|
on Innovation |
| By: | Lukas Rosenberger; W. Walker Hanlon; Carl Hallmann |
| Abstract: | How did Britain sustain faster rates of economic growth than comparable European countries, such as France, during the Industrial Revolution? We argue that Britain possessed an important but underappreciated innovation advantage: British inventors worked in technologies that were more central within the innovation network. We offer a new approach for measuring the innovation network using patent data from Britain and France in the late-18th and early-19th century. We show that the network influenced innovation outcomes and demonstrate that British inventors worked in more central technologies within the innovation network than French inventors. Drawing on recently developed theoretical tools, and using a novel estimation strategy, we quantify the implications for technology growth rates in Britain compared to France. Our results indicate that the shape of the innovation network, and the location of British inventors within it, explains an important share of the more rapid technological change and industrial growth in Britain during the Industrial Revolution. |
| JEL: | N13 O30 |
| Date: | 2024–08 |
| URL: | https://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:nbr:nberwo:32875 |
| By: | Giacomo Damioli; Vincent Van Roy; Daniel Vertesy; Marco Vivarelli |
| Abstract: | Artificial intelligence (AI) is emerging as a transformative innovation with the potential to drive significant economic growth and productivity gains. This study examines whether AI is initiating a technological revolution, signifying a new technological paradigm, using the perspective of evolutionary neo-Schumpeterian economics. Using a global dataset combining information on AI patenting activities and their applicants between 2000 and 2016, our analysis reveals that AI patenting has accelerated and substantially evolved in terms of its pervasiveness, with AI innovators shifting from the ICT core industries to non-ICT service industries over the investigated period. Moreover, there has been a decrease in concentration of innovation activities and a reshuffling in the innovative hierarchies, with innovative entries and young and smaller applicants driving this change. Finally, we find that AI technologies play a role in generating and accelerating further innovations (so revealing to be “enabling technologies”, a distinctive feature of GPTs). All these features have characterised the emergence of major technological paradigms in the past and suggest that AI technologies may indeed generate a paradigmatic shift. |
| Keywords: | Artificial Intelligence, Patents, Structural Change, Technological Paradigm |
| Date: | 2024–08–14 |
| URL: | https://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:ete:msiper:746877 |
| By: | D’Alessandro, Francesco (Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore); Santarelli, Enrico (University of Bologna); Vivarelli, Marco (Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore) |
| Abstract: | In this paper we integrate the insights of the Knowledge Spillover Theory of Entrepreneurship and Innovation (KSTE+I) with Schumpeter's idea that innovative entrepreneurs creatively apply available local knowledge, possibly mediated by Marshallian, Jacobian and Porter spillovers. In more detail, in this study we assess the degree of pervasiveness and the level of opportunities brought about by AI technologies by testing the possible correlation between the regional AI knowledge stock and the number of new innovative ventures (that is startups patenting in any technological field in the year of their foundation). Empirically, by focusing on 287 Nuts-2 European regions, we test whether the local AI stock of knowledge exerts an enabling role in fostering innovative entry within AI-related local industries (AI technologies as focused enablers) and within non AI-related local industries, as well (AI technologies as generalised enablers). Results from Negative Binomial fixed-effect and Poisson fixed-effect regressions (controlled for a variety of concurrent drivers of entrepreneurship) reveal that the local AI knowledge stock does promote the spread of innovative startups, so supporting both the KSTE+I approach and the enabling role of AI technologies; however, this relationship is confirmed only with regard to the sole high-tech/AI-related industries. |
| Keywords: | KSTE+I, Artificial Intelligence, innovative entry, enabling technologies |
| JEL: | O33 L26 |
| Date: | 2024–08 |
| URL: | https://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:iza:izadps:dp17206 |
| By: | Dirk Czarnitzki; Malte Prüfer |
| Abstract: | This paper investigates the impact of Public Procurement of Innovation (PPI) and Research and Development (R&D) grants on firms' R&D investment using data from Belgian R&D-active firms over the past decade. Our empirical analysis robustly reveals a non-negligible crowding-out effect between the two instruments, suggesting a substitutive relationship. While each policy individually positively influences R&D investment, their combined implementation diminishes their effectiveness. These results challenge prevailing evidence and emphasize the need for a careful policy implementation, raising policymakers’ awareness against a blanket increase in innovation policies without considering potential interactions. |
| Keywords: | Public procurement of innovation, Research and Development, Econometric policy evaluation, Crowding-out |
| Date: | 2024–08–14 |
| URL: | https://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:ete:msiper:746875 |
| By: | Machteld Hoskens; Koenraad Debackere |
| Abstract: | Given the importance of innovation for economic growth, many countries conduct innovation surveys. International guidelines for such measurement have been established (OECD/Eurostat, 2018). The European Commission has made the measurement of innovation mandatory for EU member states. Many differences remain, however, between countries in the practical implementation of measuring innovation at the firm level, which complicates cross-country comparability. We conducted a randomized experiment in which we randomly assigned enterprises a long or a short form for measuring their innovation activities. We found clear differences between the two types of forms. We discuss implications of this work and put this in the broader perspective of other work done investigating questionnaire design issues in innovation surveys. |
| Keywords: | questionnaire design, innovation survey, randomized experiment, questionnaire length, shortened survey form, nonresponse survey |
| Date: | 2024–08–19 |
| URL: | https://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:ete:msiper:747238 |