Innovación tecnológica y competitividad industrial: Un análisis bibliométrico de la producción científica
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.61347/ei.v5iEsp.1.314Palabras clave:
Competitividad industrial, industria 4.0, innovación tecnológica, manufacturaResumen
El presente artículo analiza bibliométricamente la producción científica sobre innovación tecnológica y competitividad industrial, con el propósito de examinar la evolución, estructura e impacto académico de este campo de conocimiento, estableciendo así un objetivo claramente definido y coherente con el enfoque metodológico adoptado. La investigación se desarrolló desde un enfoque bibliométrico, documental y descriptivo-retrospectivo, utilizando como fuente de información la base de datos Scopus. La búsqueda consideró artículos publicados entre 1991 y 2025 en inglés, español y portugués, mediante los términos technological innovation, competitiveness, industry, industrial y manufacturing, aplicados en los campos de título, resumen y palabras clave. A partir de una identificación inicial de 488 documentos, se delimitó un corpus final de 296 artículos científicos, analizados mediante indicadores de producción, impacto, colaboración científica y estructura temática, con apoyo de herramientas como Bibliometrix/Biblioshiny y VOSviewer. Los resultados evidencian un crecimiento sostenido de la producción científica, así como una concentración en revistas especializadas vinculadas con sostenibilidad, gestión tecnológica, desarrollo productivo e innovación, identificándose además autores, documentos y países con mayor centralidad académica. El análisis de co-ocurrencia de palabras clave y el mapa temático revela que innovación, innovación tecnológica, competitividad, sostenibilidad, transformación digital e Industria 4.0 constituyen ejes centrales y emergentes del campo. Se concluye que la innovación tecnológica es una categoría estratégica para comprender la competitividad industrial contemporánea, y aunque el análisis es de alcance global, sus resultados permiten una lectura interpretativa orientada a América Latina, especialmente en relación con los desafíos de transformación productiva, fortalecimiento de capacidades tecnológicas e inserción en redes internacionales de conocimiento.
Descargas
Citas
Aria, M., & Cuccurullo, C. (2017). bibliometrix: An R-tool for comprehensive science mapping analysis. Journal of Informetrics, 11(4), 959–975. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2017.08.007
Arredondo-Trapero, F., Vázquez-Parra, J., & Guerra-Leal, E. (2020). Information and communication technologies and their impact on competitiveness in Latin America. Journal of Technology Management & Innovation, 15(4), 43–53. https://doi.org/10.4067/S0718-27242020000400043
Bacca-Acosta, J., Gómez-Caicedo, M., Gaitán-Ángulo, M., Robayo-Acuña, P., Ariza-Salazar, J., Suárez, Á., & Villamil, N. (2023). The impact of digital technologies on business competitiveness: A comparison between Latin America and Europe. Competitiveness Review, 33(7), 22–46. https://doi.org/10.1108/CR-10-2022-0167
Barney, J. (1991). Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. Journal of Management, 17(1), 99–120. https://doi.org/10.1177/014920639101700108
Blyde, J., Pires, J., & Rodríguez, M. (2022). International trade, job training, and labor reallocation. Review of International Economics, 31(1), 204–236. https://doi.org/10.1111/roie.12623
Bornmann, L., & Daniel, H. (2007). What do we know about the h index? Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 58(9), 1381–1385. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.20609
Bornmann, L., & Daniel, H. (2008). What do citation counts measure? A review of studies on citing behavior. Journal of Documentation, 64(1), 45–80. https://doi.org/10.1108/00220410810844150
Bradford, S. (1934). Sources of information on specific subjects. Engineering: An Illustrated Weekly Journal, 137, 85–86. https://n9.cl/8jofd
Callon, M., Courtial, J., & Laville, F. (1991). Co-word analysis as a tool for describing the network of interactions between basic and technological research: The case of polymer chemistry. Scientometrics, 22(1), 155–205. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02019280
Chesbrough, H. (2003). Open innovation: The new imperative for creating and profiting from technology. Harvard Business Press. https://n9.cl/vc2u9
Cobo, M., López-Herrera, A., Herrera-Viedma, E., & Herrera, F. (2011). An approach for detecting, quantifying, and visualizing the evolution of a research field: A practical application to the Fuzzy Sets Theory field. Journal of Informetrics, 5(1), 146–166. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2010.10.002
Crespi, G., & Zuñiga, P. (2010). Innovation and productivity: Evidence from six Latin American countries (IDB Working Paper No. IDB-WP-218). Inter-American Development Bank. https://n9.cl/01aay
Crespi, G., Tacsir, E., & Vargas, F. (2014). Innovation dynamics and productivity: Evidence for Latin America (UNU-MERIT Working Paper No. 092). Maastricht Economic and Social Research Institute on Innovation and Technology (UNU-MERIT). https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-349-58151-1_2
Crespo, N., Crespo, C., Silva, G., & Nicola, M. (2023). Innovation in times of crisis: The relevance of digitalization and early internationalization strategies. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 188, 122283. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2022.122283
Donthu, N., Kumar, S., Mukherjee, D., Pandey, N., & Lim, W. (2021). How to conduct a bibliometric analysis: An overview and guidelines. Journal of Business Research, 133, 285–296. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2021.04.070
Egghe, L. (2006). Theory and practise of the g-index. Scientometrics, 69(1), 131–152. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-006-0144-7
