tuomi 9.5. 2002 page: 22
…and even more……and even more…• Economy
• critical mass of networked people (the biggest community in the world?)– about 100% of primary and secondary schools have Internet access
• low income differences: growing, but still small– 1994: top-ten percent had 3.9 times the income of bottom ten percent– 1997: the ratio was 4.6– this leads to shared lifestyles, easy propagation of new ideas and products
• high taxation on work– investment in technology instead of human work; this is a big difference
between Europe and the US– taxation, however, makes good public infrastructure and services possible
• low telecom tariffs– about half of the OECD average– caller pays: no need to hide your phone number– Nordic countries were the first to deregulate telecom, digitalize telecom
infrastructure, and start international competition• Nokia
© I. Tuomi 9.5. 2002 page: 23
R&D expenditure by sector R&D expenditure by sector EUR MillionEUR Million
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
Universities Public sector Private sector
© I. Tuomi 9.5. 2002 page: 24
Finland as a Breeding Ground forFinland as a Breeding Ground forNokiaNokia
• Mobile communications and digital transmission systems developed inFinland from 1960s
• Joint effort to get a Nordic mobile phone system in place (starting at theend of 1970s)
• Fairly open competition among operators and equipment suppliers,promoting innovation and diffusion of new technology
• Close supplier-operator collaboration, leading to effective user-producerlearning
• Close interaction between firms, universities and research institutes,leading to effective competence development and utilization of state-of-the-art technology and know-how
• Flexibility in the adjustment to the new techno-economic environment• Availability of skilled human resources• Enthusiasm of Finnish organizations and consumers to adopt new
technology
Modified from: Tarmo Lemola, Ministry of Trade and Industry, Finland, 17.4.2002
© I. Tuomi 9.5. 2002 page: 25
Finland as a Breeding Ground for NokiaFinland as a Breeding Ground for Nokia(2)(2)
• Laying the infrastructure for rapid growth• Broad competence development in ICT in 1970s-1980s• Entrepreneurial innovators (often with radio-amateur background)• Active redefinition of Nokia’s strategy in the 1980s towards consumer electronics,
communication, and personal computers• Active globalization of Nokia’s business in the 1980s• Evolving international R&D collaboration (in particular in the EU research
programmes)
• The Nokia crisis of 1991• leadership crisis in Nokia• unprofitable consumer electronics division• disappearing Soviet Union market
• Nokia in 1992• a quick reorientation to global growth markets• new top management team• focus on mobile communications
© I. Tuomi 9.5. 2002 page: 26
Finland as a Breeding Ground for NokiaFinland as a Breeding Ground for Nokia(3)(3)
• The Finnish economic crisis of 1992-1994• Over 20 % (official) unemployment touched all Finnish families and
created a pool of highly educated unemployed people• General crisis consciousness, with ICT (Nokia) as the only economic
growth sector• Rapid adjustment of educational system towards producing ICT
competencies• National high-profile policies on making Finland the leader in the
information society transformation• Policies and societal atmosphere pro-ICT and Nokia• Taxation system that ensured “trickle-down”
• Extremely rapid growth of mobile telecommunications
© I. Tuomi 9.5. 2002 page: 27
The Nokia MiracleThe Nokia Miracle
CrisisInstitutional andOrganizational
Flexibility
BusinessOpportunity
Technological& market
discontinuity
Competent labor and managementSocial capitalLow hierarchyOpen communication
Organizational& environmental
crisis
© I. Tuomi 9.5. 2002 page: 28
GDP 1985=100GDP 1985=100 (at market prices per capita)(at market prices per capita)
100
110
120
130
140
150
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
*
Finland EU countries
Source: Tarmo Lemola, Ministry of Trade and Industry, Finland, 17.4.2002
© I. Tuomi 9.5. 2002 page: 29
Wood andwood productsPulp, paper andpaper products
Electronics andelectrotechnicalproducts
Other goods
Machines,machinery andvehicles
Basic metals andmetal products
Chemicals andchemical products
Services
Finnish Exports by IndustryFinnish Exports by Industry
05
1015202530354045505560
1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000
EUR billion
© I. Tuomi 9.5. 2002 page: 30
Wood products
Pulp, paper andpaper products
Basic metals andmetal products
Other goods
Electronics andelectrotechnicalproducts
Machines,machinery andvehicles
Chemicals andchemical products
Finnish Exports of GoodsFinnish Exports of Goods% of total exports of goods
15 15 15 9 12
119
11
31
15
78
9
42
4030
312227
16 158
541
42
17
18
16
246
5
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
1960 1970 1980 1990 2000
© I. Tuomi 9.5. 2002 page: 31
R&D expenditure by sector R&D expenditure by sector EUR MillionEUR Million
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
Universities Public sector Private sector
© I. Tuomi 9.5. 2002 page: 32
Nokia’s Contribution to the Finnish EconomyNokia’s Contribution to the Finnish Economy
• 1.1 % of total employment, 30 % of the ICT cluster employment (25,000employees in Finland)
• 300 first-tier partnerships in Finland (18,000-20,000 employees), 10 % ofNokia’s turnover
• 24 % of exports, 80 % of ICT cluster exports• 30 % of the total Finnish R&D, 43-47 % of the business enterprise sector• 50 % of the growth in total R&D expenditure• 54 % of the company’s R&D input is spent in Finland
Source: Tarmo Lemola, Ministry of Trade and Industry, Finland, 17.4.2002
© I. Tuomi 9.5. 2002 page: 33
Challenge: Jobless GrowthChallenge: Jobless Growth
0
500
1,000
1,500
2,000
2,500
3,000
3,500
4,000
4,500
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001
Year
Pers
ons
(thou
sand
s)
population, 15-74 yearsin labor force
"Worked one hour or more during the
survey week"
© I. Tuomi 9.5. 2002 page: 34
Challenge: Space MattersChallenge: Space Matters
Net movement ofpeople with post-secondary degrees1997-1999
”the killer app of the knowledge societyprovides access to life opportunities”
© I. Tuomi 9.5. 2002 page: 35
But,But,There is a new mode of technology andThere is a new mode of technology and
knowledge creation emergingknowledge creation emerging
Tuomi, I. (2002): Networks of Innovation: Change andMeaning in the Age of the Internet. Oxford University Press.
