Sectorial analysis of nanotechnology companies in Argentina

J Nanopart Res (2017) 19:186 DOI 10.1007/s11051-017-3864-0 PERSPECTIVES Sectorial analysis of nanotechnology companies in Argentina Guillermo Foladori & Edgar Záyago Lau & Tomás Carroza & Richard P. Appelbaum & Liliana Villa & Eduardo Robles-Belmont Received: 23 December 2016 / Accepted: 20 April 2017 # Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2017 Abstract In this paper, we identify 37 companies that produce nano-enabled products in Argentina. We locate the products of these firms in terms of both their economic sector and position in a value chain. The research was done through a four-step methodology. Firstly, an inventory of firms was created. Secondly, the firms were classified by their economic sector, following the United Nations economic classification. Thirdly, the firms were located within a simple nanotechnology value chain. Finally, the products were classified according to their G. Foladori (*) Department of Development Studies, Universidad Autónoma de Zacatecas, Zacatecas, Mexico e-mail: [email protected] E. Z. Lau Center for Research and Advanced Studies of the National Polytechnic Institute (CINVESTAV), Mexico City, Mexico e-mail: [email protected] T. Carroza Universidad Nacional de Mar del Plata, Buenos Aires, Argentina e-mail: [email protected] R. P. Appelbaum University of California, Santa Barbara, USA e-mail: [email protected] L. Villa Universidad Autónoma de Zacatecas, Zacatecas, Mexico e-mail: [email protected] E. Robles-Belmont Universidad Nacional Autónoma de Mexico, UNAM, Mexico City, Mexico e-mail: [email protected] final destination, being either means of production or final consumer products. The results show that healthcare, cosmetics, and medicine is the most represented sector along the value chain, followed by electronics. Keywords Nanotechnology . Value chain . Argentina . Companies . New technologies . Innovation Introduction This article analyzes the distribution of nanotechnology firms in Argentina by economic sectors and in relation with a generic value chain.1 Argentina is considered the third country in development of nanotechnologies in Latin America, after Brazil and Mexico. As in the rest of Latin American countries, the information on the performance of these technologies is scarce and irregular. At this time, we have taken the step of analyzing the distribution of the firms across economic sectors, employing a simplified value chain analysis. Thirtyseven firms were identified and grouped, according to the economic sector that they belong to and the place that they take in a value chain. This is an initial exercise in classifying these companies, which will enable interested researchers to better gauge their social and economic impact. 1 We are grateful to Magdalena Silva for the help with the proofreading and editing in English. 186 Page 2 of 13 This study went through four methodological phases. We first inventoried nanotechnology firms in Argentina following a methodology developed for this purpose. We then classified those firms according to the economic sector that corresponds to the nanotechnologyenabled product. Following, we located these products in a simplified value chain. In the final phase, we identified the principal end use of the products—whether they are destined as inputs into industrial processes or as final products for personal consumption. The results show that around half of the firms are located in the final stage of the value chain and that the economic sectors most represented are healthcare, cosmetics, and medicine, followed by electronics. The article is presented in five sections. In the first one, we examine the development of nanotechnology in Argentina. In the second section, we explain the methodology used to obtain the data and to analyze it. In the third section, we present the results, using descriptive and graphic tools. In the fourth one, we discuss the results. At the end, we present the most important conclusions. The development of nanotechnology in Argentina Argentina is third in Latin American in nanotechnology development, following Brazil and Mexico (Kay and Shapira 2009). Like other Latin American countries, Argentina has singled out nanotechnology as a priority area for development since the beginning of this century, doing so via the Department of Science and Technology (Andrini and Figueroa 2008). This step should not be surprising. Global orientation on the promotion of Science and Technology (S&T) is towards sectors with greater knowledge content. From several international organizations, the information and communication technologies, biotechnologies, and nanotechnologies have been promoted to be the priority areas of technological development. The World Bank, for example, notes that Research and Development (R&D) plays an essential role in the economy and that developing countries should make a strong investment in knowledge (World Bank 1991). The OECD understands that in order to sustain economic growth, investment in knowledge is necessary (OECD 1997). A document of the Working Group on Science, Technology and Innovation of the Millennium Project of the United Nations emphasized the capacity of nanotechnologies to improve the living conditions of the poor (Calestous and Yee-Cheong 2005). The drive of J Nanopart Res (2017) 19:186 nanotechnologies in Latin America came first through the World Bank. Since the late 1990s, the World Bank and other institutions created a global network of Millennium Scientific Initiative (MSI). These initiatives materialized in centers of excellence in developing countries for the purpose of promoting research in S&T at the same level of infrastructure and resources that exist in developed countries (Macilwain 1998). Several nanotechnology research institutes were created in Latin America through MSIs, the first ones in Chile as of 1999 and during the following years in Brazil, Mexico, and Venezuela (Foladori and Fuentes 2008; Rushton et al. 2009). The Organization of American States (OAS) is also one of the international organizations that had influence in homogenizing S&T policy in Latin America. Various conferences of the Inter-American Commission of Science and Technology (COMCyTOAS), which was created in 1998, have addressed the topic of the role of S&T in the development, and they have selected four areas as priorities, including nanotechnologies (OEST 2004). After the first decade of the century, most Latin American countries considered nanotechnologies as a priority area in their S&T policies, but not all of them granted public funding for R&D, Argentina did. In 2004, a year after acknowledging nanotechnology as a priority area for R&D in Argentina, the National Agency for the Advancement of Science and Technology (ANPCyT) started to finance research by providing funds for 3-year projects in four areas: nano- and microdevices; bio-nanostructures; nanostructured materials and systems; and molecular and supra-molecular