nep-ino New Economics Papers
on Innovation
Issue of 2021‒12‒13
seven papers chosen by
Uwe Cantner
University of Jena

  1. Coping with increasing tides: technological change, agglomeration dynamics and climate hazards in an agent-based evolutionary model By Alessandro Taberna; Tatiana Filatova; Andrea Roventini; Francesco Lamperti
  2. Regions and trademarks. Research opportunities and policy insights from leveraging trademarks in regional innovation studies By Carolina Castaldi; Sandro Mendonca;
  3. Innovation Performance and the Signal Effect: Evidence from a European Program By Aurélien Quignon; Nadine Levratto
  4. Direct and indirect effects of universities on European regional productivity By E. Marrocu; R. Paci; S. Usai
  5. Sizing Up the Effects of Technological Decoupling By Mr. Shanaka J Peiris; Mr. Dirk V Muir; Rui Mano; Diego A. Cerdeiro; Johannes Eugster
  6. Islands of Innovation and diversities of innovation in the UK and France By Helen Lawton Smith; Dimitris Assimakopoulos
  7. Growth, Concentration and Inequality in a Unified Schumpeter Mark I + II model By Patrick Mellacher

  1. By: Alessandro Taberna; Tatiana Filatova; Andrea Roventini; Francesco Lamperti
    Abstract: By 2050 about 70% of the worldùs population is expected to live in cities. Cities offer spatial economic advantages that boost agglomeration forces and innovation, fostering further concentration of economic activities. For historic reasons urban clustering occurs along coasts and rivers, which are prone to climate-induced flooding. To explore trade-offs between agglomeration economies and increasing climate-induced hazards, we develop an evolutionary agent-based model with heterogeneous boundedly-rational agents who learn and adapt to a changing environment. The model combines migration decision of both households and firms between safe Inland and hazard-prone Coastal regions with endogenous technological learning and economic growth. Flood damages affect Coastal firms hitting their labour productivity, capital stock and inventories. We find that the model is able to replicate a rich set of micro- and macro-empirical regularities concerning economic and spatial dynamics. Without climate-induced shocks, the model shows how lower transport costs favour the waterfront region leading to self-reinforcing and path-dependent agglomeration processes. We then introduce five scenarios considering flood hazards characterized by different frequency and severity and we study their complex interplay with agglomeration patterns and the performance of the overall economy. We find that when shocks are mild or infrequent, they negatively affect the economic performance of the two regions. If strong flood hazards hit frequently the Coastal region before agglomeration forces trigger high levels of waterfront urbanization, firms and households can timely adapt and migrate landwards, thus absorbing the adverse impacts of climate shocks on the whole economy. Conversely, in presence of climate tipping points which suddenly increase the frequency and magnitude of flood hazards, we find that the consolidated coastal gentrification of economic activities locks-in firms on the waterfront, leading to a harsh downturn for the whole economy.
    Keywords: Agglomeration; path-dependency; climate; flood; shock; relocation; migration; agent-based model; tipping point; resilience; lock in.
    Date: 2021–11–29
  2. By: Carolina Castaldi; Sandro Mendonca;
    Abstract: At the intersection of regional and innovation studies, trademark research is producing stylized facts, methodological lessons and policy insights underlining the importance of softer intangible assets for regional resilience and growth. Despite all the recent attention, there are still several opportunities that the present agenda-framing piece tries to canvas, identifying at least two directions for further research: the geography of innovation/entrepreneurship and regional specialization/diversification. Not only do these emerge from a dedicated special issue in Regional Studies (to which this paper also serves as an Editorial), they also unfold in emerging research and policy trajectories.
    Keywords: trademarks, regions, geography, intangibles, innovation, specialization, diversification
    JEL: O3 L5 R1
    Date: 2021–12
  3. By: Aurélien Quignon; Nadine Levratto
    Abstract: This paper seeks to estimate the effect of a European policy that subsidizes innovation investments. By carefully selecting observables, we compare recipients of the program with non-recipient firms to overcome the endogeneity of R&D grants. We conduct a difference-in-differences design on the universe of a unique firm-level dataset of European SMEs between 2008 and 2017. We find a significant effect of proof of concept grants, which implies an increase in the number of patentapplications and the probability of patenting. There are positive impacts on credit financing, which suggest a signal effect to investors about the project quality of young firms.
    Keywords: R&D subsidies, Innovation, Patent, Financing constraints, H2020
    JEL: G28 G32 O30 O38
    Date: 2021
  4. By: E. Marrocu; R. Paci; S. Usai
    Abstract: For the first time we investigate the effects that Universities exert on Total Factor Productivity dynamics for a very ample sample of 270 European regions over the period 2000-2016. This novel contribution goes beyond the traditional human capital and technological capital indirect effects and proposes a sound empirical assessment of the highly differentiated "third mission" activities. These are unique to engaged academic institutions and shape the key role they play as societal development-promoting agencies. Our analysis provides evidence of sizeable and robust universities direct supply-side effects, which complement the traditional ones in driving European regional productivity growth.
    Keywords: university;Regional Total Factor Productivity;human capital;technological capital;Universities' third mission