Eisenhardt, K., & Martin, J. (2000). Dynamic capabilities: What are they? Strategic Management Journal, 21(10–11), 1105–1121. https://doi.org/10.1002/1097-0266(200010/11)21:10/11<1105::AID-SMJ133>3.0.CO;2-E
Etzkowitz, H., & Leydesdorff, L. (2000). The dynamics of innovation: From National Systems and “Mode 2” to a Triple Helix of university–industry–government relations. Research Policy, 29(2), 109–123. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0048-7333(99)00055-4
Freeman, C. (1987). Technology, policy, and economic performance: Lessons from Japan. Pinter Publishers. https://n9.cl/yg3h2
Glänzel, W. (2001). National characteristics in international scientific co-authorship relations. Scientometrics, 51(1), 69–115. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1010512628145
Glänzel, W. (2006). On the opportunities and limitations of the h-index. Scientometric News/Newsletter, [Newspaper/Magazine Article]. http://eprints.rclis.org/9378/
Glänzel, W., & Schubert, A. (2005). Analysing scientific networks through co-authorship. In H. F. Moed, W. Glänzel, & U. Schmoch (Eds.), Handbook of quantitative science and technology research (pp. 257–276). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/1-4020-2755-9_12
Hagedoorn, J. (2002). Inter-firm R&D partnerships: An overview of major trends and patterns since 1960. Research Policy, 31(4), 477–492. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0048-7333(01)00120-2
Harzing, A., & van der Wal, R. (2009). A Google Scholar h-index for journals: An alternative metric to measure journal impact in economics and business. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 60(1), 41–46. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.20953
Hirsch, J. (2005). An index to quantify an individual's scientific research output. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 102(46), 16569–16572. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0507655102
Hofman, A., Aravena, C., & Aliaga, V. (2016). Information and communication technologies and their impact in the economic growth of Latin America, 1990–2013. Telecommunications Policy, 40, 485–501. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.telpol.2016.02.002
Katz, J., & Martin, B. (1997). What is research collaboration? Research Policy, 26(1), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0048-7333(96)00917-1
Lefranc, G. (2024). Importance of manufacturing and industrial robotics in Latin America’s economic development. In 2024 IEEE International Conference on Automation/XXVI Congress of the Chilean Association of Automatic Control (ICA-ACCA) (pp. 1–6). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICA-ACCA62622.2024.10766801
Lundvall, B. (1992) National Systems of Innovation: Toward a Theory of Innovation and Interactive Learning. Pinter Publishers, London. https://n9.cl/pvbs19
Moed, H. (2006). Citation analysis in research evaluation. Springer Science & Business Media. https://n9.cl/v6q9d6
Navarro, J., Benavente, J., & Crespi, G. (2016). The new imperative of innovation: Policy perspectives for Latin America and the Caribbean. Inter-American Development Bank. http://dx.doi.org/10.18235/0012638
Nelson, R. (1993). National innovation systems: A comparative analysis. Oxford University Press. https://n9.cl/donfa
Newman, M. (2001). The structure of scientific collaboration networks. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 98(2), 404–409. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.98.2.404
Persson, O., Glänzel, W., & Danell, R. (2004). Inflationary bibliometric values: The role of scientific collaboration and the need for relative indicators in evaluative studies. Scientometrics, 60(3), 421–432. https://doi.org/10.1023/B:SCIE.0000034384.35498.7d
Porter, M. (1990). The competitive advantage of nations. Free Press. https://n9.cl/bklnp
Royal Society. (2011). Knowledge, networks and nations: Global scientific collaboration in the 21st century. The Royal Society. https://n9.cl/9a107
Schumpeter, J. (1983). The theory of economic development: An inquiry into profits, capital, credit, interest, and the business cycle (Reprint of 1911 edition). Transaction Publishers. https://books.google.com.ec/books?id=-OZwWcOGeOwC
Schwab, K. (2017). The fourth industrial revolution. Portfolio. https://n9.cl/pbel9n
Small, H. (1973). Co-citation in the scientific literature: A new measure of the relationship between two documents. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 24(4), 265–269. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.4630240406
van Eck, N., & Waltman, L. (2010). Software survey: VOSviewer, a computer program for bibliometric mapping. Scientometrics, 84(2), 523–538. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-009-0146-3
van Raan, A. (2004). Measuring science: Capita selecta of current main issues. In H. F. Moed, W. Glänzel, & U. Schmoch (Eds.), Handbook of quantitative science and technology research (pp. 19–50). Springer. https://n9.cl/x5nty
Wagner, C., & Leydesdorff, L. (2005). Network structure, self-organization, and the growth of international collaboration in science. Research Policy, 34(10), 1608–1618. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2005.08.002
Zhou, P., & Leydesdorff, L. (2006). The emergence of China as a leading nation in science. Research Policy, 35(1), 83–104. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2005.08.006
Zupic, I., & Čater, T. (2015). Bibliometric methods in management and organization. Organizational Research Methods, 18(3), 429–472. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428114562629
Publicado
Cómo citar
Número
Sección
Licencia
Derechos de autor 2026 Gustavo Richard Morejon Flores
Esta obra está bajo una licencia internacional Creative Commons Atribución-NoComercial 4.0.
