Catch-up strategies in the Indian auto components industry: domestic firms’ responses to market liberalization

Market liberalization in emerging-market economies and the entry of multinational firms spur significant changes to the industry/institutional environment faced by domestic firms. Prior studies have described how such changes tend to be disruptive to the relatively backward domestic firms, and negatively affect their performance and survival prospects. In this paper, we study how domestic supplier firms may adapt and continue to perform, as market liberalization progresses, through catch-up strategies aimed at integrating with the industry's global value chain. Drawing on internalization theory and the literatures on upgrading and catch-up processes, learning and relational networks, we hypothesize that, for continued performance, domestic supplier firms need to adapt their strategies from catching up initially through technology licensing/collaborations and joint ventures with multinational enterprises (MNEs) to also developing strong customer relationships with downstream firms (especially MNEs). Further, we propose that successful catch-up through these two strategies lays the foundation for a strategy of knowledge creation during the integration of domestic industry with the global value chain. Our analysis of data from the auto components industry in India during the period 1992–2002, that is, the decade since liberalization began in 1991, offers support for our hypotheses.

Goal sketching with activity diagrams

Goal orientation is acknowledged as an important paradigm in requirements engineering. The structure of a goal-responsibility model provides opportunities for appraising the intention of a development. Creating a suitable model under agile constraints (time, incompleteness and catching up after an initial burst of creativity) can be challenging. Here we propose a marriage of UML activity diagrams with goal sketching in order to facilitate the production of goal responsibility models under these constraints.

Adapting to new challenges: extension theory and practice for the 21st century

Twenty first century challenges facing agriculture include climate change, threats to food security for a growing population and downward economic pressures on rural livelihoods. Addressing these challenges will require innovation in extension theory, policy and education, at a time when the dominance of the state in the provision of knowledge and information services to farmers and rural entrepreneurs continues to decline. This paper suggests that extension theory is catching up with and helping us to understand innovative extension practice, and therefore provides a platform for improving rural development policies and strategies. Innovation is now less likely to be spoken of as something to be passed on to farmers, than as a continuing process of creativity and adaptation that can be nurtured and sustained. Innovation systems and innovation platforms are concepts that recognise the multiple factors that lead to farmers’ developing, adapting and applying new ideas and the importance of linking all actors in the value chain to ensure producers can access appropriate information and advice for decision making at all stages in the production process. Concepts of social learning, group development and solidarity, social capital, collective action and empowerment all help to explain and therefore to apply more effectively group extension approaches in building confidence and sustaining innovation. A challenge facing educators is to ensure the curricula for aspiring extension professionals in our higher education institutions are regularly reviewed and keep up with current and future developments in theory, policy and practice.

A novel approach to national technological accumulation and absorptive capacity: aggregating Cohen and Levinthal

The paper develops a more precise specification and understanding of the process of national-level knowledge accumulation and absorptive capabilities by applying the reasoning and evidence from the firm-level analysis pioneered by Cohen and Levinthal (1989, 1990). In doing so, we acknowledge that significant cross-border effects due to the role of both inward and outward FDI exist and that assimilation of foreign knowledge is not only confined to catching-up economies but is also carried out by countries at the frontier-sharing phase. We postulate a non-linear relationship between national absorptive capacity and the technological gap, due to the effects of the cumulative nature of the learning process and the increase in complexity of external knowledge as the country approaches the technological frontier. We argue that national absorptive capacity and the accumulation of knowledge stock are simultaneously determined. This implies that different phases of technological development require different strategies. During the catching-up phase, knowledge accumulation occurs predominately through the absorption of trade and/or inward FDI-related R&D spillovers. At the pre-frontier-sharing phase onwards, increases in the knowledge base occur largely through independent knowledge creation and actively accessing foreign-located technological spillovers, inter alia through outward FDI-related R&D, joint ventures and strategic alliances.