Global collaboration has become the strategy of choice for companies and nations to break through their technological frontiers and gain a competitive edge. Governments worldwide are actively promoting participation in Global Innovation Networks (GINs), viewing them as a pathway to access planetary-scale resources and knowledge.
But does it truly work? Does participating in these networks guarantee that a country’s manufacturing industry will climb the complex Global Value Chain (GVC), transitioning from simple assemblers to true value creators? A recent study published in Scientific Reports analyzes this question and reveals a dual reality: one full of opportunities for developed economies, and another with persistent risks of stagnation for those still developing.
What are embedding breadth and depth in innovation networks?
To understand the true impact of these collaborations, the study—published by researchers from Wuhan University of Technology and Jianghan University—doesn’t just look at whether a country participates in a GIN, but how it does so. To this end, it defines two key metrics:
- Embedding breadth: This measures the scope of collaboration. In simple terms, it is the number of distinct countries or partners with which an economy collaborates. Greater breadth suggests access to a more diverse range of knowledge and technologies.
- Embedding depth: This measures the total intensity of collaboration. It refers to the frequency and volume of interactions with network partners. Greater depth implies closer relationships and a more robust exchange of knowledge.
The central hypothesis is that both greater breadth and depth should, in theory, allow a country’s manufacturing industry to climb to higher value-added positions in the GVC.
The verdict: Global collaboration does drive the ascent
The empirical analysis, using patent cooperation data from 50 economies between 2007 and 2021, confirms the researchers’ main hypothesis: both the breadth and depth of embedding in GINs significantly improve a country’s position in the manufacturing value chain.
But how does this happen? The study identifies two key mechanisms through which these networks generate value:
- Enhancement of human capital: Collaborating with leading research teams and participating in global projects attracts top-tier talent. This exposes local teams to advanced management practices and frontier knowledge, optimizing the country’s human capital structure.
- Acceleration of technological progress: GINs act as a direct channel for technology transfer and knowledge spillovers, far surpassing the effects of purely domestic innovation. This allows companies to absorb, adapt, and reinvent advanced technologies, improving their own innovation capabilities.
So far, everything seems positive. However, as always, the devil is in the details.
The “Fine Print”: A growing gap between economies
When the researchers divided the sample between developed and developing economies, the results changed dramatically.
- For developed economies, the story is a resounding success. Both the breadth and depth of their innovation networks strengthen their position in the GVC. As technological leaders, they use these networks to export knowledge, set standards, and capture the largest share of profits, further consolidating their dominance.
- For developing economies, the outlook is alarming. The study found that greater network breadth had no statistically significant effect on their advancement. Worse still, greater depth in collaboration showed an inhibitory effect, increasing the risk of “low-end lock-in”—a phenomenon where the country becomes permanently trapped in the low-value-added links of the chain.
The reason for this disparity lies in the “absorptive capacity” and the role each economy plays in the network. Developing economies, with weaker internal innovation capabilities, often enter a “subordinate” relationship, where they are limited to executing low-cost tasks without achieving a real knowledge transfer that would allow them to scale up.
The Unexpected Role of Intellectual Property Protection
To further complicate the scenario, the study introduces a crucial factor: the level of Intellectual Property (IP) protection. IP is the institutional foundation that, in theory, encourages collaboration by reducing risks. However, its effect is not universal.
- In developed economies, A strong IP system amplifies the benefits of participating in GINs. It gives them the security to transfer technology, knowing their innovations are protected and will generate economic returns, which further drives their ascent in the GVC.
- In developing economies, an overly strict IP system inhibits their ability to improve. Historically, these economies have advanced technologically through imitation, absorption, and the reinvention of existing technologies. Strong IP protection can create barriers that limit this learning process, making it difficult for local firms to develop their own capabilities and capture more value.
Conclusion: Innovate in networks, yes, but with a clear strategy
The study’s message is unequivocal: joining global innovation networks is essential, but it is not a magic bullet. The benefits are not automatic and depend critically on a country’s level of development and its technological absorptive capacity.
For innovation leaders, entrepreneurs, and policymakers, especially in emerging economies, the lesson is clear. It is not enough to sign collaboration agreements; it is imperative to:
- Strengthen internal innovation capacity: Before looking outward, a solid foundation must be built at home. This is crucial to be able to absorb and leverage external knowledge rather than simply executing orders.
- Design appropriate institutional frameworks: The intellectual property strategy must be carefully calibrated. It’s not about copying the systems of the most advanced countries, but about creating an environment that fosters local innovation without closing the door to learning and adaptation.
Ultimately, global collaboration is a powerful tool, but like any tool, its effectiveness depends on who uses it and how. To climb the global value chain, it’s not enough to be in the network; you have to know how to play the game.
Contact
Long Wei
School of Economics, Wuhan University of Technology
Wuhan, China
Email: longwei@whut.edu.cn
Reference (open access)
Zhang, M., Wei, L. & Yi, Z. The impact of embedded global innovation networks on manufacturing value chains. Sci Rep 15, 28275 (2025). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-025-13395-4
Editor and founder of “Innovar o Morir” (‘Innovate or Die’). Milthon holds a Master’s degree in Science and Innovation Management from the Polytechnic University of Valencia, with postgraduate diplomas in Business Innovation (UPV) and Market-Oriented Innovation Management (UPCH-Universitat Leipzig). He has practical experience in innovation management, having led the Fisheries Innovation Unit of the National Program for Innovation in Fisheries and Aquaculture (PNIPA) and worked as a consultant on open innovation diagnostics and technology watch. He firmly believes in the power of innovation and creativity as drivers of change and development.
