nep-ino New Economics Papers
on Innovation
Issue of 2019‒10‒07
eleven papers chosen by
Uwe Cantner
University of Jena

  1. Teaming up with Large R&D Investors: Good or Bad for Knowledge Production and Diffusion? By Sara Amoroso; Simone Vannuccini
  2. The Potential for innovation in mining value chains. Evidence from Latin America By Iizuka, Michiko; Pietrobelli, Carlo; Vargas, Fernando
  3. The Role of Universities in the Knowledge Triangle Model on the Example of EIT Activities By Klimczuk-Kochańska, Magdalena
  4. Structural Transformation of Innovation By Diego Comin; Danial Lashkari; Marti Mestieri
  5. Global Innovation and Knowledge Diffusion By Nelson Lind; Natalia Ramondo
  6. ‘Novel’ Ideas: The Effects of Carnegie Libraries on Innovative Activities By Enrico Berkes; Peter Nencka
  7. Experimental Innovation Policy By Albert Bravo-Biosca
  8. Mission (im)possible? Mobilizing innovation – and policies supporting it – in the transition to sustainability By Jan Fagerberg
  9. Dynamic Effects of Patent Policy on Innovation and Inequality in a Schumpeterian Economy By Chu, Angus C.; Furukawa, Yuichi; Mallick, Sushanta; Peretto, Pietro; Wang, Xilin
  10. Procurement in Big Science Centres: politics or technology? Evidence from CERN By Andrea, Bastianin; Chiara F., Del Bo
  11. World Corporate Top R&D investors: Shaping the Future of Technologies and of AI By Helene Dernis; Petros Gkotsis; Nicola Grassano; Shohei Nakazato; Mariagrazia Squicciarini; Brigitte van Beuzekom; Antonio Vezzani

  1. By: Sara Amoroso (Joint Research Centre, European Commission); Simone Vannuccini (Science Policy Research Unit (SPRU), University of Sussex Business School, University of Sussex)
    Abstract: The participation of top R&D players to publicly funded research collaborations is a common yet unexplored phenomenon.If,on the one hand,including top R&D firms creates opportunities for knowledge spillovers and increases the chance for a project to be funded, on the other hand, the uneven nature of such partnerships and the asymmetry in knowledge appropriation capabilities could hinder the overall performance of such collaborations. In this paper, we study the role of top R&D investors in the performance of publicly funded R&D consortia (in terms of number of patents and publications). Using a unique data set that matches informationon R&D collaborative projects and proposals with data on international top R&D firms, we find that indeed teaming up with leading R&D firms increases the probability to obtain funds. However,the participation of such R&D leaders hinders the innovative performance of the funded projects, both in terms of patents and publications. In light of this evidence, the benefits of mobilizing top R&D players should be carefully leveraged in the evaluation and design of innovation policies aimed at R&D collaboration and technology diffusion.
    Keywords: Collaboration; publicfunding; innovationperformance; appropriability; top R&D investor
    JEL: L24 L25 O33
    Date: 2019–09
  2. By: Iizuka, Michiko (National Graduate Institute for Policy Studies, Japan); Pietrobelli, Carlo (UNU-MERIT, and University Roma Tre); Vargas, Fernando (UNU-MERIT, and Inter†American Development Bank)
    Abstract: This paper tries to broaden the scope and understanding of innovation in the mining sector, with a focus on emerging countries based on the experience of Latin America. It discusses the innovation processes that are developing in the mining sector of emerging countries, and uses the global value chains (GVC) approach to analyze the potential available to local firms. The focus is on all forms of innovation, not only those eventually subject to patenting, to include innovations in products and processes, but also in business, marketing and organizational models and practices. The new features of scientific knowledge applied to the mining sector (e.g. ICT, new materials, biotechnology) open new opportunities for new suppliers to enter and add value in mining GVCs, and we illustrate this point with specific examples of Latin American suppliers. However, in developing this argument, we cannot forget that in most of Latin American mining there is insufficient supply of local knowledge, indicators of R&D expenditures and researchers involved show a significant lag with respect to advanced countries. Multinational mining companies have not traditionally conducted intensive R&D activities near their operations, and local universities do not tend to specialize in scientific topics directly linked to the mining industry. The paper concludes by arguing that there is a need to rethink and innovate policy approaches, if countries aim at scaling up and broadening the many good examples of innovative suppliers.
