Pub Date : 2022-05-13DOI: 10.1080/10438599.2022.2072307
Mário A. P. M. da Silva
ABSTRACT We consider a Cobb–Douglas production function with two firm-specific R&D resource inputs and specify the conditions under which higher knowledge spillovers cause higher technological progress in the industry. We then consider the exponential R&D production function and establish sufficient conditions for per-firm own R&D expenditures to be an increasing function of knowledge spillovers and technological opportunities. Knowledge spillovers and technological possibilities encourage R&D spending if firms’ decisions on R&D investments are strategic complements. We consider two identical firms that, prior to competition in the product market, first decide whether to reveal their R&D efforts to the other firm and second conduct cost-reducing or demand-enhancing R&D and examine the conditions under which full revelation of R&D efforts to rivals yields higher profits. Trigger strategies which require non-cooperative firms to share their R&D inputs will ensure the efficient sharing of R&D efforts. This model has new policy implications about the effects of knowledge spillovers and complementarity in R&D on the incentives to innovate and promote welfare. We present an intellectual property policy that challenges the traditional model of intellectual property as exclusive ownership rights.
{"title":"Cobb–Douglas R&D production function, appropriability and opportunity: effects on R&D, technological progress and knowledge sharing","authors":"Mário A. P. M. da Silva","doi":"10.1080/10438599.2022.2072307","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10438599.2022.2072307","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT We consider a Cobb–Douglas production function with two firm-specific R&D resource inputs and specify the conditions under which higher knowledge spillovers cause higher technological progress in the industry. We then consider the exponential R&D production function and establish sufficient conditions for per-firm own R&D expenditures to be an increasing function of knowledge spillovers and technological opportunities. Knowledge spillovers and technological possibilities encourage R&D spending if firms’ decisions on R&D investments are strategic complements. We consider two identical firms that, prior to competition in the product market, first decide whether to reveal their R&D efforts to the other firm and second conduct cost-reducing or demand-enhancing R&D and examine the conditions under which full revelation of R&D efforts to rivals yields higher profits. Trigger strategies which require non-cooperative firms to share their R&D inputs will ensure the efficient sharing of R&D efforts. This model has new policy implications about the effects of knowledge spillovers and complementarity in R&D on the incentives to innovate and promote welfare. We present an intellectual property policy that challenges the traditional model of intellectual property as exclusive ownership rights.","PeriodicalId":51485,"journal":{"name":"Economics of Innovation and New Technology","volume":"32 1","pages":"1069 - 1086"},"PeriodicalIF":3.3,"publicationDate":"2022-05-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45925677","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-05-13DOI: 10.1080/10438599.2022.2072836
Dolores Añón Higón
ABSTRACT Research and Development (R&D) outsourcing has rapidly grown in recent decades but little attention has been paid to the persistence with which these contracts are carried out. In this way, this study contributes to the literature by providing new evidence on the extent of true state dependence in explaining the persistence of outsourcing R&D to a type of contractor. Further, we explicitly distinguish between offshore and onshore outsourcing strategies and study their own- and cross-state dependence. In doing so, we estimate a set of dynamic models of strategy adoption using a panel of Spanish manufacturing firms from 2005 to 2014. The data allow for the distinction between five types of contractors and their domestic or foreign origin in each of them. Our results support the idea that R&D outsourcing with a type of contractor exhibits true-state dependence although moderate, with onshore R&D outsourcing being more state-dependent than its offshore counterpart. Results also indicate the existence of cross-state dependence in both directions.