nanoscience, nanotechnology, and interfaces (Andrini and Figueroa 2008). Public funding for nanotechnologies is justified, at the beginning, by the need to create research networks (vacancy areas program). However, this program was short-lived and of limited resources (Hurtado, Lugones, and Surtayeva 2017). Two public initiatives to support small and medium enterprises were implemented. One was the pre-seed program of the Argentine Foundation of Nanotechnology (FAN); the other was the Nanopymes program. To this date, these programs were not evaluated or the results were not disclosed. The amounts awarded were reduced and also the public policy instruments that were made available as well as the state visibility (MINCyT 2013; MINCyT 2014; Programa Nanopymes, nd). In 2005, the governments of Brazil and Argentina created the Brazilian-Argentine Center of Nanotechnology J Nanopart Res (2017) 19:186 (CBAN) that will be an important base of professional development and research as well as capacity building. The Bicentennial Plan for Science and Technology 2006–2010 (MINCyT 2006) is the first attempt for political integration of R&D that includes nanotech. Within this framework, all areas of nanotechnology are proposed as candidates to solve problems in industry, the food and agriculture sectors, and the betterment of infrastructure, energy, and public health. In 2007, the National Agency for the Development of Science and Technology financed, through its Program for Strategic Areas, the Interdisciplinary Center for Nanoscience and Nanotechnology. This is a virtual consortium that couples public institutions that perform research with hi-tech businesses (Spivak L’Hoste et al. 2012). Although nanotechnology research enjoys a diversity of existing funding, in 2010, the National Agency for Scientific and Technology Development established specific funding for nanotechnology called Funds for the Nano Sector (FS-Nano). This funding had the goal of creating public-private associations that link research with production, thus facilitating the transfer of technology and spanning the diverse stages of the value-chain of nanotechnologies. FS-Nano funded eight proposals in 2010 with a clear component of oriented science, incorporating 23 firms besides public institutions (Vila Seoane 2011). In 2012, the Ministry of Science, Technology and Innovation launched a National Plan called BInnovative Argentina 2020^ (MCTI 2013), where nanotechnology should play a central role in supporting the development of agroindustry, sustainable development, social development, energy, industry, and healthcare. In parallel with these institutional advances, starting in the middle of the first decade of the 2000s, various activities were carried out that drove these new technologies, beginning with the Congress of Nano-Mercosur, organized by the FAN. The foundation continues uniting researchers and specialists, thus bringing together different organizations and institutes of R&D with technology-specialized businesses. Various agencies and teaching and research institutions strengthened their connections in areas of nanotechnology research. Some of the first institutions that stood out included & The University of Buenos Aires, through its Institute of the Materials, Environment, and Energy (INQUIMAE), Page 3 of 13 186 & & The National University of La Plata, through its Institute of Theoretical and Applied Physiochemical Research (INIFTA), The National Commission of Atomic Energy, through its Atomic Center of Bariloche and the Constituyentes Atomic Center (CAB and CAC, respectively). With the passing of years, various institutes associated with national universities maintained a close relationship with the National Council of Technical Scientific Research (CONICET) in order to give impetus to nanotechnology (Barrere and Matas 2013). One example was the Institute of Research in Science and Materials Technology (INTEMA), which is part of the National University of Mar del Plata (UNMdP). This was also the case in the Institute of Research in Physical Chemistry of Cordoba (INFICQ), part of the National University of Cordoba (Vila Seoane 2011). From the public sector, the need to build capacity in the private sector is emphasized and also that the latter takes part in the innovation process, but the bulk of resources in R&D continues coming from the public sector (Ladenheim 2015). There is no information on how far this state incentive for R&D in nanotechnologies culminated in products on the market. Information and monitoring of public funding for nanotechnology are partial. For example, the FS-Nano was founded in 2010, which funded eight research projects, including, besides public institutions, 23 companies, of which six appear as producing items with nanotechnology in the list in Table 3 (Nanotek S.A., Laring, Eriochem SA, Biochemiq S.A., Inmeba S.R.L., and AADEE S.A.). There is also no information on private research funding, although from the 37 companies present in the market (Table 3), we traced only seven with access to public funds for research, suggesting that most of them have developed nanotechnology products with own funds (Vila Seoane 2011). As in the majority of Latin American countries, the main difficulty is to link the different parties working in nanotechnology, and this is one of the principal reasons why FAN created a catalog of companies and suppliers of equipment, services, and consumables of all nanotechnology production activity. The FAN catalog is based on voluntary reporting. The contributing companies fill out a simple form and submit by Internet the firm’s logo and photographs of the products (FAN 2015). We reviewed the original list from the FAN’s 186 Page 4 of 13 catalog along with other sources, reaching 37 companies that incorporate nanotechnology in some way within the value chain. Our database leaves aside those companies that only do R&D or that commercializes imported products but do not add any nanotechnology process in Argentina. Methodology This research is part of a wider one on nanotechnology value chains in different Latin American countries. Although this methodology is slightly different from the one that we already presented for Mexico, we copy here the main directives that we used previously (Appelbaum et al. 2016). The research had two objectives. The first one was to develop a list of firms that produce with nanotechnology in Argentina. Given the lack of official information, this stage required extensive work and a specific methodology that is detailed in the following. The second objective was to take a first step in understanding the role of nanotechnologies in development. To do this, we located the companies in a simple value chain of nanotechnologies and classified them according to the economic sector in which they take part. This allowed us to detect the extent in which some areas are more represented vertically, as well as the final destination of the products in terms of the accumulation process, depending on whether the products are for