Kinh doanh bền vững trong bối cảnh cách mạng công nghiệp 4.0

Nội dung text: Kinh doanh bền vững trong bối cảnh cách mạng công nghiệp 4.0

1. KỶ YẾU HỘI THẢO KHOA HỌC QUỐC TẾ INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE PROCEEDINGS KINH DOANH BỀN VỮNG TRONG BỐI CẢNH CÁCH MẠNG CÔNG NGHIỆP 4.0 BUSINESS SUSTAINABILITY IN THE CONTEXT OF INDUSTRY 4.0 HANOI, September 27th , 2018
2. BAN CHỈĐẠO HỘI THẢO TT Họ và tên Chức vụ/ Đơn vị Nhiệm vụ 1 GS.TS. Trần ThọĐạt Hiệu trưởng Trưởng ban 2 PGS.TS. Trần Thị Vân Hoa Phó Hiệu trưởng Phó trưởng ban 3 PGS.TS. Phạm Hồng Chương Phó Hiệu trưởng Ủy viên 4 PGS.TS. Hoàng Văn Cường Phó Hiệu trưởng Ủy viên BAN TỔ CHỨC TT Họ và tên Chức vụ/ Đơn vị Nhiệm vụ Trưởng khoa Trưởng ban 1 PGS.TS. Nguyễn Thành Hiếu Khoa Quản trị Kinh doanh Phó trưởng khoa Phó trưởng ban 2 PGS.TS. Nguyễn Thị Hoài Dung Khoa Quản trị Kinh doanh Phó trưởng phòng Ủy viên 3 TS. Trịnh Mai Vân Phòng Quản lý Khoa học Trưởng phòng Ủy viên 4 PGS.TS. Phạm Thị Bích Chi Phòng Tài chính – Kế toán Trưởng phòng Ủy viên 5 TS. Nguyễn Đình Trung Phòng Quản trị thiết bị Trưởng phòng Ủy viên 6 PGS.TS. Bùi Đức Thọ Phòng Tổ chức cán bộ Trưởng phòng Ủy viên 7 Ths. Bùi Đức Dũng Phòng Tổng hợp Trưởng phòng Ủy viên 8 Ths. Nguyễn Hoàng Hà Phòng CTCT&QLSV Trưởng phòng Ủy viên 9 TS. Vũ Trọng Nghĩa Phòng Truyền thông Giám đốc Trung tâm dịch Ủy viên 10 TS. Cấn Anh Tuấn vụ và Hỗ trợđào tạo
3. TT Họ và tên Chức vụ/ Đơn vị Nhiệm vụ Trưởng phòng Ủy viên 11 Ông Đoàn Đức Cường Phòng Bảo vệ Trưởng Bộ môn Quản trị Ủy viên 12 TS. Hà Sơn Tùng Doanh nghiệp Trưởng Bộ môn Văn hóa Ủy viên 13 TS. Nguyễn Thị Ngọc Anh Kinh doanh Trưởng Bộ môn Quản trị Ủy viên 14 PGS.TS. Đỗ ThịĐông Chất lượng Trưởng Bộ môn Quản trị Ủy viên 15 TS. Ngô Thị Việt Nga Kinh doanh Tổng hợp Giám đốc Trung tâm Tư Ủy viên 16 TS. Nguyễn Kế Nghĩa vấn Doanh nghiệp Giảng viên Ủy viên 17 TS. Trần Phương Hiền Khoa Quản trị Kinh doanh Peter Loescher Professor Ủy viên and Chair of Busines Ethics and Global Governance 18 Prof. Dr. Christoph Luetge TUM School of Governance Technical University of Munich, Germany President of Council for Ủy viên Research Institutes and Centers of Japanese National Universities; 19 Prof. Dr. Satoshi Mizobata Director of Institute of Economic Research, Tokyo University, Japan; Council member of Science Council of Japan, Japan
4. BAN BIÊN TẬP KỶ YẾU TT Họ và tên Chức vụ/ Đơn vị Nhiệm vụ 1 GS.TS. Nguyễn Kế Tuấn Hội đồng Khoa học và Đào tạo Trưởng ban 2 GS.TS. Nguyễn Thành Độ Nhà Xuất bản ĐHKTQD Ủy viên 3 PGS.TS. Nguyễn Thị Hoài Dung Khoa Quản trị Kinh doanh Ủy viên 4 PGS.TS. Lê Công Hoa Khoa Quản trị Kinh doanh Ủy viên 5 PGS.TS. Nguyễn Ngọc Huyền Khoa Quản trị Kinh doanh Ủy viên 6 PGS.TS. Ngô Kim Thanh Khoa Quản trị Kinh doanh Ủy viên 7 PGS.TS. Nguyễn Thành Hiếu Khoa Quản trị Kinh doanh Ủy viên 8 PGS.TS. Nguyễn Mạnh Quân Khoa Quản trị Kinh doanh Ủy viên 9 PGS.TS. Dương Thị Liễu Khoa Quản trị Kinh doanh Ủy viên 10 PGS.TS. Trần Việt Lâm Khoa Quản trị Kinh doanh Ủy viên 11 PGS.TS. Vũ Minh Trai Khoa Quản trị Kinh doanh Ủy viên 12 PGS.TS. Đỗ ThịĐông Khoa Quản trị Kinh doanh Ủy viên 13 TS. Hà Sơn Tùng Khoa Quản trị Kinh doanh Ủy viên 14 TS. Nguyễn Thị Ngọc Anh Khoa Quản trị Kinh doanh Ủy viên 15 TS. Ngô Thị Việt Nga Khoa Quản trị Kinh doanh Ủy viên 16 TS. Hoàng Thị Thanh Hương Khoa Quản trị Kinh doanh Ủy viên 17 TS. Nguyễn Thu Thủy Khoa Quản trị Kinh doanh Ủy viên Trường Đại học TUM- Ủy viên 18 GS.TS. Christoph Luetge Cộng hòa Liên Bang Đức 19 GS.TS. Satoshi Mizobata Trường Đại học Kyoto-Nhật Bản Ủy viên BAN BIÊN THƯ KÝ TT Chức vụ/ Đơn vị Nhiệm vụ Nhiệm vụ 1 TS. Vũ Hoàng Nam Khoa Quản trị Kinh doanh Trưởng ban 2 TS. Nguyễn Thu Thủy Khoa Quản trị Kinh doanh Ủy viên 3 TS. Đặng Thị Kim Thoa Khoa Quản trị Kinh doanh Ủy viên 4 Ths. Tạ Thu Phương Khoa Quản trị Kinh doanh Ủy viên 5 Ths. Trần Mạnh Linh Khoa Quản trị Kinh doanh Ủy viên
5. MỤC LỤC TT Tên bài viết Trang ĐỀ DẪN HỘI THẢO/ INTRODUCTION PHẦN 1- KINH DOANH BỀN VỮNG TRONG BỐI CẢNH CÁCH MẠNG CÔNG NGHIỆP 4.0: NHỮNG VẤN ĐỀ CHUNG VÀ BẰNG CHỨNG THỰC TIỄN PART 1- BUSINESS SUSTAINABILITY IN THE CONTEXT OF INDUSTRY 4.0: GENERAL ISSUES AND PRACTICES 1 “SOCIETY 5.0” AND ECONOMIC SYSTEM TRANSFORMATION 2 IN JAPAN Prof. Dr. Satoshi Mizobata 2 ETHICS AND INNOVATION IN INDUSTRY 4.0 28 Prof. Dr. Christoph Lütge 3 PHÁT TRIỂN KINH TẾ XANH – XU THẾ TẤT YẾU TRÊN THẾ 62 GIỚI VÀ VIỆT NAM TS. Lê Tố Anh Ths. Nguyễn Công Đức Ths. Đào Thu Huyền 4 TĂNG TRƯỞNG XANH HƯỚNG TỚI PHÁT TRIỂN BỀN VỮNG 75 Ở VIỆT NAM TS. Phạm Thị Nga TS. Phạm Thị Thu Hường Ths. Nguyễn Thị Thủy Ths. Nguyễn Thị Như Quỳnh TS. Trần Văn Giảng 5 TĂNG TRƯỞNG XANH TRONG NÔNG NGHIỆP VIỆT NAM - 89 BỐI CẢNH CÁCH MẠNG CÔNG NGHIỆP 4.0 Ths. Trần Thị Thoa 6 CÔNG NGHIỆP HỖ TRỢ VỚI PHÁT TRIỂN NGÀNH CÔNG 101 NGHIỆP ĐIỆN TỬ VIỆT NAM TRONG BỐI CẢNH CÁCH MẠNG CÔNG NGHIỆP 4.0 Ths. Vũ Thị Thanh Huyền
6. TT Tên bài viết Trang 7 TĂNG TRƯỞNG XANH VÀ BÀI HỌC KINH NGHIỆM CỦA 118 HÀN QUỐC PGS.TS. Nguyễn Thị Hoài Dung 8 GREENHOUSE GASES REDUCTION EFFECT THROUGH 144 INFRASTRUCTURE EXPORT: VERIFICATION ON MODAL SHIFT Assoc. Prof. Dr. Tomoyo Toyota 9 SUSTAINABLE CONSUMPTION TRENDS IN THE EUROPEAN 156 MARKET AND PROBLEMS GIVEN TO VIETNAM’S AGRICULTURAL PRODUCT EXPORTS Le Thi Hong Thuan Nguyen Thuy Linh 10 ANTECEDENTS OF PURCHASE INTENTION TOWARD ORGANIC 176 FOOD: A STUDY OF YOUNG CONSUMERS IN VIETNAM Nguyen Thi Tuyet Mai, Nguyen Minh Chau, Le Minh Duc, Pham Ngoc Mai, Vu Khanh Huyen Tran, Nguyen Ha Ngoc, Phan Thanh Hung 11 A REVIEW OF STUDIES IN EXTERNAL CORPORATE SOCIAL 199 RESPONSIBILITY Bui Thu Van, MA. Tran Trong Duc, MA. 12 SELF-EFFICACY, PERCEIVED BEHAVIORAL CONTROL AND 215 ENTREPRENEURIAL INTENTION AMONG POLISH STUDENTS IN THE CONTEXT OF INDUSTRY 4.0: ASSESSING THE EFFECT OF EDUCATION LEVEL Duong Cong Doanh, MBA. MSc. Assoc. Prof. Dr. Nguyen Ngoc Huyen 13 VAI TRÒ CỦA HỆ THỐNG KIỂM SOÁT QUẢN LÝ ĐỐI VỚI SỰ 231 PHÁT TRIỂN BỀN VỮNG CỦA DOANH NGHIỆP ThS. Tạ Thu Phương PHẦN 2- ẢNH HƯỞNG CỦA CÁCH MẠNG CÔNG NGHIỆP 4.0 ĐẾN KINH DOANH BỀN VỮNG PART 2- INDUSTRY 4.0’S INFLUENCES ON BUSINESS SUSTAINABILITY 14 OVERVIEW OF INDUSTRIAL NETWORKS 4.0 AND SOME 245 IMPACTS ON SUSTAINABLE BUSINESS Truong Thi Thuy Lien
7. TT Tên bài viết Trang 15 CƠ HỘI VÀ THÁCH THỨC DOANH NGHIỆP KHỞI NGHIỆP 253 TRONG BỐI CẢNH CÁCH MẠNG CÔNG NGHIỆP 4.0 Ths. Nguyễn Thị Phương Lan 16 THÁCH THỨC CỦA CUỘC CÁCH MẠNG CÔNG NGHIỆP 4.0 265 ĐỐI VỚI QUẢN TRỊ NGUỒN NHÂN LỰC CỦA CÁC DOANH NGHIỆP VIỆT NAM PGS.TS. Trần Việt Lâm 17 REQUIREMENTS OF HUMAN RESOURCE IN VIETNAM 282 MECHANICAL INDUSTRY IN THE CONTEXT OF INDUSTRY 4.0 Vu Hong Van 18 TÁC ĐỘNG CỦA CÁCH MẠNG CÔNG NGHIỆP 4.0 ĐẾN LAO 294 ĐỘNG NGÀNH DỆT MAY VIỆT NAM TS. Nguyễn Kế Nghĩa 19 CÁC DOANH NGHIỆP NGÀNH BÁN LẺ NỘI ĐỊA VIỆT NAM 307 VỚI NHỮNG THÁCH THỨC TRONG BỐI CẢNH CÁCH MẠNG CÔNG NGHIỆP 4.0 TS. Ngô Tuấn Anh 20 NHẬN DIỆN NHỮNG NHÂN TỐ ẢNH HƯỞNG ĐẾN ĐẠO ĐỨC 315 NGHỀ NGHIỆP BÁO CHÍ TRONG BỐI CẢNH CUỘC CÁCH MẠNG CÔNG NGHIỆP 4.0 Ths. Huỳnh Bá Thúy Diệu Ths. Nguyễn Thị Như Quỳnh PHẦN 3- PHÁT TRIỂN KINH DOANH BỀN VỮNG TRONG BỐI CẢNH CÁCH MẠNG CÔNG NGHIỆP 4.0: SÁNG KIẾN TỪ QUỐC TẾ ĐẾN ĐỊA PHƯƠNG PART 3- DEVELOPING BUSINESS SUSTAINABILITY IN THE CONTEXT OF INDUSTRY 4.0: INTERNATIONAL TO LOCAL INITIATIVES 21 JAPANESE FINTECH: PROBLEMS AND DEVELOPMENT 329 PROSPECTS Assoc. Prof. Dr. Victor Gorshkov 22 PRESENT CONDITIONS AND PROBLEMS OF WORK STYLE 339 REFORM IN JAPAN Assoc. Prof. Dr. Hiroaki Hayashi
8. TT Tên bài viết Trang 23 LEVERAGING INDUSTRY 4.0: THE NEED FOR VIETNAMESE 346 BUSINESS TO EMBRACE GLOBAL BUSINESS ETHICS Nguyen Thi Ngoc Anh, PhD. 24 INTERNET OF THINGS: APPLICATIONS IN BUSINESS FIELD 359 IN FOREIGN COUNTRIES AND IMPLICATIONS TO VIETNAMESE ENTERPRISES Assoc. Prof. Dr. Do Thi Dong 25 THE SUSTAINABLE BUSINESS MODELS FOR INDUSTRY 4.0 372 IN VIETNAM Huynh Ba Thuy Dieu, MBA. Nguyen Thi Quynh Anh, MBA. 26 PHÁT TRIỂN VÀ KINH DOANH BỀN VỮNG CỦA DOANH 394 NGHIỆP VỪA TRONG BỐI CẢNH CÁCH MẠNG CÔNG NGHIỆP 4.0 Ths. Lê Quốc Anh Lê Thị Trâm Anh 27 THE HUMAN RESOURCES IN VIETNAM SUPPLY CHAIN 410 Nguyen Thi Dieu Chi 28 GIẢI PHÁP THÚC ĐẨY ỨNG DỤNG CÔNG NGHỆ CAO Ở CÁC 419 DOANH NGHIỆP NÔNG NGHIỆP Ở VIỆT NAM TS. Nguyễn Thu Thủy 29 IMPLICATIONS FOR SUSTAINABLE ENTREPRENEURSHIP 428 IN THE VIETNAM SERVICE SECTOR IN THE CONTEXT OF 4TH INDUSTRIAL REVOLUTION Hoang Viet Huy, MA. Ha Son Tung, PhD. 30 LIÊN KẾT PHÁT TRIỂN DU LỊCH BỀN VỮNG TẠI BA TỈNH 442 DUYÊN HẢI MIỀN TRUNG VIỆT NAM Ths. Ngô Thị Hiền Trang 31 TRUYỀN THÔNG MARKETING KỸ THUẬT SỐ TẠI CÁC 457 DOANH NGHIỆP VIỆT NAM TRONG KỶ NGUYÊN CÁCH MẠNG CÔNG NGHIỆP 4.0 GS.TS. Nguyễn Viết Lâm
9. TT Tên bài viết Trang 32 KINH DOANH BỀN VỮNG: HIỂU TỪ CÁCH MẠNG CÔNG NGHIỆP 473 4.0 TỚI NĂNG LỰC ĐỔI MỚI SÁNG TẠO DOANH NGHIỆP TS. Lê Ngọc Thông Dương Trọng Hạnh 33 NHÃN SINH THÁI – CÔNG CỤ HỖ TRỢ PHÁT TRIỂN BỀN VỮNG 489 TS. Đặng Thị Kim Thoa 34 XÂY DỰNG HỆ THỐNG THÔNG TIN KẾ TOÁN QUẢN TRỊ 502 CHO CÁC DOANH NGHIỆP DƯỢC PHẨM VIỆT NAM TRONG BỐI CẢNH CÁCH MẠNG CÔNG NGHIỆP 4.0 Ths. Hàn Thị Lan Thư 35 EVALUATION OF THE DISCLOSURE DATA OF SUSTAINABILITY 514 REPORTS IN THE CONTEXT OF INDUSTRY 4.0: A CASE STUDY IN SEVEN COUNTRIES Tran Nhat Minh, MA. Chu Tuan Vu, MA. 36 INDUSTRIAL REVOLUTION 4.0: DEVELOPING 534 OPPORTUNITIES FOR VIETNAMESE COMMERCIAL BANKS Doan Phuong Thao, PhD. Ngo Thanh Xuan, MBA. 37 TRÁCH NHIỆM XÃ HỘI – ĐẠO ĐỨC KINH DOANH VÀ SỰ 547 PHÁT TRIỂN BỀN VỮNG Ths. Trần Đức Dũng 38 ASSIST STUDENTS IN ACCESSING LABOR MARKET IN 572 INDUSTRY 4.0 Tran Thi Phuong Hien, PhD. 39 ALIGNING ORGANIZATIONAL CULTURE AND STRATEGY AT 596 THE UNIVERSITY LEVEL FOR CORPORATE SUSTAINABILITY - THE CASE OF NATIONAL ECONOMICS UNIVERSITY Ha Son Tung, PhD. PHẦN 4 - CÁC VẤN ĐỀ KHÁC PART 4- OTHER TOPICS 40 SIMILARITIES IN POLICY FRAMEWORK RELATED TO 606 FEMALE WORKER IN TWO GERMANYS Mihoko Satogami, PhD.
10. TT Tên bài viết Trang 41 THE FACTORS AFFECTING THE SUPPLY CHAIN INTEGRATION 615 IN FISHERY INDUSTRY- RESEARCH IN BEN TRE PROVINCE Assoc. Prof. Dr. Nguyen Thanh Hieu Nguyen Ngoc Trung 42 IMPACTS OF NATURE OF WORK, SOCIAL ENVIRONMENT 631 AND BENEFITS ON MOTIVATION OF EMPLOYEES: THE CASE OF A PUBLIC ORGANIZATION IN BRITAIN Hoang Le An 43 IMPACT OF SHARING MECHANISMS ON SUPPLY CHAIN 662 PERFORMANCE: EVIDENCE FROM AGRICULTURAL SUPPLY CHAIN IN RED RIVER DELTA Lai Manh Khang, MBA. Nguyen Thi Minh Hue Lai Trung Kien Pham Thi Phuong Oanh 44 ASSESSING THE ENTREPRENEURIAL OPPORTUNITIES FOR 678 THE YOUTH IN BEN TRE Do Thi Hoa Lien Hoang Vo Hang Phuong 45 CHINA'S OUTWARD DIRECT INVESTMENT: FOCUSING ON 694 ONE BELT, ONE ROAD AREA Takuma Kobayashi, PhD.
11. ĐỀ DẪN HỘI THẢO KINH DOANH BỀN VỮNG TRONG BỐI CẢNH CUỘC CÁCH MẠNG CÔNG NGHIỆP 4.0: SỰ CẦN THIẾT NGHIÊN CỨU VÀ NHỮNG VẤN ĐỀ ĐẶT RA I. ĐẶT VẤN ĐỀ Năm 2012, Thủ tướng Chính phủ Việt Nam đã ban hành quyết định số 1393/QĐ-TTg phê duyệt “Chiến lược tăng trưởng xanh thời kỳ 2011-2020 và tầm nhìn đến 2050”. Theo đó, nền kinh tếđược tái cấu trúc dựa trên áp dụng công nghệ tiên tiến, sử dụng hiệu quả tài nguyên, giảm phát thải khí nhà kính, góp phần xoá đói giảm nghèo và tạo động lực thúc đẩy tăng trưởng kinh tế bền vững. Một điểm đáng lưu ý, phần lớn các chỉ tiêu mục tiêu của bản Chiến lược này liên quan đến xác định trách nhiệm xã hội của doanh nghiệp trong kinh doanh. Cụ thể, đến năm 2020: giá trị sản phẩm ngành công nghệ cao, công nghệ xanh trong GDP đạt 42-45%, giảm cường độ phát thải khí nhà kính 8-10% so với 2010, 100% cơ sở sản xuất kinh doanh mới áp dụng công nghệ thân thiện môi trường hoặc trang bị các thiết bị xử lý chất thải đạt tiêu chuẩn môi trường, 100% khu công nghiệp có hệ thống xử lý nước thải tập trung đạt tiêu chuẩn,v.v . Điều đó có nghĩa là Chiến lược tăng trưởng xanh chỉ có thểđi vào cuộc sống khi có sự tham gia thực hiện của doanh nghiệp và các doanh nghiệp cần phải coi kinh doanh bền vững là sứ mệnh của mình. Cuộc Cách mạng Công nghiệp 4.0 được nhận dạng những năm gần đây và tiến bộ nhanh đến chóng mặt sẽ làm cho thế giới thay đổi nhanh chóng. Cuộc cách mạng này được xem là một sự tiến hóa mang tính đột phá sang một thời kỳ phát triển mới của kinh tế tri thức. Nó không còn là đơn thuần chỉ là "mở rộng" số hóa kinh tế, dù sử dụng Internet như một nền tảng, bởi lẽ Cách mạng Công nghiệp 4.0 còn dựa vào nhiều thành tựu của tựđộng hóa, vật liệu mới, công nghệ sinh học, và chúng được "tích hợp" với nhau tạo ra sự thay đổi cơ bản cách sống. Cuộc Cách mạng Công nghiệp 4.0 đã tạo ra những cơ hội lớn trong phát triển kinh tế và kinh doanh, nó cho phép du nhập các công nghệ tiên tiến giúp tạo ra các sản phẩm và dịch vụ mới, tăng hiệu quả sản xuất, thúc đẩy sáng tạo. Tuy nhiên, những thách thức trong kinh doanh bền vững cũng đã xuất hiện bởicuộc cách mạng này, đó là: (i) Tiềm ẩn nguy cơ phá vỡ sự cân bằng của thị trường lao động, khi rôbốt và tựđộng hóa lên ngôi, số lượng lao động dư
