Journal of Technology Innovation (기술혁신연구)

Korea Society for Innovation Managemetn & Economics (기술경영경제학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Several Concepts of Industrial Innovation Policy and their Weights in Diverse Countries: Policy Implications for Korea

산업혁신정책의 주요 담론들과 그 정책목표의 국제 비교: 한국에의 시사점

  • 이근 (서울대학교 경제학부 ) ;
  • 김준엽 (서울대학교 경제학부 )
  • Received : 2023.01.01
  • Accepted : 2023.05.20
  • Published : 2023.05.31
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

This study first reviews the evolving literature on industrial innovation policy and thereby identifies three main goals of such policy. The first goal is traditional industrial policy aiming growth of existing and future industries, the second goal is sustainable development and quality of life, and third goal encompasses the issues related to supply chain and economic security. Then, the paper evaluates industrial innovation policy goals of the five economies (United States, China, Germany, Japan, and Taiwan) in terms of the relative weights given to each goal by each economy, and derives implications for Korea. The United States emphasizes economic security and supply chain stability amid its rivalry with China. In contrast, China focuses more on traditional industrial policies but has recently begun to consider supply chain and economic security. Germany and Japan tend to give similar weights to each of the three goals. Taiwan follows this trend with a new and additional emphasis on economic security given the rising threats from China. For Korea, economic security may not be the top priority, unlike the two super-powers. Instead, it seems more appropriate for Korea to follow Germany or Japan to prioritize supply chain stability and technology sovereignty, and, at the same time, fostering future growth industries must be still an important goal. Further, the concept of economic security for Korea should include promotion of defense industry and food security.

본 연구는 최근 세계 주요국(미국, 중국, 독일, 일본, 대만)의 산업혁신정책의 목표를 3대 분야 6개 세부목표로 분류하여 평가한다. 3대 분야의 첫째는 '기존산업과 미래성장'이라는 전통적 산업정책 목표인데 이는 다시 '기존산업 경쟁력 강화'와 '미래 성장산업의 육성'이라는 두 세부 목표로 나뉜다. 둘째는 '환경과 삶의 질' 분야인데 이는 '국민의 삶의 질 개선'과 '환경과 지속가능성'으로 구분된다. 셋째는 '공급망과 경제안보'인데, 이는 '공급망 안정성 확보'와 '경제안보'로 세분된다. 미국은 미·중 패권경쟁 상황 속에서 상대적으로 공급망과 경제안보를 중시하는 반면, 중국은 전통적 산업정책을 추구하여 왔으나 최근 공급망과 경제안보도 고려하기 시작했다. 독일과 일본은 전통적 산업정책과 함께 환경과 삶의 질뿐만 아니라 기술주권 및 공급망 안정도 중시함에 따라 산업정책의 3대 분야를 골고루 중시한다고 볼 수 있다. 대만도 비슷하다고 볼 수 있으나, 최근 중국의 위협에 따라 경제안보를 중시하기 시작했다. 한국의 경우, 경제패권국인 미·중과 달리 '경제안보'가 최우선 순위가 아닐 수 있다. 오히려 독일과 같이 국가 간 연대와 협력에 기반한 '공급망 안정성', '기술주권' 확보가 더 적절하여 보인다. 즉, 미국이나 독일 및 일본과의 기술격차를 줄이고 넘어서기 위한 '미래 성장산업과 기술의 육성'이 여전히 중요하다. 결론적으로 한국은 3대 분야에 대해서 비슷한 수준으로 가중치를 두어 기존산업과 미래산업을 중시하는 '전통적 산업정책'을 지속하면서, 일단 리스크 관리 차원에서 '공급망 안정성 확보'에 단기적으로 가중치를 둘 필요가 있다. 한국적 상황에서 안보란 방위산업 육성이나 식량안보가 더 적절하다.