personal consumption or for productive consumption as means of production of subsequent economic cycles. The general hypothesis that guided the research is that the presence of nanotechnology firms would occur without considerable connection with each other and scattered on the different economic sectors. This hypothesis is based on three factors extensively studied in Latin America: first, the gap between mostly public research institutions and private companies (de Deane et al. 2016; Ladenheim 2015; Loray and Piñero 2014; Thomas and Becerra 2012); second, the lack of a public policy to promote new technologies that selectively commands innovation in economically strategic areas (Casas et al. 2014); and finally, the existence of an open economy that favors the purchase of inputs and final products in the foreign market, which hinders the vertical integration of national productive chains (Bisang 2003; Kosacoff 1993; López 2007; Wainer and Schorr 2014). J Nanopart Res (2017) 19:186 The research took place in four phases that required specific methods. The first phase was the creation of a list of nanotechnology companies, the second was the placement of each firm within the economic sector, the third was the classification of the companies according to their position in a value chain, and the fourth was their distribution according to whether they serve as inputs into industrial processes (thereby contributing to capital accumulation) or as consumer products. Phase 1: the listing of nanotechnology firms Each of the firms was identified according to its nano-enabled product(s). This identification took place through a systematic search of information during an 8-month period (March– December 2016). Between February and March 2017, this list was revised and corrected because information on nanotechnology had disappeared in some firms and other new ones had emerged. The following sources were utilized: the 8th Report of the Program to Strengthen Competitiveness of Small and Medium Businesses and the Creation of Employment in Argentina (ACE 2015), a Google Internet search (with the following Spanish search terms: nano* + Argentina, producto + Argentina + nano*, empresa + Argentina + nano*), scientific and informational articles, specialized books, forum presentations, academic meetings and conferences, interviews with researchers, a review of main Argentine newspapers, and advertising in the mass media. These data were then compared with the FAN database. Once the preliminary list that identified the names of the firms, their product in the market, geographic location, reference information, and incidental data was established, we proceeded to validate the list through one of the following criteria: & & & The firm explicitly shows on its Web page the application or utilization of nanotechnology. There exists marketing material of the product that clearly shows nanotechnology content. Firm spokespeople validate the use of nanotechnology in articles, interviews, or public presentations. The result of this procedure generated 37 cases of firms that were engaged in nanotech-related production. The information was organized in a matrix that included firm name, geographic location (Argentine province and city), date of creation, firm size (number of employees), website reference or other validating publication, and the date of the search. J Nanopart Res (2017) 19:186 The exact number of nanotechnology firms in Argentina for a specific period of time is difficult to determine, since it is a dynamic sector with little public information. We do know that there is no regulation with respect to the labeling of nanotechnology content and that it is not made known when this technology is used in different stages of the value chain. As a consequence, the inventory presented here is not exhaustive or statistically representative. Nevertheless, we believe that it provides an up-to-date valid classification of the nanotechnology manufacturing sector in Argentina. Since the matrix was created from market products, it necessarily omitted firms that engaged only in nanotechnology R&D but did not produce any nano-enabled good, for example, firms with nanotech patents that had not yet reached the stage of having products in the market. Phase 2: classification of nanotechnology products by economic sector To document the economic sector of nanotechnology products, we utilized the Uniform International Industrial Classification for all Economic Activity (ISIC/4-International Standard Industrial Classification of All Economic Activities-4) published by the United Nations (UN), which is used by the majority of countries and by the United Nations. The ISIC/4 is specifically also used in most of the countries and international organizations to classify economic sectors (United Nations 2008). We manually allocated the ISIC/4 classification to each of the nanotechnology products in our inventory, starting with the search engine of the website of the United Nations. The categorization was based on a hierarchic alphanumeric coding that classifies according to activities that include the manufacture of products as well as services. The ISIC classifies the firms according to four levels—section, division, group, and class. The broadest level involves 21 sections and includes both goods and services. Manufacturing (which includes the firms for this study) is designated by section letter C and includes activities that result in the physical transformation of materials to obtain a product (United Nations 2008). The result of this classification was incorporated into the matrix. For example, a nanotechnology water filter was classified as C 2825, which according to ISIC/4 includes Hierarchy & & Section: C—manufacturing Division: 28—manufacture of machinery and equipment n.e.c. Page 5 of 13 186 & & Group: 282 —manufacture of special-purpose machinery Class: 2025—manufacture of machinery for food, beverage, and tobacco processing Source: http://unstats.un.org/unsd/cr/registry/regcs. asp?Cl=27&Lg=1&Co=2825 Phase 3: placement in the nanotechnology value chain The third phase of the research consisted in the classification of each of the products according to its location in a simple nanotechnology value chain. To carry this out, we utilized as a guide the project California in the nano-economy (Frederick 2014, n.d.). The model structure was taken from a value chain developed by Lux Research, a company responsible for following emerging technology markets. Lux Research considers the following categories: (1) nanomaterials with one, two, or three nanoscale dimensions; (2) nanointermediaries that make practical use of nanoparticles or nanostructures to be used in final products; (3) final nanoproducts, prepared for the final consumer or industry; and (4) nanotools, equipment, and machinery. This includes equipment that measures, handles, analyzes, and produces nanomaterials and nanostructures (Lux Research 2004). This approach is not intended to be exhaustive, given that each of the