Externality effects of information and communication technologies across country Borders

As information and communications technology (ICT) involves both traditional capital and knowledge capital, potential spillovers through various mechanisms can occur. We posit that ICT capital may boost productivity growth, not only in the home country, but also in other countries. In this paper, we provide empirical evidence of such spillovers using panel data on 37 countries from 1996 to 2004. Our results support the existence of ICT spillovers across country borders. Furthermore, we find that developing countries could reap more benefits from ICT spillovers than developed countries. This is particularly important for policy decisions regarding national trade liberalization and economic integration. Developing economies that are more open to foreign trade may have an economic advantage and may develop knowledge-intensive activities, which will lead to economic development in the long run.

Externalities of openness in innovation

Discussion of open innovation has typically stressed the benefits to the individual enterprise from boundary-spanning linkages and improved internal knowledge sharing. In this paper we explore the potential for wider benefits from openness in innovation and argue that openness may itself generate positive externalities by enabling improved knowledge diffusion. The potential for these (positive) externalities suggests a divergence between the private and social returns to openness and the potential for a sub-optimal level of openness where this is determined purely by firms' private returns. Our analysis is based on Irish plant-level panel data from manufacturing industry over the period 1994-2008. Based on instrumental variables regression models our results suggest that externalities of openness in innovation are significant and that they are positively associated with firms' innovation performance. We find that these externality effects are unlikely to work through their effect on the spread of open innovation practices. Instead, they appear to positively influence innovation outputs by either increasing knowledge diffusion or strengthening competition. Our evidence on the significance of externalities from openness in innovation provides a rationale for public policy aimed at promoting open innovation practices among firms. © 2013 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Counting on use of technology to enhance learning

In global policy documents, the language of Technology-Enhanced Learning (TEL) now firmly structures a perception of educational technology which ‘subsumes’ terms like Networked Learning and e-Learning. Embedded in these three words though is a deterministic, economic assumption that technology has now enhanced learning, and will continue to do so. In a market-driven, capitalist society this is a ‘trouble free’, economically focused discourse which suggests there is no need for further debate about what the use of technology achieves in learning. Yet this raises a problem too: if technology achieves goals for human beings, then in education we are now simply counting on ‘use of technology’ to enhance learning. This closes the door on a necessary and ongoing critical pedagogical conversation that reminds us it is people that design learning, not technology. Furthermore, such discourse provides a vehicle for those with either strong hierarchical, or neoliberal agendas to make simplified claims politically, in the name of technology. This chapter is a reflection on our use of language in the educational technology community through a corpus-based Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA). In analytical examples that are ‘loaded’ with economic expectation, we can notice how the policy discourse of TEL narrows conversational space for learning so that people may struggle to recognise their own subjective being in this language. Through the lens of Lieras’s externality, desubjectivisation and closure (Lieras, 1996) we might examine possible effects of this discourse and seek a more emancipatory approach. A return to discussing Networked Learning is suggested, as a first step towards a more multi-directional conversation than TEL, that acknowledges the interrelatedness of technology, language and learning in people’s practice. Secondly, a reconsideration of how we write policy for educational technology is recommended, with a critical focus on how people learn, rather than on what technology is assumed to enhance.