nep-ino New Economics Papers
on Innovation
Issue of 2019‒05‒06
six papers chosen by
Uwe Cantner
University of Jena

  1. The digital innovation policy landscape in 2019 By Caroline Paunov; Sandra Planes-Satorra
  2. The Contribution of High-Skilled Immigrants to Innovation in the United States By Bernstein, Shai; Diamond, Rebecca; McQuade, Timothy James; Pousada, Beatriz
  3. Local entrepreneurship ecosystems and emerging industries: Case study of Coventry and Warwickshire, United Kingdom By OECD
  4. The Wrong Kind of AI? Artificial Intelligence and the Future of Labor Demand By Acemoglu, Daron; Restrepo, Pascual
  5. Financing Entrepreneurship and Innovation in China: A Public Policy Perspective By Cong, Lin William; Lee, Charles M. C.; Qu, Yuanyu; Shen, Tao
  6. The disciplinary effect of post-grant review - causal evidence from European patent opposition By Markus Nagler; Stefan Sorg

  1. By: Caroline Paunov; Sandra Planes-Satorra
    Abstract: How are OECD countries supporting digital innovation and ensuring that benefits spread across the economy? This paper explores the current landscape of strategies and initiatives implemented in OECD countries to support innovation in the digital age. It identifies common trends and differences in national digital, smart industry and artificial intelligence (AI) strategies. The paper also discusses policy instruments used across OECD to support digital innovation targeting four objectives: First, policies aimed at enhancing digital technology adoption and diffusion, including demonstration facilities for SMEs. Second, initiatives that promote collaborative innovation, including via the creation of digital innovation clusters and knowledge intermediaries. Third, support for research and innovation in key digital technologies, particularly AI (e.g. by establishing testbeds and regulatory sandboxes). Fourth, policies to encourage digital entrepreneurship (e.g. through early-stage business acceleration support).
    Keywords: digital innovation, digital technologies and artificial intelligence (AI), innovation and research policy, innovation strategies
    JEL: O30 O31 O33 O38 O25 I28
    Date: 2019–05–06
  2. By: Bernstein, Shai (Stanford University GSB and NBER); Diamond, Rebecca (Stanford University GSB and NBER); McQuade, Timothy James (Stanford University GSB); Pousada, Beatriz (?)
    Abstract: We characterize the contribution of immigrants to US innovation, both through their direct productivity as well as through their indirect spillover effects on their native collaborators. To do so, we link patent records to a database containing the first five digits of 160 million of Social Security Numbers (SSN). By combining this part of the SSN together with year of birth, we identify whether individuals are immigrants based on the age at which their Social Security Number is assigned. We find that over the course of their careers, immigrants are more productive than natives, as measured by number of patents, patent citations, and the economic value of these patents. Immigrant inventors are more likely to rely on foreign technologies, to collaborate with foreign inventors, and to be cited in foreign markets, thus contributing to the importation and diffusion of ideas across borders. Using an identification strategy that exploits premature inventor deaths, we find that immigrant collaborators create especially strong positive externalities on the innovation production of natives, while natives create especially large positive externalities on immigrant innovation production, suggesting that combining these different knowledge pools into inventor teams is important for innovation. A simple decomposition suggests that despite immigrants only making up 16% of inventors, they are responsible for 30% of aggregate US innovation since 1976, with their indirect spillover effects accounting for more than twice their direct productivity contribution.
    Date: 2018–11
  3. By: OECD
    Abstract: This report examines the local entrepreneurship ecosystem of the Coventry and Warwickshire region in the United Kingdom and its capacity to promote productivity upgrading and industrial renewal. It forms part of the OECD’s work stream on local entrepreneurship ecosystems and emerging industries. This work examines how policy at the local level can promote innovative start-ups, innovative scale-ups and innovation in existing enterprises for entrepreneurship and industrial diversification.
    Date: 2019–05–03
  4. By: Acemoglu, Daron (MIT); Restrepo, Pascual (Boston University)
    Abstract: Artificial Intelligence is set to influence every aspect of our lives, not least the way production is organized. AI, as a technology platform, can automate tasks previously performed by labor or create new tasks and activities in which humans can be productively employed. Recent technological change has been biased towards automation, with insufficient focus on creating new tasks where labor can be productively employed. The consequences of this choice have been stagnating labor demand, declining labor share in national income, rising inequality and lower productivity growth. The current tendency is to develop AI in the direction of further automation, but this might mean missing out on the promise of the "right" kind of AI with better economic and social outcomes.
    Keywords: automation, artificial intelligence, jobs, inequality, innovation, labor demand, productivity, tasks, technology, wages
    JEL: J23 J24
    Date: 2019–04
  5. By: Cong, Lin William (University of Chicago - Booth School of Business); Lee, Charles M. C. (Stanford University - Graduate School of Business); Qu, Yuanyu (University of International Business and Economics (UIBE) - School of Banking and Finance); Shen, Tao (Tsinghua University)
    Abstract: This study reports on the current state-of-affairs in the funding of entrepreneurship and innovations in China and provides a broad survey of academic findings on the subject. We discuss the implications of these findings for public policies governing the Chinese financial system. In particular, we conclude that regulations governing the initial public offering (IPO) process in China are antiquated and in dire need of reform. We also identify and discuss promising areas for future research.
    Date: 2018–08
  6. By: Markus Nagler; Stefan Sorg
    Abstract: We study the causal impact of invalidating marginally valid patents during post-grant opposition at the European Patent Office on affected inventors’ subsequent patenting. We exploit exogenous variation in invalidation by leveraging the participation of a patent’s original examiner in the opposition division as an instrument. We find a disciplinary effect of invalidation: Affected inventors file 20% fewer patent applications in the decade after the decision. This effect is entirely driven by a reduction in low-quality filings, i.e., filings that examiners associate with prior art that threatens the application’s novelty or inventive step. We do not observe shifts into national patenting.
    Keywords: inventors, marginal patents, patent invalidation, patent opposition, post-grant review, EPO, innovation
    JEL: O31 O34
    Date: 2019

This nep-ino issue is ©2019 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 For comments please write to the director of NEP, Marco Novarese at <>. 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.