{"title":"The persistence and cross-persistence of R&D outsourcing: onshore and offshore strategies","authors":"Dolores Añón Higón","doi":"10.1080/10438599.2022.2072836","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10438599.2022.2072836","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Research and Development (R&D) outsourcing has rapidly grown in recent decades but little attention has been paid to the persistence with which these contracts are carried out. In this way, this study contributes to the literature by providing new evidence on the extent of true state dependence in explaining the persistence of outsourcing R&D to a type of contractor. Further, we explicitly distinguish between offshore and onshore outsourcing strategies and study their own- and cross-state dependence. In doing so, we estimate a set of dynamic models of strategy adoption using a panel of Spanish manufacturing firms from 2005 to 2014. The data allow for the distinction between five types of contractors and their domestic or foreign origin in each of them. Our results support the idea that R&D outsourcing with a type of contractor exhibits true-state dependence although moderate, with onshore R&D outsourcing being more state-dependent than its offshore counterpart. Results also indicate the existence of cross-state dependence in both directions.","PeriodicalId":51485,"journal":{"name":"Economics of Innovation and New Technology","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.3,"publicationDate":"2022-05-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41328491","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-05-13DOI: 10.1080/10438599.2022.2070843
Anders Kärnä, J. Karlsson, Erik Engberg, P. Svensson
ABSTRACT Within the field of innovation studies, researchers have identified systematic failures that hamper investment in R&D, innovation, and growth. Accordingly, researchers in this field often seek to provide policy recommendations on how to alleviate these failures. However, previous discussions have often been lacking considerations to the risks of political failures, meaning that policies fail to achieve their stated goals in a systematic manner. In response to this gap, this article aims to illustrate the concept of political failure and its relevance for innovation research. This is done by both discussing how political failure can impact innovation policy and by reviewing the prevalence of any discussions of political failure among top-ranked journals on innovation for the period 2010–2019, a total of 7161 articles. The results show that consideration of political failure is scarce, with a small number of papers that have a substantial analysis of political failures. If the awareness of political failures could be increased, this could lead to better policy recommendations with a more nuanced discussion of the risks and limitations of public policy.
{"title":"Political failure: a missing piece in innovation policy analysis","authors":"Anders Kärnä, J. Karlsson, Erik Engberg, P. Svensson","doi":"10.1080/10438599.2022.2070843","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10438599.2022.2070843","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Within the field of innovation studies, researchers have identified systematic failures that hamper investment in R&D, innovation, and growth. Accordingly, researchers in this field often seek to provide policy recommendations on how to alleviate these failures. However, previous discussions have often been lacking considerations to the risks of political failures, meaning that policies fail to achieve their stated goals in a systematic manner. In response to this gap, this article aims to illustrate the concept of political failure and its relevance for innovation research. This is done by both discussing how political failure can impact innovation policy and by reviewing the prevalence of any discussions of political failure among top-ranked journals on innovation for the period 2010–2019, a total of 7161 articles. The results show that consideration of political failure is scarce, with a small number of papers that have a substantial analysis of political failures. If the awareness of political failures could be increased, this could lead to better policy recommendations with a more nuanced discussion of the risks and limitations of public policy.","PeriodicalId":51485,"journal":{"name":"Economics of Innovation and New Technology","volume":"32 1","pages":"1037 - 1068"},"PeriodicalIF":3.3,"publicationDate":"2022-05-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49554039","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-05-06Print Date: 2022-10-01DOI: 10.3171/2022.3.SPINE211529
Raphaële Charest-Morin, Christopher S Bailey, Greg McIntosh, Y Raja Rampersaud, W Bradley Jacobs, David W Cadotte, Jérome Paquet, Hamilton Hall, Michael H Weber, Michael G Johnson, Andrew Nataraj, Najmedden Attabib, Neil Manson, Philippe Phan, Sean D Christie, Kenneth C Thomas, Charles G Fisher, Nicolas Dea