value chain categories can, in turn, be subdivided into additional subcategories. Nevertheless, we believe that the simple value chain approach is useful, in that it enables us to distinguish between research and application; the degree to which the product serves as a basic input, intermediate input, or final product; and the intended use of the final product (as itself an input into an industrial process or as a consumer good). Raw nanomaterials (particles or structures) constitute the first stage in the value chain, the further transformation and incorporation of the nanomaterial into an intermediate product constitute the second stage, and the development of a final product that will not undergo further physicochemical transformations constitutes the final stage. It must be taken into account that the classification is based on the physical transformations of the products, not in the value changes. A couple of examples can give light to this distinction. Paint is a final product, because from the point of view of the nanotechnology physical process, it does not suffer further modifications; nevertheless, paint is mainly bought by the construction industry, and from the 186 Page 6 of 13 point of view of its value, it reappears in the value of the house or building. Another example could be electrical devices. These do not suffer further nanotechnology modifications; nevertheless, from the point of view of their value, they are embedded in final electrical products, which incorporate the value of the devices. In these two examples, the products are final in terms of their nanotechnology physical transformation, although they are intermediate or means of production for further processes, and in this last sense, their value does not appear separated from the final product that embodies it. Different stages of the value chain are the instruments for nanotechnology (tools and equipment). We applied the criteria used in the research on the nanotechnology firms in California (Frederick n.d.) to classify the products and firms registered. Table 1, in the following, summarizes the main keywords used for each step of the value chain. Each of the products was manually classified according to the information and description of the product provided by the firm. A simple classification of nanomaterials by the Environmental Protection Agency of the USA makes a similar division of the raw material; it identifies five groups or types: carbon-based (e.g., carbon nanotubes, fullerenes, graphene), metals and metal oxides (e.g., gold, silver, titanium dioxide, zinc oxide, cerium oxide), quantum dots (semiconductors), polymers (e.g., dendrimers and liposomes), and composite materials (EPA n.d.) These materials are worked with nanotechnology, and their main forms appear in the first column of Table 3. Phase 4: placement of the product within the process of capital accumulation The final products can enter into a new cycle of capital accumulation or can end up in individual consumption. The distinction is necessary to understand the character of nanotechnology in the process, given its potential to revolutionize production and thereby act as a lever for economic growth. In contrast, when the application of nanotechnology results in a product for final consumption, while it may have the potential to benefit consumers, it does not serve as a potential lever to stimulate economic growth. We acknowledge that this distinction (between nano-enabled products serving as means of production or as goods for consumption) is somewhat ambiguous, in that the same product can be either a means of production or J Nanopart Res (2017) 19:186 consumption. 2 Nevertheless, some of the product groups (raw materials, intermediate materials, and tools and equipment) clearly serve as means of production, as also do final products intended for construction or transportation. Results We identified 37 firms in Argentina producing with nanotechnology at any stage of the value chain. The majority of the firms, 19, were located in the Province of Buenos Aires, followed by seven in the Autonomous City of Buenos Aires. The rest were located in the provinces of Córdoba (5), Santa Fe (2), Río Negro (2), and Entre Ríos and Catamarca with one each. The address of the head office was the criterion that we used to define the physical location of each business. In all cases, the principal center of manufacturing coincided with the central office. Figure 1 illustrates the distribution. The 19 firms found in the Province of Buenos Aires accounted for 51.4% of the total. Considering that most of them are near the Autonomous City of Buenos Aires (CABA), which has another seven firms, the region close to the capital concentrates 70.3% of the total nanotechnology firms in Argentina. The data illustrate the high geographical concentration of productive nanotechnology activity in Argentina, which is concomitant with the economic activity in the city of Buenos Aires, the third richest in Latin America after Sao Paulo and Mexico City (Crowe 2015) and nearby area. There is the policy of the Ministry of Science, Technology and Productive Innovation to improve the geographical distribution of the National Innovation System (COFECyT n.d.). However, with regard to nanotechnologies, there has been no major change on the R&D concentration and on the production in traditional areas of technological development such as the Autonomous City of Buenos Aires and surrounding cities and the province of Cordoba. These 37 firms based in Argentina were classified according to their product and using the United Nations 2 For example, a vehicle is a means of production when it is utilized by a firm to transport its workers, but it is a means of consumption when it is used for personal transport. Wheat flour is consumed as a means of production by biscuit makers and bakeries, but wheat flour could be bought by individuals for domestic consumption. J Nanopart Res (2017) 19:186 Page 7 of 13 186 Table 1 Key concepts used to identify nanotechnology products in the value chain Raw material Intermediate materials Final products Measuring, tools, and handling equipment Nanoparticles Nanofibers Nanotubes Nanocables Spherical nanoparticles Nanosheets Nanofilms Coatings Catalysts Sensors and NEMS Generators and storage of energy Drug delivery Integrated circuits Nanocomposites Clothing Sports articles Household products Construction products Transportation Electronics and computers Healthcare products Foodstuffs and agricultural products Medicine and medical products Equipment or tools dedicated to the analysis, development, production, or application of nanomaterials or nanostructured materials Source: Stacey Frederick, California in the nano-economy (http://californiananoeconomy.org/) methodology previously discussed. All firms were placed within the four manufacturing divisions. It is worth noting, nevertheless, that as a result of the nanotechnology product classification, the classification by sector did not necessarily coincide