M. Larionova, O. Perfilieva, Irina Lazutina, Anastasia Lopatina, V. Nagornov, L. Zavarykina
The Russian universities as well as universities from other countries increasingly compete not only at the national level, but globally. This trend is reflected in growing interest to universities rankings. Despite criticism, rankings outcomes are in demand and influence universities’ positioning in the global higher education area. In Russia several rankings have been recently established, striving to satisfy needs of various stakeholders. However, all these approaches are single dimensional rankings that use a composite indicator and weight coefficients. The article presents a rationale and draft methodology of a multidimensional ranking system in Russia. The authors advocate relevancy of the chosen approach as it allows them to reflect complexity and diversity of the Russian Higher Education system. Drawing on the project outcomes, the authors focus on the national multidimensional ranking methodology concept, choice of indicators, the approbation outcomes, dilemmas and decisions. Key words: rankings, university ranking, higher education institutions, tertiary education institutions.
{"title":"Constructing National Ranking Methodology: Dilemmas, Choices, and Decisions","authors":"M. Larionova, O. Perfilieva, Irina Lazutina, Anastasia Lopatina, V. Nagornov, L. Zavarykina","doi":"10.33225/pec/12.48.62","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.33225/pec/12.48.62","url":null,"abstract":"The Russian universities as well as universities from other countries increasingly compete not only at the national level, but globally. This trend is reflected in growing interest to universities rankings. Despite criticism, rankings outcomes are in demand and influence universities’ positioning in the global higher education area. In Russia several rankings have been recently established, striving to satisfy needs of various stakeholders. However, all these approaches are single dimensional rankings that use a composite indicator and weight coefficients. The article presents a rationale and draft methodology of a multidimensional ranking system in Russia. The authors advocate relevancy of the chosen approach as it allows them to reflect complexity and diversity of the Russian Higher Education system. Drawing on the project outcomes, the authors focus on the national multidimensional ranking methodology concept, choice of indicators, the approbation outcomes, dilemmas and decisions. \u0000Key words: rankings, university ranking, higher education institutions, tertiary education institutions.","PeriodicalId":346559,"journal":{"name":"Innovation Measurement & Indicators eJournal","volume":"29 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2012-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"133912787","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
We develop a new test of simultaneous versus sequential complementarities by using a discrete-time binary model for survival-type panel data on the adoption of one, both, or neither of two technologies while controlling for unobserved heterogeneity by instrumenting key variables. We examplify using data on the adoption of CAD and CNC technologies by US metalworking plants. Results indicate significant complementarities. Simultaneous adoption is in this case more likely than adoption of the two technologies in isolation. Sequential adoption is significant but in only one direction. Prior adoption of CNC has a positive effect on the posterior adoption of CAD. We find no evidence of the opposite.
{"title":"A Test of Sequential Versus Simultaneous Complementarity in Technology Diffusion Using Survival Type Data: The Adoption of CAD and CNC","authors":"T. Åstebro, G. Battisti, M. Colombo","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.2125930","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2125930","url":null,"abstract":"We develop a new test of simultaneous versus sequential complementarities by using a discrete-time binary model for survival-type panel data on the adoption of one, both, or neither of two technologies while controlling for unobserved heterogeneity by instrumenting key variables. We examplify using data on the adoption of CAD and CNC technologies by US metalworking plants. Results indicate significant complementarities. Simultaneous adoption is in this case more likely than adoption of the two technologies in isolation. Sequential adoption is significant but in only one direction. Prior adoption of CNC has a positive effect on the posterior adoption of CAD. We find no evidence of the opposite.","PeriodicalId":346559,"journal":{"name":"Innovation Measurement & Indicators eJournal","volume":"11 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2012-08-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"133905876","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This paper attempts to test the effect that wind power production has on the variability of wholesale electricity prices in the spot market. I use a simple distributed lag econometric model and five years worth of hourly and daily data from Denmark, which is one of the few places with a long history of significant wind power penetration. I show that wind power has the effect of reducing intra-day variability but that this result only partially carries over to price variation over weekly time windows. I suggest that the reduction in price variability in turn is due to a steeper supply schedule at peak-load times.