<p><strong>Objective: </strong>In multilevel posterior cervical instrumented fusion, extension of fusion across the cervicothoracic junction (CTJ) at T1 or T2 has been associated with decreased rates of reoperation and pseudarthrosis but with longer surgical time and increased blood loss. The impact on patient-reported outcomes (PROs) remains unclear. The primary objective was to determine whether extension of fusion through the CTJ influenced PROs at 3, 12, and 24 months after surgery. The secondary objective was to compare the number of patients who reached the minimal clinically important differences (MCIDs) for the PROs, modified Japanese Orthopaedic Association (mJOA) score, operative time, intraoperative blood loss, length of stay, discharge disposition, adverse events (AEs), reoperation within 24 months of surgery, and patient satisfaction.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This was a retrospective observational cohort study of prospectively collected multicenter data of patients with degenerative cervical myelopathy. Patients who underwent posterior instrumented fusion of 4 levels or greater (between C2 and T2) between January 2015 and October 2020 and received 24 months of follow-up were included. PROs (scores on the Neck Disability Index [NDI], EQ-5D, physical component summary and mental component summary of SF-12, and numeric rating scale for arm and neck pain) and mJOA scores were compared using ANCOVA and adjusted for baseline differences. Patient demographic characteristics, comorbidities, and surgical details were abstracted. The proportions of patients who reached the MCIDs for these outcomes were compared with the chi-square test. Operative duration, intraoperative blood loss, AEs, reoperation, discharge disposition, length of stay, and satisfaction was compared by using the chi-square test for categorical variables and the independent-samples t-test for continuous variables.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 198 patients were included in this study (101 patients with fusion not crossing the CTJ and 97 with fusion crossing the CTJ). Patients with a construct extending through the CTJ were more likely to be female and have worse baseline NDI scores (p > 0.05). When adjusted for baseline differences, there were no statistically significant differences between the two groups in terms of the PROs and mJOA scores at 3, 12, and 24 months. Surgical duration was longer (p < 0.001) and intraoperative blood loss was greater in the group with fusion extending to the upper thoracic spine (p = 0.013). There were no significant differences between groups in terms of AEs (p > 0.05). Fusion with a construct crossing the CTJ was associated with reoperation (p = 0.04). Satisfaction with surgery was not significantly different between groups. The proportions of patients who reached the MCIDs for the PROs were not statistically different at any time point.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>There were no statistically significant difference
{"title":"Does extending a posterior cervical fusion construct into the upper thoracic spine impact patient-reported outcomes as long as 2 years after surgery in patients with degenerative cervical myelopathy?","authors":"Raphaële Charest-Morin, Christopher S Bailey, Greg McIntosh, Y Raja Rampersaud, W Bradley Jacobs, David W Cadotte, Jérome Paquet, Hamilton Hall, Michael H Weber, Michael G Johnson, Andrew Nataraj, Najmedden Attabib, Neil Manson, Philippe Phan, Sean D Christie, Kenneth C Thomas, Charles G Fisher, Nicolas Dea","doi":"10.3171/2022.3.SPINE211529","DOIUrl":"10.3171/2022.3.SPINE211529","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>In multilevel posterior cervical instrumented fusion, extension of fusion across the cervicothoracic junction (CTJ) at T1 or T2 has been associated with decreased rates of reoperation and pseudarthrosis but with longer surgical time and increased blood loss. The impact on patient-reported outcomes (PROs) remains unclear. The primary objective was to determine whether extension of fusion through the CTJ influenced PROs at 3, 12, and 24 months after surgery. The secondary objective was to compare the number of patients who reached the minimal clinically important differences (MCIDs) for the PROs, modified Japanese Orthopaedic Association (mJOA) score, operative time, intraoperative blood loss, length of stay, discharge disposition, adverse events (AEs), reoperation within 24 months of surgery, and patient satisfaction.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This was a retrospective observational cohort study of prospectively collected multicenter data of patients with degenerative cervical myelopathy. Patients who underwent posterior instrumented fusion of 4 levels or greater (between C2 and T2) between January 2015 and October 2020 and received 24 months of follow-up were included. PROs (scores on the Neck Disability Index [NDI], EQ-5D, physical component summary and mental component summary of SF-12, and numeric rating scale for arm and neck pain) and mJOA scores were compared using ANCOVA and adjusted for baseline differences. Patient demographic characteristics, comorbidities, and surgical details were abstracted. The proportions of patients who reached the MCIDs for these outcomes were compared with the chi-square test. Operative duration, intraoperative blood loss, AEs, reoperation, discharge disposition, length of stay, and satisfaction was compared by using the chi-square test for categorical variables and the independent-samples t-test for continuous variables.