12. thừa sẽ tăng lên; (ii) Khoảng cách giàu nghèo sẽ gia tăng giữa những đối tượng cung cấp vốn tài chính và vốn tri thức (các nhà sáng chế, cổđông và nhà đầu tư) và những đối tượng phụ thuộc vào sức lao động (người lao động). Như vậy, sứ mệnh kinh doanh bền vững được thực hiện trong bối cảnh cuộc Cách mạng Công nghiệp 4.0 với nhiều cơ hội và không ít thách thức. Điều này đặt ra câu hỏi cho các chủ thể kinh doanh: làm thế nào để vượt qua những thách thức và tận dụng triệt để các cơ hội từ Cách mạng Công nghiệp 4.0, lựa chọn các phương án phát triển kinh doanh đảm bảo tối ưu nhất yêu cầu bền vững. Đó cũng là những “đơn đặt hàng” từ phía thực tếđối với lĩnh vực nghiên cứu và triển khai, cần có những trao đổi, phân tích sâu sắc, tổng hợp đa chiều các khía cạnh: từ lý luận kinh doanh bền vững, Cách mạng Công nghiệp 4.0, tác động của cuộc cánh mạng này đối với kinh doanh bền vững, khả năng tiếp nhận của các chủ thể kinh doanh trong các điều kiện khác nhau, đến kinh nghiệm quốc tế và bài học cho Việt Nam trong quá trình hướng tới kinh doanh bền vững. Với cách đặt vấn đề nói trên, Hội thảo khoa học quốc tế: “Kinh doanh bền vững trong bối cảnh Cách mạng Công nghiệp 4.0” do Trường Đại học Kinh tế Quốc dân chủ trì với sự phối hợp với Trường Đại học Kyoto, Nhật Bản và Trường Đại học Kỹ thuật Munich, CHLB Đức, có ý nghĩa rất quan trọng, vớikỳ vọng tìm đếnnhững câu trả lời cho những “đơn đặt hàng” từ phía thực tiễn đặt ra. II.MỘT SỐ NỘI DUNG TRAO ĐỔI TRONG HỘI THẢO Trong khung khổ chủđề Hội thảo: “ Kinh doanh bền vững trong bối cảnh Cách mạng Công nghiệp 4.0”, đã có 45 bài viết đến từ các nhà khoa học, các chuyên gia, nhà quản lý và hoạch định chính sách với nhiều nội dung phong phú và sâu sắc. Dựa trên những phân tích và những gợi mở từ các bài viết, căn cứ vào cách đặt vấn đề ở trên, chúng tôi xin được đưa ra 5 nội dung trao đổi chủ yếu trong buổi hội thảo này. Nội dung thứ nhất: Phát triển kinh doanh bền vững được xác định là trách nhiệm của doanh nghiệp đối với toàn xã hội. Các doanh nghiệp Việt Nam cần phải có những cải cách gì để đáp ứng tốt được những yêu cầu xã hội đặt ra. Rõ ràng là, để có phát triển xanh, bền vững, với tư cách là tế bào của nền kinh tế, hoạt động kinh doanh của doanh nghiệp không phải chỉ chạy theo lợi nhuận cá
13. nhân, trong ngắn hạn và chấp nhận bằng mọi giá, mà phải hướng tới một hình ảnh doanh nghiệp kinh doanh bền vững. Kinh doanh bền vững được hiểu, đó là việc duy trì được trạng thái kinh doanh có hiệu quả cao một cách lâu dài trong các điều kiện khắc nghiệt và đổi thay, đồng thờithực hiện được sự lan toả tích cực đến các đối tượng chịu ảnh hưởng. Điều đó đặt doanh nghiệp phải gắn kết đượchoạt động kinh doanh với thực hiện tốt được trách nhiệm của mình đối với xã hộitrên tất cả các mặt: bảo vệ môi trường, tiến bộ xã hội, phát triển khoa học công nghệ và đổi mới sáng tạo, gắn kết cộng đồng và bảo vệ người lao động, v.v Nhiều bài viết trong Kỷ yếu hội thảo đã đề cập đến nội dung trên theo một số lĩnh vựccụ thể:quản trị phát triển nguồn nhân lực, liên kết phát triển kinh doanh của các tỉnh, vùng, phát triển nông nghiệp công nghệ cao, thân thiện môi trường, phát triển thị trường sản phẩm quốc tế theo hướng bền vững, thực hiện trách nhiệm xã hội của doanh nghiệp, kiểm soát quản trị quá trình phát triển doanh nghiệp, các hoạt động đổi mới trong quảng cáo, tiếp thị, nhãn sinh quan đối với sản phẩm hàng hoá, nghiên cứu hành vi tiêu dùng của các tầng lớp dân cư,v.v Để làm sâu sắc hơn những nội dung nêu trên, chúng tôi xin tiếptục phát triển một số khía cạnh cần trao đổi thêm : (i) Nội hàm của kinh doanh bền vững và cụ thể hoá trong các ngành, lĩnh vực, vùng và loại hình doanh nghiệp khác nhau; (ii) Khoảng cách giữa yêu cầu đặt với mức độ bảo đảm của các doanh nghiệpViệt Nam hiệnnay, những mâu thuẫn thường gặp phảicủa doanh nghiệp trong thực hiện kinh doanh bền vững; (iii) Cần có những cải cách gì tiếp theo đối với các doanh nghiệp, các cơ quan quản lý, các tổ chức xã hội để thực hiện sứ mệnh kinh doanh bền vững ở Việt Nam Nội dung thứ hai: Cuộc Cách mạng Công nghiệp 4.0 đặt ra những ràng buộc mới trong quá trình thực hiện kinh doanh của các doanh nghiệp Việt Nam. Các chủ thể kinh tế cần nắm bắt và cập nhật như thế nào để đổi mới hoạt động, bảo đảm kinh doanh bền vững. Nhiều bài viết trong cuốn kỷ yếu hội thảo đã nhấn mạnh đến sự gắn kết của cuộc Cách mạnh Công nghiệp 4.0 với thực hiện mục tiêu phát triển kinh doanh bền vững trên các khía cạnh tổng quát cũng như cụ thể, như: Kinh doanh bền vững trong bối cảnh Cách mạng Công nghiệp 4.0, Tổng quan về cuộc cách mạng 4.0 và cơ sở kinh doanh bền vững, Nông nghiệp xanh với cách mạng 4.0, Mô hình kinh doanh bền vững trong bối cảnh công nghiệp 4.0, Phát triển công nghiệp hỗ trợ với cuộc cách mạng
14. công nghiệp 4.0, Cách mạng Công nghiệp 4.0 với đổi mới sáng tạo của doanh nghiệp, Đạo đức nghề nghiệp, đạo đức kinh doanh với cách mạng 4.0, Cách mạng công nghiệp 4.0 với hoàn thiện hệ thống thông tin kế toán,v.v Một số phát hiện và đề xuất của các bài viết này đặt ra cho hội thảonhững nội dung trao đổi sâu sắc hơn: (i) Những thách thức của Cách mạng 4.0 đến phát triển kinh tế và kinh doanh của Việt Nam: nền kinh tế năng suất thấp, áp dụng khoa học công nghệ rất hạn chế, không có những tập đoàn, công ty thuộc “top” hàng đầu thế giới, cuộc Cách mạng Công nghiệp 4.0 có thể làm doãng thêm khoảng cách phát triểncủa Việt Nam so với thế giới, công nghệ mới và rôbốt có thể dẫn đến tình trạng thất nghiệp hàng loạt vì không thể chuyển đổi nghề kịp thời, phân hóa giàu nghèo gia tăng thêm và các xung đột xã hội có thể nổi lên; (ii) Việt Nam phải nỗ lực tiếp nhận cuộc cách mạng này để thay đổi trên cơ sở thực hiện nhiều cuộc “cách mạng con” từ tư duy đến hoạch định chính sách, tạo đột phá trong tạoviệc làm năng suất cao, loại trừ tư tưởng lợi ích nhóm, cục bộ, hay bảo hộ; tái cấu trúc nền kinh tế theo hướng cân bằng động lực kinh tế với an sinh xã hội; (iii) Liên quan đến kinh doanh bền vững trong bối cảnh Cách mạng Công nghiệp 4.0, các doanh nghiệp cần quan tâm nhiều hơn đến vấn đạo đức kinh doanh: Nếu quan niệm đạo đức là “trái tim” của kinh doanh, đổi mới sáng tạo là “bộ não” của kinh doanh, Cách mạng Công nghiệp 4.0 đã tạo cơ hội cho các doanh nghiệpcó “bộ não” thông minh hơn, thì “trái tim” của kinh doanh cũng cần phải có sự hoàn thiện theo hướng liêm chính, có như vậy, doanh nghiệp mới thực hiện được các cơ hội kinh doanh mới dựa trên giá trị cốt lõi, nền tảng vềđạo đức kinh doanh và đổi mới sáng tạo, vì sự phát triển bền vững của mình. Nội dung thứ ba: tính chấtvận hành của Cách mạng Công nghiệp 4.0 khác nhau đối với từng ngành, từng lĩnh vực, từng loại hình doanh nghiệp. Các chủ thể kinh tế khác nhau cần có cơ chế sử dụng thành quả của cuộc cách mạng này như thế nào trong việc hướng tới kinh doanh bền vững. Nhiều trong số các bài viết của các nhà khoa học đã đề cập nội dung tác động khá đa chiều củacủa Cách mạng Công nghiệp 4.0: (i) Đến các ngành,các lĩnh vực kinh tế khác nhau như ngành công nghiệp cơ khí chế tạo, công nghiệp hỗ trợ, ngành dệt may, ngành điện tử, ngành du lịch, ngành nông nghiệp, ngành dược, ngành bán lẻ nội địa, xuất nhập khẩu; ngân hàng thương mại, lĩnh vực thông tin marketing,v.v ; (ii) Đến các vùng và địa phương khác nhau như: vùng duyên hải miền Trung, vùng Đồng
15. bằng sông Hồng, tỉnh Thanh Hoá, Bến Tre. Để có thể tìm ra nguyên lý hệ thống trong vận hành kinh doanh bền vững dưới tác động phức tạp của Cách mạng Công nghiệp 4.0, hội thảo muốn hướng sự trao đổi đến: (i) Phân nhóm ngành, lĩnh vực, vùng kinh tế của quốc gia như thế nào để có khả năng mô hình hoá sự tác động của Cách mạng Công nghiệp 4.0 đến phát triển kinh tế và kinh doanh; (ii) Hình thành những mô hình kinh doanh bền vững phù hợp với từng nhóm ngành, vùng dưới tác động của các biến sốđặt ra từ Cách mạng Công nghiệp 4.0; (iii) Những sự thay đổinào cần đặt ra trong hoạch định chiến lược, trong xây dựng chính sách, trong tổ chức và quản lý hoạt động kinh doanh phù hợp với bối cảnh Cách mạng Công nghiệp 4.0. Nội dung thứ tư: Tác động của cuộc Cách mạng Công nghiệp 4.0 đến phát triển kinh doanh bền vững ở các nước trên thế giới như thế nào và những bài học gì được vận dụng cho Việt Nam. Đối với các nước phát triển, cách mạng 4.0 với các biểu hiện của nó đã thực sự tạo những nền tảng quan trọng cho quá trình tái cấu trúc nền kinh tế và phát triển kinh doanh của các chủ thể kinh tế. Một số bài viết trong kỷ yếu hội thảo đã đề cập đến nội dung này như:tăng trưởng xanh trong bối cảnh cách mạng 4.0 ở Hàn Quốc, cách mạng 4.0 và sự thay đổi hệ thống kinh tếởNhật Bản, vấn đề tạo động lực việc làm trong bối cảnh công nghiệp 4.0, những vấn đề đặt ra trong phát triển của một số doanh nghiệp điển hình của một số nước như Nhật Bản, Ba Lan.v.v Các kết quả nghiên cứu đã cho thấy, đối với các nước phát triển, quá trình tiếp nhậnvà thực hiện cách mạng công nghiệp 4.0 không phải không có những khó khăn để vận hành phát triển kinh tế và kinh doanh và họđã phải vượt qua. Vì vậy, việc đi sâu phân tích sâu sắc và hệ thống hơn nữa những kinh nghiệm quốc tế (cả các nước phát triển và các nước đang phát triển) và những bài học kinh nghiệm gì sẽđược rút ra cho Việt Nam với lợi thế là nước đi sau, là những vấn đề cần được trao đổi trong hội thảo. Nội dung thứ năm: Trường đại học sẽ làm gì để góp phần tham gia vào thực hiện sứ mệnh kinh doanh bền vững của các chủ thể kinh tếởViệt Nam trong bối cảnh Cách mạng Công nghiệp 4.0 Có 3 vấn đề đặt ra liên quan đến các trường đại học từ thực tiễn đòi hỏi thực hiện mục tiêu phát triển kinh tế và kinh doanh bền vững trong bối cảnh Cách mạng
16. Công nghiệp 4.0. Các vấn đề này ít nhiều được đề cập trong một số bài viết trong kỷ yếu, tuy nhiên còn ít và chưa đủ độ sâu, rất cần trao đổi trong buổi hội thảo này, đó là: (i) Thị trường lao động, nhất là lao động có trình độ cao đòi hỏi khắt khe hơn, sinh viên tốt nghiệp cần phải có kiến thức, kỹ năng và thái độ thích ứng; (ii) Cách mạng Công nghiệp 4.0 tạo nhiều cơ hội cho các trường đại học tham gia thị trường khoa học công nghệ, nhưng đòi hỏi phải thay đổi trong tư duy, phương pháp và cách tiếphiện đại với tính ứn dụng cao hơn; (iii) Các trường đại học phải có những thay đổi trong nội dung chương trình đào tạo, phương pháp tổ chức đào tạo, kể cả các chuẩn đầu ra của các ngành, chuyên ngành đào tạo, nhất là các chuyên ngành liên quan trực tiếp đến phát triển kinh tế kinh doanh bền vững. III. KẾT LUẬN Kinh doanh bền vững trong bối cảnh Cách mạng Công nghiệp 4.0, vừa là mục tiêu, vừa là sứ mệnh, đồng thời là những ràng buộc đặt ra đối với các chủ thể kinh tế và kinh doanh ở Việt Nam hiện nay và trong nhiều năm tới. Đây cũng là mối quan tâm hàng đầu của các nhà lãnh đạovà quản lý khi hoạch định phát triển và xây dựng chính sách. Hội thảo về chủđề này thực sự có ý nghĩa quan trọng cả về lý luận và thực tiễn. Các gợi ý về nội dung trao đổi trong hội thảo, một mặt tổng hợp từ kết quả nghiên cứu ban đầu từ các bài viết khoa học đăng trong kỷ yếu, nhưng đó cũng chính là những trăn trở của thực tiễn khi Việt Nam bước vào giai đoạn Cách mạng Công nghiệp 4.0 với rào cản thách thức. Hội thảo kỳ vọng thu được những kết quả như mong muốn. Rất mong nhận được các ý kiến từ phía các nhà khoa học, các chuyên gia, các nhà lãnh đạo, quản lý và hoạch định chính sách. Hà Nội, ngày 10 tháng 9 năm 2018
17. PHẦN 1- KINH DOANH BỀN VỮNG TRONG BỐI CẢNH CÁCH MẠNG CÔNG NGHIỆP 4.0: NHỮNG VẤN ĐỀ CHUNG VÀ BẰNG CHỨ NG THỰC TIỄN PART 1- BUSINESS SUSTAINABILITY IN THE CONTEXT OF INDUSTRY 4.0: GENERAL ISSUES AND PRACTICES 1