{"title":"What Happens When it's Windy in Denmark? An Empirical Analysis of Wind Power on Price Variability in the Nordic Electricity Market","authors":"Johannes Mauritzen","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.2045489","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2045489","url":null,"abstract":"This paper attempts to test the effect that wind power production has on the variability of wholesale electricity prices in the spot market. I use a simple distributed lag econometric model and five years worth of hourly and daily data from Denmark, which is one of the few places with a long history of significant wind power penetration. I show that wind power has the effect of reducing intra-day variability but that this result only partially carries over to price variation over weekly time windows. I suggest that the reduction in price variability in turn is due to a steeper supply schedule at peak-load times.","PeriodicalId":346559,"journal":{"name":"Innovation Measurement & Indicators eJournal","volume":"7 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2012-04-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"127454268","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2012-04-05DOI: 10.6084/M9.FIGSHARE.4955549
Maxim Kotsemir
Анализ публикационной активности все чаще применяется для межстранового сопоставления эффективности научных систем и расстановки сил в глобальном исследовательском сообществе. Углубленная, комплексная оценка глобальных, региональных и национальных тенденций публикационной активности призвана содействовать повышению адаптивности и эффективности научной политики. В статье представлен обзор динамики основных показателей публикационной активности и цитируемости научных публикаций России и стран – лидеров в научно-технологической сфере за период 1996–2010 гг. На основе этих данных показан меняющийся расклад сил в мировой науке и позиции России. Для оценки используются материалы баз данных Scopus и Web of Science. По всем рассмотренным странам изучены динамика числа публикаций, полученных ими ссылок, и другие показатели цитируемости. Для России дополнительно оценивается публикационная активность по областям науки с целью выявления сфер ее научной специализации. Анализируются высокоцитируемые российские публикации и уровень интеграции российских исследователей в международное научное сообщество, измеряемый числом публикаций, подготовленных в соавторстве с зарубежными коллегами. Обозначены основные методологические подходы к оценке цитирования научных работ и главные проблемы, с которыми сталкиваются исследователи в этом направлении. Данные свидетельствуют, что из всех стран выборки Россия наиболее сильно сдала свои позиции. В то же время остальные государства БРИК и некоторые другие развивающиеся страны Азии существенно улучшили показатели своей публикационной активности.This paper analyses publication activities of scientists in Russia and selected other countries for a cross-country comparison of their integration into the global scientific community. It adds to the literature assessing global, regional and national trends in knowledge production to help policy makers develop a more flexible and effective science policy.It provides an overview of the dynamics of main indicators of scientific publications and their citation in Russia and leading countries over the period 1995-2010. Based on this analysis, the author estimates Russia’s position within the global scientific community. The data are drawn from Scopus and the Web of Science databases. For Russia, the focus is on publication activity in specific areas of science, identified as specializations. In particular, the level of citation of the most highly Russian publications is noted. Also, the paper focuses on the integration of Russian researchers in the international scientific community, as measured by the number of publications co-authored with foreign researchers. Finally, it reviews the methodological approaches of the evaluation of citations, focusing on resulting problems which require further investigations.The analysis shows that Russia has lost more international status in scientific publishing activity than other countries of the studied sample. At the same time the other BRIC nations
{"title":"Динамика ро�?�?ий�?кой и мировой науки �?квозь призму международных публикаций (Dynamics of Russian and World Science Through the Prism of International Publications)","authors":"Maxim Kotsemir","doi":"10.6084/M9.FIGSHARE.4955549","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.6084/M9.FIGSHARE.4955549","url":null,"abstract":"Анализ публикационной активности все чаще применяется для межстранового сопоставления эффективности научных систем и расстановки сил в глобальном исследовательском сообществе. Углубленная, комплексная оценка глобальных, региональных и национальных тенденций публикационной активности призвана содействовать повышению адаптивности и эффективности научной политики. В статье представлен обзор динамики основных показателей публикационной активности и цитируемости научных публикаций России и стран – лидеров в научно-технологической сфере за период 1996–2010 гг. На основе этих данных показан меняющийся расклад сил в мировой науке и позиции России. Для оценки используются материалы баз данных Scopus и Web of Science. По всем рассмотренным странам изучены динамика числа публикаций, полученных ими ссылок, и другие показатели цитируемости. Для России дополнительно оценивается публикационная активность по областям науки с целью выявления сфер ее научной специализации. Анализируются высокоцитируемые российские публикации и уровень интеграции российских исследователей в международное научное сообщество, измеряемый числом публикаций, подготовленных в соавторстве с зарубежными коллегами. Обозначены основные методологические подходы к оценке цитирования научных работ и главные проблемы, с которыми сталкиваются исследователи в этом направлении. Данные свидетельствуют, что из всех стран выборки Россия наиболее сильно сдала свои позиции. В то же время остальные государства БРИК