|
on Innovation |
| By: | Colin Wessendorf; Nils Grashof |
| Abstract: | This study analyses the influence of Key Enabling Technologies (KETs) on radical innovation at the firm-level in 27 EU countries. KETs are a group of six technologies that are considered to be promising for Europe’s industrial competitiveness and innovativeness because they are horizontal and widely combinable, representing properties of General Purpose Technologies. We test this by investigating whether KET knowledge promotes the emergence of radical innovation in firms and whether regional specialization in KETs can moderate this relationship. Based on a unique firm-level database, our results show that KETs generally facilitate the emegence of radical innovation and that firms lacking KET knowledge in particular can benefit from being located in regions specialised in KETs. However, when focusing on the six individual KETs, the results get markedly heterogeneous and point to differences in the influence of engineering-oriented and science-based KETs. Our results therefore call for tailored, KET-specific, approaches – both in research and policy. |
| Keywords: | Radical Innovation, Recombinant Novelty, Knowledge Creation, General Purpose Technologies, Key Enabling Technologies, Firm-Level |
| JEL: | L25 O31 O33 R10 |
| Date: | 2023–11 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:atv:wpaper:2303&r=ino |
| By: | Andreas Teichgraeber; John Van Reenen |
| Abstract: | What research and innovation (R&I) policies should Europe adopt? The world faces a challenge to rebuild after the pandemic, but also faces the same structural slowdown of productivity growth that occurred in the decades before the COVID crisis. We need to have a plan around innovation policy to address the challenge. We show that Europe is less innovative on many dimensions compared to other advanced regions, such as the US and parts of Asia. We review the econometric evidence on R&I policies and argue that there is good evidence for the efficacy of many of them. A mix of R&D subsidies, reinvigorated competition and a big push on expanding the quantity and quality of human capital is needed. These could be bound together around the need for green innovation in order to achieve the mission to radically reduce carbon emissions. |
| Keywords: | innovation, R&D, human capital, Europe |
| Date: | 2022–02–25 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:cep:poidwp:025&r=ino |
| By: | Gianluca Biggi; Andrea Mina; Federico Tamagni |
| Abstract: | Using a firm-level dataset from the Spanish Technological Innovation Panel (2003-2016), this study explores the characteristics of environmentally innovative firms and quantifies the effects of pursuing different types of environmental innovation strategies (resource-saving, pollution-reducing, and regulation-driven innovations) on sales, employment, and productivity dynamics. The results indicate, first, that environmental innovations tend to be highly correlated with firms’ technological capabilities, although to varying degrees across types of environmental innovation, whereas structural characteristics are less significant. Second, we observe heterogeneous effects of different types of environmental innovation on performance outcomes. We find no evidence that any type of environmental innovation fosters sales growth while pollution-reducing and regulation-driven innovations boost employment growth. Moreover, both resource-saving and pollution-reducing innovations bring about productivity advantage. |
| Keywords: | Environmental Innovation; Green Investments, Resource-saving, Pollution-reduction, Envi- ronmental compliance; Firm performance. |
| Date: | 2023–11–20 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:ssa:lemwps:2023/42&r=ino |
| By: | Darius Lambrecht; Jörn Block; Matthias Neuenkirch; Holger Steinmetz; Tom Willeke |
| Abstract: | Firms often struggle with the successful commercialization of innovations, and there is a need for reliable predictors. Prior research suggests that intellectual property (IP) rights play a key role in the commercialization of innovations. However, to what extent can IP rights be used to predict successful commercialization of innovations in the manufacturing industry? Our paper studies the role of patents and trademarks and their complementary and substitutive relationships to predict commercialization success as measured by sales. We also analyze potential reciprocal relationships between commercial success and IP rights. The relationships are explored in a panel dataset of 2, 617 German Mittelstand firms over a 10-year period. The results of a panel vector autoregressive model show a short-lived positive effect of patents on sales growth and vice versa. However, no significant effects are found between trademarks and sales growth. Finally, a positive and complementary relationship between patents and trademarks is documented. |