18. “SOCIETY 5.0” AND ECONOMIC SYSTEM TRANSFORMATION IN JAPAN Prof. Dr. Satoshi Mizobata1 Kyoto University, Japan Abstract Collapse of the economic growth and so-called “lost decades” required transformation of the Japanese corporate system which became from the growth engine to malfunctioned barrier under globalization. Traditionally, the Japanese innovation system was private-led and corporate institutes as well as supported by the government policy. As far as innovation was based on the Japanese corporate/economic system, the post bubble-collapse innovation has been related not only with new technology but also with transformation of the economic/corporate system with changes in work style and values. The Japanese version “Industry 4.0”, so-called “Society 5.0” aimed at reorganization of industry, corporations and society, and the policy has been promoted in 2000s, especially under the Abenomics government. This paper examines a series of policy focusing the above target. In reality, we can observe the positive symptoms: transition to open innovation system, an increase of R&D expenditures in the export competitive sectors such as automobile, home electronics, and others. However, at the same time, there are not so many innovative enterprises and the Japanese international competitiveness looks to decline. The state higher education organizations’ budgets are restrictive and damage in research potential and basic sciences become a constraints for the economic development. In the Japanese transformation, innovation has been in effect, before the drastic changes in labour system have reached a consensus among people. Society 5.0 type innovation is quite different in the scope and speed from the previous industrial revolutions. Prompt innovation needs quick social “adaptation” which eases adjustment costs. As a result, trust to the government and markets, and market/government quality has been deteriorated under the innovation, and Japan has been in the trap of a vicious circle. In short, the economic system transformation for innovation becomes a constraint of innovation. “Society 5.0” requires high quality markets/government based on the adaptive consensus and trust to the institutions. JEL classification: D40, E61, O31, O32, O38, O57, P16 Keywords: innovation, market quality, economic system, policy, government, trust 1 mizobata@kier.kyoto-u.ac.jp 2
19. Introduction The Japanese economy entered into the long-term recession, so-called “lost decades” after a collapse of the bubble economy in the beginning of 1990s. This process may be regarded as overlapping with the period of the rise of neo-liberalism in the world and the Japanese economic system has been spontaneously transformed into the American type. In practice, the corporate reform in 1990s- 2000s including corporate governance and stewardship has been based on the shareholder authority. In addition, in this process, the innovation has become a cornerstone for the economic recovery in Japan, and after 2000s, ICT (Information and Communication Technology), IoT (Internet of Things) and AI (Artificial Intelligence) have strengthened their position in innovation. The German type revolution “Industry 4.0” (the forth industrial revolution2) has been focused as “Society 5.0” in Japan, and this strategy may well become a strategy for the economic recovery. In short, The Japanese economic system sustaining the economic growth had changed into the growth constraints under the new international environment and the market environments, and the escape from “lost decades” means search for a new strategy by the system transformation. As far as the revolution “Society 5.0” refers AI, robots, big data as a basis of international competitiveness, it has linked with industrial structure and the manufacturing regime, and the competitiveness in this field has been directly linked with the economic system supremacy over others. Thus the severe international competition includes technology as well as economic system of corporations and society. The above transformation looks similar to the system transformation in the former socialist economies. The contemporary innovation in the world is linked with the social system itself. Reconsideration of the growth path is connected with socio-economic institutions and all the countries can be regarded as a “transition economy”. This paper examines the innovation policy in Japan, and why Japan failed in innovation and whether the contemporary innovation policy may be free from the past failures. Moreover, the new industrial revolution “Society 5.0” has changed job regime and work style, and it has potential to cause conflicts with the traditional Japanese customs. Therefore, innovation itself becomes a trap deteriorating markets/governments for innovation. Thus, the paper investigates the innovation adaptability of the Japanese society and its conditions. 1. Why Japan failed in innovation? 2 See Schwab, 2016. 3
20. Traditionally, the Japanese innovation has been led by the government and the private corporations. On the one hand, big corporations established their own research institutes in order to catch up the global R&D standard in 1950s. Those institutes expanded their research levels into both applied and basic. In short, corporations invented the Japanese innovation style based on the linkage among basic research, applied research, innovation and commercialization on their own expenses. As far as the government supported those research institutes and the business world promoted cooperation among those institutes, the innovation system was named as “convoy system” (Yamaguchi 2016:189). This special competition rule on innovation faced to its malfunction, and after the collapse of the bubble economy, the system drastically diminished. All the institutes have changed their roles and functions; they changed innovation system from closed to open with universities. In addition, the competitive advantages of the Japanese economic system have been lost under the decomposition and outsourcing in the manufacturing. “The decomposition of production has undermined the competitive advantage of Japanese business models that rely on long-term relationships with suppliers, banks, and workers to foster incremental advances in production processes. Japanese manufacturers have maintained a stronger competitive position in products that continue to be characterized by integral production (such as automobiles and digital cameras) than in those that have shifted further to modular production (such as personal computers and cellular telephones)” (Vogel, 2013: 2). The Japanese economic policy has been based on the state-led industrial policy. The innovation policy has been deeply liked with the Japanese growth strategy. Under the new environment such as energy constraints, need to develop local community, and change of the growth engine based on the domestic technology, in 1979-1980, MITI (Ministry of International Trade and Industry 3 ) officially raised the concept “Technology-driven nation”. The government regarded the catch-up growth strategy with technology transfer exhausted, and raised the independent technology based growth by improving manufacturing technology. The decisive policy, “the science and technology basic plan”, started in 1995, and it meant “transformation of industrial policy into realization of practical industrial technology policy” (Kawamura and Takeda 2014:6). The government emphasized innovation for building the new industry. In spite of the aggressive bias to the innovation policy, the results are not successful and the traditional tasks remain. The following three measures typically express the results of 3 After 2001 it was reorganized into METI: Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry. 4
21. the innovation policy: industrial cluster; direct subsidies to R&D investment; business promotion (Hoshi and Okazaki 2016). Although in 1983, MITI adopted Act on the Development of High Technology Agglomeration Regions, in 2001, METI newly started Industrial Cluster 4 Policy. This policy aimed open-cooperation innovation system based on the Silicon Valley model in USA. The regional innovation policy has evolved from subsidies distribution to the innovation-biased project. Secondly, the government subsidies are diversified, and the national projects can be regarded as the typical case for creating the new industries. Thirdly the business promotion policy has been carried out as SME policy. The NIS also drastically changed after 1980s (Kawamura and Takeda 2014). In order to adapt new technology and to respond a growing sense of crisis in declining competitiveness, the NIS has become more flexible and the academic society has also definitely been integrated into the NIS5. The policy results, however, are not so effective. Okubo, Okazaki and Tomiura (2016) concluded the policy led agglomeration of low productivity firms under the subsidies. Hoshi and Okazaki (2016) insists the following institutional bases are fragile, which lead all the players to be cautious on innovation: financial system has insufficient screening ability; due to a low-mobilization of labour market, the job market does not function; the cooperation between business and universities is weak; big business has organized the closed R&D organizations; Japan lacks social norms cultivating entrepreneurship; the star-up infrastructure is premature. The traditional Japanese business organizations and values changed into barriers for open innovation. Yamaguchi (2016) points the institutional weakness vividly. The big business’s research institutes have been shrunk since a collapse of the bubble economy. Due to a lack of networking between academic society and business, the fundamental research has also weakened. The strength has changed into weakness. 2. Drastic development of the Japanese innovation policy The long-term vision of Japan has been traditionally based on the Science and Technology Basic Plan drafted by Cabinet Office of the Japanese Government since the year 1996. Now, Cabinet Office adopted the 5th Science and Technology Basic Plan (Council for Science, Technology and Innovation, 2015). In parallel, the government established Council for Science, Technology and Innovation for the important policy in 4 The state where industries are agglomerated in broad areas with competitively advantageous industries as the core through the development of a business environment in which new business are created one after another. (METI) 5 See Industrial Structure Council 2009. 5
22. 2001 within Cabinet Office and was reorganized into Council for Science and Technology6. This organization schemed and adjusted policy on innovation as a whole. The innovation 2025 strategy was drafted in February 2007, and the Prime Minister Shinzo Abe defined his view on innovation which meant dynamic social changes. Even though the government expressed the comprehensive view on innovation, it lacked a sense of impending crisis, compared with the strategy in the then German strategy7 (The Japan Research Institute, 14 May 2017, accessed in 1 August 2018). The contemporary policy may be regarded as a growth strategy of Abenomics under the Abe government. In December 2012, the Cabinet established the “Headquarters for Japan’s Economic Revitalization,” and in 2013 under the Headquarters, the Cabinet held meetings of the “Industrial Competitiveness Council” and in September 2016 organized meetings of the “Council on Investment for the Future”. Based on the organizational changes, in 2013 Japan Revitalization Strategy and in 2014 Action Plan for Strengthening Industrial Competitiveness was adopted8 and on this line, Growth Strategy 2018 (Basic Outlook and Key Strategies) was drafted in 2017 and 2018. Through the above strategies, the key moment was a society construction by the innovation, and the 2016 Science and Technology Basic Plan raised “Society5.0”9 realizing super smart society that brings sustainable growth and self-sustaining regional development, ensures the safety and security for our nation and its citizens, respond to global challenges and contribute to global development, gives sustainable creation of intellectual property using ICT. Super smart society is defined as “a society where the various needs of society are finely differentiated and met by providing the necessary products and services in the required amounts to the people who need them when they need them, and in which all the people can receive high-quality services and live a comfortable, vigorous life that makes allowances for their various differences such as age, sex, region, or language” 6 The Cabinet Office started “Impulsing paradigm change through disruptive technologies program” and has focused revolutionary innovation. 7 See Federal Ministry of Education and Research 2006. German clarified its lack of competitiveness on cost and sought the new competitiveness through innovation. In 2011, based on the negative impact of the Lehman shock of 2008, German started the new controversy on innovation, and in 2013 Recommendations for implementing the strategic initiative INDUSTRIE4.0 (digitalization), Final report of the Industrie4.0 Working Group was adopted. In 2015 German expanded its sphere into the service sector. 8 Japan Revitalization Strategy was revised in 2015 and 2016. Action Plan was also approved every year. 9 Innovation by the fourth Industrial Revolution means a drastic change of the society which follows the hunting society (Society 1.0), agricultural society (Society 2.0), industrial society (Society 3.0), and information society (Society 4.0). Society 5.0 means the new future society: “a human-centered society that balances economic advancement with the resolution of social problems by a system that highly integrates cyberspace and physical space” (Cabinet Office, Government of Japan, accessed in 1st August 2018). 6