и некоторые другие развивающиеся страны Азии существенно улучшили показатели своей публикационной активности.This paper analyses publication activities of scientists in Russia and selected other countries for a cross-country comparison of their integration into the global scientific community. It adds to the literature assessing global, regional and national trends in knowledge production to help policy makers develop a more flexible and effective science policy.It provides an overview of the dynamics of main indicators of scientific publications and their citation in Russia and leading countries over the period 1995-2010. Based on this analysis, the author estimates Russia’s position within the global scientific community. The data are drawn from Scopus and the Web of Science databases. For Russia, the focus is on publication activity in specific areas of science, identified as specializations. In particular, the level of citation of the most highly Russian publications is noted. Also, the paper focuses on the integration of Russian researchers in the international scientific community, as measured by the number of publications co-authored with foreign researchers. Finally, it reviews the methodological approaches of the evaluation of citations, focusing on resulting problems which require further investigations.The analysis shows that Russia has lost more international status in scientific publishing activity than other countries of the studied sample. At the same time the other BRIC nations","PeriodicalId":346559,"journal":{"name":"Innovation Measurement & Indicators eJournal","volume":"50 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2012-04-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"132058825","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Digitization is defined as the social transformation triggered by the massive adoption of digital technologies to generate, process, share and transact information. Unlike other technological innovations, digitization builds on the evolution of network access technologies, semiconductor technologies, software engineering and the spillover effects resulting from their use. This paper presents a methodology followed to calculate the Digitization Index, a measure of country level of digitization, a concept originally developed by Booz & Company, the global management consulting firm. This index consists of six elements capturing Ubiquity, Affordability, Reliability, Speed, Usability and Skill and 23 sub-indicators measuring tangible parameters of perceived digitization metrics. The sample spans across 150 countries from 2004 to 2010. Countries are clustered as Digitally Constrained, Emerging, Transitional or Advanced. Once the index is defined, hypotheses regarding the contribution of digitization to economic growth, job creation and welfare are tested. In addition, a critical mass hypothesis is also tested as additional returns might derive from network externalities and spillover effects. The results provide strong support for the effect of digitization across all growth generating metrics.
{"title":"Measuring Socio-Economic Digitization: A Paradigm Shift","authors":"Raul L. Katz, P. Koutroumpis","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.2070035","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2070035","url":null,"abstract":"Digitization is defined as the social transformation triggered by the massive adoption of digital technologies to generate, process, share and transact information. Unlike other technological innovations, digitization builds on the evolution of network access technologies, semiconductor technologies, software engineering and the spillover effects resulting from their use. This paper presents a methodology followed to calculate the Digitization Index, a measure of country level of digitization, a concept originally developed by Booz & Company, the global management consulting firm. This index consists of six elements capturing Ubiquity, Affordability, Reliability, Speed, Usability and Skill and 23 sub-indicators measuring tangible parameters of perceived digitization metrics. The sample spans across 150 countries from 2004 to 2010. Countries are clustered as Digitally Constrained, Emerging, Transitional or Advanced. Once the index is defined, hypotheses regarding the contribution of digitization to economic growth, job creation and welfare are tested. In addition, a critical mass hypothesis is also tested as additional returns might derive from network externalities and spillover effects. The results provide strong support for the effect of digitization across all growth generating metrics.","PeriodicalId":346559,"journal":{"name":"Innovation Measurement & Indicators eJournal","volume":"4 2 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2012-03-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"131381151","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
L. Kogan, D. Papanikolaou, Amit Seru, Noah Stoffman
We propose a new measure of the economic importance of each innovation. Our measure uses newly collected data on patents issued to US firms in the 1926 to 2010 period, combined with the stock market response to news about patents. Our patent- level estimates of private economic value are positively related to the scientific value of these patents, as measured by the number of citations that the patent receives in the future. Our new measure is associated with substantial growth, reallocation and creative destruction, consistent with the predictions of Schumpeterian growth models. Aggregating our measure suggests that technological innovation accounts for significant medium-run fluctuations in aggregate economic growth and TFP. Our measure contains additional information relative to citation-weighted patent counts; the relation between our measure and firm growth is considerably stronger. Importantly, the degree of creative destruction that is associated with our measure is higher than previous estimates, confirming that it is a useful proxy for the private valuation of patents.