with the economic sector registered by the firm, given that a firm can occupy a significant economic sector and, at the same time, produce a nanoproduct that corresponds to a different sector. Table 2 illustrates the distribution of firms (from the nanoproduct) by economic sector. The manufacturers of chemical substances and products (subsector ISIC division 20) have the highest concentration of firms, followed by pharmaceuticals, medicinal chemicals, and botanic for pharmaceutical purposes (subsector ISIC division 21). Then, it comes the manufacturers of information technology, electronics, and optics (subsector ISIC division 26). The rest are sectors with less than four firms. Table 2 gives an overview of the economic sectors most likely to incorporate nanotechnology. If we omit the first one, which produces chemicals and, therefore, is more generic and its products can be spread in many other sectors, it is evident that the chemical and pharmaceutical industry (producing medicines, cosmetics, or nutraceuticals) is, along with electronics, the most receptive to nanotechnology in Argentina, at least if measured by the number of participating firms. A closer approximation to the value chain results from the analysis of nanotechnology products according to whether they are raw materials, intermediates, final products, or tools and equipment. The result can be seen in Fig. 2. Figure 2 shows that only six firms can be identified as producing raw nanomaterial, understanding it in this case as the first transformation of matter to obtain nanoparticles and nanostructures useful for further processing. Nanointermediates are the second step in the value chain. They constitute adaptations to nanoparticles and nanostructures for specific purposes. From the material point of view, it means a subsequent processing of the first step. In economic terms, these nanointermediates are also raw material for later stages of the value chain. So, if we add the first two stages, it turns out that nearly half of nanotechnology products are raw materials in economic terms. This also requires further research to identify the quantity and destination of the raw nanomaterials and nanointermediates. Finally, somewhat less than half of the products are final products (48.6%) that do not undergo subsequent material nanotechnological transformations. Here, it is about firms seeking the competitive advantage offered by the novelty of nanotechnology products. No firms were found in the stage of tools and equipment. Table 3 identifies the total number of firms (37) according to their location in the value chain. In addition, the table subdivides each stage depending on the type of material (in the case of raw material) or on the most likely economic purpose of the product (in the other stages). The four major groups or sectors in which the value chain was divided are raw materials, intermediates, final products, and tools and equipment. Likewise, the first three were subdivided according to the main economic and sectoral guidelines. The first sector, which produces raw nanomaterials, was subdivided according to the base substance: metals and oxides, polymers, carbon, and semiconductors. Four firms share the category of metallic nanomaterials and oxides: Argentum (n.d.), Lizys (n.d.), Nanotek S.A. (n.d.), and Tenaris (n.d.). Two firms correspond to the production of polymer nanomaterials: Dhacam (Dhacam n.d.) and GIHON chemical Laboratories S.R.L.; the latter 186 Page 8 of 13 J Nanopart Res (2017) 19:186 Fig. 1 Geographic distribution of nanotechnology firms in Argentina. Source: own elaboration Table 2 Firms by economic sector (ISIC division) classified according to the nanotechnology product Firms by main ISIC division Number of firms Chemical products (subsector ISIC division 20) 11 Pharma chemicals and botanic (subsector ISIC division 21) Inf. technology, electronics and optics (subsector ISIC division 26) Less than 4 firms in a sector 10 Total 37 Source: own classification 8 8 commercializes nanoencapsulates for drug delivery (GIHON SRL n.d.). Firms producing carbon nanomaterials or semiconductors were not found. The nanointermediates were divided into five subsectors: circuits and sensors, composites, therapeutic, coatings, and packaging. The first four were represented. Bell Export S.A. manufactures sensors for detecting atmospheric gases, such as oxygen, argon, and nitrogen (Nitroair n.d.). Besides, there is PENTA S.A. that manufactures metal detectors for food and ARO S.A. that produces sensors for industrial applications; there is also ARS ULTRA that produces chips. In the composite subsector, there is Laring, which manufactures ceramics with nanosurface treatment J Nanopart Res (2017) 19:186 Page 9 of 13 186 Fig. 2 Distribution of nanotechnology firms in the value chain. Source: own elaboration (Laring n.d.), LH Plast SRL, which produces water seals with polymeric materials (Andahazi 2015), and Protex S.A., which manufactures chemicals for construction and industry, where the product called prokrete, a polyurethane self-priming system, stands out (Andahazi 2015). In the therapeutic subsector, we find Enorza, with the manufacture of products for drug delivery (Enorza S.A. n.d.), Fabriquimica S.R.L. producing liposomes and nanospheres (Svarc 2013), Omega Sur with fish oil for balanced pet food (Andahazi 2015), then, Kalium Table 3 Nanotechnology firms by placement in the value chain Raw material No. Intermediates Metals and oxides • Nanotek S.A. (2005) • Tenaris (1948) • Argentum (2014) • Lizys S.A. (2014) Polymers • Dhacam S.R.L. (1990) • GIHON Lab químicos S.R.L. (1991) 4 Circuits and sensors 4 • Bell Export S.A. (1989) • PENTA (1976) • ARO S.A. (1957) • ARS ULTRA (2012) Composites 3 • Laring (1964) • LH Plast S.R.L. (2006) • Protex S.A. (1982) 2 Carbon No. Therapeutics 5 • Enorza S.A. • Fabriquimica S.R.L. (1961) • Omega Sur S.A. (2001) • Kaliumtech (2011) • ADOX (1990) Coatings 1 • Chemisa S.R.L (1994) Semiconductors Packing Total Source: Own elaboration 6 16.2% 13 35.1% Final products No. Apparel, sports and home • Arquipets S.R.L. (2011) 1 Personal care, cosmetics and medicine • Lipomize S.R.L (2013) • Eriochem S.A. (2000) • Laboratorio Mayors S.R.L (1999) • MZP (2014) • Nanotica (2015) • Silmag S.A. (1992) • Biochemiq S.A. (1999) • AADEE S.A. (1973) • -CEPROFARM (2014) • Laboratorios ELEA (1939) Construction and industry • Rasa (+20 years) • Solcor (2014) 10 Electronics • Unitec Blue S.A. (2012) • Inmeba S.R.L (1975) • Solar S.R.L (2014) • Tecnoacción (1988) Agriculture and food • Red Surcos (2008) Tools and equip 2 4 1 18 0 48.6% 186 Page 10 of 13 Technologies producing reagents for biology (Andahazi 2015), and ADOX S.A. with disinfectants (ADOX n.d.). In coatings, there is Chemisa S.R.L, which prepares composites for surface treatment, especially the metallic ones of aluminum and iron (Andahazi 2015; Chemisa n.d.). No firm was found in the subsector of packaging. The final product stage—the largest category— was subdivided into clothing, sports, and home; healthcare, cosmetics, and medicine; construction and industry; electronic components; and agriculture and food. In the clothing, sports, and home subsector, there is the Arquipets firm, dedicated to the production of pillows with nanosilver particles for pets (FAN n.d.