© I. Tuomi 9.5. 2002 page: 36
Two Different Dynamics of InnovationTwo Different Dynamics of Innovation• Innovation based on evolving specialization
• Requires gradual change of underlying social practices and stocks ofknowledge
• “Spin-off” from existing communities of practice• Combinatorial innovation
• Recombination of resources so that they become meaningful for existingsocial practices
• Recombination of resources so that they enable new social practices
• Silicon Valley has become specialized in the combinatory model• Little original technology and knowledge development but very rapid
experimentation with recombinations• Silicon Valley has a specialized role within a global innovation system; it
does not make sense as a social model
© I. Tuomi 9.5. 2002 page: 37
”Old Theory””Old Theory”
• linear innovation model• heroic inventors and entrepreneurs• idea generation – invention – R&D – marketing – diffusion
• separation between basic and applied research• economic and entrepreneurial theory of innovation
• e.g. patents (limited monopoly) needed for new innovations to emerge• adoption based on individual preferences and choices• corporate R&D units as focus of innovation
• product-centric view• focus on functionality and product attributes• focus on technological artifacts
© I. Tuomi 9.5. 2002 page: 38
Elements of the New TheoryElements of the New Theory• meaningful products
• interpretative flexibility• social practices and communities as the foundation of meaning• identity construction using artifacts• product adoption as meaning creation
• focus on down-stream resources and innovation capability• unintended dominant uses• adoption constrained by social learning and change capability in downstream user
communities• multifocal innovation model
• user-centric instead of product-centric• ”all innovation is social innovation”
• social dimension• control, coordination, power, and division of labor
• corporate R&D• integration with social innovation processes• management beyond organizational boundaries• demand articulation and platform innovations• flexible products
© I. Tuomi 9.5. 2002 page: 39
Linux DevelopersLinux Developersin the First Credits Filein the First Credits File
00.10.20.30.40.50.60.70.80.9
1nu
mbe
r of d
evel
oper
spe
r mill
ion
inha
bita
nts
Australi
aBelg
iumCan
ada
Denmark
Finland
France
German
yNeth
erlands
SpainSwed
en UK
USA
13-Mar-94
I. Tuomi. Internet, innovation, and open source: actors in the network. First Monday 6 (1), 2001.
© I. Tuomi 9.5. 2002 page: 40
Licenses Make Open Source PossibleLicenses Make Open Source Possible
GNU
BSD
ArtisticMIT
open source
freeware
shareware
not defined
PD
restricted
FRSGNUBSDArtisticMITopen sourcefreewaresharewarePDrestrictednot defined
Linux Software Mapdatabase at ibiblio.org
Tuomi, I. (2002): Networks of Innovation: Change andMeaning in the Age of the Internet.
© I. Tuomi 9.5. 2002 page: 41
Copyrights in the Copyrights in the Linux Software MapLinux Software MapRepositoryRepository
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
Dec-92 Dec-93 Dec-94 Dec-95 Dec-96 Dec-97 Dec-98 Dec-99 Dec-00 Dec-01
Not defined
ProprietaryFree distribution, no source
Open with restrictions\no modification
Open with restrictions\non-commercial
Open with restrictions\otherShareware
Public Domain
Freeware without explicit license
OS copyrightOS copyleft
Tuomi, I. (2002): Networks of Innovation: Change andMeaning in the Age of the Internet.
© I. Tuomi 9.5. 2002 page: 42
The Open Source ModelThe Open Source Model• Key factors driving rapid growth:
• Multi-focal user-centric innovation modelInnovation occurs where it makes a differenceLack of centralized decision-making makes knowledge, innovation, and
implementation local• Evolution instead of implementation of predetermined design• Successful “universal” interfaces facilitate recombination of resources
• Boundary conditions:• Tight control of core is needed to enable continuous growth in the
periphery• Standard interfaces (technical and procedural) necessary to reduce
complexity and to translate sub-networks into resources• Requires constraints that substitute for design (e.g. a given processor
architecture)
I. Tuomi. Internet, innovation, and open source: actors in the network. First Monday 6 (1), 2001.
© I. Tuomi 9.5. 2002 page: 43
The Final ChallengeThe Final Challenge• How to develop innovation policy when:
• Innovators almost always miss the actual dominant uses of newtechnologies
• When radical new technologies emerge they are always ill-defined,unclear, and worse than existing technologies
• The decisions on resource allocation heavily over-emphasizes the winnersof the previous generation
• ICT seems to accelerate regional change faster than we have realized• Policy development occurs in slower time-scales than technology
architectures evolve• National innovators can only operate successfully if they are parts of
global networks• Statistics are based on national accounting which gives an increasingly
misleading picture of innovation activity