Araştırma Makalesi
BibTex RIS Kaynak Göster

SEKTÖREL İNOVASYON SİSTEMİ, ENDÜSTRİ 4.0 VE TÜRK TAKIM TEZGÂHLARI SANAYİ DURUMU

Yıl 2019, , 73 - 105, 30.06.2019

Cem Okan Tuncel

https://doi.org/10.30626/tesamakademi.584285

Öz

Bu çalışma takım tezgâhları endüstrisini sektörel inovasyon sistemi perspektifinden incelemektedir.   Takım tezgâhları sanayi,  yatırım malı üreten temel sektör olarak, mühendislik sanayilerinin rekabet gücünü ve verimliliğini belirlediği için stratejik bir öneme sahiptir.  Günümüzde takım tezgâhları sanayini etkileyen en önemli olgu üçüncü endüstri devriminden dördüncü endüstri devrimine geçiş olarak tanımlanabilir.  Ortaya çıkan bu yeni teknolojik yörünge sektörün geleceğinde belirleyici olacaktır. İmalat sanayisinin küresel rekabetçiliğini korumak için Türkiye,  takım tezgâhları endüstrisine gereken önemi vermek zorundadır. Çalışma kapsamında, Türk takım tezgahları sektörünün durumu ve sorunları sektörel inovasyon sistemi yaklaşımının teorik çerçevesinden incelenmiştir. İncelemenin sonucuna göre Türk takım tezgâhı sanayinin sahip olduğu teknolojik yetenek birikimi, Endüstri 4.0’ın yaratacağı fırsatları kullanmak için yeterli değildir. Bu nedenle, yeni sanayi devrimini yakalamak için, politika yapıcıların, takım tezgâhı endüstrisindeki teknolojik gelişmeyi hızlandırmak için acilen teknoloji politikaları uygulaması gerekir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Sektörel İnovasyon Sistemi Takım Tezgâhları Sanayi Teknolojik Yörünge Endüstri 4.0