-a). Within the healthcare, cosmetics, and medicine subsector, the included firms are Lipomize that produces cosmetics and nutraceuticals (Andahazi 2015; Lipomize n.d.) and Eriochem S.A. with controlledrelease medications and injectable nanoparticles, which are exported to markets such as the USA and Europe (FAN n.d.-b). Laboratorio Mayors produces pharmaceutical products and preparations for veterinary use (FAN n.d.-c), MZP with fluid measurement systems (MZP n.d.), Nananotica producing disinfectants and bactericides based on nanosilver (Nanotica n.d.), Silmag with biomedical products (Andahazi 2015), and Biochimiq producing a diagnostic kit to detect infectious diseases (TSS n.d.). AADEE S.A. is involved in the development of the Nanopoc, a portable equipment for detecting diseases (AADEE S.A. n.d.). CEPROFARM, on its part, is dedicated to the manufacture of drugs (Ceprocor n.d.). In the construction and industry subsector, two firms were identified. RASA Protect producing flame retardant fabrics for firemen clothing (FAN n.d.-d) and the Solcor S.A. firm, dedicated to the manufacture of paint (Solcor n.d.). In the electronic component subsector, there are devices such as memories and chip cards manufactured by Unitec Blue (Unitec Blue n.d.) and optical devices for computer and electronic industries produced by Inmeba S.R.L. (INMEBA n.d.) and also, Solar S.R.L. that produces lithium batteries (Solar S.R.L n.d.) and Tecnoacción dedicated to the manufacture of equipment for gambling (Tecnoacción n.d.). In the agriculture and food subsector, we find RedSurcos, a firm that produces nanoencapsulated fertilizers (Agro Link n.d.; Red Surcos 2012). J Nanopart Res (2017) 19:186 The production of tools and equipment was placed in the last column of the value chain. This sector does not have representation. The last step of the analysis relates to the distribution of products depending on whether they are means of production for subsequent industrial processes or final products for personal consumption. It is clear that all products classified as raw materials and intermediate materials are means of production, which comprises 51.3% of the total of firms. Interestingly, from the total of the final products (column of final products), the vast majority are products with greater potential to enter subsequent economic processes; in other words, they are also means of production. While firms located in Clothing, Sports and Home are oriented towards the final consumer, most of the firms located in healthcare, cosmetics, and medicine are suppliers for the medical industry, and the same works for the firms located in the construction and industry, electronics, and agriculture and food subsectors, which supply goods for other industries. All these firms that manufacture products which reenter as means of production in subsequent manufacturing processes are more dynamic in economic terms with regard to capital accumulation and suggest that, with a planned public policy, they could give interesting economic fruits. Discussion In the first place, the location of Argentine firms that produce with nanotechnology, according to their position in a generic value chain, shows that almost half of them are incorporated in the final stage, for the development of products that will not undergo subsequent nanotechnological transformations. Later researches should clarify what type of raw material they use and where they buy it and distinguish whether there is productive linkage among Argentine firms. Secondly, an important aspect of the results is that Argentina does not produce generic equipment for nanotechnology. This means a dependence on the international market to import the basic means of production, at least for the production of raw materials and intermediate materials. Thirdly, an overview shows a fairly even distribution of the firms along the different stages of the generic value chain. However, this has to be considered with caution for several reasons. So, although the medicine J Nanopart Res (2017) 19:186 and health subsector is the most representative along the value chain—namely the one that integrates all stages of the value chain and therefore represents a greater dynamism—it is the area that faces major regulatory restrictions, which may involve more delays in its development compared, for example, to electronics.3 The electronics subsector appears as the second most promising, even though in this case, there is no representation of firms that produce the raw nanomaterials (e.g., carbon in its variants, silica); thus, the semiconductor subgroup is empty. It is possible that this sector only handles imported raw materials. Nevertheless, this subsector, though in second place, confirms the world trend that shows that the semiconductor industry is one of the most promising in the nanotechnology industry (BCC Research 2014). In fourth place, a large number of firms (40%) were created after 2004, when the Argentine government formally considers nanotechnology as a priority area of development and the public financing starts. The information obtained about Argentina is not very different from the one illustrated in the case of Mexico (Appelbaum et al. 2016). Like in Mexico, in Argentina, almost half of the firms are located in the final stage (final products) of the value chain. Perhaps the only noticeable difference with the Mexican case corresponds to the subsector of healthcare, cosmetics, and medicine. In Argentina, this subsector is represented by ten firms, which constitutes 27% of the total of nanotechnology firms, while in Mexico, we identified 20 firms in this sector, which represents 14% of the total. Conclusions Argentina deems nanotechnology as one of the priority areas of development since 2004. This decision coincides with the wave of public policies to support nanotechnologies worldwide. Most Latin American countries made the same decision during the first two decades of this century. However, this political decision was not always accompanied by public funds to promote R&D. Argentina established a series of public policies and some funds aimed at promoting research and commercialization of 3 The National Administration of Drugs, Food and Medical Technology (ANMAT in Spanish) is designing a regulation to be applied for the use of nanotechnology in the food sector (Gobbo, 2014), Page 11 of 13 186 nanotechnology, although irregularly and not always articulated with the broadest national plans. Nevertheless, Argentina positioned itself as the third country in development of nanotechnologies in Latin America by the end of the first decade, this according to R&D indicators such as scientific publications, patents, and number of researchers. Unfortunately, there are no official