nep-ino New Economics Papers
on Innovation
Issue of 2009‒05‒02
sixteen papers chosen by
Steffen Lippert
Massey University Department of Commerce
  1. Innovation and Market Design By Peter Cramton
  2. Technology proximity between firms and universities and technology transfer By Martin Woerter
  3. Green R&D versus End-of-Pipe Emission Abatement: A Model of Directed Technical Change By Michael Rauscher
  4. Historical Foundations of American Technology By Gavin Wright
  5. Exploring Innovation with Firm Level Data By Samuel Kortum
  6. Accounting for the Knowledge Economy By Charles Hulten
  7. Innovation as Viewed from Within the Corporation By Jim Lichtenberg; Christopher Woock
  8. Technological Change and Earnings Polarization: Implications for Skill Demand and Economic Growth By David Autor
  9. Entrepreneurs, Inventors and the Growth of the Economy By William J. Baumol
  10. Immigration and Labor Force Trends By B. Lindsay Lowell
  11. On Competition and the Strategic Management of Intellectual Property in Oligopoly By Jos Jansen
  12. Technology diversification, product innovations, and technology transfer By Martin Woerter
  13. Incentives to Innovate and Social Harm: Laissez-Faire, Authorization or Penalties? By Immordino, Giovanni; Pagano, Marco; Polo, Michele
  14. Development paths for emerging innovation systems: implications for environmental innovations By Floortje Alkemade; Marko Hekkert
  15. Technological Capabilities and Patterns of Cooperation of UK Firms: A Regional Investigation By Iammarino, Simona; Piva, Mariacristina; Vivarelli, Marco; Von Tunzelmann, Nick
  16. On R&D, medium and high-tech industries and productivity: an application to the Portuguese case By Celeste Amorim Varum; Bruno Cibrão
  1. By: Peter Cramton (Economics Department, University of Maryland)
    Abstract: Market design plays an essential role in promoting innovation. I examine emission allowance auctions, airport slot auctions, spectrum auctions, and electricity markets, and demonstrate how the market design can encourage innovation. Improved pricing information is one source of innovation. Enhancing competition is another driver of innovation seen in all of the applications. Market design fosters innovation in other ways as well by addressing other potential market failures.
    Keywords: Auctions, market design, innovation
    JEL: D44
    Date: 2009
    URL: http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:pcc:pccumd:09imd&r=ino
  2. By: Martin Woerter (KOF Swiss Economic Institute, ETH Zurich, Switzerland)
    Abstract: This paper investigates the technological orientation of firms and universities and their propensity to have knowledge and technology transfer (KTT) activities. This study looks at the technological potential for KTT and how it is used, emphasizing differences between smaller and larger firms. To this end we collected information about the technology activities of firms (patent statistics) and the technology activities of universities. Furthermore we used survey data on technology transfer activities. We combined the three datasets and found – especially for smaller firms – that great technology proximity fosters transfer activities with different universities (case 1). The same is true, if proximity is low and expertise is considerable at universities in the respective technology field (case 2). In both cases additional transfer potential exists. In the second case firms engage in transfer activities in order to update and modifying their knowledge base and as a consequence improve “competitiveness” in certain technology fields. Furthermore firms show a tendency to diversify their contacts with universities in order to avoid knowledge lock-in.
    Keywords: Innovation, Knowledge and Technology Transfer, Technology Proximity, Universities, Firms
    Date: 2009–04
    URL: http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:kof:wpskof:09-222&r=ino
  3. By: Michael Rauscher (University of Rostock)
    Abstract: The paper looks at a model of directed technical change in an environmental-economics context. Firms can do conventional or "green" R&D or they can abate emissions at the end of pipe. The paper has two main foci. On the one hand, it investigates the impact of environmental regulation on the allocation of resources to conventional R&D, green R&D, and end- of-pipe abatement. On the other hand, it addresses the question whether stricter emission standards should be used to support green R&D and/or economic growth.
    Keywords: economic growth and the environment, directed technical change
    JEL: Q55 O41
    Date: 2009
    URL: http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:ros:wpaper:106&r=ino
  4. By: Gavin Wright (Stanford University)
    Abstract: Part of the Supplemental Materials for INNOVATION AND U.S. COMPETITIVENESS, The Conference Board report #R-1441-09-RR. About the Report: The Conference Board has recently undertaken a project on innovation and competitiveness, with funding from Microsoft Corporation. The goal of the project is to provide an overview of the current state of knowledge on the nature of innovation, and its role in stimulating economic growth and improved living standards in the U.S. The project draws on experts across the academic, corporate, and policy arenas, in addition to The Conference Board’s own analysis, surveys, and focus groups of the business community. Such experts met in February 2007 to present and discuss various aspects of the innovation process and measurement thereof. Each presenter wrote a summary piece focusing on his respective area of expertise. These summary documents underpin the content in Innovation and U.S. Competitiveness; however the conclusions drawn are those of The Conference Board alone. These papers are retained for reference in The Conference Board Economics Program Working Paper Series.
