Introduction
A national innovation system (NIS) was introduced as a new conceptual framework in science, technology, and innovation studies in the 1980s and has been developed by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) to put into practice.1 The NIS has been considered as a system approach in view of a macro system consisting of government, university, industry, and their environment, emphasising their relationships. The NIS framework has been developed by Freeman, Nelson, and Lundvall.2 According to UNESCO, science, technology, and innovation (STI) play a pivotal role in sustainable development, highlighting a proper policy framework.3 In this context, STI emphasises a creativity, which thereby constitutes a core component for the NIS.
Meanwhile, it has been observed that the relationships between/among entities constituting the NIS have been closely linked under the ever-changing information and communication technology (ICT) environment in an era of a digital economy, which incorporates all economic activities enhanced by the use of digital technologies, digital infrastructure, digital services, and data.4 The digital economy is accordingly underpinned by the spread of ICTs across all business sectors to enhance its productivity,5 and STI activities function in the all sectors of knowledge-based society. As such, all sectors have been interlinked in a way that (i) NIS vitalises the entitiesā interactions and relationships, (ii) STI facilitates knowledge activities, and (iii) the digital economy provides ICT enablers as the platform. While the digital economy has currently been a global trend to form the emerging innovation ecosystem and laid the foundation for all sectors, STI continues to generate new products and services and thereby promote technology-intensive industries as a new growth engine in a knowledge-based society. Likewise, the digital economy should be so aligned with STI that the lack of concerted endeavours might otherwise make it difficult for (i) the digital economy to find new solutions and services with more benefits and less effort and (ii) STI to be implemented in an effective and efficient manner.
The Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) member countries, consisting of various ethnic groups, religions, cultures, and industry development status, have dramatically achieved economic development, indicating (i) 5.7% economic growth rate between 2010 and 2020 and (ii) around 3 billion of GDP, 2 billion in trade, and 170 million in foreign direct investment (FDI) in U.S. dollars as of 2019.6 Particularly, the FDI growth rate was 15% between 2008 and 2015, which means that the ASEAN member countries will be positioned as a global economic growth engine in the near future. However, the ASEAN member countries are confronted with insufficient STI initiatives in the digital economy era. In spite of the recent successful national development by ASEAN member countries, they might be caught in a middle-income trap without STI efforts. As the digital economy has increasingly been influencing all sectors in the ASEAN, particularly industries, ASEAN member countries have to seek out STI and ICT initiatives that would induce more technology-intensive industries.
This chapter addresses the following questions: (i) what is the relationship between STI and the digital economy; (ii) what are the major STI thrusts and how are they identified in the digital economy; and (iii) what are the strategies to achieve this endeavour effectively?
The methodology of this chapter is mainly based on a qualitative approach through discussions with the Ministry of Science and ICT in Korea, ASEAN-Korea Centre, Asian Development Bank (ADB), and related agencies/academy associations. The interviews have been carried out through (i) official workings and tasks such as drafting a memorandum of understanding (MoU) for bilateral collaboration, (ii) conducting the project as an international consultant for ADB, and (iii) official visits to related agencies of research institutes.
ASEAN STI thrusts in accordance with the advent of the digital economy
Industry-oriented innovation
ASEAN leaders recognised the need for the ASEAN to be prepared to maximise digital economy opportunities7 with the advent of the Fourth Industrial Revolution (4IR), from the perspective of industry development. In initiating the 4IR, crucial steps have been taken by the ASEAN, including an āAssessment of ASEAN Readiness for 4IRā which discusses (i) the diversity of readiness levels among the ASEAN member states and (ii) the need to strengthen cross-pillar sectorial coordination and transform various frameworks and guidelines into implementation.8
The ASEAN Secretariat released the āASEAN Economic Community Blueprint 2025ā highlighting digital technology as leverage to enhance trade and investments to provide an e-based business platform, promote micro, small, and medium enterprises (MSMEs), and facilitate the use of green technology.9
ASEAN STI and ICT initiatives
The ASEAN telecommunication and IT ministers (TELMIN) have mapped out the ICT Masterplan (AIM) 2020 with eight strategic thrusts, including (i) Economic Development and Transformation; (ii) People Integration and Empowerment Through ICT; (iii) Innovation; (iv) ICT Infrastructure Development; (v) Human Resource Development; (vi) ICT in the ASEAN Single Market; (vii) New Media and Content; and (viii) Information Security and Assurance,10 while at the same time, the ASEAN Committee of Science and Technology (COST) released the āASEAN Plan of Action on Science, Technology and Innovation (APASTI) 2016ā2025ā11 with the visions of science, technology, and innovation-enabled ASEAN, which is innovative, competitive, vibrant, sustainable, and economically integrated. APASTIās goals include (i) ASEAN STI addressing the grand challenges of the new millennium; (ii) an economically integrated ASEAN that actively collaborates with the public and private sectors, especially SMEs, and enhances mobility of talents; (iii) deep awareness of STI and the beneficial impacts of STI on the bottom of the pyramid that refers to economic development that promises to alleviate widespread poverty;12 (iv) an innovation-driven economy with deep STI enculturation and a system of seeding and sustaining STI by leveraging ICT and the resources of the talented young, women, and private sectors; (v) active research and development collaboration, technology commercialisation and entrepreneurship and network of centres of excellence; and (vi) an enhanced STI management system that supports ASEAN innovation reaching global markets and promotes innovation, integration and narrowing of development gaps across the ASEAN members countries.
As such, the ASEAN has been implementing both STI and ICT initiatives, recognising STIās potential to bring huge benefits to its member countries. If STI and ICT had not been developed separately, they would have maximised the synergy effect in a mutually related and coordinated way.
Official Development Assistant (ODA)
There have been collaborative programmes and projects to facilitate knowledge flow across the ASEAN countries, particularly ASEAN and Plus 3 comprising China, Japan, and Korea, beyond the ASEAN regional collaboration. Korea has been assisting science and technology and R&D for the ASEAN member countries as part of official development assistance (ODA).13 ODA projects have usually been decided through (i) official discussions between donor country and recipient country and (ii) international organisation such as the Asian Development Bank and the World Bank.
Koreaās ODA flagship projects are variously designed and implemented, ranging from S&T infrastructure to human resource development.14 These Korean ODA projects for STI are considered to be applied to the ASEAN member countries, given that their requirements are on the rise in the fields of appropriate technologies, human resource development, joint use of research equipment, technology transfer, and promoting industrial R&D.
Identification of STI thrusts
In order to identify the appropriate STI thrusts for the ASEAN member countries, this chapter uses five different sources through reviewing policy documents and interviewing related officials. The sources are from (i) ASEAN Secretary General, (ii...
