How to Measure Knowledge Economy

Q3 Business, Management and Accounting
Marcela Katuščáková, E. Capková, Juraj Grečnár
{"title":"How to Measure Knowledge Economy","authors":"Marcela Katuščáková, E. Capková, Juraj Grečnár","doi":"10.34190/ejkm.21.2.3025","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The paper’s primary goal is to analyse the development of Knowledge Economy (KE) measurement methods ranging from those based on national income to indices identifying and combining the relevant indicators. The paper focuses on four current global and European KE level indices: Global Innovation Index (GII), Global Knowledge Index (GKI), European Innovation Scoreboard (EIS), and Digital Economy and Society Index (DESI), highlighting persistent significant differences in the perception of the very essence of KE, as there is no clear interdisciplinary definition of the initial concept of knowledge, leading to further problems with ambiguous and insufficiently specific definitions and measurement of KE. Tacit aspects of knowledge are rarely part of KE definitions or measurements, excluding a large part of the knowledge system from KE measurements. The results of the analysis show that the set of KE indicators used by the individual KE indices is heterogeneous, with the set of intersecting indicators having different weights in terms of importance. Frequent interventions in the indices by their authors were observed, such as changes in index methodology, the indicators used, main pillars (subindices), etc. Despite the high heterogeneity in the approach to measuring KE, we identified the pillars, which can be viewed as the core pillars of KE. These include, for example the level of ICT, R&D, human resources, innovation, patents, and education.","PeriodicalId":37211,"journal":{"name":"Electronic Journal of Knowledge Management","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-05-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Electronic Journal of Knowledge Management","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.34190/ejkm.21.2.3025","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Business, Management and Accounting","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The paper’s primary goal is to analyse the development of Knowledge Economy (KE) measurement methods ranging from those based on national income to indices identifying and combining the relevant indicators. The paper focuses on four current global and European KE level indices: Global Innovation Index (GII), Global Knowledge Index (GKI), European Innovation Scoreboard (EIS), and Digital Economy and Society Index (DESI), highlighting persistent significant differences in the perception of the very essence of KE, as there is no clear interdisciplinary definition of the initial concept of knowledge, leading to further problems with ambiguous and insufficiently specific definitions and measurement of KE. Tacit aspects of knowledge are rarely part of KE definitions or measurements, excluding a large part of the knowledge system from KE measurements. The results of the analysis show that the set of KE indicators used by the individual KE indices is heterogeneous, with the set of intersecting indicators having different weights in terms of importance. Frequent interventions in the indices by their authors were observed, such as changes in index methodology, the indicators used, main pillars (subindices), etc. Despite the high heterogeneity in the approach to measuring KE, we identified the pillars, which can be viewed as the core pillars of KE. These include, for example the level of ICT, R&D, human resources, innovation, patents, and education.
如何衡量知识经济
本文的主要目的是分析知识经济(KE)的测量方法的发展,从基于国民收入的方法到识别和组合相关指标的指数。本文重点研究了当前全球和欧洲的四个KE水平指数:全球创新指数(GII)、全球知识指数(GKI)、欧洲创新记分牌(EIS)和数字经济与社会指数(DESI),突出了对知识的本质的感知存在持续的显著差异,因为对知识的初始概念没有明确的跨学科定义,导致了进一步的问题,即对知识的定义和测量模糊且不够具体。知识的隐性方面很少是KE定义或度量的一部分,从KE度量中排除了知识系统的很大一部分。分析结果表明,各个KE指数所使用的KE指标集具有异质性,交叉指标集的重要程度不同。我们观察到指数作者对指数的频繁干预,例如指数方法、所使用的指标、主要支柱(子指数)等方面的变化。尽管测量KE的方法具有高度异质性,但我们确定了可以视为KE核心支柱的支柱。这些指标包括信息通信技术、研发、人力资源、创新、专利和教育水平。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Electronic Journal of Knowledge Management
Electronic Journal of Knowledge Management Business, Management and Accounting-Management of Technology and Innovation
CiteScore
3.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
9
审稿时长
20 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信