    Keywords: Global value chains, Natural resources, Mining, Latin America, Innovation and learning, public policies
    JEL: O13 O32 O43
    Date: 2019–09–20
  3. By: Klimczuk-Kochańska, Magdalena
    Abstract: Background. For universities, it is essential to develop in the direction of market expectations. It is necessary to enter into cooperation with entrepreneurs which allows technology transfer to create innovations. The knowledge triangle model is a concept that involves creating relationships between universities, research institutions and enterprises. This idea is very important for European policy and is implemented by the European Institute of Innovation and Technology (EIT). However, it is worth checking whether it is actually being implemented. Research Aims. To check if the approach of the knowledge triangle is used in practice by entities set up under the EIT. Another research aim is an exploration of the current directions in which the university's cooperation with other bodies is heading, and if this has an impact on raising the level of innovation in Europe. Methodology. A look at the model of cooperation between universities and the environment and search for an appropriate framework of benefit from this kind of collaboration on scientific literature review. Moreover, the desk research regarding the EIT Food - one of the European initiatives in the food sector. Key findings. The analyses carried out allow us to state that the concept of the knowledge triangle is not just a theoretical idea. The concept has its application in practice. It was also identified that universities are the main engine of all undertaken activities in the field of education, research and innovation.
    Keywords: cooperation, entrepreneurial university, knowledge triangle, third mission, triple helix, quadruple helix
    JEL: L22 O31 O32 Q55
    Date: 2018
  4. By: Diego Comin (Dartmouth College); Danial Lashkari (Boston College); Marti Mestieri (Northwestern University)
    Abstract: We develop a multi-sector endogenous growth model in which the direc- tion of innovation across sectors is endogenous. The model provides a the- oretical general equilibrium framework for studying the classical demand- pull and technology-push drivers of innovation. A robust prediction is that the rate of growth innovation growth is asymptotically higher in more income-elastic sectors. We test this prediction using the universe of U.S. patents and firm R&D investments for the period 1976-2007. The analysis lends empirical support for the main predictions of the model.
    Date: 2019
  5. By: Nelson Lind (Emory University); Natalia Ramondo (UCSD)
    Abstract: This paper develops a model of economic growth and trade in which countries innovate ideas that diffuse across the globe. This model dynamically generates max-stable multivariate Frechet productivity distributions and implies a mixed-CES import demand system. This demand system allows for rich substitution patterns in trade flows that arise from spatial correlation in technology. In the special case of a pure innovation model where countries do not share ideas, productivities are independent across space, and the demand system is CES. As a consequence, departures from CES reflect how knowledge diffusion generates technological similarity. In the general case with diffusion, high innovation countries tend to have dissimilar technology and their goods are less substitutable. These theoretical results provide a direct connection between estimable substitution patterns and the underlying dynamics of innovation and knowledge diffusion.
    Date: 2019
  6. By: Enrico Berkes (The Ohio State University); Peter Nencka (The Ohio State University)
    Abstract: We show that the historical rollout of public libraries increased the innovation output of recipient towns. Between 1886 and 1919, Andrew Carnegie donated $1.2 billion ($2018) to fund the construction of more than 1,500 public libraries across the United States. Drawing on a new data set based on original historical records, we identify cities that qualified to receive a library grant, applied for the program, received preliminary construction approval, but ultimately rejected Carnegie’s offer. Using the rejecting cities as a control group, we estimate the effects of Carnegie library formation on patenting activity. We provide evidence that the trends in the patenting activity in the two groups are indistinguishable before the construction of the libraries and then diverge. Cities that accepted grants experienced both short- and long-run gains in patenting activity. We also describe ongoing work to estimate how library exposure during childhood affects long-run innovative potential.