{"title":"Technological Innovation, Resource Allocation, and Growth","authors":"L. Kogan, D. Papanikolaou, Amit Seru, Noah Stoffman","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.2193068","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2193068","url":null,"abstract":"We propose a new measure of the economic importance of each innovation. Our measure uses newly collected data on patents issued to US firms in the 1926 to 2010 period, combined with the stock market response to news about patents. Our patent- level estimates of private economic value are positively related to the scientific value of these patents, as measured by the number of citations that the patent receives in the future. Our new measure is associated with substantial growth, reallocation and creative destruction, consistent with the predictions of Schumpeterian growth models. Aggregating our measure suggests that technological innovation accounts for significant medium-run fluctuations in aggregate economic growth and TFP. Our measure contains additional information relative to citation-weighted patent counts; the relation between our measure and firm growth is considerably stronger. Importantly, the degree of creative destruction that is associated with our measure is higher than previous estimates, confirming that it is a useful proxy for the private valuation of patents.","PeriodicalId":346559,"journal":{"name":"Innovation Measurement & Indicators eJournal","volume":"36 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2012-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"133768304","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Richard Petty, Suresh Cuganesan, Nigel Finch, Guy B. Ford
Many commentators have identified the pivotal role of intellectual capital in the valuation of firms and the determination of their future earnings. Innovation in voluntary disclosure of intellectual capital lead by European firms, such as Celemi and Skandia, has generated a plethora of new reporting frameworks such as the Balanced Scorecard. However, there has been little support by the accounting profession to recognise the value of intellectual capital or adopt a common disclosure framework. There has also been very little progress by firms in extending their voluntary reporting frameworks, beyond just rhetoric, and attempting to quantify their intellectual capital. This paper will critically evaluate the challenges faced by firms in disclosing the elements and value of their intellectual capital to the market.
{"title":"Intellectual Capital and Valuation: Challenges in the Voluntary Disclosure of Value Drivers","authors":"Richard Petty, Suresh Cuganesan, Nigel Finch, Guy B. Ford","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.1490208","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1490208","url":null,"abstract":"Many commentators have identified the pivotal role of intellectual capital in the valuation of firms and the determination of their future earnings. Innovation in voluntary disclosure of intellectual capital lead by European firms, such as Celemi and Skandia, has generated a plethora of new reporting frameworks such as the Balanced Scorecard. However, there has been little support by the accounting profession to recognise the value of intellectual capital or adopt a common disclosure framework. There has also been very little progress by firms in extending their voluntary reporting frameworks, beyond just rhetoric, and attempting to quantify their intellectual capital. This paper will critically evaluate the challenges faced by firms in disclosing the elements and value of their intellectual capital to the market.","PeriodicalId":346559,"journal":{"name":"Innovation Measurement & Indicators eJournal","volume":"28 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2009-10-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"132398397","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The study investigates the appropriateness of using publication of an article in a top (specifically, top three) accounting journal as a proxy for its quality, as reflected by its impact on others' research. This investigation is motivated by an apparent increase in pressures to publish in top journals, with attendant effects on the allocation of faculty and institutional resources and more broadly, the health of accounting knowledge advancement. Following related prior studies, SSCI citation counts are used as the primary metric for gauging impact. Over eight-year event windows for articles published in nine accounting journals in 1992, 1994 and 1996, articles published in the journals most often considered to be the top three (Journal of Accounting and Economics, Journal of Accounting Research, and The Accounting Review) do tend to be cited significantly more often than ones published in the other journals, though some of the non-top-three journals are not far behind. Far more important, across three different criteria for placing articles into top vs. non-top categories, there were substantial errors from using a top-three journal ranking as a proxy for quality. Many top accounting articles are published in non-top-three journals, at the same time that substantial numbers of non-top articles make it into the top three. Citations from a Google-based Internet search exhibited somewhat different patterns, but did not change these fundamental results. Together, these findings strongly support the need to evaluate each article on its own merit, rather than abdicating this responsibility by using journal ranking as a key proxy for quality.