| Keywords: | Innovation, Commercialization, Patents, Trademarks, Panel Vector Autoregression |
| JEL: | O14 O30 O34 |
| Date: | 2023 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:trr:wpaper:202310&r=ino |
| By: | Hussinger, Katrin; Issah, Wunnam |
| Abstract: | This paper shows that the American Inventor's Protection Act, which introduced the disclosure of patent applications after 18 months, i.e. before a grant decision is taken and, hence, before it is known whether the respective technology receives legal protection, is associated with a reduction of family firms' research and development (R&D) investment. This suggests that early disclosure of patent applications is perceived as a threat to family firms' innovation activity and discourages their R&D investment. This finding deserves our attention because family firms account for a large share of the U.S. economy and a reduction of their R&D investment can have long-term consequences. |
| Keywords: | R&D investments, AIPA, Family firms, Socio-emotional wealth (SEW) |
| JEL: | O32 M14 O34 |
| Date: | 2023 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:zbw:zewdip:279811&r=ino |
| By: | Erik Arnold; Caroline Paunov; Sandra Planes-Satorra; Sylvia Schwaag Serger; Luke Mackle |
| Abstract: | This paper discusses five innovation policy imperatives critical to achieving green and digital transitions: coordinated government, stakeholder engagement, policy agility and experimentation, directionality and support for breakthrough innovation. The paper provides policy examples from Germany, based on the OECD Review of Innovation Policy: Germany, and other countries to illustrate in what ways countries have addressed these imperatives. Overall, the quality and scale of these policy responses need to increase if transitions are to succeed. Open questions for future policy research are also highlighted. |
| Keywords: | agile policy, breakthrough innovation, country policy examples, digital transformation, digital transition, directionality, Germany, governance, green transition, innovation policy, policy experimentation, stakeholder engagement, STI policy |
| JEL: | O31 O33 O38 |
| Date: | 2023–11–30 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:oec:stiaac:162-en&r=ino |
| By: | OECD |
| Abstract: | This document provides an integrated view on income-based tax incentives for R&D and innovation. It brings together the latest evidence on the adoption, design, generosity, cost and take-up of income-based tax incentives, and gives new insights into both the long-term and short-term trends in the take-up of income-based tax incentives by business and their cost to governments, including role of policy design changes. Furthermore, the report explores the scope for developing indicators that provide a more complete picture of the value of expenditure- and income-based tax relief for R&D and innovation in the OECD area and beyond. |
| Keywords: | innovation, Research and development, tax incentives |
| JEL: | H25 O38 O34 |
| Date: | 2023–11–24 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:oec:stiaac:161-en&r=ino |
| By: | Nils Grashof; Alexander Kopka |
| Abstract: | Artificial intelligence (AI) is seen as a key technology for economic growth. However, the impact of AI on firm productivity has been under researched – particularly through the lens of inequality and clusters. Based on a unique sample of German firms, filling at least one patent between 2013 and 2019, we find evidence for a positive influence of AI on firm productivity. Moreover, our analysis shows that while AI knowledge does not contribute to productivity divergences in general, it increases the productivity gap between laggard and all other firms. Nevertheless, this effect is reduced through the localisation in clusters. |
| Keywords: | Artificial intelligence, Inequality, Productivity, Clusters, Patents, Firm-level |
| JEL: | O18 O30 R10 |
| Date: | 2023–11 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:atv:wpaper:2304&r=ino |
| By: | Iorio, Roberto (CELPE - CEnter for Labor and Political Economics, University of Salerno, Italy); Segnana, Maria Luigia (Department of Economics and Management - University of Trento, Italy) |
