Chapter-II: Review of Literature
Chapter-II: Review of Literature
Chapter-II: Review of Literature
Chapter-II
Review of Literature
2.1: Introduction
This chapter deals with the review of existing literature on the knowledge
economy with respect to developed as well as developing country context. A large
number of literatures in Indian context have also been
Based on this review we have been able to identify some of the important aspects of
the knowledge economy vital for the growth and expansion of different sectors such
as agriculture, industry and the service sectors of the Indian economy. The review of
literature has been done in section 2.2.
16
and practice become embedded in the organization. Thus the CKOs have two
particular leadership qualities they are the entrepreneurs and the consultants.
Regarding the functions of the CKOs the authors add: . they have to
create awareness of knowledge management, faster language and develop frameworks
to help managers understand what it is, what is new and what can be done to sell the
promise and to create support and demand for knowledge management initiatives.
Etienne Wenger (2000) in his paper Communities of Practice: The Structure
of Knowledge Stewarding [knowledge Horizon (2000), Edited by Charles Despress
and Daniele Chauvel, Butter Worth Heine Mana] discusses that communities of price
have been around for a long time. These are in fact the first forms of knowledge
organization. Communities of practice are found everywhere at work, at school, at
home, at gatherings it. This consists of three elements it has a sense of joint enterprise.
This brings members together. It works as a community which creates a relationship
of mutual engagement among the members. In this system learning takes place
through joint activities with a concrete relationship of trust and mutual understanding.
This produces the shared repertoire of communal rezones among the members
through their mutual engagement. This includes routines, lessons learned, semibilities,
artifacts, standards, tools, stories, vocabulary, styles, and so on. The communities of
practice are also found with the businesses, across business units across institutional
boundaries, and across multiple organizations.
Theories of the firm are concerned primarily with predicting the behaviour of
firms in external markets. Neoclassical theory of the firm uses, in most cases, partial
equilibrium analysis to predict firms purchase decisions in input markets and supply
decisions in output markets. Robert M.Grant(1996) in his paper explores the
coordination mechanisms through which firms integrate the specialist knowledge of
their members. Here knowledge is viewed as residing within the individual and the
primary role of the organisation is knowledge application rather than knowledge
creation. The author assumes that the critical input in production and primary source
of value is knowledge. An interesting feature of the knowledge-based approach, as the
paper suggests, is that it offers a theoretical basis for understanding a number of
recent organizational innovations and trends which include the renovation of
traditional organizational structures through delaying and empowerment and the
development of new organizational forms including horizontal and team-based
17
structures and inter-firm alliances. The knowledge-based approach also calls into
question other contemporary trends in corporate management. The primary driving
force behind corporate restructuring and strategic change has been the quest for
shareholder value maximization and enhanced shareholder power. The paper states
that if primary resource of the firm is knowledge if knowledge, is owned by the
employees, if more of this knowledge can be exercised by the individuals who own
this, then the theoretical foundations of the shareholder value approach are
challenged. The paper gives emphasis on the application of knowledge and the role of
individual.
Surendra Gera (1998) in his paper analyses industrial structure in Canada over
20 years from 1971 to 1991.In analyzing the role of knowledge in enhancing the level
of output in the Canadian economy the author relies on Statistics Canadas national
input/output data for three sub-periods: 1971-1981, 1981-86 and 1986-1991.The study
basically addresses three questions: Is the Canadian industry becoming more
innovative? Is the knowledge technology and skills intensity of industrial output
increasing? What are the key factors driving this structural change-domestic final
demand, exports, imports, and/or changes in production techniques? The study
analyses structural change at the sectoral and industrial levels. Industries have been
identified as high-growth and low-growth industries. Canadian changing
industrial structure has been analysed under three headings: change at the aggregate
level, change at individual industry level, and the pace of structural change. Analysis
at the aggregate level shows that there has been a dramatic decline in the
manufacturing sector and a rise in the service sector. It also shows that primary
industries and construction sectors have not shown any major changes in the output
share. Analysis at the individual industry level shows that of the 13 leading growth
industries in 1986-91 eight appear among those which led in the two preceding sub
periods. Eight industries such as computers and office equipments, communication
equipment and semiconductors, communication services, real estate and business
services; community, social, and personal services, pharmaceuticals; Electricity, gas,
and water; and finance and insurance are Canadas growth engines.