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 198 patients were included in this study (101 patients with fusion not crossing the CTJ and 97 with fusion crossing the CTJ). Patients with a construct extending through the CTJ were more likely to be female and have worse baseline NDI scores (p > 0.05). When adjusted for baseline differences, there were no statistically significant differences between the two groups in terms of the PROs and mJOA scores at 3, 12, and 24 months. Surgical duration was longer (p < 0.001) and intraoperative blood loss was greater in the group with fusion extending to the upper thoracic spine (p = 0.013). There were no significant differences between groups in terms of AEs (p > 0.05). Fusion with a construct crossing the CTJ was associated with reoperation (p = 0.04). Satisfaction with surgery was not significantly different between groups. The proportions of patients who reached the MCIDs for the PROs were not statistically different at any time point.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>There were no statistically significant difference","PeriodicalId":51485,"journal":{"name":"Economics of Innovation and New Technology","volume":"31 1","pages":"547-555"},"PeriodicalIF":2.8,"publicationDate":"2022-05-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"83915501","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-05-01DOI: 10.1080/10438599.2022.2067150
Keun Lee, Sunghoon Lee
ABSTRACT Entry barrier has long been considered as a major determinant of firm profitability. Although a less competitive market structure has been commonly known as an indicator of an entry barrier, pieces of past empirical evidence are mixed. Moreover, technological factors, such as R&D intensity, have also been considered. However, no satisfactory empirical analysis has been made, mostly due to the lack of a suitable proxy variable that can reflect the technological environment of a sector. This study addresses this problem by trying a new proxy variable, cycle time of technologies (CTT), and shows, using the US firm data, that firms in a sector with a long CTT tend to enjoy higher profitability and values than others. A long CTT of a sector presents a high entry barrier against any entrant because in such sectors, an existing stock of knowledge tends to be important for a longer period of time, making new innovation continuously rely on old knowledge owned by incumbents and protected by patent rights.
{"title":"A Schumpeterian approach to entry barrier and firm profitability: cycle time of technology","authors":"Keun Lee, Sunghoon Lee","doi":"10.1080/10438599.2022.2067150","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10438599.2022.2067150","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Entry barrier has long been considered as a major determinant of firm profitability. Although a less competitive market structure has been commonly known as an indicator of an entry barrier, pieces of past empirical evidence are mixed. Moreover, technological factors, such as R&D intensity, have also been considered. However, no satisfactory empirical analysis has been made, mostly due to the lack of a suitable proxy variable that can reflect the technological environment of a sector. This study addresses this problem by trying a new proxy variable, cycle time of technologies (CTT), and shows, using the US firm data, that firms in a sector with a long CTT tend to enjoy higher profitability and values than others. A long CTT of a sector presents a high entry barrier against any entrant because in such sectors, an existing stock of knowledge tends to be important for a longer period of time, making new innovation continuously rely on old knowledge owned by incumbents and protected by patent rights.","PeriodicalId":51485,"journal":{"name":"Economics of Innovation and New Technology","volume":"32 1","pages":"1019 - 1036"},"PeriodicalIF":3.3,"publicationDate":"2022-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46032900","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This work discusses and empirically investigates the relationship between labor regulation and robotization. In particular, the empirical analysis focuses on the relationship between the discipline of workers' dismissal and the adoption of industrial robots in nineteen Western countries over the 2006–2016 period. We find that high levels of statutory employment protection have been negatively associated with robot adoption, suggesting that labor-friendly national legislations, by increasing adjustment costs (such as firing costs), and thus making investment riskier, provide less favorable environments for firms to invest in industrial robots. We also find, however, that the correlation is positively mediated by the sectoral levels of capital intensity, a hint that firms do resort to industrial robots as potential substitutes for workers to reduce employees' bargaining power and to limit their hold-up opportunities, which tend to be larger in sectors characterized by high levels of operating leverage.