该研究调查了用在顶级(特别是前三名)会计期刊上发表的文章作为其质量代表的适当性，这反映在其对其他人研究的影响上。这项调查的动机是在顶级期刊上发表论文的压力明显增加，随之而来的影响是教师和机构资源的分配，更广泛地说，是会计知识进步的健康。根据先前的相关研究，SSCI被引次数被用作衡量影响的主要指标。在1992年、1994年和1996年发表在9种会计期刊上的文章的8年事件窗口中，发表在最常被认为是前三名的期刊(Journal of accounting and Economics, Journal of accounting Research和the accounting Review)上的文章确实比发表在其他期刊上的文章被引用的频率要高得多，尽管一些非前三名的期刊也不落后。更重要的是，在将文章放入顶级和非顶级类别的三个不同标准中，使用前三名期刊排名作为质量的代表存在重大错误。许多顶尖的会计论文发表在非前三名的期刊上，同时也有相当数量的非前三名的文章。基于google的网络搜索的引用显示出一些不同的模式，但没有改变这些基本结果。总之，这些发现有力地支持了对每篇文章的价值进行评估的必要性，而不是通过将期刊排名作为质量的关键代理来放弃这一责任。
{"title":"How Well Can Publication of an Article in a Top Accounting Journal Be Used as a Proxy for its Contribution?","authors":"C. Chow, K. Haddad, Gangaram Singh, A. Wu","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.921297","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.921297","url":null,"abstract":"The study investigates the appropriateness of using publication of an article in a top (specifically, top three) accounting journal as a proxy for its quality, as reflected by its impact on others' research. This investigation is motivated by an apparent increase in pressures to publish in top journals, with attendant effects on the allocation of faculty and institutional resources and more broadly, the health of accounting knowledge advancement. Following related prior studies, SSCI citation counts are used as the primary metric for gauging impact. Over eight-year event windows for articles published in nine accounting journals in 1992, 1994 and 1996, articles published in the journals most often considered to be the top three (Journal of Accounting and Economics, Journal of Accounting Research, and The Accounting Review) do tend to be cited significantly more often than ones published in the other journals, though some of the non-top-three journals are not far behind. Far more important, across three different criteria for placing articles into top vs. non-top categories, there were substantial errors from using a top-three journal ranking as a proxy for quality. Many top accounting articles are published in non-top-three journals, at the same time that substantial numbers of non-top articles make it into the top three. Citations from a Google-based Internet search exhibited somewhat different patterns, but did not change these fundamental results. Together, these findings strongly support the need to evaluate each article on its own merit, rather than abdicating this responsibility by using journal ranking as a key proxy for quality.","PeriodicalId":346559,"journal":{"name":"Innovation Measurement & Indicators eJournal","volume":"28 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2006-07-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"127981592","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This paper discusses the determinants of three alternative measures of innovative output by looking at firm's own formal RD however, both inputs increase a firm's innovative intensity. Significant evidence is also found that small firms and firms belonging to low-tech sectors rely more on the acquisition of external technologies and on cooperation agreements, while larger firms in high-tech sectors rely more on their own formal R&D.
{"title":"One or Many Knowledge Production Functions? Mapping Innovative Activity Using Microdata","authors":"Andrea Conte, M. Vivarelli","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.870284","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.870284","url":null,"abstract":"This paper discusses the determinants of three alternative measures of innovative output by looking at firm's own formal RD however, both inputs increase a firm's innovative intensity. Significant evidence is also found that small firms and firms belonging to low-tech sectors rely more on the acquisition of external technologies and on cooperation agreements, while larger firms in high-tech sectors rely more on their own formal R&D.","PeriodicalId":346559,"journal":{"name":"Innovation Measurement & Indicators eJournal","volume":"26 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2005-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"124711497","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2005-03-01DOI: 10.1111/J.1467-9310.2005.00384.X
M. Hirschey, Robert A. Connolly
Significant market value effects of research and development (R&D) are generally apparent, but aggregate evidence has the potential to obscure meaningful differences according to firm size. Consistent with findings reported by Chauvin and Hirschey (1993) for the late 1980s, valuation effects of R&D remain somewhat greater for larger as opposed to smaller firms.
{"title":"Firm Size and the Effect of R&D on Tobin's Q","authors":"M. Hirschey, Robert A. Connolly","doi":"10.1111/J.1467-9310.2005.00384.X","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/J.1467-9310.2005.00384.X","url":null,"abstract":"Significant market value effects of research and development (R&D) are generally apparent, but aggregate evidence has the potential to obscure meaningful differences according to firm size. Consistent with findings reported by Chauvin and Hirschey (1993) for the late 1980s, valuation effects of R&D remain somewhat greater for larger as opposed to smaller firms.","PeriodicalId":346559,"journal":{"name":"Innovation Measurement & Indicators eJournal","volume":"62 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2005-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"129443325","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：