    Date: 2021
  5. By: Mr. Shanaka J Peiris; Mr. Dirk V Muir; Rui Mano; Diego A. Cerdeiro; Johannes Eugster
    Abstract: This paper proposes channels through which technological decoupling can affect global growth, and embeds these different layers in a global dynamic macroeconomic model. Multiple scenarios are considered that differ along two dimensions: (i) the coalition of countries (hubs) that initiate the decoupling, and (ii) whether non-hub countries are also forced to decouple via ‘preferential attachment’ – i.e. by aligning themselves with the hub they trade most with. All global technology hubs lose across scenarios, and losses are largest under preferential attachment. Smaller countries with relations that straddle multiple hubs generally lose, whereas those whose trade is heavily concentrated with one hub may gain due to reduced competition under some scenarios. Technological fragmentation can lead to losses in the order of 5 percent of GDP for many economies.
    Keywords: Technological decoupling; trade; non-tariff barriers.; non-tariff barriers; China-United States; R&D number; innovation drive; United States stop; world trade f low; sectoral trade elasticity; high-tech goods trade; Labor productivity; Productivity; Spillovers; Exports; Trade balance; Global; Asia and Pacific
    Date: 2021–03–12
  6. By: Helen Lawton Smith (emlyon business school); Dimitris Assimakopoulos
    Abstract: This paper explores diverging patterns of innovation and regional development in two ‘islands of innovation'. In the early 2000s the growth trajectories of Grenoble and Oxfordshire were compared (Lawton Smith 2003). The focus was on national laboratories as territorial actors in the clustering of high-tech firms. Building on longitudinal data collected since 2003 the theme shifts in this study to the forms that government intervention takes through investments in knowledge organisations in high tech economies and how that leads to particular specialisations of technological advance. While there are many similarities, there are differences in starting points and structures, leading to diversities in innovation. The analysis shows how both are embedded in their national situations and opportunities for development. We focus on two key elements in sustaining clusters of innovation, those of highly skilled labour and networks. We show that in Grenoble, the clusters are orchestrated information and project-based while in Oxfordshire they are labour market dominated and organic. We demonstrate complementary relationships between the national and regional level policy formation and implementation. In both cases importance of place is sustained over time but for different reasons.Este documento explora patrones divergentes de innovación y desarrollo regional en dos "islas de innovación". A principios de la década de 2000 se compararon las trayectorias de crecimiento de Grenoble y Oxfordshire (Lawton Smith 2003). La atención se centró en los laboratorios nacionales como actores territoriales en la agrupación de empresas de alta tecnología. Basándose en los datos longitudinales recopilados desde 2003, el objeto de análisis cambia en este estudio a las formas que la intervención gubernamental adopta a través de inversiones en organizaciones de conocimiento en sectores de alta tecnología y cómo eso conduce a especializaciones particulares del avance tecnológico. Si bien hay muchas similitudes, hay diferencias en los puntos de partida y las estructuras, lo que conduce a las diversidades en la innovación. El análisis muestra cómo ambos están integrados en sus situaciones nacionales y oportunidades de desarrollo.Nos centramos en dos elementos clave para sostener grupos de innovación, los de trabajadores altamente cualificados y redes. Demostramos que en Grenoble, los clusters se organizan entorno a la información y proyectos, mientras que en Oxfordshire están dominados por el mercado de trabajo y son de carácter orgánico. Demostramos relaciones complementarias entre la formación y aplicación de políticas a nivel nacional y regional. En ambos casos, la importancia del lugar se mantiene en el tiempo, pero por diferentes razones.
    Date: 2020–05–01
  7. By: Patrick Mellacher
    Abstract: I develop a simple Schumpeterian agent-based model where industries are born and evolve endogenously and use it to study the interrelation between technological change, economic growth, market concentration and inequality. This theoretical model combines features of the Schumpeter Mark I (centering around the entrepreneur) and Mark II model (emphasizing the innovative capacities of firms), and is capable of reproducing a large set of stylized facts concerning growth, market concentration, inequality and productivity. In particular, the model can reproduce the industry life-cycle, a Kuznets curve, a Piketty-style increase of inequality in "mature" economies, as well as recent stylized facts on "declining business dynamism". I conduct an extensive policy analysis to identify the parameters that produce these stylized facts in the model. Notably, the empirically-grounded assumption that the difficulty to imitate a firm depends on its technological distance to the imitator can explain prominent stylized facts of economic development since the 1980s. However, growth in the number of industries triggered by the exploitation of new technological opportunities can prove to be a counteracting force to these tendencies in the short run. Thus, the model suggests a wave-like evolution of growth, inequality and market concentration centered around advances in basic research. Extensive sensitivity analysis suggest that policies aimed at increasing the innovative capacities of firms increase the rate of growth of output and real wages (dynamic efficiency) at the expense of increasing market concentration (static inefficiency) and inequality.
    Date: 2021–11

This nep-ino issue is ©2021 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.