The
industries
in
decline
are
textiles,
leather;food,beverages,andtobacco;wood,woodproducts,
clothing,
and
footwear,and
furniture;
electrical
equipment and appliances; iron and steel; other transportation equipment; other
18
The knowledge economy can transform the roles between all parties in the
economy. All economic agents can be beneficial from the effect of knowledge
economy. Manorama Tripathis paper(2006) gives an exposition of current
developments in the information and communication technology (ICT) sector in India
and their implications in transforming
specifically analyses the ICT infrastructure, policies, present states within the
framework of India Vision 2020.It also describes Indias rank in global IT
infrastructure , digital opportunity Task Force of G8 (Dot Force) World Summit on
the Information Society(WSIS) Geneva 2003 and Tunis 2005.The paper dwells upon
the challenges which must be overcome
of the country.
Technology and knowledge are the key factors of production with increased
mobility of information and the global work force, knowledge and expertise can be
transported instantaneously around the world, and any advantage gained by a firm
can be reduced or eliminated by competitive advantage within a short time span. The
only thing that a country can enjoy is its comparative advantage of knowledge
economy. Carl Dahlman and Anuja Utz (2005) in their paper have modified the
definition of knowledge economy and have described that it would be appropriate to
use the concept more broadly to cover how any economy uses the new and existing
knowledge to improve the productivity in different sectors of the economy such as
agriculture, industry and service. This would ultimately increase overall well-being of
the country .They predict that India can increase its output at a maximum level if
labourers can be shifted from low productivity and subsistence activities in
agriculture, informal industry, and informal service activities to more productive
modern sectors and knowledge based activities. This effort can be able to reduce
poverty and touch every member of society. In their paper they have indicated that
India has a number of favourable points to become a leader in knowledge creation and
use. The paper states India has a critical mass of skilled, English speaking knowledge
workers, especially in science and technology. Not only this India has a well
functioning democracy and has a huge domestic market. It has macroeconomic
stability, dynamic private sector, institutions of free market economy, a well
developed financial sector and a broad and diversified science and technology
infrastructure. The paper gives stress on strong basic education system and
improvement of tertiary education. It states that tertiary education is critical for the
21
and society will be true and binding knowledge. The author, in his paper, further
asserts that it is time to grow into a full adult maturity and to use this as the only
standard by which we will judge our knowing, believing and behaving.
The changing dimensions of the Indian economy in the light of the growth of
knowledge based society has been portrayed in the writing of Rajesh Kumar Jhamb
and Sanjay Kaushik(2008).
decreasing in transport costs and the rate of decrease should be faster for firms using
technically complex production technologies. The authors have empirically tested the
hypothesis and found that when technologies are relatively complex, affiliates have
less opportunity to substitute for imports from their parent with local production. Also
it is found that both the extensive and intensive margins of affiliate activity contract as
transport costs rise, and this is true for firms with relatively complex production
technologies.
Vinod Kumar, Harsha Sinvhal and Vinay K. Nangia (2009) study the impact
of some thirteen areas in shaping a knowledge economy. They, in fact, elaborately
analysed a proposal / project titled National Competitiveness in the Knowledge
Economy prepared and submitted by Indian Institute of Technology Roorkee to the
Department of Information Technology of the Ministry of Communications and
Information Technology in 2006. The key areas highlighted in the paper are
demography, socio-economic scenario, IT-based and non-IT based technology,
environment, natural resources renewable and non-renewable, energy resources
renewable and non- renewable water management, national, regional and global
inequalities, health, military, geo-political realities, agriculture and global system. It is
stressed that India is going to be country of young people while the so-called
developed nations may have a large size of population who are in relatively older
group. In their paper a set of questions were raised regarding national, regional and
global inequalities. The questions are as follows. What factors will decide the
national, regional and global inequalities, and evolve strategies to bridge the gaps?
Will knowledge economy widen the divide or bridge it? How can knowledge
economy deal with the issue related to equal rights and opportunities, irrespective of
colour, race and gender? It is stated that with better technology and knowledge of
modern techniques, in developing countries also there may be a major shift of
population from agriculture to other sectors of economy. It is also stated that the
effect of knowledge economy on agricultural sector may ensure a better life for the
majority of Indian population.