    Date: 2019
  7. By: Albert Bravo-Biosca
    Abstract: Experimental approaches are increasingly being adopted across many policy fields, but innovation policy has been lagging. This paper reviews the case for policy experimentation in this field, describes the different types of experiments that can be undertaken, discusses some of the unique challenges to the use of experimental approaches in innovation policy, and summarizes some of the emerging lessons, with a focus on randomized trials. The paper concludes describing how at the Innovation Growth Lab we have been working with governments across the OECD to help them overcome the barriers to policy experimentation in order to make their policies more impactful.
    JEL: C93 L26 O25 O38
    Date: 2019–09
  8. By: Jan Fagerberg (Centre for Technology, Innovation and Culture, University of Oslo & UNU-MERIT)
    Abstract: Research has shown that transitions easily may take several decades if not more to unfold. However, it has also been suggested that change may occur faster when advantages for end-users are sufficiently large and/or there are proactive policies in place. This paper aims at providing new insights on these matters through a discussion of three specific cases, all from Europe, in which change has been very quick indeed: Wind energy in Denmark, the German Energiewende and electrical cars in Norway. The focus is particularly on the actors that took part, how policy schemes supporting these developments were shaped and what their impacts were. It is concluded that by embracing the opportunities offered by the renewable energy revolution and actively involving users (and attracting new ones) it is possible for policy-makers to encourage (green) innovation, create new jobs and significantly speed up the transition.
    Date: 2019–09
  9. By: Chu, Angus C.; Furukawa, Yuichi; Mallick, Sushanta; Peretto, Pietro; Wang, Xilin
    Abstract: This study explores the dynamic effects of patent policy on innovation and income inequality in a Schumpeterian growth model with endogenous market structure and heterogeneous households. We find that strengthening patent protection has a positive effect on economic growth and a positive or an inverted-U effect on income inequality when the number of differentiated products is fixed in the short run. However, when the number of products adjusts endogenously, the effects of patent protection on growth and inequality become negative in the long run. We also calibrate the model to US data to perform a quantitative analysis and find that the long-run negative effect of patent policy on inequality is much larger than its short-run positive effect. This result is consistent with our empirical finding from a panel vector autoregression.
    Keywords: patent policy; income inequality; innovation; endogenous market structure
    JEL: D3 O3 O4
    Date: 2019–09
  10. By: Andrea, Bastianin; Chiara F., Del Bo
    Abstract: Procurement from Big Science Centers (BSC) yields a variety of spillover effects that can ultimately have growth enhancing consequences for their partner countries. We study the determinants of procurement for the biggest research infrastructure ever built: the Large Hadron Collider (LHC) at CERN. Using a unique cross-section database of firms that have registered to become industrial partners of the LHC program, we estimate the determinants for potential suppliers of receiving an order from CERN. We compare the relative weight of firms’ technological features and CERN’s procurement rules aimed at securing a juste retour for its Member States. Our results point to a strong impact of technological factors, while also highlighting the importance of political constraints related with CERN’s procurement rules as well as the presence of a home bias. Since the constraints related with the achievement of a juste retour affect–directly or indirectly–the procurement policy of many European BSCs, our results have policy implications that go beyond the CERN case study.
    Keywords: big science; procurement; innovation; hi-tech; CERN.
    JEL: C21 C25 H57 O32 O38
    Date: 2019–05–21
  11. By: Helene Dernis (OECD); Petros Gkotsis (European Commission - JRC); Nicola Grassano (European Commission - JRC); Shohei Nakazato (OECD); Mariagrazia Squicciarini (OECD); Brigitte van Beuzekom (OECD); Antonio Vezzani
    Abstract: This report brings together data on patents, scientific publications, trademarks and designs of the world’s top corporate R&D investors to shed some light on the role they play in shaping the future of technologies and AI. As for the two previous editions, the present report is the product of a collaborative effort of the JRC of the European Commission and the OECD, two organisations committed to provide high quality open data and up-to-date indicators and analysis. The audience this report wants to reach is quite diverse: from the scientific community to the industry representatives, from practitioners to policy makers. Its scope is to be a useful source of analysis and data for all those interested in getting an understanding of the scientific and technological activities of key industrial players, particularly in the field of AI. The data underlying the analysis presented are publicly available for all those who want to use them for further analysis.
    Keywords: R&D investment, Artificial Intelligence, Intellectual Property, Patents, Trademarks,Scientific publications
    Date: 2019–09

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.