23. (Cabinet Office, 2016:13). For the purpose of achieving the forth industrial revolution and Society 5.0, Growth Strategy 2017 and Growth Strategy 2018 also consider healthcare, medical and nursing, distribution reform, the world-wide supply-chain, infrastructure and city functions, and promotion of Fintech, energy and environment constraints, robots and biomaterial, and housing markets as strategic fields, and raise reforms for realization of Society 5.0. In contrast to Industry 4.0 in German and Industrial Internet in US progressing IoT in production/stock management of manufacturing, even though the Japanese government lacks a sufficient sense of crisis and is based on the abstract vision10, the Japanese Society5.0 aims formation of connected industries in manufacturing and socio-economic system. In short, the Japanese strategy includes not only an increase of productivity but also social transformation from the collapsed society in the post-bubble economy. From the angle of corporate system, to cope innovation policy, the corporations progress open-innovation replacing the traditional closed-innovation. Moreover, the new scheme of R&D infrastructure including higher education institutions and universities (formation of the new National Innovation System), and the policy includes human capital formation and mobility of labour. In short, the contemporary transformation means market adaptive reform of corporate system and socio-economic system, with the leadership of the government. Business society has also requested the strategy of innovation. The Japan Business Federation (Keidanren)11 announced that innovation became a key to sustainable development and illustrated the vision of building innovation-based country (Intellectual Property Policies and Systems for an Innovation-Driven Japan, Overview, 16 March 2010), and call for a New Science and Technology Basic Plan to create innovation. At that time, Keidanren requested reorganization of the headquarter of the government (19 October 2010), and announced a proposal titled “Aiming to Build ‘Japan as an Innovation-Oriented Nation”, which has three pillars: “expansion of ‘investment’ for the future,” “development of a ‘foundation’ for creating the future” and “development of ‘human resources’ capable of leading the future” (17 April 2012). Following the above proposals, Keidanren call for the new Science and Technology Basic Plan in March 2015, in which Keidanren expressed the basic vision of the new industry creation, super smart society, NIS with open innovation. Following the 10 Even though Growth Strategy 2017 and 2018 suggests a sense of crisis in aging society and decreasing workforce, under the Abenomics policy, the economic situation is considered as positive virtuous circle. At the same time, the long-term stagnation is common to the developed countries. 11 See (accessed in 1 August 2018). 7
24. government strategy and plans, Keidanren raises some measures for Society 5.0: formation of business models and knowledge/rule formation, building open innovation (15 May 2018). Keidanren stands as a strong voice to the innovation policy. Japan Association of Corporate Executives (Keizaidouyukai) may be also regarded as an influential body to the government. This Association announced the influential proposals as follows: “Development of innovation-oriented management achieving the high targets” (2008), “Enhancing true playmaker function for realizing R&D innovation” (2012), “Management behavior principles for innovation promotion” (2017). Particularly, the Association considered that Japan needs the fundamental transformation after the World War II, and expressed its basic view “Japan 2.0” in 2016. This view is based on three basic general changes (globalization, digitalization, and socialization/diversity) and domestic changes in the Japanese corporations (Japan Association of Corporate Executives 2016). The business society has stronger sense of crisis in the global competitiveness and considers the government-led strategy as a prop for innovation promotion. As far as the government and the private sector have worked hand in hand to promote innovation, the Japanese tradition economic system may be regarded as unchanged. 3. Reality and results of innovation policy How can we evaluate reality and the results of innovation policy, so-called Society 5.0? Here, based on the public data, I will illustrate reality. Particularly, data of Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications, “Science and Technology survey results “, are helpful for the general investigation of the confusing results Traditional Japanese innovators - the enterprises innovation institutes - have diminished since 1980s (Yamaguchi 2016:13). After the second half of 1990s many famous innovative enterprises shrunk their innovation base12. The results are not so simple. The quantitative data include confusing results. In spite of the lost decades, R&D expenditure has increased (Figure 1). However, the R&D investment value of Japan is not small; it has not been linked with the corporations’ performance (Otsuka 2011). Even though the global economic crisis damaged R&D expenditure in the private and the public, it recovered under the “Abenomics policy”. The result, however, cannot be overestimated. The expenditure has been vulnerably affected by the business conditions, and it reached 18.4 trillion Yen, 3.42 % of GDP in 2016. The investment has been outstripped by China, and looked stagnant. Particularly, share of R&D in the total 12 The USA corporate institutes withdrew from the private sector research in 1990s, and Japan followed this trend. Hitachi stopped institute for basic science in fact, and NTT, NEC and Sony and others diminished their R&D functions due to their financial fragility (Yamaguchi 2016:13). 8
25. investment shows a decline till 2012, and after that we can observe a recovery trend (Figure 2). The public expenditure in the universities has been stagnant or declining, and the private business has been kept as a main engine of innovation (Figure 3). The economic system has been unchanged or deteriorated. R&D efficiency (corporate value added/total R&D expenditure) has been low, compared with other OECD countries. Japan’s share of high-technology industry in the world has declined. The corporations have been conservative in R&D. They (78.1% of the total) focused on the short term R&D (1-4 years), and this trend enhanced itself (Institute for Future Engineering 2016:20). As far as corporations have strong risks in middle and long-term R&D investment, they expect the leading role of the government. Almost all R&D has been carried out by their own corporations and/or their group (70.5% in 2015), and 50 % corporations have no changes in open innovation (Institute for Future Engineering 2016). The total number of scientific researchers is stable or is lightly increasing in 2000s (60% in the private sector in 2014), and liquidity of researchers is low (METI 2016). The private sector looks successful. The top Japanese multinationals in the automobile have occupied the leading position, and manufacturing sectors can be regarded as main players of innovation. Particularly, the following four sectors may be regarded as the promising sectors: life science with pharmaceutical), information and communication technology (ICT), environment, nanotechnology and material (Figure 4, 5). Figure 4 indicates automobile has kept a leading, and ICT looks declining. The investigation on R&D activities by Nihonkeizai Newspaper (26 July 2018) also clarified the current investment: 43.9% companies of the total invested the maximum in R&D and particularly automobile and home electronics companies have concentrated on the advanced research such as AI and automatic driving and others13. As far as the export companies led innovation, the traditional R&D model has survived. However, R&D does not always lead the high performance. Even though the Japanese R&D accumulated investment has been large, the companies’ profits have been small. Sakakibara and Tsujimoto (2004) certify a decline of R&D efficiency. Analyzing 43 large corporations, a third companies cannot recover their investment. High performance companies have following characteristics different from the traditional economic system: companies have strategy concentrating their investment into advantageous and competitive fields; when the company has no technology; companies 13 Even though the investigation indicated an increase of R&D investment of the Japanese corporations, their size is smaller than the top companies in Europe/America, and their competitiveness is not always superior. 9
26. have accepted it from outside (Nihonkeizai Newspaper, 26 February 2018)14. Technology trade has drastically changed. Till 1990s, Japan was the net importer of technology (USA occupied the main exporter). However, after 1990s, Japan has shown a sharp increase of technology trade profits. In 2015, export was about 4 trillion Yen, and profits recorded 3.3 trillion Yen (Figure 6). Intra-firm trade has occupied 80% in export, and 30% in import. In short, technology trade is based on the traditional economic system. While the statistical data looks positively, the results cannot be overestimated, and the trade profits cannot bring about the economic growth. The reality is quite the opposite, and the existing innovation system has shown its deficiency 15 . The innovation policy is not so positively evaluated due to malfunctioned Japanese corporations, and both corporations and research units have lost their competitiveness due to severe administrative regulation. National Institute of Science and Technology Policy (NISTEP) “Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology (MEXT)” has clarified qualitative structure of innovation. NISTEP nationally investigated innovative behavior of Japanese corporations since 2004 (investigation of 1999-2001) and in 2015 NISTEP reported the result of 2012-2014, and the 2017 survey was distributed among 3,573 companies (1,844 of whom responded) with investments of at least 100 million yen which carry out internal research and development during 2014-201616. According to NISTEP (2016), innovation of Japan is lower than not only developed but also emerging China, and enforcement level is not so high. In 1999-2014, around 77% companies do not fulfill their innovation, and both product-innovation and process- innovation companies are stagnant (Figure 7). “47% of productive innovative enterprises implemented products into the market first in the world or in Japan (NISTEP, 2015: 5). Moreover, innovation is mainly based on group-enterprises. In spite of the policy, majority companies are conservative on innovation, and they are apt to keep their tradition organizations. NISTEP data raise us the causes that hinder innovation activity as follows: “lack of competent employees was the most prevalent hampering factor”(NISTEP, 2016: 7) of innovation (61%), and pursuit of short term goals or profits (51%) and restrictions of technology and know-how (49%) followed it. Lack of finance (34%) and difficulties in 14 Concerning the empirical survey by the Basic Survey of Japanese Business Structure and Activities, see Kim 2016. 15 The service sector expresses Japan’s competitiveness clearly. Labour productivity of Japan in manufacturing (in average) is smaller than that of USA by 30% and in service sector gap is bigger (50%) in 2010-2012. The gap in service sector tends to expand after the 2008 economic crisis (Japan Productivity Centre, USA and Japan Labour Productivity Comparison by Industry, 12 December 2016). Even though labour productivity in the service sector is difficult to measure precisely due to scale of economy, quality and extraordinary gaps within the service sector, this gap suggests weakness of the Japanese business organization and employment system. 16 See NISTEP 2004; 2010; 2014; 2016. 10
