The Development and Design of Engineering Economic Indicator System for Nanotechnology Industry Product Manufacturing: A Case Study of Latvia / Inženierekonomisko Rādītāju Sistēmas Attīstība Un Izveide Nanotehnoloģiju Industrijas Produktu Ražošanai: Latvijas Pieredze

Open access


The current scientific paper is developed to continue the research on further commercialisation of the nanotechnology products of manufacturing industries in Latvia. To create the system of engineering economic indicators for multifunctional nanocoating technologies, the scientific indicators and their theoretical justification have been used, the issues from the experts’ analysis and survey of the Latvian companies operating in the nanotechnology industry have been summarised.

If the inline PDF is not rendering correctly, you can download the PDF file here.

  • 1. Geipele I. Staube T. Ciemlejа G. Zeltins N. Ekmanis J. (2015). Identity of Innovative Multifunctional Material Manufacturing Business in Latvia. Latvian Journal of Physics and Technical Sciences. 52 (4) 3-18. DOI: 10.1515/LPTS-2015-0019.

  • 2. Ministry of Education and Science of Latvia (2007). Study of Mechanical Engineering and Metalworking Industries of Latvia. Retrieved from (in Latvian).

  • 3. Central Statistical Bureau of Latvia (2014). Research and Development Statistics. Retrieved from (in Latvian).

  • 4. Es-Sadki N. & Hollanders H. (2014). Innovation Union Scoreboard 2014. European Union Belgium.

  • 5. Ministry of Education and Science of Latvia (2013). About Development of Smart Specialisation Strategy. Retrieved from (in Latvian).

  • 6. Liu Z. & Sha J. (2012). Static and dynamic analysis of industrial structure in Inner Mongolia based on BCG matrix. In 2012 Int. Conf. on Social Science and and Environment Protection 9-11 November 2012 (pp. 3-8). Jiujiang China: Science and Engineering Publishing Company.

  • 7. Urbahs A. Urbaha M. Savkovs K. & Andrejeva D. (2015). Protective Antifriction Multilayer Coating by Ion-Plasma Sputtering Development Technological Process Analysis. In Mechanika 2015: 20th Int. Scientific Conf. 23-24 April 2015 (pp.253-256). Kaunas Lithuania: Kaunas University of Technology.

  • 8. The Boston consulting Group. Most Deals Aim for Technology and Segment Leadership. Retrieved from:

  • 9. The Boston consulting Group (2014). The Shifting Economics of Global Manufacturing: How Cost Competitiveness Is Changing Worldwide. Retrieved from

  • 10. Internet Center for Management and Business Administration. The BCG Growth-Share Matrix. Retrieved from:

  • 11. Grieger K. D. Laurent A. Miseljic M. Christensen F. Baun A. & Olsen S. I. (2012). Analysis of current research addressing complementary use of life-cycle assessment and risk assessment for engineered nanomaterials: have lessons been learned from previous experience with chemicals? Journal of Nanoparticle Research. 14 (7) 1-23. DOI:10.1007/s11051-012-0958-6.

  • 12. Hischier R. & Walser T. (2012). Life cycle assessment of engineered nanomaterials: state of the art and strategies to overcome existing gaps. Science of the Total Environment. 425 271-282. DOI:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2012.03.001.

  • 13. Som C. Berges M. Chaudhry Q. Dusinska M. Fernandes T. F. Olsen S. I. & Nowack B. (2010). The importance of life cycle concepts for the development of safe nanoproducts. Toxicology. 269 (2) 160-169. DOI:10.1016/j.tox.2009.

  • 14. Hanks S. H. Watson C. J. Jansen E. & Chandler G. N. (1993). Tightening the life cycle construct: A taxonomic study of growth stage configurations in high technology organizations. Entrepreneurship: Theory & Practice. 18 (2) 5-30.

  • 15. Miller D. & Friesen P. H. A. (1984). Longitudinal study of the corporate life-cycle. Management Science. 30 1161-1183.

  • 16. Warusawitharana M. (2012). Profitability and the Lifecycle of Firms. Federal Reserve Board WP 2012-63.

  • 17. Robinson K. C. & McDougall P. P. (2001). Entry Barriers and New Venture Performance: A Comparison of Universal and Contingency Approaches. Strategic Management Journal. 22 (6/7) 659-685. DOI: 10.1002/smj.186.

  • 18. Hardman R. (2006). A Toxicologic Review of Quantum Dots: Toxicity Depends on Physicochemical and Environmental Factors. Environmental Health Perspectives. 114 (2) 165-172. DOI:10.1289/ehp.8284.

  • 19. Bhat J. S. A. (2005). Concerns of new technology based industries - the case of nanotechnology. Technovation. 25 (5) 457-462. DOI:10.1016/j.technovation.2003.09.001.

  • 20. Thukral I.S. Von Ehr J. Walsh S. Greon A.J. Van de Sijde P. & Adham K.A. (2008). Entrepreneurship emerging technologies emerging markets. International Small Business Journal. 26 (1) 101-116. DOI: 10.1177/0266242607084656.

  • 21. Walsh S. (2004). Roadmapping a disruptive technology: A case study the emerging microsystems and top-down nanosystems industry. Technological Forecasting and Social Change. 71 (1) 161-185. DOI: 10.1016/j.techfore.2003.10.003.

  • 22. Adamsone-Fiskovica A. (2012). Science-society relations in Latvia: communicative practices and discourses. Doctoral thesis. Riga: Zinatne 252 p. DOI: 10.13140/2.1.2769.2489 (in Latvian)

  • 23. Society Institute for Corporate Sustainability and Responsibility. Sustainability Index. Retrieved from: (in Latvian).

  • 24. European Union Research and Innovation (2014). Research and Innovation performance in the EU. Innovation Union progress at country level. Retrieved from:

  • 25. Bertelsmann Stiftung (2014). Sustainable governance indicators SGI. 2014 Rule of Law Report. Retrieved from:

  • 26. Tambovceva T. Geipele I. (2011). Environmental Management Systems Experience among Latvian Construction Companies. Technological and Economic Development of Economy. 17 (3) 491-506. DOI:10.3846/20294913.2011.603179.

  • 27. European Union Health Portal (2010). The Assessment Problems of Risk Caused by Nanomaterials. Health-EU. Retrieved from: (in Latvian).

  • 28. ICMM International Council on Mining & Metals (2014) Health and safety performance indicators. Report January 2014. Retrieved from:

  • 29. Information system. Encyclopædia Britannica Inc. Retrieved from: http://www.britannica. com/EBchecked/topic/287895/information-system.

  • 30. Saeima of the Republic of Latvia (2010). Sustainable Development Strategy of Latvia until 2030. Retrieved from:

Journal information
Impact Factor

CiteScore 2018: 0.32

SCImago Journal Rank (SJR) 2018: 0.147
Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP) 2018: 0.325

All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 0 0 0
Full Text Views 220 128 3
PDF Downloads 96 64 1