nep-ino New Economics Papers
on Innovation
Issue of 2018‒04‒02
eighteen papers chosen by
Uwe Cantner
University of Jena

  1. OPEN INNOVATION AND IPRs: MUTUALLY INCOMPATIBLE OR COMPLEMENTARY INSTITUTIONS? By Mário Alexandre Patrício Martins da Silva
  2. Is There a Role for Patents in the Financing of Innovative Firms? By Bronwyn H. Hall
  3. International Technology Sourcing and Knowledge Spillovers: Evidence from OECD Countries By Sophia Chen; Estelle Dauchy
  4. Can depleting technological opportunities explain the stagnation of productivity? Panel data evidence for 11 OECD countries By Schubert, Torben; Neuhäusler, Peter
  5. The future of work: How G20 countries can leverage digital-industrial innovations into stronger high-quality jobs growth By Annunziata, Marco; Bourgeois, Hendrik
  6. Growth and the geography of knowledge By Marta Aloi; Joanna Poyago-Theotoky; Frederic Tournemaine
  7. Lost Einsteins: who becomes an inventor in America? By Alex Bell; Raj Chetty; Xavier Jaravel; Neviana Petkova; John Van Reenen
  8. R&D investments and spillovers under endogenous absorptive capacity: Competitive R&D cannot take full-advantage of complementarity in absorptive capacity while cooperative R&D can By Mário Alexandre Patrício Martins da Silva
  9. Systems Innovation, Inertia and Pliability: A mathematical exploration with implications for climate change abatement By Grubb, M.; Mercure, J.; Salas, P.; Lange, R.
  10. The Effect of R&D Growth on Employment and Self-Employment in Local Labour Markets By Tommaso Ciarli; Alberto Marzucchi; Edgar Salgado; Maria Savona
  11. Horizontal Mergers and Innovation By Jullien, Bruno; Lefouili, Yassine
  12. The Impact of the French Policy Mix on Business R&D: How Geography Matters By Benjamin Montmartin; Marcos Herrera; Nadine Massard
  13. Reconciling the original Schumpeterian Model with the observed inverted-U relationship between competition and innovation By Roberto Bonfatti; Luis A. Bryce Campodonico; Luigi Pisano
  14. Patent Applications - Structures, Trends and Recent Developments 2017 By Neuhäusler, Peter; Rothengatter, Oliver; Frietsch, Rainer
  15. Promote and Support Eco-innovation By Isabelle Nicolaï; Julien Pillot
  16. Short-Run Pain, Long-Run Gain? Recessions and Technological Transformation. By Alexandr Kopytov; Nikolai Roussanov; Mathieu Taschereau-Dumouchel
  17. The entrepreneur's experiential diversity and entrepreneurial performance By Spanjer, Anne; van Witteloostuijn, Arjen
  18. Organisational innovations, social innovations and societal acceptability in the context of sustainability By Ostertag, Katrin; Bodenheimer, Miriam; Neuhäusler, Peter; Helmich, Patricia; Walz, Rainer

  1. By: Mário Alexandre Patrício Martins da Silva (Faculdade de Economia da Universidade do Porto)
    Abstract: In this paper, we explain the analytics of a particular type of mechanism of Open Innovation (OI), namely the management of non-pecuniary exchange of information, and address the relationship between Intellectual Property Rights (IPRs), particularly patent rights, and OI using a static game-theoretic setting of Research and Development competition. We show that, surprisingly perhaps, a rise in the strength of patent protection induces the free sharing and dissemination of technological information and other contributions to the OI development of innovations. Conversely, a fall in the strength of the patent system induces the exercise of traditional IPRs by innovative firms to protect their intellectual assets.
    Keywords: Open innovation; IPRs; knowledge spillovers; R&D
    JEL: O33
    Date: 2017–11
    URL: http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:por:fepwps:596&r=ino
  2. By: Bronwyn H. Hall
    Abstract: It is argued by many that one of the benefits of the patent system is that it creates a property right to invention that enables firms to obtain financing for the development of that invention. In this paper, I review the reasons why ownership of knowledge assets might be useful in attracting finance and then survey the empirical evidence on patent ownership and its impact on the ability of firms to obtain further financing at different stages of their development, both starting up and after becoming established. Studies that attempt to separately identify the role of patent rights and the underlying quality of the associated innovation(s) will be emphasized, although these are rather rare.
    JEL: G24 G32 L26 O34
    Date: 2018–03
    URL: http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:nbr:nberwo:24370&r=ino
  3. By: Sophia Chen; Estelle Dauchy
    Abstract: How much do firms benefit from foreign R&D and through what channel? We construct a global network of corporate innovation using more than 1.5 million patents granted to firms in OECD countries. We test the “international technology sourcing” hypothesis that foreign innovation activities tap into foreign R&D and improve home productivity through knowledge spillovers. We find that firms with stronger inventor presence in technology frontier countries benefit disproportionately more from their R&D. The strength of knowledge spillovers depends on the direction of technology sourcing. Knowledge externality is larger for firms in technology frontier countries than for firms in non-frontier countries.