27. obtaining external finance (23%) are relatively small and administrative regulation and lack of customers’ response is marginal. In short, internal (organizational) constraints are influential than economic constraints, and this trend can be observed since 1999. Even though the companies which employ the doctorates are low, the big companies have higher share doctorates, and their product-innovation share is high. The doctorates have potential to link the company with universities (Ikeda and Inui, 2018). Though the characteristics of the doctorates market look similar internationally (Calmand, Kobayashi, Nohara, 2018), this type of market is restricted, under the home made skill formation system of the company. The Japanese economic system tends to organize R&D in-house, and it may be regarded as closed-type. The surveys by NISTEP show the path from other companies within the group is declining and the share of other companies of other groups and universities/higher education institutions have increased, and the above trend may well suggest open-innovation. This trend cannot be overestimated. In-house R&D has been kept in more than 40% companies, and particularly in the export leading sectors such as metal products and machine building, in-house becomes more popular. In addition, intra-group R&D transaction has been kept around 10% level. Even though in 2000s, the government is very active for implementing innovation, the results may be regarded as mixed. On the one hand, the companies are very active in innovation activities, and they have transformed from closed to open, and market transaction has become more influential. On the other hand, so many companies are conservative to innovation, and external pressure adapting the environment is restricted. They have kept their own system. In this case, not only organizations but also markets are conservative. The higher education (doctorates) job market is restricted, and companies have not organized their new skill formation. The internal factor, lack of competent employees, is a typical case. Moreover, companies have shown short-term profit seeking and risk-escaping behavior, and innovation policy cannot change economic system in Japan. 4. Trap of innovation policy: vanishing institutional complementarities17 When the Industry 4.0 type industrial revolution has caused the revolutionary increase of productivity, the place and values of “working” also drastically change. The outstanding feature of the new innovation is its rapid pace which makes adaptation and adjustment fall into difficulties. First, the future employment looks insecure, and employees have a risk to decrease 17 See Wood, Deeg and Wilkinson 2014: 36-37. 11
28. their wages under a rapid change. Even though unemployment rate in Japan is very low (2.8% in 2017), Society 5.0 has a risk to cause unemployment through an increase of productivity. In contrast to the view that “three trends – automation, globalization and the rising productivity of a highly skilled few – combining to generate an abundance of labour” (Avent, 2016: 5), as far as the labour force is under a decline, and Japan has a potential to be free from social conflicts (Growth Strategy 2017, 2018). However, reality is different from the official perspective and labour participation rate is decreasing as the USA case shows18. In case of Japan, although the total rate of participation looks unchanged, a spin-out of male workers and an entry of female. As Figure 8 indicate, while men in 25-34 age decreases their participation rate, female in the same age drastically increase their participation. When we compare 1980 and 2017, male workforce decreased by 4 million, and female workforce increased 7.5 million. At the same time, aging strata also decrease their participation. As the typical Japanese female participation rate traditionally suggested M-shape, the contemporary innovation means drastic change of work style (Figure 9). Moreover, this replacement process changes content of work and stability of employees. Digitalization, automatization and utilization replaced simple work into the operation of machine and computers. Regular workers have been replaced by irregularly employed. We can observe the drastic change in work style in the Japanese welfare model19. Moreover, concerning employment, as far as digitalization and automatization requires high skilled job and employees have been difficult to change their jobs into higher skilled one, firm specific skill formation has become outdated. The traditional Japanese skill formation and promotion regime suffered to change. In short the Japanese corporate system needs adaptation to the new environment. Secondly, “major technological revolutions usually generate enormous benefits alongside the disruption they cause” (Avent, 2016: 42). Digitalization by Society 5.0 also has potential to increase productivity, income and tax revenue, and to create the economic virtuous circle. However, as far as labour system has been shocked, and employees lost their traditional jobs and skill formation, and as far as “rapid growth in incomes keeps receding to higher and higher echelons of the income and skill distribution” (Avent, 2016: 56), falling wages and incomes have been clearly observed, and economic gaps also have expanded itself. The society has been instable, and all the stakeholders of the society have enhanced their compliant. 18 In USA, among all men, the rate of participation in the workforce dropped from about 76% in 1990 to 69% in 2015, corresponding to a decrease of nine million men (Avent, 2016: 3) 19 See Vogel 2018. 12
29. In practice, many workers were replaced from regular employees to irregular employees. The drastic change can be observed after 1995 till now (Figure 10). Irregularly employed are higher in the young generation (15-24) and aged one (65 and over), and the share has increased in 2000s undoubtedly (Figure 11). In addition, motivation looks to change. Figure 12 certifies workers’ own convenience is increasing and external factor that he/she cannot formal job is decreasing. In addition, among those with external factor, the share who hopes to change his/her job is decreasing. From the view point of labour adjustment, labour hording type employment has been kept and workers enhance their adaptation in the labour market. According to the research data of JILPT (2013)20, concerning the balance of regular and irregular, 50.1% enterprises regards reasonable, 17.6% tries to increase regular employment, and 14.4% tries to increase irregularly employment. For those demanding irregularly employment, though 46% requests costs cut and 38.7% requests employment adjustment, 35.7% demands continuous employment of aged (retired) workers. For those demanding regular employment, 53.75 requests workers’ self-training and 51.2% requests succession of skill formation. We may conclude the Japanese system is partially damaged and is partially preserved. However, as regular employment is replaced by irregular, and it is partially motivated by economizing labour costs, for the Japanese companies, this replacement means labour cost cut, and therefore this process follows wage decline21. Real wage increase till 1997, and after that till now, it has been declining. During 1997-2017, real wage lost more than 20% (Figure 13). Particularly, as in 2010s, wages of irregularly employed has sharply increased, regular workers suffered real wage decline. As for family income, we can observe the same trend as real wage. As a whole, the family cannot recover its income in 1994-2016, and they lost about one million yen. Even though the income level is low, aged family earns stably (Figure 14). As a result, the economic gap has drastically increased in 1981-2014. At the level of initially income without any redistribution, Gini coefficient sharply increased (Figure 15). However. In this period, Gini coefficient in redistributed income increases moderately. The Japanese welfare policy may be regarded as efficient, and it has potential to impose severe pressure to the budget. Another point of the employment change is a gap by generation and by status. Looking at Figure 16, even though in 1970-2002 unemployment rate increased, and 20 In questionnaire research to 20,000 enterprises (with employment 30 and over), respondents were 2,783 companies in February-March 2013. 21 The new industrial revolution causes an increase of high and low skilled jobs and a decline of middle skilled, particularly routine jobs. However, the declining degree of the middle in Japan is milder than that in USA (RIETI, 2017). 13
30. after that we can observe a slight improvement. At the very least, as far as unemployment rate keeps 2-3%, the Japanese labour adjustment looks to well function. However, adaptation of the Japanese labour hoarding includes conflicts. First of all, the workers easily divided into regularly and irregularly and it harms the Japanese skill formation process. Secondly, status is different by age. The younger generation (15-34 age), situation is huge different from other generation. In addition, the younger generation is apt to be employed as irregularly (Figure 11). Therefore economic gaps also reflect generation conflicts. We cannot ignore generation gaps in the economic situation. Thirdly, the above process deeply invades the field of labour market of innovation-driven human resources. Researchers have increased as Figure 17 suggests. In 2016, among 847.1 thousand, 486.2 thousand (57.4%) was employed in companies, and 322.1 thousand (38.0%) were employed in universities and others. 78.1 thousand engaged in ICT and the numbers is decreasing. 74.1 thousand was in automobile industry and its number is increasing. In short, researchers have been severely influenced by business fluctuation. In addition, due to a lack of research funds, supporting stuffs cannot be sufficiently employed (Figure 17). Figure 18 indicates researchers cannot dominantly engage in research, and the number of researchers who have another business except research is increasing. Researchers are also in the same job market (declining wages and economic gaps) in Japan. In addition, brain drain can be observed in the young scholars in Japan (Murakami 2008). Figure 19 suggests aging society in R&D. The share of aged increases, and the younger generation drastically shrank. Moreover, the Japanese R&D has insufficient foreign researchers, when we compare the case in USA (RIETI, 2017). The above phenomena suggest that the Japanese corporate institutions have not functioned sufficiently, and the traditional stable institutional complementarities of the Japanese corporations have eroded and vanished22. “There is a general consensus that national institutional orders are presently undergoing a period of great structural crisis” (Wood et al. 2014: 37). We may regard this vanishing and eroding as a trap of adaptation, because vanishing has increased organization and social costs, and when the resources are restricted stakeholders are apt to suppress their adaptive transformation. In short, even though the Japanese corporations have included unchanged trend, the speed and the scale of adaptation to industry 4.0 type innovation looks too large for its adaptation to digitalization and globalization. 22 Market and government also deteriorate their quality under the dynamic changes of technology and innovation. Concerning market quality, see Yano (2008; 2009; 2010; 2014). 14
