|
on Knowledge Management and Knowledge Economy |
|
Issue of 2013‒02‒08
four papers chosen by Laura Stefanescu European Research Centre of Managerial Studies in Business Administration |
| By: | Nishimura, Junichi; Okamuro, Hiroyuki |
| Abstract: | R&D consortia (collaborative R&D projects among private firms, universities, and public research institutes) have been attracting increasing attention as an effective means of promoting innovation. Especially for SMEs, such collaboration provides important opportunities to access and obtain advanced scientific knowledge generated by universities and public research institutes. It is expected that not only the participants in R&D consortia will enhance their performance, through direct knowledge spillovers, but also that the business partners of consortia members may enjoy indirect effects (rent spillovers), through their business transactions. This paper empirically examines the spillover effects through government-sponsored R&D consortia using firm-level data and the propensity score method. Focusing on a major support program for R&D consortia in Japan, the “Consortium R&D Project for Regional Revitalization” by METI, we confirm that there are both direct (knowledge) spillover effects from firms’ participation in this program and indirect (rent) spillover effects on the customer firms of the consortia members. Moreover, by comparing SMEs and large firms, we find that only SMEs obtain knowledge spillovers in R&D consortia, whereas, among their customers, only large firms enjoy rent spillovers. |
| Keywords: | R&D consortia, business transaction, knowledge spillover, rent spillover, SME, policy evaluation |
| JEL: | H25 L53 O32 O38 |
| Date: | 2013–01 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:hit:cinwps:24&r=knm |
| By: | Reinhilde Veugelers |
| Abstract: | Highlights â?¢ Research and development spending has risen rapidly in Asia, particularly in China, which is now the worldâ??s second R&D spender behind the United States.The increase in Korean and Chinese patent applications has been even more rapid, but Chinese patenting for exploitation on the main markets for innovation(the European Union, Japan and the US) is still marginal. â?¢ Asia's increased innovation spending is most prominently related to information and communication technologies. Overall, the Chinese and Korean economies are still not specialised in knowledge-intensive goods and services.Furthermore, China in particular is not (so far) capturing much value from its role as a manufacturer and exporter of high-tech goods; China remains mostly an assembler of goods, the value of which is created elsewhere. â?¢ It would be wrong to ignore China's innovation potential on the basis of its current performance. Its clear innovation ambitions are likely to drive its future growth. â?¢ Europe is struggling much more than the US to retain its place at the global innovation table. The EU should use Asiaâ??s capacity building in innovation as an opportunity for value capture. Reinhilde Veugelers (reinhilde.veugelers@bruegel.org) is a Senior Fellow at Bruegel. Research assistance from Francesca Barbiero is gratefully acknowledged. |
| Date: | 2013–02 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:bre:polcon:766&r=knm |
| By: | Enrica De Cian (Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei (FEEM) and Euro-Mediterranean Center on Climate Change (CMCC)); Samuel Carrara (Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei (FEEM) and Euro-Mediterranean Center on Climate Change (CMCC)); Massimo Tavoni (Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei (FEEM) and Euro-Mediterranean Center on Climate Change (CMCC)) |
| Abstract: | This paper investigates whether an inefficient allocation of abatement, due to constraints on the use of currently available low carbon mitigation options, can promote innovation in new technologies and eventually generate welfare gains. We focus on the case of nuclear power phase out, when accounting for endogenous technical change in energy efficiency and in low carbon technologies. The analysis uses the Integrated Assessment Model WITCH, which features multiple externalities due to both climate and innovation market failures. Our results show that phasing out nuclear power stimulates additional R&D investments and deployment of infant technologies with large learning potential. The innovation benefits which this would generate and that would not otherwise be captured due to intertemporal and international externalities almost completely offset the economic costs of phasing out nuclear power. The technological change benefit depends on the stringency of the climate policy and is distributed unevenly across countries. |
| Keywords: | Technological change, Climate policy, Nuclear phase-out |
| JEL: | H40 O33 Q40 Q55 |
| Date: | 2012–12 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:fem:femwpa:2012.96&r=knm |
| By: | Ugur, Mehmet |
| Abstract: | The aim of this paper is to investigate the relationship between market power, governance and patenting activity in a sample of 25 OECD countries from 1988-2007. Controlling for a wide range of innovation predictors, we report that governance quality is related positively with patenting activity in the full sample and in samples of countries with higher-than-average per-capita GDP, governance scores and economic openness. Secondly, the relationship between market power and innovation has a U-shape in the full sample, but inverted-U shape in split samples. Third, when interacted with governance, market power tends to have an offsetting effect that weakens the positive relationship between governance and innovation. These findings are robust to a range of control variables such as per-capita GDP, income inequality, depth of equity markets, labour share in national income, economic globalization and military expenditures. Our findings indicate that governance is a significant factor that explain innovation and that blanket statements about the relationship between competition and innovation as well as the kind of reforms necessary to foster innovation can be misleading. |
| Keywords: | Economic governance; innovation; patenting; market power |
| JEL: | E02 B52 O3 |
| Date: | 2012–11 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:pra:mprapa:44141&r=knm |