K. Narayanan and Savita Bhat (2009) in their paper have analysed the
structure and behaviour of the IT fibers in India. The pattern of growth for the three
segments of IT industry i.e. computer hardware, software and IT-enabled services has
been attempted in this paper. An overview of IT industry in India has been analysed in
24
which the details of the initiation of IT industry in India during 1960s and 1970s and
the role India can play in this sector have elaborately been provided. By 1980s India
was capable of exporting software and computer peripherals. Also India permitted
import of mainframes and super computers for the purpose of modernizing the Indian
IT industry. The paper highlights the major policy issues India Government took
during 1960s and 1970s, 1990s and during 200-2006 for the growth of Indian IT
sector and its consequent effect on the growth of income and the growth of the gross
domestic product (GDP). This sector alone had an impact of over 35 percent to the
total exports. An empirical analysis of the sample data from the Indian IT industry has
been done wherein the growth, profits and technological behaviour of IT firms have
critically been described.
Arindam Banik and Pradip K. Bhaumiks paper Indias Transition to
knowledge Economy: Variation Across States (2009) makes a comparison between
human and economic capital in developing country perspective. They have shown in
this paper the interdependence of economic and human capital. It is found that the
productivity of economic capital depends on the intensity of human capital and viceversa based on data published by the CMIE, Economic Survey data 2005 2006
published by the Government of India and the data published by Indiastant.com Only
the data of 2003-2004 were considered to especially explain the time dimension of the
transition of Indian economy into knowledge economy. The findings reveal that the
rise of knowledge economy is very important aspect for the overall growth of Indian
economy in the 21 st century.
Siddharth Mahajan, Ashoka Chanda and Mainak Sarkar in their paper An
Approach to Developing Knowledge Economy Indicators for Individual States
(2009) have developed a knowledge economy methodology for the states of India
with a discussion on knowledge assessment methodology framework developed by
the World Bank.
The knowledge assessment methodology (KAM) developed by the World
Bank is based on four pillars, namely education and training, innovation and
technological advancement information infrastructure and economic and institutional
regime. The variables related to first pillar (i.e. education and training) are adult
literacy rate, secondary enrolment & tertiary enrolment. Innovation and technological
advancement include researchers in R & D (per million population), patent
25
applications granted by the USPTO (per million population). The third pillar i.e.
information infrastructure includes telephones per 1,000 persons, computers per 1,000
persons and internet users per 1,000 persons. Economic and institutional regime
comprises tariff and non-tariff barriers, regulatory quality and rule of law. The authors
have measured the performance of a particular state over time with the help of
knowledge economy indicators (KEI). KEI is calculated by taking the average of the
normalized scores on the four pillars of the knowledge economy for each state. A
state KEI between 0.9 and 1.0, the authors estimated, implies that the state is in the
top 10 percentile amongst the states in moving towards a knowledge economy. A state
KEI between 0.2 and 0.3 indicates that a state is in the bottom 30 percentile but above
the bottom 20 percentile in moving towards a knowledge economy.
The comparison of a states KEI in a reference year (for example, 2000) with
its KEI in the current year (May, 2013) can be seen in fig.-2.1 shown below.
Fig-2.1:
1.0
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.7
0.8
1.0
In figures-2.1, the X axis indicates state KEI in the base year and the Y axis
the state KEI in the current year. The solid line bisecting the figure in the line y = x,
that is the state KEI in the current period is the same as the KEI in the base period. A
point to the left of the solid line in the figure indicates that the state has improved its
relative performance i.e. the state KEI in the current period is higher than the state
KEI in the base period. Similarly, a point to the right of the base line indicates that the
state KEI in the current period is lower than the state KEI in the base period.
26
The authors also have tried to show a relationship between annual economic
growth and knowledge economy indicators in the country level. Himanshu Joshi,
Vidhu Shekhar Jha and Siddharth Mahajan (2009) in their paper have analysed that
knowledge and learning are the fundamental factors for achieving business
excellence. For this, the authors consider, it is necessary to establish and sharing. In
their paper the authors have established a relationship between knowledge
management and learning organization. It is a great challenge before any organization
to properly manage its intellectual capital. In any business enterprise today knowledge
has become power and learning rapidly has become a pre-eminent strategy for
success. Obviously, knowledge is becoming more important to organization than
financial resources, market positions, technology and other tangible assets. The
authors have adapted the model of learning organization and business excellence from
causal model of Eskildsen et al. (1999). This model is shown below in fig.2.2.