{"title":"Robots and labor regulation: a cross-country/cross-industry analysis","authors":"Silvio Traverso, Massimiliano Vatiero, Enrico Zaninotto","doi":"10.1080/10438599.2022.2063122","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10438599.2022.2063122","url":null,"abstract":"<p><b>ABSTRACT</b></p><p>This work discusses and empirically investigates the relationship between labor regulation and robotization. In particular, the empirical analysis focuses on the relationship between the discipline of workers' dismissal and the adoption of industrial robots in nineteen Western countries over the 2006–2016 period. We find that high levels of statutory employment protection have been negatively associated with robot adoption, suggesting that labor-friendly national legislations, by increasing adjustment costs (such as firing costs), and thus making investment riskier, provide less favorable environments for firms to invest in industrial robots. We also find, however, that the correlation is positively mediated by the sectoral levels of capital intensity, a hint that firms do resort to industrial robots as potential substitutes for workers to reduce employees' bargaining power and to limit their hold-up opportunities, which tend to be larger in sectors characterized by high levels of operating leverage.</p>","PeriodicalId":51485,"journal":{"name":"Economics of Innovation and New Technology","volume":"512 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.3,"publicationDate":"2022-04-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"138496226","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
ABSTRACT This article examines the gender gap in patenting activities and the predominance of male innovators among outstanding inventors, so-called ‘stars'. In particular, we investigate different metrics of productivity among top inventors, identified employing different definitions with respect to the quantity and quality of output. We distinguish between prolific inventors, with high numbers of patents registered in their name, and high-quality inventors, with portfolios comprising patents with large numbers of citations. Using patent data for more than 600,000 inventors, we find that star inventors differ from the pool of non-star inventors in terms of gender: while for non-star inventors being a woman constitutes a significant disadvantage, for stars it actually presents a positive association both with quantity and quality of innovative outputs. Moreover, career length constitutes a key premium for female inventors’ productivity, but with smaller magnitudes among stars. The only exception where we observe no gender differences is among inventors with large portfolios (more than five patent families): among them, women do not display any significant gap in the quality of outputs, nor does career length provide a gendered premium.
{"title":"Gender differences among innovators: a patent analysis of stars","authors":"Federico Caviggioli, Alessandra Colombelli, Chiara Ravetti","doi":"10.1080/10438599.2022.2065634","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10438599.2022.2065634","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT\u0000 This article examines the gender gap in patenting activities and the predominance of male innovators among outstanding inventors, so-called ‘stars'. In particular, we investigate different metrics of productivity among top inventors, identified employing different definitions with respect to the quantity and quality of output. We distinguish between prolific inventors, with high numbers of patents registered in their name, and high-quality inventors, with portfolios comprising patents with large numbers of citations. Using patent data for more than 600,000 inventors, we find that star inventors differ from the pool of non-star inventors in terms of gender: while for non-star inventors being a woman constitutes a significant disadvantage, for stars it actually presents a positive association both with quantity and quality of innovative outputs. Moreover, career length constitutes a key premium for female inventors’ productivity, but with smaller magnitudes among stars. The only exception where we observe no gender differences is among inventors with large portfolios (more than five patent families): among them, women do not display any significant gap in the quality of outputs, nor does career length provide a gendered premium.","PeriodicalId":51485,"journal":{"name":"Economics of Innovation and New Technology","volume":"32 1","pages":"1000 - 1018"},"PeriodicalIF":3.3,"publicationDate":"2022-04-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44803976","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-04-06DOI: 10.1080/10438599.2022.2053848
L. Rubalcaba, M. Deschryvere
ABSTRACT This paper provides a conceptual and empirical framework for analyzing the role of users in innovation and performance at the firm level in the service sector. The theoretical model builds on the user innovation theory in services and proposes to distinguish between different modes and degrees of user participation that may perform differently. The empirical testing is based on a unique dataset from Finland. Results show that not all user engagement led to similar impacts: more active roles versus passive ones have a significant positive relationship with innovation output, but only specific combinations of user orientation and its intensity matter. Besides, no direct significant impacts from user orientation on productivity were found. As a managerial implication, service companies may approach users as co-innovation partners oriented to service quality and customer satisfaction rather than oriented to increase business efficiency.
