APÉNDICE D. CÉDULAS DE INTERNACIONALIZACIÓN

With the purpose of encouraging and the development of high technology firms and technological innovation in their localities, technology parks11 _{and other ‘modern’ industrial units have been} implemented in the last few decades in places with technological ambitions (Alaedini and Marcotulio, 2002), especially in South-East Asia. The most salient examples of this investment- oriented industrialisation strategy are Malaysia’s Multimedia Super Corridor, the Dubai Internet City and Singapore’s Intelligent Island. In other cases these technology parks have been the fruit of public and private efforts as in Hong Kong’s Cyberport or India’s software technology parks.12

Although there are not such huge projects in Latin American, the experience of Brazil in technology parks is remarkable. Brazil accounted for more than 150 start-up ‘incubators’13 _and 40 technology parks in 2003 (Cobos, 2003). Campinas, in São Paulo, is the largest and more significant technology park in Latin America (see Box 5.2).

Policies to encourage technology parks in other countries than Brazil have been much more recent, weak, or in some cases simply do not exist. Mexico, the tenth world economy, began to create business incubators in 1990. There were fifteen incubators in 1999, and there are two technology parks in Morelos (created in 1988) and Guadalajara, Mexico’s Silicon Valley, (in 1997) linked to the respective universities (IADB, 2001). The Sartenejas Technology Park linked to the Simon Bolivar University in the hills of Caracas and the Mérida Technological Park, linked to the University of The Andes are the examples in Venezuela. In Argentina and Chile technology parks are a recent policy. There are nine parks and eleven incubators in Argentina, according to the Argentinean Association of Technology Parks. Seven of them are linked to the National Institute of Agronomic Technology, one to the Litoral National University and the Constituyentes Technological Pole in Buenos Aires, linked to the San Martin National University. The only technology park in Chile is the Valparaiso IT-port. In all these countries (Brazil, Argentina, Chile, Mexico and Venezuela) there are active policies to promote technological parks and, in many cases, associations promoting high-technology firms.

Innovation clusters also appear in a given location around firms that belong to the same or to related lines of business. According to the definition of the UNCTAD, innovation clusters are clusters of knowledge intensive activities that are able to undertake technology innovations, design new products and processes and bring them to the market14 _{(IADB, 2001). The most} known world example is Silicon Valley. The existence of a cluster in a region is an important indication of its economic dynamism. Since the most complex, innovative and advanced activities require long-term relationships, closeness and agglomeration, high-technology manufacturing firms and knowledge-intensive industries are highly clustered. (Storper and Leamer, 2001).

Box 5.2. Technology parks in Brazil

Brazil turned into a true industrial power, the eighth in the world, in the 1970s. Its large-scale and diversified industry is the result of an economic history which relied heavily on the substitution of imports, and more recently internationalisation of production processes. Brazil launched its Technological Innovation Programme in 1982 as the first initiative to link academy and industry. Universities and research centres initially created thirteen nodes. In 1984 a programme for the implementation of Technology Parks was created. In 1987 there were sixteen of them in Brazil, and the ANPROTEC (National Association of Institutions Promoting High Technology Firms) was established. But, the economic crisis triggered a period of low activity between 1987 and 1992.

Since 1993 a new impulse was observed, linked with increasing links between academia, commercial and industrial associations and (public) development banks. In 1996 there were sixty start-up incubators and seven technology parks. With the leadership of ANPROTEC and the clear support of SEBRAE (Brazilian Service of Support to SMEs) there have been great advances in this area in the latest years, although a drawback is observed in the concentration of innovation firms in the South and South West regions of the country. At present, the most important technology parks in Brazil are Campina Grande, Campinas, Curitiba, Florianópolis, Rio de Janeiro, Santa Rita de Sapucaí, São José dos Campos and São Carlos.