Keywords

Acknowledgement

이 논문은 2021년도 서울대학교 융·복합 연구과제 지원사업의 지원을 받아 수행된 연구이다,

References

  1. 나영식 (2020), "제조용 IoT", 한국과학기술기획평가원, 「KISTEP 기술동향브리프」, 제2020-10호.
  2. 백서인.박동운.조용래.이다은.이선아.윤여진 (2021), "글로벌 기술패권 경쟁에 대응하는 주요국의 기술주권 확보 전략과 시사점", 과학기술정책연구원, 「STEPI Insight」, pp. 1-55.
  3. 송위진.성지은 (2019), "'임무지향적 혁신정책'의 관점에서 본 사회문제 해결형 연구개발 정책 - '제 2 차 과학기술기반 사회문제 해결 종합계획'사례 분석", 「기술혁신연구」, 제27권 제4호, pp. 85-110.
  4. 신동평.권용완.안소영.김진용.구본진.조길수.정선민.김성규 (2021), "성장동력 정책 체계 비교 연구", 한국과학기술기획평가원.
  5. 이효영 (2022), "경제안보의 개념과 최근 동향 평가", 국립외교원 외교안보연구소, 「주요국제문제분석」, pp. 1-41.
  6. 이희진 (2022), "글로벌 기술표준경쟁과 룰-메이커로의 도약", 「동아시아재단 정책논쟁」, 제183호.
  7. 장석인.정은미.이준.이자연 (2017), "글로벌 저성장시대 새로운 산업정책 방향과 과제 (New industrial policy in the era of secular stagnation) 제4차 산업혁명 대응을 중심으로", 산업연구원 연구보고서, 제2017-867호.
  8. 최계영 (2022), 차가운 평화의 시대: 우크라이나 전쟁 이후, 미중 기술패권, 인문공간. 
  9. Amsden, A. H. (1992), Asia's next giant: South Korea and late industrialization. Oxford University Press on Demand.
  10. Asheim, B., Grillitsch, M., and Trippl, M. (2017), "Smart specialization as an innovation-driven strategy for economic diversification: Examples from Scandinavian regions", In Advances in the theory and practice of smart specialization (pp. 73-97), Academic Press.
  11. Barca, F. (2009), Agenda for a reformed cohesion policy, Brussels: European Communities.
  12. Bonvillian, W. B. (2022), "Industrial Innovation Policy in the United States", Annals of Science and Technology Policy, 6(4), pp. 315-411. https://doi.org/10.1561/110.00000026
  13. Bonvillian, W. B. and Singer, P. L. (2018), Advanced Manufacturing: The New American Innovation Policies, MIT Press.
  14. Castillo, J. D., Paton, J. and Barroeta, B. (2014). "Territorial governance in the context of RIS3 Smart Specialisation Strategy", In 54th Congress of the European Regional Science Association.
  15. Cimoli, M., Dosi, G. and Stiglitz, J. E. (2009), The political economy of capabilities accumulation: The past and future of policies for industrial development, Oxford University Press.
  16. Criscuolo, C., Gonne, N., Kitazawa, K. and Lalanne, G. (2022), An industrial policy framework for OECD countries: Old debates, new perspectives, Paris: OECD Publishing.
  17. Deguchi, A., Hirai, C., Matsuoka, H., Nakano, T., Oshima, K., Tai, M., and Tani, S. (2020), "What is society 5.0", Society, 5, pp. 1-23.
  18. Foray, D. (2014), Smart specialisation: Opportunities and challenges for regional innovation policy. London and New York: Routledge.
  19. Holroyd, C. (2022), "Technological innovation and building a 'super smart'society: Japan's vision of society 5.0", Journal of Asian Public Policy, 15(1), pp. 18-31. https://doi.org/10.1080/17516234.2020.1749340
  20. Johnson, C. (1982), MITI and the Japanese miracle: the growth of industrial policy, 1925-1975. Stanford University Press.
  21. Kastelli, I., Mamica, L., and Lee, K. (2023), "New Perspectives and Issues in Industrial Policy for Sustainable Development: From Developmental and Entrepreneurial to Environmental State", Review of Evolutionary Political Economy (forthcoming).
  22. Lee, K. (2013), "Capability failure and industrial policy to move beyond the middle-income trap: from trade-based to technology-based specialization." in Stiglitz, E. J. and Lin, J. (eds), The industrial policy revolution I: The role of government beyond ideology pp. 244-272.
  23. Lee, K. (2020), "Diverse Tools of Industrial Policy in Korea: A Schumpeterian and Capability-based View on the Korean Experience", in Oqubay, A., Cramer, C., Chang, H., and Kozul-Wright, R. (eds), The Oxford Handbook of Industrial Policy, Oxford University Press.
  24. March, C., and Schieferdecker, I. (2021), "Technological sovereignty as ability, not autarky", CESifo Working Paper, No. 9139.
  25. Mazzucato, M. (2011), "The entrepreneurial state", Soundings, 49, pp. 131-142. https://doi.org/10.3898/136266211798411183
  26. Mazzucato, M. (2018a), "Mission-oriented innovation policies: challenges and opportunities", Industrial and Corporate Change, 27(5), pp. 803-815. https://doi.org/10.1093/icc/dty034