31. Conclusion The Japanese version “Industry 4.0”, so-called “Society 5.0” aimed at reorganization of industry, corporations and society, and the policy has been promoted in 2000s, especially under the Abenomics government. Both the government and the business (world) have positively stressed a series of policy and announcement, and they consider the new strategy as indispensable for the contemporary international competition. However, the reality of innovation explains difficulties of the transformation of the Japanese corporations. Even though the companies oblige to change the innovation path from closed to open, they have kept their conservative behavior. Their spontaneous risk-escaping behavior prefers preserving strategy, and as a result, we can observe not only difficulties such as economic gaps and losers of society 5.0, but also half-hearted transformation of the Japanese corporations. Innovation looks to play a role of transformation path and of a trap of vanishing institutions. Figure 1 R&D expenditure in Japan 19.5 3.8 19 3.7 18.5 3.6 18 17.5 3.5 17 3.4 16.5 3.3 16 3.2 15.5 15 3.1 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 R&D expenditure % of GDP Note: expenditure: trillion Yen; share of GDP:% Source: Cabinet Office, Investigation on R&D, accessed in 6 August 2018. 15
32. Figure 2 R&D investment of enterprises in Japan 16 12 14 10 12 8 10 8 6 6 4 4 2 2 0 0 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 enterprise R&D expenditure R&D in investment (%) Note: Total expenditure in trillion Yen, in left axis. R&D % in right axis. R&D in investment is in manufacturing enterprises. Source: Cabinet office, R&D expenditure, and METI, Corporate Investment and Finance, accessed in 1 March 2017. Figure 3 R&D expenditure by sector in Japan (billion Yen) 20000 18000 16000 14000 12000 universities 10000 NPOs 8000 enterprises 6000 4000 2000 0 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Source: Cabinet Office, access in 6 August 2018 16
33. Figure 4 Enterprises R&D expenditure by industry (top three; %) 25 20 15 10 5 0 2007 2008 2009 2-1- 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 transportation machines ICT pharmatic Source: Cabinet Office, Investigation on R&D, accessed in 6 August 2018. Figure 5 Sector structure in R&D expenditure in Japan (2016) % transportation machines information and communication electric machine pharmaceutical other manufacturing others Source: Cabinet Office, R&D expenditure, access in 6 August 2018. 17
34. Figure 6 Technology trade in Japan (billion Yen) 4500 4000 3500 3000 2500 Export 2000 Import 1500 Balance 1000 500 0 Source: Cabinet Office, access in 6 August 2018. Figure 7 Innovation enterprises (%) 40 35 30 ratio of enterprsies conducted innovation 25 activities 20 product innovation realized 15 process innovation realized 10 5 0 1999-2001 2006-2008 2009-2011 2012-2014 Note: Each data has a different sample enterprises. Source: NISTEP, 2004, 2009, 2014, 2016. 18
35. Figure 8 Labour force participation rate (%) 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 1980 1990 2000 2010 2017 Labourforce participation rate (total) labourforce participation rate (male) labourforce participation rate (25-34 male) labourforce participation rate (female) labourforce participation rate (25-34 female) Source: Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communication, Labour Force Report. Figure 9 Employment Level by Age in Japan % 100 75 㻝㻥㻥㻜 50 㻝㻥㻥㻣 Female 㻞㻜㻜㻢 㻞㻜㻝㻡 25 0 15-19 20-24 25-29 30-34 35-39 40-44 45-49 50-54 55-59 60- Source: Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communication, Labour Force Report. 19
36. Figure 10 Non-regular employees (million, %) 40 25 35 20 30 25 15 20 10 15 10 5 5 0 0 1990 1995 2000 2002 2005 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 million % Note: million in the right axis, % in the left axis. Source: Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communication, Labour Force Report. Figure 11 Irregularly employed by age (%) 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 15-24 25-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65 and more 1990 2000 2014 2017 Source: Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communication, Labour Force Report. 20
37. Figure 12 reasons of irregularly employment (%) 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 work in convenient support household/children cannot find ou formal time household/studies care job 2014 2016 2018 Source: Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communication, Labour Force Report. Figure 13 Index of real wage (1990=100) 115 112.6 110.8 111.1 110 109.6 109.4109.5 108.4 107.8 106.5106.8 105 104.4 104.6 103.9 103.8103.8 103.2 102.6 100.8 100 99.4 99.5 98.6 98.1 97.7 95 92.1 91.991.7 91.2 90 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 real wage Note: total money wage, 1990=100 Source: Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare, 18 August 2018 accessed. 21
38. Figure 14 Average annual income by family type (thousand Yen) 7500 6500 5500 4500 3500 2500 total aged family with children Source: Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare, 18 August 2018 accessed. Figure 15 Gini coefficient 0.6 0.5704 0.55 0.5536 0.5263 0.5318 0.5 0.4983 0.472 0.45 0.4334 0.4394 0.4412 0.4 0.3975 0.4049 0.3873 0.3814 0.3812 0.3758 0.37910.3759 0.3643 0.3645 0.3606 0.35 0.3491 0.3426 0.3382 0.3143 0.3 1981 1984 1987 1990 1993 1996 1999 2002 2005 2008 2011 2014 initially income redistributed income Source: Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare, A Report on Income Redistribution Survey (1999, 2008, 2011, 2014), 18 August 2018 accessed. 22
39. accessed in6 accessed August 2018. Source Source Number researchers of Japan(1000) in Figure 17 1000 1200 10 12 0 2 4 6 8 200 400 600 800 0 : Ministry of Internal: Ministry of Affairs a : CabinetOffice,Investigation onR&D, 1970 1994 1980 1995 1990 1996 1991 1997 1992 1998 1993 1999 1994 Figure 16 Unemployment rate by age (%) age Unemployment by 16 rate Figure 2000 1995 total 2001 1996 2002 1997 2003 1998 2004 1999 15-24 nd Communication, Labour Force Report. Force Labour nd Communication, 2005 2000 2006 2001 23 2007 2002 2008 2003 2009 25-34 2004 2010 2005 2011 2006 2012 2007 2013 65 above 2008 2014 2009 2015 2010 2016 2011 2017 2012 2013 2014 Researchers other stuffs 2015 2016 2017 2018 ,
40. Figure 18 Structure of enterprise researchers 520000 510000 500000 490000 33200 480000 24800 470000 27400 30500 37900 460000 450000 472900 440000 466100 454800 430000 454000 448300 420000 410000 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 full-time researcher researcher with another business Source: Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communication, Statistic Today No.119, accessed 23 August 2018. Figure 19 Age structure of university stuffs in Japan (%) 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 1992 1995 1998 2001 2004 2007 2010 2013 2015 under 29 30-39 40-49 50-59 60 and over Source: Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology-Japan, Investigation on School Stuffs, 2018 6 August accessed. 24
41. References Avent R. (2016) The Wealth of Humans: Work and Its Absence in the Twenty-first Century, Penguin Books, UK. Cabinet Office (2016) Science and Technology Basic Plan. (in Japanses) Calmand J., Kobayashi, T., Nohara, H. (2018) The Transition between Thesis to Labor Market in France and Japan: a Comparative Exploration, NISTEP Discussion Paper No.156. (in Japanese) Council for Science, Technology and Innovation (2015) Report on The 5th Science and Technology Basic Plan, December 18, 2015, 1 August 2018 accessed. Federal Ministry of Education and Research (2006) The High-Tech Strategy for Germany, Bundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung /Federal Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF) Public Relations Division, Germany. Hoshi T. and Okazaki T. (2016) Examination of the Japanese type innovation policy, NIRA Opinion Paper, No.19. (in Japanese) Ikeda Yu., Inui T. (2018) PhD Holders and Innovation in Firms: An Analysis Using the Japanese National Innovation Survey, NISTEP Discussion Paper No.158. (in Japanese) Industrial Structure Council (2009) Industry Technology Policy Enhancing Innovation, August 2009.(in Japanese) Institute for Future Engineering (2016) 2015 Industry-Economy Consigned Investigation: R&D Investment Trend of Corporations. (in Japanese) Japan Association of Corporate Executives (2016) Japan 2.0 Towards the Optimization Society, 21 Nov. 2016. The Japan Institute for Labour Policy and Training (JILPT) (2013) Research results on business management and human resources under the structural changes, JILPT Survey Series, No.111, December 2013. Kawamura S. and Takeda H.(2014) Outline of trade and industry policy, RIETI Policy Discussion Paper Series, 14-P-016. (in Japanese) Kim Y., Ikeuchi K., Kwon H., Fukao K. (2016) Innovation and Employment Growth in Japan: An empirical analysis based on micro data of the Basic Survey of Business Structure and Activity, RIETI Discussion Paper 2016 16-J-002. Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry (METI) (2016) On Innovation Policy. (in Japanese) Murakami Y. (2008) Brain Drain from Japan: An Analysis of Japanese Researchers Residing in the U.S., The Japan Institute for Labour Policy and Training, The Japanese Journal of Labour Studies, No.577. (in Japanese) 25
42. National Institute of Science and Technology Policy (NISTEP) (2004) Statistics on Innovation in Japan, Report on the Japanese National Innovation Survey 2003 (J-NIS 2003), NISTEP (in Japanese) NISTEP (2010) Report on Japanese National Innovation Survey 2009, NISTEP (in Japanese) NISTEP (2014) A Report on the Japanese National Innovation Survey 2012, NISTEP (in Japanese) NISTEP (2016) A Report on the Japanese National Innovation Survey 2015, NISTEP. (in Japanese) Okubo T., Okazaki T., and Tomiura E. (2016) Industrial cluster policy and transaction networks: Evidence from firm-level data in Japan, RIETI Discussion Paper Series, 16-E-071, 2016 May. Otsuka T. (2011) Seeking the competitiveness declining factors of the Japanese corporations, Mizuho Sokenronshu, II. (in Japanese) RIETI (2017) RIETI Highlight: The Fourth Industrial Revolution, 2017 summer, 65. (in Japanese) Sakakibara K., Tsujimoto M. (2004) Why has R&D Productivity of the Japanese Firms declined?, Cabinet Office Economic and Social Research Institute, Economic Analysis 172. Schwab, K. (2016) The Fourth Industrial Revolution, World Economic Forum, Cologny/Geneva, Switzerland. Vogel S. (2013) What Ever Happened to Japanese Electronics?: A World Economy Perspective, The Asian Pacific Journal, Volume 11, Issue 45, Number 2, Nov 10, 2013, pp.1-7. Vogel S. (2018) Japan's Labor Regime in Transition: Rethinking Work for a Shrinking Nation, The Journal of Japanese Studies, Vol.44, No.2, Summer 2018, pp.257-292. Wood, G., Deeg, R., and Wilkinson A. (2014) The rise and fall of complementarity and national institutional orders, The Journal of Comparative economic Studies, Vol.9, March 2014. Yamaguchi E. (2016) Why Innovation Stopped: Crises of Science Advanced Nation Japan, Chikuma. (in Japanese) Yano, M. (2008) Competitive fairness and the concept of a fair price under Delaware law on M&A. International Journal of Economic Theory, 4 (2): 175-190 Yano, M. (2009) The foundation of market quality economics, Japanese Economic Review, 60 (1): 1-31. Yano, M. (2010) The 2008 world financial crisis and market quality theory, The Earth 26
43. Institute at Columbia University and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Asian Economic Paper 9:3: 172-192. Yano, M. (2014) Contemporary financial crisis and “market quality theory”, Iwai, K. et al eds., What Should Economics Do?, Nihonkeizai Newspaper Co. (in Japanese) 27
44. Peter Löscher Chair of Business Ethics and Global Governance TUM School of Governance Technical University of Munich Ethics and Innovation in Industry 4.0 Prof. Dr. Christoph Lütge Technical University of Munich Peter Löscher Endowed Chair of Business Ethics and Global Governance Prof. Dr. Christoph Lütge | Ethics and Innovation in Industry 4.0 1 Peter Löscher Chair of Business Ethics and Global Governance TUM School of Governance Technical University of Munich Overview 1) The Concept of Industry 4.0 2) Innovation 4.0 3) Ethics in Innovation 4.0 4) Governance 4.0 5) Shared Value 4.0 for Companies 6) Education 4.0 Prof. Dr. Christoph Lütge | Ethics and Innovation in Industry 4.0 2 28