| Abstract: | This paper originates from the endless question about whether corruption “greases or sands the wheels” of growth. Focusing on innovation at the firm level, the question becomes whether corruption hampers or enhances innovation. To explore this link we use a panel data obtained merging two BEEPS surveys (2012-2014 and 2018-2019) with 3916 units located in 24 countries in Eastern Europe and Central Asia. We suggest that, to deeply understand the nexus between corruption and innovation, it is needed to go beyond the average effect. In fact, the intensity as well as the direction of this link is clearly affected by two factors: the institutional context, particularly the country’s level of control of corruption, and the market context or the degree of market competition that firms face. The empirical analysis leads to the following conclusions: • the link between corruption and innovation is reinforced by the poor quality of the institutions; • the link between corruption and innovation is non linearly connected with the degree of competition. Its intensity is particularly strong when firms face a high competitive pressure, coming from a multitude of even informal firms. This implies that in some scenarios, characterized by low control of corruption and high competitive pressure, corruption is a way to “grease the wheels” of the innovation; in other contexts, with high control of corruption and moderate competitiveness, the link becomes weak if not negative, resembling the “sanding the wheels” hypothesis. From a policy point of view, as in the countries under inspection the impact of corruption on innovation differs over different competitive markets and institutional characteristics, it follows that uniform restrictions are not appropriate. |
| Keywords: | innovation; corruption; bribery; market competition |
| JEL: | O12 O31 P27 P51 |
| Date: | 2023–11–24 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:sal:celpdp:0165&r=ino |
| By: | de Graaff, Sabine; Wanzenböck, Iris; Frenken, Koen |
| Abstract: | ‘Directionality’ in innovation policy is assumed to contribute to transformative change needed for urgent societal challenges. While directionality arguably lacks explicit conceptualization, the political and temporal nature of directionality suggests it can be viewed as a political process, in which diverse actors negotiate different directions. Through an integrative literature review of policy process literature, this paper discusses the politics of directionality by analyzing: ‘who gives which direction, where, when, how, and why’, using concepts from five policy process frameworks: Multiple Streams Framework (MSF), Punctuated Equilibrium Theory (PET), Policy Feedback Theory (PFT), Advocacy Coalition Framework (ACF) and the Narrative Policy Framework (NPF). We find that policy process frameworks provide relevant concepts to understand the political nature of policies and policymaking processes that are integral to directionality in innovation policy, such as policy subsystems, belief systems and policy conflict. Moreover, the study points to a relevant distinction between giving direction and directionality. |
| Date: | 2023–11–16 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:osf:socarx:au9hq&r=ino |
| By: | Leonardo Gambacorta; Leonardo Madio; Bruno Maria Parigi |
| Abstract: | We analyse the impact of platform lending on innovation and e-commerce vendors' surplus. The platform generates revenues from both lending and marketplace fees, and can use lending to price discriminate vendors, thereby leading to higher marketplace fees and below-market interest rates. While platform lending can encourage innovation by providing access to subsidised credit, it can harm vendors who do not have financial needs. A sufficient condition for platform lending to be welfare-enhancing is that innovators would not receive funding from banks otherwise. However, if innovators would receive funding from banks, platform lending may reduce the overall vendor surplus. Cream skimming arises when the platform has better information than the bank about the prospects of the innovators' projects. To address the potential negative effects of platform lending on vendors' surplus, we also explore the impact of different regulatory instruments. |
| Keywords: | platform lending, big tech, online platforms, credit, innovation |
| JEL: | G20 L86 O31 |
| Date: | 2023–11 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:bis:biswps:1142&r=ino |
| By: | Christian R. {\O}stergaard; Bram Timmermans |
| Abstract: | Over the last 10 years, there has been a growing interest in diversity in human capital. Fueled by the business case for diversity, there is an increasing interest in understanding how the combination of people with different backgrounds fosters the innovation performance of firms. Studies have measured diversity on a wide range of personal-level characteristics, at different levels of the organization, and in particular kinds of settings. Innovation performance has been measured using an arsenal of indicators, often drawing on a large range of databases. This paper takes stock of this research, identifying the current state of affairs and proposing future research trajectories in the field of diversity and innovation |
| Date: | 2023–11 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:arx:papers:2311.05219&r=ino |