  27. Mazzucato, M. (2018b), Mission-oriented research & innovation in the European Union, European Commission.
  28. Nelson, R. R. and Langlois, R. N. (1983), "Industrial innovation policy: lessons from american history", Science, 219, pp. 814-818. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.219.4586.814
  29. Park, S. (2022), "Technology Sovereignty and the Mission-Oriented Policy in Korea: Lession from the Korea-Japan Trade Dispute", International Forum on Critical Technologies and Technology Sovereignty (2022.10.5.).
  30. Radosevic, S., Curaj, A., Gheorghiu, R., Andreescu, L. and Wade, I. (2017), Advances in the theory and practice of smart specialization, Amsterdam: Academic Press.
  31. Soete, L. (2007), "From industrial to innovation policy", Journal of industry, competition and trade, 7, pp. 273-284. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10842-007-0019-5
  32. Song, W. and Seong, J. (2019), "Mission-oriented Innovation Policy and Korea's Social Problem Solving Innovation Policy: a Case Study", Journal of Technology Innovation, 27(4), pp. 85-110. https://doi.org/10.14386/SIME.2019.27.4.85
  33. Stiglitz, E. J. and Lin, J. (eds) (2013), The Industrial Policy Revolution I, Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
  34. Thurbon, E. (2014), "The resurgence of the developmental state: a conceptual defence", Critique internationale, 63(2), pp. 59-75. https://doi.org/10.3917/crii.063.0059
  35. World Bank (1993), The East Asian Miracle: Economic Growth and Public Policy, New York: Oxford University Press. 
  36. US Congress (2021), H.R.3684 - 117th Congress : Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, (2021.11.15.).
  37. US Congress (2022a), H.R.5376 - 117th Congress : Inflation Reduction Act of 2022, (2022.8.16.).
  38. US Congress (2022b), H.R.4346 - 117th Congress : Chips and Science Act, (2022.8.9).
  39. White House (2021), Executive order on America's supply chains, Executive Order, (2021.2.24.).
  40. White House (2022a), Remarks by President Biden At Signing of H.R. 5376, The Inflation Reduction Act of 2022, (2022.8.16.).
  41. White House (2022b), The Biden-Harris Plan to Revitalize American Manufacturing and Secure Critical Supply Chains in 2022, (2022.2.24.). 
  42. BMBF. (2022). Federal Report on Research and Innovation.
  43. BMWK. (2022). Stucture of the Platform Innovation 4.0.
  44. Edler, J. and Fagerberg, J. (2017), "Innovation policy: what, why, and how", Oxford Review of Economic Policy, 33(1), pp. 2-23. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxrep/grx001
  45. Edler, J., Blind, K., Frietsch, R., Kimpeler, S., Kroll, H., Lerch, C., Reiss, T., Roth, F., Schubert, T., Schuler, J. and Walz, R. (2020), "Technology sovereignty: From demand to concept [Technologiesouveranitat: Von der Forderung zum Konzept]", Perspectives - Policy Briefs, 02/2020, Fraunhofer Institute for Systems and Innovation Research (ISI).
  46. Edler, J., Blind, K., Kroll, H. and Schubert, T. (2021), "Technology sovereignty as an emerging frame for innovation policy: Defining rationales, ends and means", Fraunhofer ISI Discussion Papers-Innovation Systems and Policy Analysis, No. 70. 
  47. 国家制造强国建设战略咨询委员会 (2015), 《中国制造2025》 重点领域技术路线.
  48. 国家制造强国建设战略咨询委员会 (2016), 中国制造 2025 蓝皮书 (2016), 电子工业出版社.
  49. 国家制造强国建设战略咨询委员会 (2017), 中国制造 2025 蓝皮书 (2017), 电子工业出版社.
  50. 国家制造强国建设战略咨询委员会 (2018), 中国制造 2025 蓝皮书 (2018), 电子工业出版社.
  51. 国务院 (2021), 中华人民共和国国民经济和社会发展第十四个五年规划和2035年远景目标纲要.
  52. 中国科学技术协会 (2021), 现代科技馆体系发展十四五规划(2021-2025年). 
  53. 內閣官房 (2021a). 成長戦略実行計画.
  54. 內閣官房 (2021b). 成長戦略フォローアップ.
  55. 内閣府 (2022) 経済施策を一体的に講ずることによる安全保障の確保の推進に関する法律 (経済安全保障推進法).
  56. 未来投資会議( 2017), 未来投資戦略 2017 Society5.0の実現に向けた改革.
  57. 産業競争力会議 (2013), 日本再興戦略 Japan is Back.
  58. 総合科学技術・イノベーション会議 (2021), 科学技術・イノベーション基本計画(案). 
  59. 經濟部工業局 (2023) 立法院三讀通過產創條例第10條之2及第72條修正案.
  60. 國家發展委員會 (2021). 六大核心戰略產業推動方案.
  61. 行政院 (2021a). 推動 「6大核心戰略產業」-讓臺灣成為未來全球經濟的關鍵力量. 新聞傳播處.
  62. 行政院 (2021b). DIGI+ program to accelerate 'five plus two' industries, create smart nation. Department of Information Services.