    Date: 2018–03–12
    URL: http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:imf:imfwpa:18/51&r=ino
  4. By: Schubert, Torben; Neuhäusler, Peter
    Abstract: We analyze the stagnating productivity levels observable across many Western economies during the last two decades. Relying on techniques to measure total factor productivities (TFP), we provide evidence for a set of 11 OECD countries observed over the period from 1993-2011 that TFP-levels exhibited growth rates of about 0.9% per year until 2000. In the period after 2000, the TFP levels almost stagnated with average annual growth rates declining to about 0.3%. The stagnating trends hold almost uniformly across the analyzed countries and across broad economic sectors. Following recently made claims in the literature, we analyze the hypothesis that the stagnating trend was due to generally declining technological opportunities. Our evidence suggests that the importance of intrasectoral innovation as measured by R&D remained relatively constant and was at best slightly decreasing. However, the importance of investments in the physical capital stock considerably declined after 2000. We take this as evidence that rather than a general depletion of technological opportunities, the possibilities to achieve TFP-growth via capital-embodied technical change became less abundant.
    Date: 2018
    URL: http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:zbw:efisdi:112018&r=ino
  5. By: Annunziata, Marco; Bourgeois, Hendrik
    Abstract: A new wave of innovation is beginning to disrupt industry on a global scale. It constitutes a tremendous opportunity for faster productivity growth, but also a potential disruption to a number of economic sectors and to job markets. Academic research and the public debate have focused mostly on the threat that innovation poses to jobs and wages. This paper instead suggests that (i) these same technological disruptions make human capital more important than ever for companies' strategies; (ii) greater attention needs to be devoted to new forms of complementarity between new technologies and human capital. While some jobs will be displaced, the greatest impact of innovation will come in the way that many jobs will be transformed; the evidence to date supports the authors' view that innovation will once again result in more and better jobs - but much work needs to be done to optimize the transition. In particular, more effort should be devoted to (i) understanding what new skills will be needed, and how existing jobs will change; (ii) upgrading education and professional training schemes; (iii) reforming labor market institutions to support a future where a larger share of workers will change jobs and employers more frequently, and more people will work independently in a crowdsourcing or "gig economy" framework; (iv) reforming social benefits systems and bolstering social safety nets to smooth the economic transition and cushion the impact on the worst-affected workers. As innovation disrupts a growing number of industries, human capital strategies will need the collaboration of companies, educational institutions, governments and multilateral policy agencies. This paper presents an analysis of the challenges, addresses the key areas of action, and puts forward some specific proposals, including policy actions, industry initiatives, and further research projects. The authors argue that the G20 could and should champion a comprehensive approach to leverage digital-industrial innovations for faster job creation and growth, with measures to re-align demand and supply of skills, labor market reforms, redesigned social safety nets, measures to promote digital innovation and facilitate the adoption of skills-augmenting technologies. Private sector companies should strengthen training programs. International cooperation, standards harmonization and interoperability will be essential to maximize the benefits and minimize the disruptions - the G20 can therefore play a key role.
    Keywords: innovation,productivity,technological unemployment,training,education,manufacturing,R&D,investment
    JEL: J20 J23 J24 J62 J68 O32 O33 M5 I28 E24 D24
    Date: 2018
    URL: http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:zbw:ifwedp:201828&r=ino
  6. By: Marta Aloi; Joanna Poyago-Theotoky; Frederic Tournemaine
    Abstract: We analyse how spatial disparities in innovation activities, coupled with migration costs, affect economic geography, growth and regional inequality. We provide conditions for existence and uniqueness of a spatial equilibrium, and for the endogenous emergence of industry clusters. Spatial variations in knowledge spillovers lead to spatial concentration of more innovative firms. Migration costs, however, limit the concentration of economic activities in the most productive region. Narrowing the gap in knowledge spillovers across regions raises growth, and reduces regional inequality by making firms more sensitive to wage differentials. The associated change in the spatial concentration of industries has positive welfare effects.
    Keywords: Growth; Economic geography; Geographic labour mobility; Innovation; Knowledge spillovers; Regional economics
    Date: 2018
    URL: http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:not:notgep:18/04&r=ino
  7. By: Alex Bell; Raj Chetty; Xavier Jaravel; Neviana Petkova; John Van Reenen
    Abstract: Who are America's most successful inventors - and what can we learn from their experiences in designing policies to stimulate innovation? To answer these questions, former CEP director John Van Reenen and his colleagues have analysed data on the lives of more than one million inventors.