records that provide information on the business sector. The purpose of the research whose results are presented here aims to start filling this gap with a first list of firms working with nanotechnology in Argentina. A specific methodology for the different stages of the research was developed: first, the identification of firms working with nanotechnology, something that is dispersed in public information; second, the sectoral economic location of such firms according to the nanotechnological product put on the market; third, the location in a simple and generic value chain (raw materials, intermediates, final products, instruments); and fourth, the estimate of the product final destination; in other words, whether they reenter subsequent production cycles as means of production or they are for personal consumption. This methodology was previously applied for the analysis of Mexico and can be replicated in other cases. The result was the identification of 37 companies working with nanotechnology during the period of information gathering. The data omit all those companies and products with nanotechnology that are marketed in Argentina as a result of importation, without nanotechnological processes within the country; which leaves aside many subsidiaries of transnational corporations. Production with nanotechnological processes represents an emerging sector in Argentina from the perspective of its role in development. The number of companies is low. Their development is tied to imported equipment of R&D and production, judging by the fact that no company producing nanotools in the value chain was detected. In subsectoral economic terms, the best represented along the value chain is healthcare, cosmetics, and medicine, which includes companies in the production of raw material (e.g., dendrimers, liposomes), in intermediates (e.g., drug delivery), and in final products. It is followed by electronics, although in this case, there are no companies producing nanoraw materials such as semiconductors. One last feature worth mentioning is that nearly half of the companies are located in the final stage of the value chain, which means that the products will not undergo further material nanotechnological 186 Page 12 of 13 transformations, but that does not mean they are not sold as means of production for subsequent production processes, which occurs in most cases. Compliance with ethical standards This study was funded by UCMexus-Conacyt. Grant 2013, CN-14-2. Conflict of interest The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest. References AADEE S.A. (n.d.). AADEE S.A. /MEDICINA. Retrieved December 15, 2016, from http://www.aadee.com/medicina/ ACE (2015) Resultados del Proyecto. Asistencia técnica para el programa de fortalecimiento de la competitividad de las PYME y creación de empleo en Argentina. Informe Semestral VIII. International Consultants/Unión Europea, Europe ADOX. (n.d.). Adox. Retrieved December 15, 2016, from http://www.adox.com.ar/component/search/?searchword= nano&searchphrase=all&Itemid=210 Agro Link. (n.d.). Red Surcos. Retrieved December 15, 2016, from http://www.redsurcos.com/uploads/prensa/large/20160523105815.jpg Andahazi, L. (2015). INFORME DE UNSAM—10/12/2015. Retrieved from http://noticias.unsam.edu.ar/wpcontent/uploads/2015/12/lupi-pdf-uelm.pdf Andrini L, Figueroa S (2008) Governmental encouragement of nanosciences and nanotechnologies in Argentina. In: Foladori G, Invernizzi N (eds) Nanotechnologies in Latin America. Karl Dietz Verlag, Berlin, pp 27–39 Appelbaum R, Lau EZ, Foladori G, Parker R, Vazquez LLV, Belmont ER, Figueroa ERA (2016) Inventory of nanotechnology companies in Mexico. J Nanopart Res 18(2):1–13. doi:10.1007/s11051-016-3344-y Argentum. (n.d.). Argentum Tεχνη—Sistemas Olfatométricos. Retrieved March 18, 2017, from http://www.argentumtexne. com.ar/narices.html Barrere, R., & Matas, L. (2013). Indicadores de Micro y Nano Tecnologías en Argentina 2012. ACE / Unión Europea. Retrieved from http://www.nanopymes.mincyt.gob. ar/files/Informe_indicadores_2012.pdf BCC Research. (2014). Nanotechnology: a realistic market assessment. BCC Research. Retrieved from http://www. reportlinker.com/p096617/Nanotechnology-A-RealisticMarket-Assessment.html Bisang R (2003) Apertura económica, innovación y estructura productiva: la aplicación de biotecnología en la producción agrícola pampeana argentina. Desarrollo Económico 43:413–442 Calestous J, Yee-Cheong L (eds) (2005) Innovation: applying knowledge in development. Earthscan, London Retrieved from www.unmillenniumproject.org/documents/Sciencecomplete.pdfVisited Casas R, Corona J, Rivera R (2014) Políticas de Ciencia, Tecnología e Innovación en América Latina: entre la J Nanopart Res (2017) 19:186 competitividad y la inclusión social. In: Kreimer P, Vessuri H, Velho L, Arellano A (eds) Perspectivas Latinoamericanas en el Estudios Social de la Ciencia, la Tecnología y el Conocimiento. Siglo XXI, Ciudad de México Ceprocor. (n.d.). CEPROFARM | Ceprocor. Retrieved March 28, 2017, from http://ceprocor.cba.gov.ar/cepro/ Chemisa. (n.d.). Chemisa. Retrieved December 15, 2016, from http://www.chemisa.com.ar/productos/hierros/ COFECyT. (n.d.). Consejo Federal de Ciencia y Tecnología. Retrieved from http://www.cofecyt.mincyt.gob.ar/ Crowe, P. (2015). Wealthy people think these are the most important cities in the world. Retrieved December 15, 2016, from http://www.businessinsider.com/most-important-cities-forthe-wealthy-2015-3 de Deane, C. A., Corengia, Á., de Fanelli, A. G., & Carranza, M. P. (2016). La investigación en las universidades privadas de la Argentina. Cambios tras las políticas de aseguramiento de la calidad y financiamiento competitivo. REICE. Revista Iberoamericana Sobre Calidad, Eficacia Y Cambio En Educación, 12(3) Dhacam. (n.d.). Dhacam. Retrieved from http://www.dhacam. com.ar Enorza S.A. (n.d.). Enorza S.A. Retrieved March 18, 2017, from http://www.enorza.com.ar/produccion.html EPA. (n.d.). Nanotechnology research. Basic Information [Web Page] Retrieved February 25, 2015, from http://www.epa. gov/nanoscience/basicinfo.htm FAN. (2015). Catálogo de Empresas. Fundación Argentina de Nanotecnología. Retrieved from http://www.fan.org. ar/acciones/cde FAN. (n.d.-a). Arquipets. Retrieved December 15, 2016, from http://www.fan.org.ar/catalogo-de-empresas/arquipets/ FAN. (n.d.-b). Eriochem S.A. Retrieved December 15, 2016, from http://www.fan.org.ar/catalogo-de-empresas/eriochem-s-a/ FAN. (n.d.-c). Nanotecnología para el Control de Ectoparásitos en Perros (Mayors SRL). Retrieved December 15, 2016, from http://www.fan.org.ar/proyectos-presemilla/nanotecnologiapara-el-control-de-ectoparasitos-en-perros-mayors-srl/ FAN. (n.d.