Campinas is the most consolidated park, with innovation clusters in micro-electronics, telecommunications, computer science and informatics. It counts with the State University of Campinas (UNICAMP), the Pontifical Catholic University (PUC-CAMP), the Research and Development Centre (CPqD/TELEBRAS), the Technological Centre of Informatics (CTI), the Síncrotron National Light Laboratory (LNLS), the Agronomic Institute of Campinas (IAC), the Centre of Technical Integrated Assistance (CATI), the Institute of Technology of Food (ITAL), the Biologic Institute, the Brazilian Company of Agronomic Research (EMBRAPA), the Technology Development Company (CODETEC) and the Research and Technology Foundation André Tosello. It also counts with excellent ICT infrastructure and fast accessibility to São Paulo airports and other main highways. It is located at one hour from São Paulo.

(Source: Theis, 2002 and Firmino, 2000).

An inventory of (high technology) innovation clusters over the region in 2000 pointed to 33 clusters, with a great concentration in Brazil, which had two thirds of the total number (22 clusters). There were also six clusters in Mexico, two in Argentina, one in Costa Rica, Uruguay and Cuba (IADB, 2001). The segments that they cover include microelectronics, telecommunications, computer science and informatics, software, automation engineering, biotechnology, electronics and aeronautics.

The outlook regarding research and development and technological innovation in Latin America indicates that there are great challenges and gaps in the knowledge base of the Latin American metropolises, as well as the region’s technological capabilities. The main problems refer to the limited knowledge flows, low innovation output and low synergy among universities, private sector and the government (IADB, 2001). This adverse situation endangers the economic performance

of the region. Latin America’s low productivity and capacities regarding technological innovation are not only making its future problematic, but they are also considered to be an important reason of the poor performance and the recurrence of crises of its economy since the 1980s. Furthermore, there are great intra-regional differences, which reflect the socio-economic conditions of the different countries. Geographical and locational conditions may also play a significant role. As Jeffrey Sachs (2000) explains, technology is absorbed easily when places are close to big world markets and/or located in important sea routes. It does not ‘flow’ easily to remote mountainous regions, or areas far from seaports. According to these criteria, in the Latin American region, Mexico, and the Mercosur countries are much better located than the Andean countries for technology transfer. Correspondingly, the geographical distribution of technological development in the region has two sides: the technological adopters: Argentina, Chile, the South and South-East of Brazil, Uruguay, Costa Rica and Mexico (except the South part); and the technological excluded: the rest (Sachs, 2000).

Looking at the global picture, not even ‘the technology adopters’ of the region are in a good position. Table 5.5 shows some important indicators of the state of the local production of knowledge and technology, showing the great differences that the largest technology producers have with Spain and the Netherlands in the 1997. A significant leap forward regarding science and technology is indispensable to become integrated in global flows of production, commerce and innovation.

Scientists &

engineers in R&D Per million inh. _{Technicians in R&D} Per million inh. Tertiary enrolm. science & techn. Last available year Graduates in science & techn. % of older than 24 years population _{PhDs in science &} techn. 1996-97 Per million inh. Scientific and _{technical articles Per million inh. 1995} Patents granted Per million inh.

Receipt

from licenses _{US$ per thousand}

inh. Expenditure in R&D In % of GDP In US$- PPC per inh. Argentina 660 147 0.641 1.5 11 75 8 0.5 0.38 45 Brazil 168 59 0.238 1.7 11 34 2 0.8 0.81 55 Chile 445 233 1.080 2.5 3 97 0 6.6 0.68 57 Mexico 214 74 0.528 2.7 4 32 1 0.4 0.33 27 Spain 1305 343 1.320 6.0 65 392 42 8.6 0.90 162 NL 2219 1358 0.595 6.0 98 1637 189 151.2 2.08 502

Table 5.5. Performance of four Latin American countries in the knowledge economy in 1997, in comparison with Spain and the Netherlands (Source: Moguillansky, 2003).

5.3. Networks of ICT production in the urban economy

Having analysed the situation of the Latin American urban economies regarding the most important criteria for the adoption of ICTs, the present section focuses on the production of ICTs by the same urban economies: the ICT sector. In general terms, the largest players in this sector are Brazil and Mexico. Brazil’s ICT sector growth has been very dynamic and now it is considered among the world ten largest markets with annual revenues of approximately of US$55 billion in services and products in 2001 (OECD, 2002). Mexico is another important world player, one of the largest ICT manufacturers among OECD countries.16