    Keywords: inventor, America, innovation
    Date: 2018–03
    URL: http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:cep:cepcnp:522&r=ino
  8. By: Mário Alexandre Patrício Martins da Silva (Faculdade de Economia do Porto)
    Abstract: We show that the setting up of general conditions on complementarity in absorptive capacity gives rise to different, if not opposite Nash equilibrium outcomes to those found when absorptive capacity is assumed to be determined only by the similarity of R&D orientations. Firms that cooperate in R&D can take full advantage of complementarity in R&D by adopting firm-specific R&D paths, which appears to contradict Kamien and Zang’s (2000) findings, and so would contradict Weithaus’ (2005) predictions. Oddly, firms competing in R&D cannot gain the most from the potential of complementarity in knowledge by not choosing firm-specific R&D approaches in equilibrium under even milder conditions, which is contrary to another prediction of the Kamien and Zang’s and Weithaus’ models.
    Keywords: Absorptive capacity, complementarities, R&D, knowledge spillovers
    JEL: O33
    Date: 2017–11
    URL: http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:por:fepwps:595&r=ino
  9. By: Grubb, M.; Mercure, J.; Salas, P.; Lange, R.
    Abstract: This paper develops a stylised mathematical interpretation of innovation and inertia in economic systems, characteristics which feature in economics literature traceable back at least to Schumpeter and other economic theorists of innovation, as well as economic historians. Such characteristics are particularly important in energy systems and their potential response to climate change, where it is important to distinguish operational/fuel substitution from investment because the latter necessarily embodies both inertia and innovation, in systems as well as technologies. We argue that integrated assessments of climate abatement need to focus on investment, including the associated characteristics of both learning and inertia, and derive in detail the mathematical basis for incorporating these factors through marginal investment cost curves. From this we also introduce the concept of ‘pliability’ as an expression of the ratio between costs which are significant but transitional (including learning investments, infrastructure and overcoming inertia), as compared to the enduring costs implied by purely exogenous technology assumptions. We then incorporate these features in a global model of optimal climate mitigation and show that they can generate a very different profile and pattern of results from traditional ‘integrated assessment’ models, pinpointing the key sensitivities. We conclude that alongside all the attention devoted to evaluating climate change impacts and technology scenarios, far more effort should be devoted to understanding the structural characteristics of how the global energy system may respond to climate change mitigation.
    Keywords: Innovation, path dependence, inertia, learning by doing, climate change abatement, endogenous technological change, energy systems
    JEL: B52 L50 O33 O38 Q40 Q54
    Date: 2018–03–12
    URL: http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:cam:camdae:1819&r=ino
  10. By: Tommaso Ciarli (SPRU, University of Sussex); Alberto Marzucchi (SPRU, University of Sussex); Edgar Salgado (SPRU, University of Sussex); Maria Savona (SPRU, University of Sussex)
    Abstract: The paper investigates the effects of firms’ investment in Research and Development (R&D) on employment dynamics in the British local labour markets (Travel to Work Areas). We distinguish between local areas characterised by the initial level of routinised employment of the workforce. We implement a instrumenting strategy to address endogeneity issues in the relation between innovation and employment. Our results suggest that increases in R&D investments mainly affect routinised areas, where the employment created is low skilled, concentrated in non-tradable sectors (like transport, construction) and services. A significant share of the jobs created is self-employment, concentrated in the 25-34 age cohort. We qualify the effect of R&D on self-employment by looking at local firms’ dynamics, which suggest that the increase in self-employment is reflected in a higher number of micro-firms. Rather, in non-routinized areas, R&D results in the expected increase in the demand of high-skilled workers and a reduced demand of low-skill employment.
    Keywords: Innovation; R&D investments; Employment; Self-employment; Local Labour Markets; Routinisation; Skills
    JEL: O33 J24 D3
    Date: 2018–03
    URL: http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:sru:ssewps:2018-08&r=ino
  11. By: Jullien, Bruno; Lefouili, Yassine
    Abstract: This paper discusses the effects of horizontal mergers on innovation. We rely on the existing academic literature and our own research work to present the various positive and negative effects of mergers on innovation. Our analysis shows that the overall impact of a merger on innovation may be either positive or negative and sheds light on the circumstances under which each of these scenarios is likely to arise. We derive a number of policy implications regarding the way innovation effects should be handled by competition authorities in merger control and highlight the differences with the analysis of price effects.