    Date: 2008–12
    URL: http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:cnf:wpaper:0810&r=ino
  5. By: Samuel Kortum (University of Chicago)
    Abstract: Part of the Supplemental Materials for INNOVATION AND U.S. COMPETITIVENESS, The Conference Board report #R-1441-09-RR. About the Report: The Conference Board has recently undertaken a project on innovation and competitiveness, with funding from Microsoft Corporation. The goal of the project is to provide an overview of the current state of knowledge on the nature of innovation, and its role in stimulating economic growth and improved living standards in the U.S. The project draws on experts across the academic, corporate, and policy arenas, in addition to The Conference Board’s own analysis, surveys, and focus groups of the business community. Such experts met in February 2007 to present and discuss various aspects of the innovation process and measurement thereof. Each presenter wrote a summary piece focusing on his respective area of expertise. These summary documents underpin the content in Innovation and U.S. Competitiveness; however the conclusions drawn are those of The Conference Board alone. These papers are retained for reference in The Conference Board Economics Program Working Paper Series.
    Date: 2008–12
    URL: http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:cnf:wpaper:0811&r=ino
  6. By: Charles Hulten (University of Maryland / The Conference Board)
    Abstract: Part of the Supplemental Materials for INNOVATION AND U.S. COMPETITIVENESS, The Conference Board report #R-1441-09-RR. About the Report: The Conference Board has recently undertaken a project on innovation and competitiveness, with funding from Microsoft Corporation. The goal of the project is to provide an overview of the current state of knowledge on the nature of innovation, and its role in stimulating economic growth and improved living standards in the U.S. The project draws on experts across the academic, corporate, and policy arenas, in addition to The Conference Board’s own analysis, surveys, and focus groups of the business community. Such experts met in February 2007 to present and discuss various aspects of the innovation process and measurement thereof. Each presenter wrote a summary piece focusing on his respective area of expertise. These summary documents underpin the content in Innovation and U.S. Competitiveness; however the conclusions drawn are those of The Conference Board alone. These papers are retained for reference in The Conference Board Economics Program Working Paper Series.
    Date: 2008–12
    URL: http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:cnf:wpaper:0813&r=ino
  7. By: Jim Lichtenberg (The Conference Board); Christopher Woock (The Conference Board)
    Abstract: Part of the Supplemental Materials for INNOVATION AND U.S. COMPETITIVENESS, The Conference Board report #R-1441-09-RR. About the Report: The Conference Board has recently undertaken a project on innovation and competitiveness, with funding from Microsoft Corporation. The goal of the project is to provide an overview of the current state of knowledge on the nature of innovation, and its role in stimulating economic growth and improved living standards in the U.S. The project draws on experts across the academic, corporate, and policy arenas, in addition to The Conference Board’s own analysis, surveys, and focus groups of the business community. Such experts met in February 2007 to present and discuss various aspects of the innovation process and measurement thereof. Each presenter wrote a summary piece focusing on his respective area of expertise. These summary documents underpin the content in Innovation and U.S. Competitiveness; however the conclusions drawn are those of The Conference Board alone. These papers are retained for reference in The Conference Board Economics Program Working Paper Series.
    Date: 2008–12
    URL: http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:cnf:wpaper:0808&r=ino
  8. By: David Autor (Massachusetts Institute for Technology)
    Abstract: Part of the Supplemental Materials for INNOVATION AND U.S. COMPETITIVENESS, The Conference Board report #R-1441-09-RR. About the Report: The Conference Board has recently undertaken a project on innovation and competitiveness, with funding from Microsoft Corporation. The goal of the project is to provide an overview of the current state of knowledge on the nature of innovation, and its role in stimulating economic growth and improved living standards in the U.S. The project draws on experts across the academic, corporate, and policy arenas, in addition to The Conference Board’s own analysis, surveys, and focus groups of the business community. Such experts met in February 2007 to present and discuss various aspects of the innovation process and measurement thereof. Each presenter wrote a summary piece focusing on his respective area of expertise. These summary documents underpin the content in Innovation and U.S. Competitiveness; however the conclusions drawn are those of The Conference Board alone. These papers are retained for reference in The Conference Board Economics Program Working Paper Series.