Fig 2.2: Model of Learning Oganisation and Business Excellence
Cognitive
Processes
Knowledge
Management
Support
Processes
The
learning
The creation
organisation
Strategies and
Techniques
Business
Excellence
Enables
Results
Communication
and Evaluation
Source: Knowledge Economy, 2009, page, 76. The Indian Challenge, Sage Publications.
27
Organizational Culture
Design
People
Action
KM
Process
Technology
Capture, Encode &
Distribute
knowledge
Implement
L
Assess
Observe
Improved processes
Reduced Variability
TQM
continuous
Improvement
28
countries. It is also hoped that each individual knowledge economy is well developed
based on its distinct characteristics.
For economic development of a country the role of knowledge is paramount.
Knowledge plays an extremely important role in the three pillars of development, i.e.,
economic development, environment development and socio-cultural development
and it is the innovation and competitiveness that are vital for knowledge economy.
Rajeeva Ratna Shahs paper entitled Innovation in Knowledge Economy explains
elaborately the key drivers of innovation, viz, technology, global competitiveness
human resource, role of public and private sectors, public private partnership etc. In
a knowledge society, the author states, knowledge benefits the common man. Due to
innovation and the consequent growth of the ICT it is now possible to have a
complete list of all the villages and the names and addresses of all the villagers in
India. Naturally, the implementation of rural development programmes such as
MGNREGA can easily be monitored, although data capture is still a problem.
A.K. Sengupta in his paper Intellectual Property Rights in Knowledge
Management (2009) has described some issues concerning the interplay of
intellectual property rights (IPR) in the knowledge management processes, in the
industry and traditional knowledge sectors in Indian context. A detailed discussion
has been made on the agreement on Trade- Related Aspects of Intellectual Property
Rights (TRIPS) in which eight categories of intellectual property have been defined.
These are patents, copyrights, trademarks and service marks, design registration,
layout designs for integrated circuits, trade secrets and undisclosed information,
geographical indications and new plant varieties.
An elaborate analysis has been made to patents throughout the paper. It is said
that an effective intellectual property rights system can speed up the process of
identification, development, dissemination and undertake of innovations through the
expansion and development of knowledge economy in India.
Arundhati Chattopadhyay, G.S. Krishnan and U.S. Singh sponsored
mechanisms, such as, 48, Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), South
Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC) and Organisation for
Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) establish international networks in
the economic field.
29
businesses,
cultural and behavioural factors. Surinder Batra in his paper titled Promoting the use
of Knowledge Management as a Tool for securing Larger Good of the Society
(2009)describes about the importance of knowledge for development and for this
purpose he refers two reports- World Development Report Knowledge for
Development, 1998-99(1999) and the OECD Report (1996). According to World
Development Report, 1998-1999, knowledge is assured to be critical because
knowledge depends on every economic activity. Since resources are scarce thus such
resources needs to use in such a manner so that ever-higher return can be possible.
This will be possible only through wider and judicious application of knowledge in
production and management activities. The author discusses some of the
characteristics of knowledge in the context of development identified by Ferreira and
Neto (2005). The first characteristic/ feature of knowledge is that knowledge leaks
from the innovators to a large spectrum of society. The second feature is: when
knowledge spreads in society it becomes a public good. Another characteristic is that
linguistic, social and cognitive barriers impede knowledge from being transferred to
whoever may need this knowledge. The author analyses the region of knowledge
society in the Indian context and in explaining this he refers to the report of the task
force India as Knowledge Superpower: Strategy for Transformation,2001
(Government of India). In this report a detailed discussion is made about our saints,
poets, philosophers, scientists, astronomers and mathematicians towards our new
thoughts, principles and practices. The report observes that India possesses a huge
potentiality to be a leading knowledge society. In this report it is stressed that Indian
knowledge society has three drivers, namely, societal transformation for a just and
equitable society, wealth generation and protection of traditional knowledge.