    Keywords: Innovation; Merger Policy; R&D Investments
    JEL: K21 L13 L40
    Date: 2018–03
    URL: http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:cpr:ceprdp:12773&r=ino
  12. By: Benjamin Montmartin (SKEMA Business School; Université Côte d’Azur; OFCE Sciences.Po; GREDEG CNRS); Marcos Herrera (CONICET - IELDE; National University of Salta, Argentina); Nadine Massard (GAEL UMR 1215; Université Grenoble Alpes, France)
    Abstract: Based on a spatial extension of an R&D investment model, this paper measures the macroeconomic impact of the French R&D policy mix on business R&D using regional data. Our measure takes into account not only the direct effect of policies but also indirect effects generated by the existence of spatial interaction between regions. Using a unique database containing information on the levels of various R&D policy instruments received by firms in French NUTS3 regions over the period 2001-2011, our estimates of a spatial Durbin model with structural breaks and fixed effects reveal the existence of a negative spatial dependence among R&D investments in regions. In this context, while a-spatial estimates would conclude that all instruments have a crowding-in effect, we show that national subsidies are the only instrument that is able to generate significant crowding-in effects. On the contrary, it seems that the design, size and spatial allocation of funds from the other instruments (tax credits, local subsidies, European subsidies) lead them to act (in the French context) as beggar-thy-neighbor policies.
    Keywords: Policy mix evaluation, R&D investment, Spatial panel, French NUTS3 regions
    JEL: H25 O31 O38
    Date: 2018–03
    URL: http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:gre:wpaper:2018-09&r=ino
  13. By: Roberto Bonfatti; Luis A. Bryce Campodonico; Luigi Pisano
    Abstract: Empirical studies have uncovered an inverted-U relationship between product-market competition and innovation. This is inconsistent with the original Schumpeterian Model, where greater competition reduces the profitability of innovation. We show that the model can predict the inverted-U if the innovators’ talent is heterogenous, and privately observable. With competition low and profitability high, talented innovators are credit constrained, since others are eager to mimic them. As competition increases, the mimickers become less eager, and talented innovators can invest more. This generates the increasing part of the relationship. With competition high, talented innovators are unconstrained, and the relationship is decreasing.
    Keywords: Innovation, Competition, Schumpeterian Model of Growth, Asymmetric Information
    Date: 2018
    URL: http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:not:notgep:18/03&r=ino
  14. By: Neuhäusler, Peter; Rothengatter, Oliver; Frietsch, Rainer
    Date: 2018
    URL: http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:zbw:efisdi:42018&r=ino
  15. By: Isabelle Nicolaï (LGI - Laboratoire Génie Industriel - EA 2606 - CentraleSupélec); Julien Pillot (GREDEG - Groupe de Recherche en Droit, Economie et Gestion - UNS - Université Nice Sophia Antipolis - UCA - Université Côte d'Azur - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique - UCA - Université Côte d'Azur)
    Date: 2017–02–06
    URL: http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:hal:journl:hal-01715029&r=ino
  16. By: Alexandr Kopytov; Nikolai Roussanov; Mathieu Taschereau-Dumouchel
    Abstract: Recent empirical evidence suggests that job polarization associated with skill-biased technological change accelerated during the Great Recession. We use a standard neoclassical growth framework to analyze how business cycle fluctuations interact with the long-run transition towards a skill-intensive technology. In the model, since adopting the new technology disrupts production, firms prefer to do so in recessions, when profits are low. Similarly, workers also tend to learn new skills during downturns. As a result, recessions are deeper during periods of technological transition, but they also speed up adoption of the new technology. We document evidence for these mechanisms in the data. Our calibrated model is able to match both the long-run downward trend in routine employment and the dramatic impact of the Great Recession. We also show that even in the absence of the Great Recession the routine employment share would have reached the observed level by the year 2012.
    JEL: E24 E25 E3
    Date: 2018–03
    URL: http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:nbr:nberwo:24373&r=ino
  17. By: Spanjer, Anne (Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management); van Witteloostuijn, Arjen (Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management)
    Abstract: This study examines the relationship between the entrepreneur’s experiential diversity and entrepreneurial performance. First, we argue that entrepreneurial and industry experiences are positively associated with performance. Second, by combining Lazear’s jacks-of-all-trades theory with the cognition and learning literatures, an inverted U-shaped experience diversity-performance relationship is predicted. The hypotheses are tested using data from the US National Labor Survey Youth 1979 and O*NET. We find that industry experience is positively associated with performance, but entrepreneurial experience is negatively related. Moreover, experience diversity measured in terms of skills is found to be positively associated with performance up to a certain threshold. After this threshold, an increase in an entrepreneur’s experiential diversity lowers performance. Entrepreneurs with 23 different skills have the highest performance. Furthermore, when depreciating for experience, experience diversity measured in terms of both skills and knowledge is found to be positively related to performance.
    Date: 2017
    URL: http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:tiu:tiutis:c613c681-b545-4660-ad6a-467a47361a83&r=ino
  18. By: Ostertag, Katrin; Bodenheimer, Miriam; Neuhäusler, Peter; Helmich, Patricia; Walz, Rainer
    Date: 2018
    URL: http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:zbw:efisdi:82018&r=ino

This nep-ino issue is ©2018 by Uwe Cantner. 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.