    Date: 2008–12
    URL: http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:cnf:wpaper:0807&r=ino
  9. By: William J. Baumol (New York University / Princeton University)
    Abstract: Part of the Supplemental Materials for INNOVATION AND U.S. COMPETITIVENESS, The Conference Board report #R-1441-09-RR. About the Report: The Conference Board has recently undertaken a project on innovation and competitiveness, with funding from Microsoft Corporation. The goal of the project is to provide an overview of the current state of knowledge on the nature of innovation, and its role in stimulating economic growth and improved living standards in the U.S. The project draws on experts across the academic, corporate, and policy arenas, in addition to The Conference Board’s own analysis, surveys, and focus groups of the business community. Such experts met in February 2007 to present and discuss various aspects of the innovation process and measurement thereof. Each presenter wrote a summary piece focusing on his respective area of expertise. These summary documents underpin the content in Innovation and U.S. Competitiveness; however the conclusions drawn are those of The Conference Board alone. These papers are retained for reference in The Conference Board Economics Program Working Paper Series.
    Date: 2008–12
    URL: http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:cnf:wpaper:0812&r=ino
  10. By: B. Lindsay Lowell (Institute for the Study of International Migration (ISIM) / Georgetown University)
    Abstract: Part of the Supplemental Materials for INNOVATION AND U.S. COMPETITIVENESS, The Conference Board report #R-1441-09-RR. About the Report: The Conference Board has recently undertaken a project on innovation and competitiveness, with funding from Microsoft Corporation. The goal of the project is to provide an overview of the current state of knowledge on the nature of innovation, and its role in stimulating economic growth and improved living standards in the U.S. The project draws on experts across the academic, corporate, and policy arenas, in addition to The Conference Board’s own analysis, surveys, and focus groups of the business community. Such experts met in February 2007 to present and discuss various aspects of the innovation process and measurement thereof. Each presenter wrote a summary piece focusing on his respective area of expertise. These summary documents underpin the content in Innovation and U.S. Competitiveness; however the conclusions drawn are those of The Conference Board alone. These papers are retained for reference in The Conference Board Economics Program Working Paper Series.
    Date: 2008–12
    URL: http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:cnf:wpaper:0809&r=ino
  11. By: Jos Jansen (Max Planck Institute for Research on Collective Goods)
    Abstract: An innovative firm chooses strategically whether to patent its process innovation or rely on secrecy. By doing so, the firm manages its rival’s beliefs about the size of the innovation, and affects the incentives in the product market. Different measures of competitive pressure in the product market have different effects on the equilibrium patenting choices of an innovative firm with unknown costs and probabilistic patent validity. Increasing the number of firms (degree of product substitutability) gives a smaller (greater) patenting incentive. Switching from Bertrand to Cournot competition gives a smaller (greater) patenting incentive if patent protection is weak (strong).
    Keywords: Bertrand and Cournot competition, oligopoly, product differentiation, entry, asymmetric information, strategic disclosure, stochastic patent, trade secret, process innovation, imitation
    JEL: D82 L13 O31 O32
    Date: 2009–04
    URL: http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:mpg:wpaper:2009_13&r=ino
  12. By: Martin Woerter (KOF Swiss Economic Institute, ETH Zurich, Switzerland)
    Abstract: This paper investigates the relationship between technology specialization and innovation performance of firms emphasizing technology transfer activities with universities as an important knowledge source in order to attenuate the opportunity costs of technological specialization. Based on an econometric analysis combining patent data and survey data on technology transfer activities of firms it was found that technology transfer is positively related with the sales share of innovative products. Following the “technology trajectory (path)” increases the probability of an above average innovation performance. Taking into account the combined effects of transfer activities and technological specialization and in this way approximating the idea that transfer activities enable a firm to be specialized and keep the knowledge base broad and upto-date, we detect a significant positive relationship between the combined effect (transfer and specialization) and the innovation performance of a firm. Smaller firms tend to benefit more from the combination of technology specialization and transfer activities with universities compared to larger firms.