Kaynakça

  • Archibugi D. ve Pianta M. (1996). Innovation surveys and patents as technology indicators: The state of the art, in OECD, Innovation, patents and technological strategies, Paris, OECD.
  • Breschi, S. ve Malerba, F. (1997). Sectoral innovation systems: Technological regimes, Schumpeterian dynamics, and spatial boundaries. In C Edquist (ed.), Systems of innovation: Technologies, institutions, and organizations (pp. 130-156). Pinter, London.
  • Carlsson, B. (1984). The development and use of machine tools in historical perspective. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 5(1), 91-114.
  • Çeliktaş M., Sonlu G., Atalay S. (2015). Endüstriyel devrimin son sürümünde mühendisliğin yol haritası. Mühendis ve Makine, 56(662), 22-34.
  • Dosi, G. (1982). Technological paradigms and technological trajectories: A suggested interpretation of the determinants and directions of technical change. Research Policy, 11, 147-162. Ege B. (2014). Endüstri 4.0 devrimi kapıda mı?. Bilim ve Teknik, Mayıs 2014.
  • Ehrnberg, E. Jacobsson, S (1993). Technological discontinuity and competitive strategy-revival through FMS for the European machine tool industry?. Technological Forecastıng and Social Change, 44, 27-48
  • Foley D.ve Michl T. (2015). Büyüme ve bölüşüm (B. Eres, Çev.). Ankara: Phoenix Y.
  • Hayashi A. M. (2014). Technology trajectories and the birth of new industries. MIT Sloan Management Review. http://sloanreview.mit.edu/article/technology-trajectories-and-the-birth-of-new-industries/ (Erişim tarihi: 28 Ekim 2015).
  • Heinrich A. (2001). The recent history of the machine tool industry and the effects of technological change. University of Munich, Institute for Innovation Research and Technology Management.
  • Jacobsson, S. (1986) Electronics and industrial policy. The case of computer controlled lathes. London: Allen & Unwin. Kaynak O. ve Sabanovic, A. (1996). Diffusion of new technologies through appropriate education and training. In John Kirkland (Ed) Barriers to international technology transfer (pp. 99-108). NATO ASI Series, Kluwer Academic Publishers.
  • Kuhn, T.S. (1962). The structure of scientific revolutions. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
  • Lee, K. (2005). Making a technological catch-up: barriers and opportunities. Asian Journal of Technology Innovation, 13(2), 97–131.
  • Lee, K. (1996). The role of user firms in the innovation of machine tools: The Japanese case. Research Policy, 25, 491-507.
  • Malerba, F. (2002). Sectoral systems of innovation and production. Research Policy, 31, 247–264.
  • Malerba, F. (2004). Sectoral system of innovation basic concepts. In F. Malerba (Ed.) Sectoral system of innovation: Concepts issues and analyses six major sector in Europe. UK: Cambridge Unv. Press.
  • Malerba, F. ve Orsenigo L. (1997). Technological regimes and sectoral patterns of innovative activities. Industrial and Corporate Change, 6(1), 83-117.
  • Mazzoleni, R. (1997). Learning and path-dependence in the diffusion of innovations: comparative evidence on numerically controlled machine tools. Research Policy, 26(4-5), 405-428.
  • North, D. (1994). Economic performance through time. American Economic Review, 84(13), 359-368.
  • Pavitt, K. (1984). Patterns of technical change: Towards a taxonomy and a theory. Research Policy, 13, 343–74.
  • Poledrini, S. (2006). Sectoral and regional systems of innovation: The case of the Italian machine tool industry. MSc Dissertation. SPRU. Brighton: University of Sussex.
  • Pepper R J. ve Garrity, (2014). The internet of everything: How the network unleashes the benefits of big data. The global information technology report. World Economic Forum.
  • Perez, C. ve Soete L. (1988). Catching up in technology: Entry barriers and windows of opportunity. In Dosi, G., C. Freeman, R. Nelson, G. Silverberg and L. Soete (Eds.) Technical change and economic theory (pp. 458-479). London.
  • Pol, E. ve Carroll P. (2004). Innovation heterogeneity, Schumpeterian growth and evolutionary theorizing. Faculty of Commerce Faculty of Commerce - Economics Working Papers.
  • Rifkin J. (2015). Nesnelerin interneti ve işbirliği çağı. İstanbul: Optimist Yayınları. Robert P. Ve J. Garrity. 2014 The internet of everything: How the network unleashes the benefits of big data. The Global Information Technology Report. World Economic Forum
  • Rosenberg, N. (1963). Technological change in the machine tool industry. The Journal of Economic History, 23(4), 414-443.
  • Sayer, S. ve Ülker, A. (2014). Ürün yaşam döngüsü yönetimi. Mühendis ve Makina, 55(657), 65-72.
  • Saygılı Ş. Cihan C. Yalçın C. T Brand,( 2014). Türkiye imalat sanayiinde ithal girdi kullanımındaki artışın kaynakları. İktisat İsletme ve Finans, 29(347), 9-44.
  • Smith, K. (1992). Technological innovation indicators: experience and prospects. Science and Public Policy, 19(6), 383-392.
  • Saviotti P. Pyka A. (2004). Economic development, qualitative change and employment creation. Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, 15, 265–287.
  • Taymaz E. (1989). İmalat teknolojisindeki gelişmeler ve mühendislik sanayileri. 1989 Sanayi Kongresi Bildirileri, Cilt 1, Ankara: MMO, 72-76.
  • Türkiye Cumhuriyeti-Ekonomi Bakanlığı. (2014) Takım tezgâhları sektörü. Ankara.
  • Wengel J. ve Shapira P. (2004). Machine tools: the remaking of a traditional sectoral innovation system. In F. Malerba (Ed) Sectoral system of Innovation: Concepts issues and analyses six major sector in Europe. UK: Cambridge Unv. Pres.

Sectoral System of Innovation, Industry 4.0 and the Situation of Turkish Machine Tool Industry

Yıl 2019, , 73 - 105, 30.06.2019

Cem Okan Tuncel

https://doi.org/10.30626/tesamakademi.584285

Öz

This study examines the machine tools industry from the sectoral innovation system perspective. The machine tools industry has a strategic importance because it determines the competitiveness and efficiency of the engineering industries as the primary sector producing investment goods. Today, the most important factor affecting the industry of machine tools is the transition from the third industrial revolution to the fourth industrial revolution. This new technological trajectory will be decisive in the future of the sector. To maintain the global competitiveness of its manufacturing industry,   Turkey is obliged to give adequate attention to its machine tools industry. In the scope of the study, the situation and problems of the Turkish machine tool sector were examined from the theoretical framework of the sectoral innovation system approach. According to the results of the study, the accumulation of technological capabilities of the Turkish machine tool industry is not enough to use the opportunities created by Industry 4.0. Therefore, in order to catch up with the new industrial revolution, policy makers need to apply technology policies urgently to accelerate technological development in the machine tool industry.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Sectoral System of Innovation Machine Tool Industry Technological Trajectory Industry 4.0

