Transcript The Case of Korea

Technology transfer in bilateral
program and lessons learned:
The Case of Korea
KEMCO, April, 2002
Seoul, Korea
Dr. Suk-hoon Woo
[email protected]
1. Technology transfer or cooperation?

Technology is a good that can be transferred?
– Globalization makes the technological
competitiveness as a primary factor in world
economy system.

Public funding replaces the direct subsidy of each
countries’ national economic policy
– more R&D expenditure, but the result of research is
considered as national strategy factor.
2
[email protected]

Network effect of technology
– A combination of units of technology is “one
system of technology.

Path dependency of investments already made.
– Choice of one technology is not just a choice of
one unit, but a choice of future system

ex) natural gas pipe-line network, electrification and
grid network
3
[email protected]

Transfer activities are multiple and complex
– Joint research, FDI, joint-venture, consortium
can be used as a implementation tools of
technological cooperation.
– Public program for demonstration project can
be understood as a principal scheme for the
technology transfer under UNFCCC

role of government and public sector
4
[email protected]
2. Criteria for needs assessment
Market potential : the technology near to
commercialization (pre-commercialization
stage, pre-standardization stage)
 Public oriented technology
 Trigger-effect to create a new markets with
advanced technology
 Technology includes “know-how” of soft
technologies like energy management

5
[email protected]
3. Selected technologies
ESCO(Energy Service Company) and
energy management system
 Methane capture and reuse in waste land-fill
site
 Heat recovery, including heat-pump

6
[email protected]
4. ESCO Experiences

Process
– Circulation of proposals for the national stakeholders (1999) - phase 1
– Selection of the ESCOs and potential projects

Hyundai Motor Ulsan Factory was selected for the
demonstration projects
– Co-auditing : Korean ESCO and US partner
– Project identification
7
[email protected]
Technology Transfer Scheme
Hyundai Motors : site
Energy auditing and ESCO
Recipient EPS Korea
Sempra
Provider
Technical support
KEMCO
NREL
MOU for TCAPP-Korea
Korea side
US Side
8
[email protected]

Barriers
– Funding : who will pay for the initial survey?

Sempra, EPS Korea, Hyundai Motors, or
KEMCO/NREL?
– Technological system : the difference of
regulation of environment related to the
painting process (ex. Treatment of VOCs)
– ESCO market structure : difference of auditing
tools and system
9
[email protected]

Limited success in Hyundai ESCO projects
– success


Technology transfer throughout a experience of
auditing
Detailed auditing report and project identification heat recovery process in painting process
– Failure


EPS Korea has been bankrupted - external cause
Difference of funding system for ESCO project
– public funding (Korea) versus private funding (US)
– Hedging for the exchange rate
10
[email protected]
5. Lessons learned
Technology transfer must be considered in
the context of national strategy, including
specific circumstances and development
stages.
 Experience matters : technology it-self is a
kind of evolutionary process, not just a
good.
 History matters : path dependency, network
11
effect must be considered.