    Keywords: Innovation, Knowledge and Technology Transfer, Specialization, Diversification, Firms History
    Date: 2009–04
    URL: http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:kof:wpskof:09-221&r=ino
  13. By: Immordino, Giovanni; Pagano, Marco; Polo, Michele
    Abstract: We analyze optimal policy design when firms' research activity may lead to socially harmful innovations. Public intervention, affecting the expected profitability of innovation, may both thwart the incentives to undertake research (average deterrence) and guide the use to which innovation is put (marginal deterrence). We show that public intervention should become increasingly stringent as the probability of social harm increases, switching first from laissez-faire to a penalty regime, then to a lenient authorization regime, and finally to a strict one. In contrast, absent innovative activity, regulation should rely only on authorizations, and laissez-faire is never optimal. Therefore, in innovative industries regulation should be softer.
    Keywords: authorization; deterrence; innovation; liability for harm; safety regulation
    JEL: D73 K21 K42 L51
    Date: 2009–04
    URL: http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:cpr:ceprdp:7280&r=ino
  14. By: Floortje Alkemade; Marko Hekkert
    Abstract: The functions of innovations systems approach states that in order for an innovation system to function well several key process or functions have to be addressed. Earlier contributions on this topic provide empirical descriptions of innovation systems over time and present analyses of how the key activities fluctuate over time .This body of literature shows that there are considerable differences between function fulfillments in different innovation systems making it difficult to directly compare innovation systems. In this paper we present a first step towards such a more theoretically based approach by describing how innovation system ideally functions over time and then use this approach to analyze 17 case studies of technological innovation systems regarding environmental innovations in the Netherlands. More specifically, we describe desirable patterns of function fulfillment over the lifecycle of a technological innovation system, thereby focusing on the transition from the exploratory phase to the growth phase. We then compare these theoretical patterns to assess 17 technological innovation systems concerning environmental technologies. Outcomes show that environmental innovations in general follow similar patterns to mostly market-driven innovations but that some key processes remain unaddressed. This leads to important insights for policymakers.
    Keywords: environmental innovations, technological innovation systems
    Date: 2009–04
    URL: http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:uis:wpaper:0908&r=ino
  15. By: Iammarino, Simona (University of Sussex); Piva, Mariacristina (Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore); Vivarelli, Marco (Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore); Von Tunzelmann, Nick (University of Sussex)
    Abstract: This paper focuses on the relationship between firms' technological capabilities and different forms of cooperation for innovation by combining the analysis of both micro and meso levels, i.e. the level of the firm and of the geographical region. Our findings, based on the Fourth UK Community Innovation Survey (CIS), provide new insights regarding the relationship between cooperative linkages for innovation and the development of technological capabilities by business units. Firstly, the distinction between competences and capabilities adopted in this paper seems appropriate for going beyond the rather simplistic dichotomy of 'innovative' versus 'non-innovative' firms commonly used in interpreting CIS data. Secondly, we find that the analysis for the UK as a whole masks stark regional differences in terms of intra- and extra-region collaborative linkages and degrees of firms' technological capabilities. These findings may be useful to help policy making to meet the priorities highlighted within the UK Government's framework for Science & Technology.
    Keywords: cooperation for innovation, technological capabilities, firms, regions
    JEL: O30 R12
    Date: 2009–04
    URL: http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:iza:izadps:dp4129&r=ino
  16. By: Celeste Amorim Varum (Departamento de Economia e Gestão Industrial, Universidade de Aveiro); Bruno Cibrão (Departamento de Economia e Gestão Industrial, Universidade de Aveiro)
    Abstract: This paper investigates the potential impact of increased R&D efforts and structural changes in Portugal on labour productivity. The paper addresses Portugal’s ambition, expressed in the 2005 Technological Plan. Based on existing literature on the relation between R&D expenditures, structural change and productivity, we evaluate the contribution of R&D and medium to high-tech industries on productivity over the last 30 years. Our results confirm the importance of governement’s R&D and of business R&D in the medium to high-tech sectors, as they stimulate productivity growth. However, we cannot hypothesize that productivity growth was primarily rooted on the development of medium-high technology industries.
    Keywords: Manufacturing, Productivity, Structural Change, R&D, High-tech industries
    JEL: O30 O40
    Date: 2008–12
    URL: http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:ave:wpaper:512008&r=ino
This nep-ino issue is ©2009 by Steffen Lippert. It is provided as is without any express or implied warranty. It may be freely redistributed in whole or in part for any purpose. If distributed in part, please include this notice.
General information on the NEP project can be found at http://nep.repec.org. For comments please write to the director of NEP, Marco Novarese at <director@nep.repec.org>. Put “NEP” in the subject, otherwise your mail may be rejected.
NEP’s infrastructure is sponsored by the School of Economics and Finance of Massey University in New Zealand.
This page is being maintained by Thomas Krichel. It was last updated on 2023‒07‒08 at 11:26.