45. Peter Löscher Chair of Business Ethics and Global Governance TUM School of Governance Technical University of Munich Chapter 1 The Concept of Industry 4.0 Prof. Dr. Christoph Lütge | Ethics and Innovation in Industry 4.0 3 Peter Löscher Chair of Business Ethics and Global Governance TUM School of Governance Technical University of Munich The Concept of Industry 4.0 • German Concept • origin: high-tech strategy of the German government • related concepts: The Fourth Industrial Revolution, The 4th Revolution • “Industry 4.0“ is a marketing term that is also used in science communication • The fourth industrial revolution that the term refers to is characterized by • individual customization (even in mass production) • hybridization of products (goods and services) • integration of customers and business partners in business processes and value creation processes 4 Prof. Dr. Christoph Lütge | Ethics and Innovation in Industry 4.0 29
46. Peter Löscher Chair of Business Ethics and Global Governance TUM School of Governance Technical University of Munich The Concept of Industry 4.0 5 Prof. Dr. Christoph Lütge | Ethics and Innovation in Industry 4.0 Peter Löscher Chair of Business Ethics and Global Governance TUM School of Governance Technical University of Munich The Concept of Industry 4.0 3D printers will be one of the main drivers of individualisation A specific industry will design the mechanical and electronic “inner lives“ of the products which users will then be able to print out in the desired shape and desired combination of modules. 6 Prof. Dr. Christoph Lütge | Ethics and Innovation in Industry 4.0 30
47. Peter Löscher Chair of Business Ethics and Global Governance TUM School of Governance Technical University of Munich The Concept of Industry 4.0 • Key components are • embedded systems and (partly) autonomous machines that act in their environments without human intervention • connected technologies and devices that are equipped with microchips result in highly complex structures and cyber-physical systems (CPS) like the Internet of Things • Main fields of application are • Mobility (smart factory, driverless cars) • Health (electronic medical record, health service robots) • Climate and energy (smart grid) 7 Prof. Dr. Christoph Lütge | Ethics and Innovation in Industry 4.0 Peter Löscher Chair of Business Ethics and Global Governance TUM School of Governance Technical University of Munich The Concept of Industry 4.0 Smart Factory Buildings Products Logistics Mobility Smart Smart Smart Smart Smart Grids Internet of Things / Internet of Services 8 Prof. Dr. Christoph Lütge | Ethics and Innovation in Industry 4.0 31
48. Peter Löscher Chair of Business Ethics and Global Governance TUM School of Governance Technical University of Munich The Concept of Industry 4.0 • Chances are • adaptability and versatility • Resource efficiency • Improvement of ergonomics • Challenges are • decision errors by machines that may follow inappropriate rules or that misinterpret processes or situations (subject to Machine Ethics) • manipulation by hackers or use of faulty data; transparent citizens or patients (subject to Information Ethics) • substitution of human labor by machine labor (subject to Labor Ethics) 9 Prof. Dr. Christoph Lütge | Ethics and Innovation in Industry 4.0 Peter Löscher Chair of Business Ethics and Global Governance TUM School of Governance Technical University of Munich Chapter 2 Innovation 4.0 Prof. Dr. Christoph Lütge | Ethics and Innovation in Industry 4.0 10 32
49. Peter Löscher Chair of Business Ethics and Global Governance TUM School of Governance Technical University of Munich Innovation 4.0 • In our age, we are witnessing a new era of artificial intelligence driven by communication technology, semantic technologies and embedded systems • These innovations will address and probably solve some of the challenges we will face in the 21th century such as resource and energy sufficiency, urban production and an ageing society 㻿㼛㼡㼞㼏㼑㻦㻌㼣㼣㼣㻚㼘㼕㼚㼗㼑㼐㼕㼚㻚㼏㼛㼙 㻿㼛㼡㼞㼏㼑㻦㻌㼣㼣㼣㻚㼟㼜㼑㼏㼠㼞㼡㼙㻚㼕㼑㼑㼑㻚㼛㼞㼓 㻿㼛㼡㼞㼏㼑㻦㻌㼣㼣㼣㻚㼠㼑㼟㼘㼍㻚㼏㼛㼙 Prof. Dr. Christoph Lütge | Ethics and Innovation in Industry 4.0 11 Peter Löscher Chair of Business Ethics and Global Governance TUM School of Governance Technical University of Munich Big Data • Big data is a term for data sets that are so large or complex that traditional data processing application software is inadequate to deal with them 㻿㼛㼡㼞㼏㼑㻦㻌㼣㼣㼣㻚㼎㼕㼓㼐㼍㼠㼍㼎㼘㼛㼓㻚㼐㼑 㻿㼛㼡㼞㼏㼑㻦㻌㼣㼣㼣㻚㼟㼕㼙㼜㼘㼕㼘㼑㼍㼞㼚㻚㼐㼑 Prof. Dr. Christoph Lütge | Ethics and Innovation in Industry 4.0 12 33
50. Peter Löscher Chair of Business Ethics and Global Governance TUM School of Governance Technical University of Munich Components of Big Data • Techniques for analyzing data, such as A/B testing • Machine learning • Natural language processing • Business intelligence • Cloud computing and databases • Visualization, such as charts, graphs and other displays of the data Prof. Dr. Christoph Lütge | Ethics and Innovation in Industry 4.0 13 Peter Löscher Chair of Business Ethics and Global Governance TUM School of Governance Technical University of Munich Internet of Things • The Internet of Things is the inter-networking of physical devices, facilities, and other items embedded with electronics which enable these objects to collect and exchange data • In the sense of IoT, things can refer to a wide range of devices such as monitoring implants (RFID chips) Source: blog.cammy.com Source: twitter.com Prof. Dr. Christoph Lütge | Ethics and Innovation in Industry 4.0 14 34
51. Peter Löscher Chair of Business Ethics and Global Governance TUM School of Governance Technical University of Munich Smart Grids • A smart grid is an electrical grid including smart meters, smart appliances, renewable energy resources, and energy efficient resources. • It allows two-way communication between the utility and its customers, and the sensing along the transmission lines. Source: offshorewind.biz Source: euronomikon.com Prof. Dr. Christoph Lütge | Ethics and Innovation in Industry 4.0 15 Peter Löscher Chair of Business Ethics and Global Governance TUM School of Governance Technical University of Munich Telehealth • Telehealth is a collection of means or methods for enhancing health care, public health, and health education delivery and support using telecommunications technologies (California Telehealth Resource Center) • An example might be a health app that alerts the public of a disease outbreak 㻿㼛㼡㼞㼏㼑㻦㻌㼣㼣㼣㻚㼙㼕㼚㼠㼛㼞㼠㼥㼚㼡㼞㼟㼑㻚㼐㼑 Prof. Dr. Christoph Lütge | Ethics and Innovation in Industry 4.0 16 35
52. Peter Löscher Chair of Business Ethics and Global Governance TUM School of Governance Technical University of Munich Telemedicine • Telemedicine is a specific kind of telehealth that involves a clinician providing some kind of medical service • This includes mobile apps that let physicians treat their patients remotely via video-chat or a software solution that lets primary care providers send patient photos of a rash or mole to a dermatologist at another location for quick diagnosis Prof. Dr. Christoph Lütge | Ethics and Innovation in Industry 4.0 17 Peter Löscher Chair of Business Ethics and Global Governance TUM School of Governance Technical University of Munich Robotics • In the last decade, we have witnessed the emergence of new types of robots: Reconfigurable robots, Bionic Robots, Swarm Robots and Humanoid Robots. • Autonomous robots are able to act on their own. • At the same time the use of military robots is spreading. 㻿㼛㼡㼞㼏㼑㻦㻌㼣㼕㼗㼕㼙㼑㼐㼕㼍㻚㼏㼛㼙 㻿㼛㼡㼞㼏㼑㻦㻌㼠㼔㼑㼟㼡㼚㻚㼏㼛㻚㼡㼗 㻿㼛㼡㼞㼏㼑㻦㻌㼣㼕㼗㼕㼙㼑㼐㼕㼍㻚㼏㼛㼙 Prof. Dr. Christoph Lütge | Ethics and Innovation in Industry 4.0 18 36
53. Peter Löscher Chair of Business Ethics and Global Governance TUM School of Governance Technical University of Munich Autonomous Driving (1/2) • Mobility is becoming increasingly shaped by the digital revolution • As the „perception“ of the vehicle‘s surroundings becomes increasingly perfected, there is likely to be an ever better differentiation of road users, obstacles and hazardous situations (BMW Vision Next 100, Google Car) 㻿㼛㼡㼞㼏㼑㻦㻌㼣㼣㼣㻚㼑㼘㼑㼏㼠㼞㼑㼗㻚㼏㼛㼙 㻿㼛㼡㼞㼏㼑㻦㻌㼣㼣㼣㻚㼣㼕㼞㼑㼐㻚㼏㼛㼙 Prof. Dr. Christoph Lütge | Ethics and Innovation in Industry 4.0 19 Peter Löscher Chair of Business Ethics and Global Governance TUM School of Governance Technical University of Munich Autonomous Driving (2/2) • Already in 2008, driverless and fully automated trains have been introduced in Nuremberg • Starting October 2016, all Tesla cars are built with the necessary hardware to allow full self-driving capability at a safety level 㻿㼛㼡㼞㼏㼑㻦㻌㼣㼣㼣㻚㼟㼠㼞㼑㼑㼠㼟㼎㼘㼛㼓㻚㼛㼞㼓 㻿㼛㼡㼞㼏㼑㻦㻌㼣㼣㼣㻚㼎㼡㼟㼕㼚㼑㼟㼟㼕㼚㼟㼕㼐㼑㼞㻚㼐㼑 Prof. Dr. Christoph Lütge | Ethics and Innovation in Industry 4.0 20 37
54. Peter Löscher Chair of Business Ethics and Global Governance TUM School of Governance Technical University of Munich Chapter 3 Ethics in Innovation 4.0 Prof. Dr. Christoph Lütge | Ethics and Innovation in Industry 4.0 21 Peter Löscher Chair of Business Ethics and Global Governance TUM School of Governance Technical University of Munich Historical perception in innovation (1/2) The fear of losing control due to scientific progress is a common theme in literature and arts. A prominent example is the poem "The Sorcerer's Apprentice" (Der Zauberlehrling, Goethe, 1797). The story begins when an old sorcerer departs his workshop and leaves his apprentice alone. Tired of fetching water, the apprentice enchants a broom to do the work for him. The floor is soon awash with water, and the Source: apprentice realizes that he cannot stop the wikimedia.com broom. Source: Prof. Dr. Christoph Lütge | Ethics and Innovation in Industry 4.0 22 38
55. Peter Löscher Chair of Business Ethics and Global Governance TUM School of Governance Technical University of Munich Historical perception in innovation (2/2) Fears about technological advance did also affect socio-political movements. A well-known example are the Luddites, a group of English textile workers in the 19th century who destroyed weaving machinery as a form of protest, fearing that the time spent learning the skills of their craft would be wasted, as machines would replace their role in the industry. Source: wikimedia.com Prof. Dr. Christoph Lütge | Ethics and Innovation in Industry 4.0 23 Peter Löscher Chair of Business Ethics and Global Governance TUM School of Governance Technical University of Munich Benefits of Innovation 4.0 (1/2) • Telemedicine: • Major problem: Rural depopulation and hence rural services • Uneven distribution of physicians • Telemedicine as solutions to reach patients in remote areas • Care-robots: • Major problem: Ageing society • Shortage on qualified healthcare personnel in the near future • Solution: Robots specifically designed for elder care •Smart grids: • Major problem: Globally increasing energy demand • Solution: Positive effect of smart grids on the feasibility of renewable power • Broad-scale electric vehicle charging Prof. Dr. Christoph Lütge | Ethics and Innovation in Industry 4.0 24 39
56. Peter Löscher Chair of Business Ethics and Global Governance TUM School of Governance Technical University of Munich Benefits of Innovation 4.0 (2/2) • Internet of Things: • Optimization of all physical environments for comfort and productivity • Reduction of expenses and improvement of efficiency • Improved decision making • Big Data: • Major problem: Poor collection and interpretation of data • Improved decisions based on more and better information • The city of Oslo (Norway) reduced street lighting energy consumption by 62% using big data • Autonomous cars: • Major current problem: High fatality rates in car accidents • Car accidents are caused by human error by ca. 90% • Autonomous cars as solution to decrease car accidents Prof. Dr. Christoph Lütge | Ethics and Innovation in Industry 4.0 25 Peter Löscher Chair of Business Ethics and Global Governance TUM School of Governance Technical University of Munich Autonomous Driving (1/3) • Autonomous driving offers an ethical improvement of the actual situation • Long-term reduction of the likelihood of an accident • More convenience • Less physical and mental stress • Significant time gain • Inclusion and integration into society due to new mobility paths • The introduction of more highly automated driving systems, especially with the option of automated collision prevention, may be socially and ethically mandated if it can unlock existing potential for damage limitation. (German Ethics Code for Automated and Connected Driving, 2017) Prof. Dr. Christoph Lütge | Ethics and Innovation in Industry 4.0 26 40