-d). Textiles inteligentes para trajes de bomberos – fan. org.ar. Retrieved March 18, 2017, from https://www.fan.org. ar/?portfolio=textiles-inteligentes-para-trajes-de-bomberos Foladori G, Fuentes V (2008) Nanotechnology in Chile. Towards a knowledge economy. In: Foladori G, Invernizzi N (eds) Nanotechnologies in Latin America. Dietz, Berlin Frederick, S. (2014). The nanotechnology value chain model & template. Unpublished manuscript. Duke University. Center on Globalization, Governance and Competitiveness. Frederick, S. (n.d.). California in the nano-economy. Retrieved April 16, 2015, from http://californiananoeconomy.org/ GIHON SRL. (n.d.). GIHON | Laboratorios Químicos SRL. Retrieved December 15, 2016, from http://www.gihonlab. com/farmoquimicos.php Gobbo A (2014). Aspectos Regulatorios de la Nanotecnología en Alimentos. Primeras Jornadas Internacionales de Nanotecnología en Agroindustria y Agroalimentos. Buenos Aires. Hurtado D, Lugones M, & Surtayeva S (2017). Tecnologías de propósito general y políticas tecnológicas en la semiperiferia: el caso de la nanotecnología en la Argentina. Revista Iberoamericana de Ciencia, Tecnología Y Sociedad, 12(34). J Nanopart Res (2017) 19:186 Retrieved from http://www.revistacts.net/volumen-12numero-34 INMEBA. (n.d.). Celdas Robotizadas—INMEBA. Retrieved December 15, 2016, from http://www.inmebasrl. com/productos/celdas-robotizadas/ Kay L, Shapira P (2009) Developing nanotechnology in Latin America. J Nanopart Res 11(2):259–278 Kosacoff B (1993) La industria argentina: un proceso de reestructuración desarticulada. In: Kosacoff B (ed) El desafío de la competitividad. La industria argentina en transformación. CEPAL / Alianza Editorial, Buenos Aires Lab Elea. (1939). Laboratorio Elea. Retrieved December 15, 2016, from http://www.elea.com/es/productos/301/354 /NOPUCID-CRYSTAL.htm Ladenheim, R. (2015). Indicadores de ciencias y tecnología Argentina-2013 (Prólogo), 17. Retrieved from indicadorescti. mincyt.gob.ar/documentos/indicadores_2013.pdf Laring. (n.d.). Laring—Especialistas en tratamiento de superficies. Retrieved December 15, 2016, from http://www.laring.com/ Lipomize. (n.d.). Cosmeceutica. Retrieved December 15, 2016, from http://www.lipomize.com/es/2013-05-07-14-56-33 /cosmeceutica Lizys. (n.d.). Nanopartículas Hidrofílicas | LiZys. Retrieved March 18, 2017, from http://lizys.com.ar/producto/hydrophilicnanoparticles/ López A (2007) Desarrollo económico y sistema nacional de innovación en la Argentina: desde 1860 hasta 2001. EDICON, Buenos Aires Loray, R. ., & Piñero, J. F. (2014). El Plan Argentina Innovadora 2020: avances en materia conceptual e institucional de las políticas públicas en ciencia, tecnología e innovación (CTI) de la Argentina reciente. VIII Jornadas de Sociología de la UNLP. Lux Research. (2004 Sizing nanotechnology’s value chain. Retrieved from https://portal.luxresearchinc.com/research/report_ excerpt/2650 Macilwain C (1998) World Bank backs Third World centers of excellence plan. Nature 396(711):24–31 MINCyT. (n.d.). Programa Fortalecimiento de la Competitividad de las PYMES y Creación de Empleo en la Argentina. http://www.nanopymes.mincyt.gob.ar/. Retrieved from http://www.nanopymes.mincyt.gob.ar/ MCTI. (2013). Argentina Innovadora 2020. Plan Nacional de Ciencia, tecnología e Innovación. Lineamientos estratégicos 2012–2015. Ministerio de Ciencia, Tecnología e Innovación Productiva. Retrieved from http://www.mincyt.gob. ar/adjuntos/archivos/000/022/0000022576.pdf MINCyT. (2013). Informe de gestión 2012. Retrieved from http://www.mincyt.gob.ar/adjuntos/descargas/informe_2012.pdf MINCyT. (2014). Informe de gestión 2013. Retrieved from http://www.mincyt.gob.ar/adjuntos/descargas/informe_2013.pdf MINCyT. (2006). Plan estratégico nacional de ciencia, tecnología e innovación BBicentenario^ (2006–2010). Ministerio de Ciencia, Tecnología e Innovación Productiva. Retrieved from http://www.mincyt.gob.ar/planes-nacionales/planestrategico-nacional-de-ciencia-tecnologia-e-innovacionbicentenario-2006-2010-8017 MZP. (n.d.). MZP. Retrieved March 18, 2017, from http://www. mzptec.com/ Nanotek S.A. (n.d.). Empresa. Retrieved December 15, 2016, from http://www.nanoteksa.com/index.php/es/empresa.html Page 13 of 13 186 Nanotica. (n.d.). NANOTICA. Retrieved March 18, 2017, from http://nanotica.com.ar/nanodesinfectante-hospitalario/ Nitroair. (n.d.). Bell Export S.A. Retrieved December 15, 2016, from http://nitroair.com.ar/quienes%20somos.html OECD (1997) National Innovation Systems. Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Development, Paris OEST. (2004). Science, technology, engineering and innovation for development: a vision for the Americas in the twenty first century. OEST (Office of Education Science and Technology). Retrieved from http://nano.gov/sites/default/files/agenda__economic_symposium.pdf Red Surcos. (2012). Fitosanitarios con nanotecnología. Retrieved June 20, 2016, from http://www.redsurcos.com/innovacion. php?idioma= Rushton M, Záyago E, Foladori G (2009) Center of educational excellence in nanotechnology: the proposed World Bank Scientific Millennium initiatives and nanotechnogy in Latin America. In: Barrañón A (ed) New nanotechnology developments. Nova Publishers, New York Solar S.R.L. (n.d.). Solar S.R.L. Retrieved March 18, 2017, from https://www.b2match.eu/nanomercosur2015 Solcor. (n.d.). SOLCOR. Retrieved March 29, 2017, from http://www.solcor.com.ar/ Spivak L’Hoste A, Hubert M, Figueroa S, Andrini L (2012) La estructura de La investigación argentina em nanociencia y nanotecnología: balances y perspectivas. In: Foladori G, Záyago E, Invernizzi N (eds) Perspectivas sobre el desarrollo de las nanotecnologías en América Latina. Miguel Angel Porrúa, México, DF Svarc, F. (2013). Un caso de utilización de nanoestructuras en la industria cosmética. Presented at the Nano Mercosur 2013. Retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Federico_ Svarc/publication/272680793_Un_caso_de_utilizacion_de_ nanoestructuras_en_la_industria_cosmetica/links/54eb84630 cf2a03051942f4b/Un-caso-de-utilizacion-de-nanoestructurasen-la-industria-cosmetica.pdf Tecnoacción. (n.d.). Tecnoacción. Retrieved March 29, 2017, from http://www.tecnoaccion.com.ar/ Tenaris. (n.d.). Investigación y Desarrollo. Tenaris. Retrieved December 15, 2016, from http://www.tenaris.com/esES/RAndD.aspx Thomas H, Becerra L (2012) Dinámicas tecno-económicas y generación de recursos humanos y cognitivos: Un análisis socio-técnico de la Argentina pre y post-convertibilidad (2002-2011). Innovation RICEC 3(2) TSS. (n.d.). Nanopoc. Retrieved March 18, 2017, from http://www.unsam.edu.ar/tss/diagnostico-instantaneo/ UnitecBlue. (n.d.). UnitecBlue. Retrieved December 15, 2016, from http://www.unitecblue.com.ar/ United Nations. (2008). International Standard industrial classification of all economic activities (ISIC) (Rev. 4). New York: United Nations. Retrieved from http://unstats.un. org/unsd/publication/seriesM/seriesm_4rev4e.pdf Vila Seoane MF (2011) Nanotecnología: su desarrollo en Argentina, sus características y tendencias a nivel mundial. Universidad Nacional de General Sarmiento, Buenos Aires Wainer A, Schorr M (2014) Concentración y extranjerización del capital en la Argentina Reciente: ¿Mayor autonomía nacional o incremento de la dependencia? Lat Am Res Rev 49(3):103–125 World Bank (1991) World development report. Oxford University Press, New York