{"title":"The uneven role of users in service innovation performance","authors":"L. Rubalcaba, M. Deschryvere","doi":"10.1080/10438599.2022.2053848","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10438599.2022.2053848","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This paper provides a conceptual and empirical framework for analyzing the role of users in innovation and performance at the firm level in the service sector. The theoretical model builds on the user innovation theory in services and proposes to distinguish between different modes and degrees of user participation that may perform differently. The empirical testing is based on a unique dataset from Finland. Results show that not all user engagement led to similar impacts: more active roles versus passive ones have a significant positive relationship with innovation output, but only specific combinations of user orientation and its intensity matter. Besides, no direct significant impacts from user orientation on productivity were found. As a managerial implication, service companies may approach users as co-innovation partners oriented to service quality and customer satisfaction rather than oriented to increase business efficiency.","PeriodicalId":51485,"journal":{"name":"Economics of Innovation and New Technology","volume":"32 1","pages":"953 - 976"},"PeriodicalIF":3.3,"publicationDate":"2022-04-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45084120","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-03-29DOI: 10.1080/10438599.2022.2052054
C. Lodi, S. Bertarelli
ABSTRACT The effects of environmental policies on eco-innovation and trade performance are studied separately in the literature, and varying inferences across the studies are reported. This paper sheds light on this debate as it theoretically and empirically studies the pollution haven effect and strong Porter hypothesis in a unified framework that accounts for productivity and size heterogeneity at the firm level. The present study discusses a detailed analysis of theoretical predictions and empirical outcomes, based on the regulation–innovation–trade nexus, to assess the specific channels through which such effects might operate. Based on German and East European cross-sectional data at the firm level, results show that an eco-innovation that a regulation induces can generate either a positive effect or a detrimental effect on exporting propensity. Results also suggest that productivity, size and geographical heterogeneity of firms are extremely relevant.
{"title":"Eco-innovation and exports in heterogeneous firms: pollution haven effect and Porter hypothesis as competing theories","authors":"C. Lodi, S. Bertarelli","doi":"10.1080/10438599.2022.2052054","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10438599.2022.2052054","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT The effects of environmental policies on eco-innovation and trade performance are studied separately in the literature, and varying inferences across the studies are reported. This paper sheds light on this debate as it theoretically and empirically studies the pollution haven effect and strong Porter hypothesis in a unified framework that accounts for productivity and size heterogeneity at the firm level. The present study discusses a detailed analysis of theoretical predictions and empirical outcomes, based on the regulation–innovation–trade nexus, to assess the specific channels through which such effects might operate. Based on German and East European cross-sectional data at the firm level, results show that an eco-innovation that a regulation induces can generate either a positive effect or a detrimental effect on exporting propensity. Results also suggest that productivity, size and geographical heterogeneity of firms are extremely relevant.","PeriodicalId":51485,"journal":{"name":"Economics of Innovation and New Technology","volume":"32 1","pages":"923 - 952"},"PeriodicalIF":3.3,"publicationDate":"2022-03-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48966516","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-03-25DOI: 10.1080/10438599.2022.2052053
P. Beneito, M. E. Rochina-Barrachina, A. Sanchis
ABSTRACT Innovative firms use patents to signal the quality of their R&D teams in evaluation processes affected by asymmetric information. Examples of these processes occur when applying for finance from external sources or when searching for collaboration partners for innovation projects. In this paper we provide evidence that, in these cases, firms' external agents undervalue patents of female R&D teams as compared to patents of male R&D teams. We investigate this issue using data of Spanish innovating firms from PITEC, spanning 2005–2014, a panel database that follows the structure of the European Community Innovation Surveys (CIS). We interpret our results as consistent with an evaluation bias against female researchers, making them to be subject to a greater scrutiny as compared to their male counterparts, and thereby suggesting the existence of gender discrimination in R&D.
{"title":"Female R&D teams and patents as quality signals in innovative firms","authors":"P. Beneito, M. E. Rochina-Barrachina, A. Sanchis","doi":"10.1080/10438599.2022.2052053","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10438599.2022.2052053","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Innovative firms use patents to signal the quality of their R&D teams in evaluation processes affected by asymmetric information. Examples of these processes occur when applying for finance from external sources or when searching for collaboration partners for innovation projects. In this paper we provide evidence that, in these cases, firms' external agents undervalue patents of female R&D teams as compared to patents of male R&D teams. We investigate this issue using data of Spanish innovating firms from PITEC, spanning 2005–2014, a panel database that follows the structure of the European Community Innovation Surveys (CIS). We interpret our results as consistent with an evaluation bias against female researchers, making them to be subject to a greater scrutiny as compared to their male counterparts, and thereby suggesting the existence of gender discrimination in R&D.","PeriodicalId":51485,"journal":{"name":"Economics of Innovation and New Technology","volume":"32 1","pages":"891 - 922"},"PeriodicalIF":3.3,"publicationDate":"2022-03-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44055825","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"经济学","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：