Mainak Sarkar and Siddharth Mahajan (2009) in their paper (chapter in an
edited book titled Knowledge Economy - The Indian Challenge, edited by Ashoka
Chandra and M.K. Khanijo, Sage 2009) raise the question whether the government
can improve its ability to provide services such as health, education, governance to its
citizens through better management of knowledge. In this write up the authors discuss
how knowledge management at the societal level is different from that at the company
level. An interesting section in this paper discusses how typically knowledge
management is implemented in a company and lesson for governments. Some
interesting case studies have been highlighted wherein it is seen that governments are
likely to face in implementing a knowledge management system.
31
References
Amartya Sen(1985): The Standard of Living. Cambridge University Press.
Amartya Sen(2005): The Argumentative Indian Allen Lane.
Anil Bhuimali and Satrajit Dutta(2006): Foreign Trade of India Under WTO Regime:
Abhijeet Publications.
Anil Bhuimali(2003): Rural Cooperative and Economic Development. Sarup and
Sons.
Anil Bhuimali(2005): Poverty and Human Rights of Women (ed). Serials Publications.
Anil Bhuimali(2006):
Globalization and
Human
Rights(ed).
Serials
Publications.
Awad, Elias M and Ghaziri, Harsan M.(2006): Knowledge Management (2006)
Pearson Education, Delhi.
Chistopher S. Rollyson (2006) : How the Knowledge Economy will Transform
Markets and the producer/Consumer Relationship. www.rollyson.net
E. Mansfield, M. Schwartz and S.Wagner, (1981): Imitation Costs and Patents: An
Empirical Study. Economic Journal 91:907-918.
G.M. Grossman and E. Helpman(1991): Quality Leaders in theTheory of Growth
Review of Economic Studies,58: 43-61.
Gera, and G. Grenien(1994): Interindustry Wage Differentials and Efficiency
Wages: Some Canadian Evidence, Canadian Journal of Economics 27(1):
81-100.
Government of India (2006-2007): Survey of India. Ministry of Finance, GOI.
Government of India(2009): Economic Survey 2008-2009 Oxford University Press.
Grant, R.M.(1996): Towards Knowledge Based Theory of Firm. Strategic
Management Journal. Vol.17 (Winter Special Issue), 109-122.
32
Can
Transform
Indias
Potential.
Topics.
development
gateway.org
Organisation for Econonic Co-operation and Development (1996): The Halics
Knowledge-Based Economy. Paris: OECD.
P.M. Romer, (1986): Increasing Returns and Long-Run Growth. Journal of
Political Economy,94(5): 1002-37.
Peteraf MA.(1993): The Cornerstones of Competitive Advantage: A ResourceBased View. Strategic Management Journal 14(3): 179-191.
Pooja Lianchandani, (2008): Knowledge Economy: The Indian Opportunity and
challenge for skills Development. Pooja.g[at]ciioline.org
33
34
Susan K. McEvily and Bala Chakravarthy (2002): The performance of KnowledgeBased Advantage: An Empirical Test for Product Performance and
Technological Knowledge. Strategic Management Journal. Vol.23,No.4,
PP.285-305
T.C. Lethbridge, (1994): Practical Techniques and Measuring Knowledge University
of Ottawa(Ontario), Canada.
Teece DJ.(1980): Economies of scope and the scope of the Enterprise. Journal of
Economic Behavior and Economic Organization 1: 223-247.
V.S. Ganesamurthy(2009): Environmental Economies in India New Century
Publications
Wagher RK. (1987) Tacit Knowledge in Everyday intelligent Behavi-our. Journal
of Personality and Social Psychology 52(6): 1236-1247.
Wikipedia,
the
free
encyclopedia
(2008):
Knowledge
Economy
www.wikipedia.com
World Bank(2005): India and the Knowledge Economy: Leveraging Strengths and
Opportunities. A world Bank Report.web.worldbank.org
Yasheng Huang, and Tarun Khanna(2003): Can India Overtake China. Foreign
Policy. July-August.
Zander U, Kogut B.(1995): Knowledge and the Speed of the Transfer and Imitation
of Organizational capabilities: An Empirical Test. Organization Science 6:
76-92. J.C. Spender and R. Grant.
35