Kaynakça

  • Archibugi D. ve Pianta M. (1996). Innovation surveys and patents as technology indicators: The state of the art, in OECD, Innovation, patents and technological strategies, Paris, OECD.
  • Breschi, S. ve Malerba, F. (1997). Sectoral innovation systems: Technological regimes, Schumpeterian dynamics, and spatial boundaries. In C Edquist (ed.), Systems of innovation: Technologies, institutions, and organizations (pp. 130-156). Pinter, London.
  • Carlsson, B. (1984). The development and use of machine tools in historical perspective. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 5(1), 91-114.
  • Çeliktaş M., Sonlu G., Atalay S. (2015). Endüstriyel devrimin son sürümünde mühendisliğin yol haritası. Mühendis ve Makine, 56(662), 22-34.
  • Dosi, G. (1982). Technological paradigms and technological trajectories: A suggested interpretation of the determinants and directions of technical change. Research Policy, 11, 147-162. Ege B. (2014). Endüstri 4.0 devrimi kapıda mı?. Bilim ve Teknik, Mayıs 2014.
  • Ehrnberg, E. Jacobsson, S (1993). Technological discontinuity and competitive strategy-revival through FMS for the European machine tool industry?. Technological Forecastıng and Social Change, 44, 27-48
  • Foley D.ve Michl T. (2015). Büyüme ve bölüşüm (B. Eres, Çev.). Ankara: Phoenix Y.
  • Hayashi A. M. (2014). Technology trajectories and the birth of new industries. MIT Sloan Management Review. http://sloanreview.mit.edu/article/technology-trajectories-and-the-birth-of-new-industries/ (Erişim tarihi: 28 Ekim 2015).
  • Heinrich A. (2001). The recent history of the machine tool industry and the effects of technological change. University of Munich, Institute for Innovation Research and Technology Management.
  • Jacobsson, S. (1986) Electronics and industrial policy. The case of computer controlled lathes. London: Allen & Unwin. Kaynak O. ve Sabanovic, A. (1996). Diffusion of new technologies through appropriate education and training. In John Kirkland (Ed) Barriers to international technology transfer (pp. 99-108). NATO ASI Series, Kluwer Academic Publishers.
  • Kuhn, T.S. (1962). The structure of scientific revolutions. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
  • Lee, K. (2005). Making a technological catch-up: barriers and opportunities. Asian Journal of Technology Innovation, 13(2), 97–131.
  • Lee, K. (1996). The role of user firms in the innovation of machine tools: The Japanese case. Research Policy, 25, 491-507.
  • Malerba, F. (2002). Sectoral systems of innovation and production. Research Policy, 31, 247–264.
  • Malerba, F. (2004). Sectoral system of innovation basic concepts. In F. Malerba (Ed.) Sectoral system of innovation: Concepts issues and analyses six major sector in Europe. UK: Cambridge Unv. Press.
  • Malerba, F. ve Orsenigo L. (1997). Technological regimes and sectoral patterns of innovative activities. Industrial and Corporate Change, 6(1), 83-117.
  • Mazzoleni, R. (1997). Learning and path-dependence in the diffusion of innovations: comparative evidence on numerically controlled machine tools. Research Policy, 26(4-5), 405-428.
  • North, D. (1994). Economic performance through time. American Economic Review, 84(13), 359-368.
  • Pavitt, K. (1984). Patterns of technical change: Towards a taxonomy and a theory. Research Policy, 13, 343–74.
  • Poledrini, S. (2006). Sectoral and regional systems of innovation: The case of the Italian machine tool industry. MSc Dissertation. SPRU. Brighton: University of Sussex.
  • Pepper R J. ve Garrity, (2014). The internet of everything: How the network unleashes the benefits of big data. The global information technology report. World Economic Forum.
  • Perez, C. ve Soete L. (1988). Catching up in technology: Entry barriers and windows of opportunity. In Dosi, G., C. Freeman, R. Nelson, G. Silverberg and L. Soete (Eds.) Technical change and economic theory (pp. 458-479). London.
  • Pol, E. ve Carroll P. (2004). Innovation heterogeneity, Schumpeterian growth and evolutionary theorizing. Faculty of Commerce Faculty of Commerce - Economics Working Papers.
  • Rifkin J. (2015). Nesnelerin interneti ve işbirliği çağı. İstanbul: Optimist Yayınları. Robert P. Ve J. Garrity. 2014 The internet of everything: How the network unleashes the benefits of big data. The Global Information Technology Report. World Economic Forum
  • Rosenberg, N. (1963). Technological change in the machine tool industry. The Journal of Economic History, 23(4), 414-443.
  • Sayer, S. ve Ülker, A. (2014). Ürün yaşam döngüsü yönetimi. Mühendis ve Makina, 55(657), 65-72.
  • Saygılı Ş. Cihan C. Yalçın C. T Brand,( 2014). Türkiye imalat sanayiinde ithal girdi kullanımındaki artışın kaynakları. İktisat İsletme ve Finans, 29(347), 9-44.
  • Smith, K. (1992). Technological innovation indicators: experience and prospects. Science and Public Policy, 19(6), 383-392.
  • Saviotti P. Pyka A. (2004). Economic development, qualitative change and employment creation. Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, 15, 265–287.
  • Taymaz E. (1989). İmalat teknolojisindeki gelişmeler ve mühendislik sanayileri. 1989 Sanayi Kongresi Bildirileri, Cilt 1, Ankara: MMO, 72-76.
  • Türkiye Cumhuriyeti-Ekonomi Bakanlığı. (2014) Takım tezgâhları sektörü. Ankara.
  • Wengel J. ve Shapira P. (2004). Machine tools: the remaking of a traditional sectoral innovation system. In F. Malerba (Ed) Sectoral system of Innovation: Concepts issues and analyses six major sector in Europe. UK: Cambridge Unv. Pres.
Toplam 32 adet kaynakça vardır.