57. Peter Löscher Chair of Business Ethics and Global Governance TUM School of Governance Technical University of Munich Autonomous Driving (2/3) Dilemma situations and Moral self-determination Example: "The driver of a car is driving along a road on a hillside. The highly automated car detects several children playing on the road. The driver of a manual vehicle would now have the choice of taking his own life by driving over the cliff or risking the death of the children by heading towards the children playing in the road environment. In the case of a highly automated car, the programmer or the self-learning machine would have to decide what should be done in this situation." Source: extremetech.com Prof. Dr. Christoph Lütge | Ethics and Innovation in Industry 4.0 27 Peter Löscher Chair of Business Ethics and Global Governance TUM School of Governance Technical University of Munich Autonomous Driving (3/3) Ethics Committee on Automated and Connected Driving of the German Federal Ministry of Transport and Digital Infrastructure: • Worldwide First Ethics Code for Self- Driving Cars, presented in Berlin in 2017 • 20 Ethical Guidelines, e.g.: • Protection of individuals takes precedence over all other considerations. • Accountability shifts from individual user to manufacturers and operators of systems • General programming justifiable to reduce the overall number of personal injuries Source: bmvi.de Prof. Dr. Christoph Lütge | Ethics and Innovation in Industry 4.0 28 41
58. Peter Löscher Chair of Business Ethics and Global Governance TUM School of Governance Technical University of Munich Big Data and the Infosphere • According to Luciano Floridi (University of Oxford), the whole informational environment is constituted by informational entities, their properties, interactions, processes and mutual relations. • Online and Offline merge into Æ Onlife • Problems such as breaches of privacy, violence, harassment, hate speech remain unresolved • Therefore, it is necessary to focus on proactive regulations. Source: fivebooks.com Prof. Dr. Christoph Lütge | Ethics and Innovation in Industry 4.0 29 Peter Löscher Chair of Business Ethics and Global Governance TUM School of Governance Technical University of Munich Risks of Innovation 4.0 (1/2) • Tendency of insufficient scrutiny and dependence on the accuracy of technical systems • Telemedicine • Autonomous driving • Loss of once autonomous decisions • Danger of technical mistakes • Increased vulnerability of cyber attacks and cyber wars • Inequality and concentration of information and digital literacy • Age gap • Development gap • State vs. Citizens • State vs. Multinationals Prof. Dr. Christoph Lütge | Ethics and Innovation in Industry 4.0 30 42
59. Peter Löscher Chair of Business Ethics and Global Governance TUM School of Governance Technical University of Munich Risks of Innovation 4.0 (2/2) • Privacy and danger of data misuse • Labor rights • Customer rights • Challenge of different privacy cultures • Changing requirements on the quality of the human workforce will be affected by the growing autonomy of machines and robots • Education in digital literacy • Higher demand for digital qualified workforce • Less demand for repetitive work Source: mckinsey.com Prof. Dr. Christoph Lütge | Ethics and Innovation in Industry 4.0 31 Peter Löscher Chair of Business Ethics and Global Governance TUM School of Governance Technical University of Munich Order ethics (1/2) Technical progress is not a zero-sum game • We cannot simply condemn technological progress, as it offers several improvements and solutions • Cost savings • Energy efficiency • Aging society • Rural depopulation • Reduction of fatalities and accidents • Improvement of education • We need a focus on rules including sector-specific regulations • Rules and laws have to be based on incentives in order to be effective and to solve dilemma structures Prof. Dr. Christoph Lütge | Ethics and Innovation in Industry 4.0 32 43
60. Peter Löscher Chair of Business Ethics and Global Governance TUM School of Governance Technical University of Munich Order ethics (2/2) - Robots In his 1942 short story “Runaround”, Isaac Asimov developed the first kind of legal framework for robots: • A robot may not injure a human being or, through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm. • A robot must obey the orders given it by human beings except where such orders would conflict with the First Law. • A robot must protect its own existence as long as such protection does not conflict with the First or Second Laws. Robots can also be used as means for enhancing ethical principles. "Androids must construct themselves as social beings, just as human beings have constructed themselves into people." (MacDorman and Ishiguro 2006) Prof. Dr. Christoph Lütge | Ethics and Innovation in Industry 4.0 33 Peter Löscher Chair of Business Ethics and Global Governance TUM School of Governance Technical University of Munich Human dignity and technical progress "Act in such a way that you treat humanity, whether in your own person or in the person of any other, never merely as a means to an end, but always at the same time as an end." (Immanuel Kant, Groundwork for the Metaphysics of Morals, 1785) Technical progress should serve Source: wikimedia.com mankind, not the other way around. Prof. Dr. Christoph Lütge | Ethics and Innovation in Industry 4.0 34 44
61. Peter Löscher Chair of Business Ethics and Global Governance TUM School of Governance Technical University of Munich Chapter 4 Governance 4.0 Prof. Dr. Christoph Lütge | Ethics and Innovation in Industry 4.0 35 Peter Löscher Chair of Business Ethics and Global Governance TUM School of Governance Technical University of Munich Governance 4.0 • Public administration and regulation are experiencing new chances and challenges as a result of the ongoing technical innovation and the increasing complexity of societies and economies. • The adaption to technical progress by public and private institutions is slow due to limited financial means and the longsome systematic procedure of political decisions. (cf. Kälin 2017, Governance 4.0) Prof. Dr. Christoph Lütge | Ethics and Innovation in Industry 4.0 36 45
62. Peter Löscher Chair of Business Ethics and Global Governance TUM School of Governance Technical University of Munich Governance 4.0 – Characterization Governance 4.0 is characterized by: • Internationalization • Supranationalization • Decentralization • Pseudonymity and anonymity • Neutrality and privacy • Transparency • Auditability • Decreasing transaction costs Prof. Dr. Christoph Lütge | Ethics and Innovation in Industry 4.0 37 Peter Löscher Chair of Business Ethics and Global Governance TUM School of Governance Technical University of Munich Governance 4.0 – Blockchain (1) • A blockchain is a data structure that makes it possible to create a digital ledger of transactions and share it among a distributed network of participating computers • It uses cryptography to allow each participant on the network to manipulate the ledger in a secure way without the need for a central authority • Instead, a protocol defines the rules of how the ledger can be altered Prof. Dr. Christoph Lütge | Ethics and Innovation in Industry 4.0 38 46
63. Peter Löscher Chair of Business Ethics and Global Governance TUM School of Governance Technical University of Munich Governance 4.0 – Blockchain (2) • Once a block of data is recorded on the block-chain ledger, it is extremely difficult to change or remove • When someone wants to add to it, participants in the network – all of which have copies of the existing blockchain – run algorithms to evaluate and verify the proposed transaction • If a majority of nodes agree that the transaction looks valid – that is, identifying information matches the blockchain’s history – then the new transaction will be approved and a new block added to the chain Prof. Dr. Christoph Lütge | Ethics and Innovation in Industry 4.0 39 Peter Löscher Chair of Business Ethics and Global Governance TUM School of Governance Technical University of Munich Governance 4.0 – Blockchain (3) • There are different blockchain configurations that use different consensus mechanisms, depending on the purpose of the network • The bitcoin blockchain, e.g., is public and “permissionless”: anyone can participate and contribute to the ledger • Many firms also are exploring private or “permissioned” blockchains: networks made up only of known participants • Key element of any blockchain setup, however, is that the entire network is responsible for validating each transaction Prof. Dr. Christoph Lütge | Ethics and Innovation in Industry 4.0 40 47
64. Peter Löscher Chair of Business Ethics and Global Governance TUM School of Governance Technical University of Munich Governance 4.0 – Blockchain (4) Blockchains can be applied in different ways: • Digital signatures: Verify the origin and authenticity of messages (or generally pos-session of a private keys) and allow version controls of documents and contracts • Signed blocks of transactions: Preserve the sequences of transactions, allow access control and create continually updated audit trails • Distributed, shared ledgers: Establish a single version of transaction truth without third parties and make ledgers accessible for autonomous agents and processes (Æ smart contracts) Prof. Dr. Christoph Lütge | Ethics and Innovation in Industry 4.0 41 Peter Löscher Chair of Business Ethics and Global Governance TUM School of Governance Technical University of Munich Governance 4.0 - Smartcontract • US-American start-up SmartContract offers self-verifying and self-executing smart contracts using the Bitcoin and Ethereum blockchains • Standardized smart contracts can easily be created online • When doing so, SmartContract accesses external data feeds, uses financial networks and connects to existing IT infrastructure to trigger smart contract events Prof. Dr. Christoph Lütge | Ethics and Innovation in Industry 4.0 42 48
65. Peter Löscher Chair of Business Ethics and Global Governance TUM School of Governance Technical University of Munich Governance 4.0 – Bitnation (1) • Founded in 2014 in an attempt to provide governance services with no geographical bounds, Bitcoin calls itself a Decentralized Borderless Voluntary Nation (DBVN) • Any individual from around the world can become a “citizen” of Bitnation by signing on to its constitution • Once registered and issued a digital ID, citizens of Bitnation are provided with services like dispute resolutions, security and insurance Prof. Dr. Christoph Lütge | Ethics and Innovation in Industry 4.0 43 Peter Löscher Chair of Business Ethics and Global Governance TUM School of Governance Technical University of Munich Governance 4.0 – Bitnation (2) • In Bitnation’s blockchain powered jurisdiction, contracts are linked to “cryptoequity” and automatically enforced • In 2015, Estonia started a cooperation with Bitnation on allowing anyone from the world to digitally notarize documents on the blockchain Prof. Dr. Christoph Lütge | Ethics and Innovation in Industry 4.0 44 49
66. Peter Löscher Chair of Business Ethics and Global Governance TUM School of Governance Technical University of Munich Governance 4.0 – Challenges (1) • Democratic legitimation and hence trust and acceptance of new systems • Security problems • Up-to-date equipment and know-how is required to protect users’ private bitcoin addresses from theft • Unless encrypted, bitcoins can be stolen through malware • Even prominent bitcoin exchanges have struggled with security, and in the case of Mt. Gox, it is still not clear whether its loss of bitcoin was due to internal problems or hacker attacks • Privacy issues Prof. Dr. Christoph Lütge | Ethics and Innovation in Industry 4.0 45 Peter Löscher Chair of Business Ethics and Global Governance TUM School of Governance Technical University of Munich Governance 4.0 – Challenges (2) • Inequality • Access to and benefits from spearhead internet technology as of today remains very unequally distributed • Elderly people might be left behind as they tend to adapt slower to technical innovation • Criminality e.g. money laundering, bypassing of rules Prof. Dr. Christoph Lütge | Ethics and Innovation in Industry 4.0 46 50