Ayrıntılar

Birincil Dil Türkçe
Bölüm Makaleler
Yazarlar

Cem Okan Tuncel

Yayımlanma Tarihi 30 Haziran 2019
Yayımlandığı Sayı Yıl 2019

Kaynak Göster

APA Tuncel, C. O. (2019). SEKTÖREL İNOVASYON SİSTEMİ, ENDÜSTRİ 4.0 VE TÜRK TAKIM TEZGÂHLARI SANAYİ DURUMU. TESAM Akademi Dergisi, 6, 73-105. https://doi.org/10.30626/tesamakademi.584285
AMA Tuncel CO. SEKTÖREL İNOVASYON SİSTEMİ, ENDÜSTRİ 4.0 VE TÜRK TAKIM TEZGÂHLARI SANAYİ DURUMU. TESAM Akademi Dergisi. Haziran 2019;6:73-105. doi:10.30626/tesamakademi.584285
Chicago Tuncel, Cem Okan. “SEKTÖREL İNOVASYON SİSTEMİ, ENDÜSTRİ 4.0 VE TÜRK TAKIM TEZGÂHLARI SANAYİ DURUMU”. TESAM Akademi Dergisi 6, Haziran (Haziran 2019): 73-105. https://doi.org/10.30626/tesamakademi.584285.
EndNote Tuncel CO (01 Haziran 2019) SEKTÖREL İNOVASYON SİSTEMİ, ENDÜSTRİ 4.0 VE TÜRK TAKIM TEZGÂHLARI SANAYİ DURUMU. TESAM Akademi Dergisi 6 73–105.
IEEE C. O. Tuncel, “SEKTÖREL İNOVASYON SİSTEMİ, ENDÜSTRİ 4.0 VE TÜRK TAKIM TEZGÂHLARI SANAYİ DURUMU”, TESAM Akademi Dergisi, c. 6, ss. 73–105, 2019, doi: 10.30626/tesamakademi.584285.
ISNAD Tuncel, Cem Okan. “SEKTÖREL İNOVASYON SİSTEMİ, ENDÜSTRİ 4.0 VE TÜRK TAKIM TEZGÂHLARI SANAYİ DURUMU”. TESAM Akademi Dergisi 6 (Haziran 2019), 73-105. https://doi.org/10.30626/tesamakademi.584285.
JAMA Tuncel CO. SEKTÖREL İNOVASYON SİSTEMİ, ENDÜSTRİ 4.0 VE TÜRK TAKIM TEZGÂHLARI SANAYİ DURUMU. TESAM Akademi Dergisi. 2019;6:73–105.
MLA Tuncel, Cem Okan. “SEKTÖREL İNOVASYON SİSTEMİ, ENDÜSTRİ 4.0 VE TÜRK TAKIM TEZGÂHLARI SANAYİ DURUMU”. TESAM Akademi Dergisi, c. 6, 2019, ss. 73-105, doi:10.30626/tesamakademi.584285.
Vancouver Tuncel CO. SEKTÖREL İNOVASYON SİSTEMİ, ENDÜSTRİ 4.0 VE TÜRK TAKIM TEZGÂHLARI SANAYİ DURUMU. TESAM Akademi Dergisi. 2019;6:73-105.