|
on Innovation |
| By: | Lapo Santarlasci; Armando Rungi; Loredana Fattorini; Nestor Maslej |
| Abstract: | Artificial intelligence has become a key arena of global technological competition and a central concern for Europe's quest for technological sovereignty. This paper analyzes global AI patenting from 2010 to 2023 to assess Europe's position in an increasingly bipolar innovation landscape dominated by the United States and China. Using linked patent, firm, ownership, and citation data, we examine the geography, specialization, and international diffusion of AI innovation. We find a highly concentrated patent landscape: China leads in patent volumes, while the United States dominates in citation impact and technological influence. Europe accounts for a limited share of AI patents but exhibits signals of relatively high patent quality. Technological proximity reveals global convergence toward U.S. innovation trajectories, with Europe remaining fragmented rather than forming an autonomous pole. Gravity-model estimates show that cross-border AI knowledge flows are driven primarily by technological capability and specialization, while geographic and institutional factors play a secondary role. EU membership does not significantly enhance intra-European knowledge diffusion, suggesting that technological capacity, rather than political integration, underpins participation in global AI innovation networks. |
| Date: | 2025–12 |
| URL: | https://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:arx:papers:2512.19569 |
| By: | Krieger, Bastian; Scrofani, Stefania; Strecke, Linus |
| Abstract: | This paper explores a novel web-based indicator to examine how firms' disclosure of university ties on their websites shapes their innovation performance. First, using data from the German Community Innovation Survey 2023 and the Tenders Electronic Daily database, combined with firms' discloser of university ties on their website provided by ISTARI.AI, we investigate the indicator's properties by comparing the most frequently disclosed types of university ties: innovation collaborations, university customers, and employee education, with firms' survey responses and their procurement contracts. Second, we analyze how website disclosure of university ties relates to firms' revenues from new or significantly improved products or services, applying Ordinary Least Squares, a Control Function, and Lewbel Instrumental Variable approach. In sum, the website disclosure of ties with universities is significantly associated with its related survey items and procurement contracts. Moreover, website disclosures show no consistent association with revenues from innovations new-to-the-firm. A consistent statistically significant relationship emerges only for small firms, where website disclosures are associated with higher revenues from market novelties. These findings suggest that our web-based indicator captures ties between firms and universities and that disclosing these ties on firms' websites may influence the market success of their novel products. |
| Keywords: | University-Industry Transfer, Innovation Performance, Signaling |
| JEL: | O31 O32 O36 |
| Date: | 2025 |
| URL: | https://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:zbw:zewdip:333900 |
| By: | David Argente; Salomé Baslandze; Douglas Hanley; Sara Moreira |
| Abstract: | We match patents to products using natural language methods applied to detailed product descriptions and patent texts in the consumer goods sector. While more than half of product innovations originate from non-patenting firms, patent filings are on average followed by subsequent product introductions. Yet this relationship weakens with firm size. Patents held by market leaders also yield revenue premiums beyond what can be explained by their own product introductions and are associated with stronger deterrence of competitors’ innovations. To interpret these findings, we develop a simple growth model in which larger firms have stronger incentives to engage in strategic patenting—filing for protection rather than market innovation—which dampens innovation and slows creative destruction. |
| JEL: | L1 O3 |
| Date: | 2025–12 |
| URL: | https://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:nbr:nberwo:34592 |
| By: | Zoë B. Cullen; Ester Faia; Elisa Guglielminetti; Ricardo Perez-Truglia; Concetta Rondinelli |
| Abstract: | We present the first large-scale field experiment test of strategic complementarities in firms’ technology adoption. Our experiment was embedded in a Bank of Italy survey covering around 3, 000 firms. We elicited firms’ beliefs about competitors’ adoption of two advanced technologies: Artificial Intelligence (AI) and robotics. We randomly provided half of the sample with accurate information about adoption rates. Most firms substantially underestimated competitors’ current adoption, and when provided with information, they updated their expectations about competitors’ future adoption. The information increased firms’ own intended future adoption of robotics, although we do not observe a significant effect on AI adoption. Our findings provide causal evidence on coordination in innovation and illustrate how information frictions shape technology diffusion. |
| JEL: | C93 D22 L21 O33 |
| Date: | 2025–12 |
| URL: | https://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:nbr:nberwo:34532 |
| By: | Riku Watanabe |
| Abstract: | This study incorporates two heterogeneous industries into an endogenous growth model within the framework of a circular economy. In the model, industries are classified as either brown or green, and each can transition between states through R&D activities related to innovation and greening. Greening R&D is conducted exclusively by firms in the brown industry and enables the transition to the green industry. We analyze the effects of subsidies for greening R&D and show that such subsidies increases labor allocation to both innovation and greening R&D. As a result, the model yields win-win outcome: economic growth is promoted not only by productivity-driven growth acceleration but also by a decline in the share of brown industries that rely on exhaustible resources, which mitigates the negative impact of resource depletion on growth. These findings suggest that advancing a circular economy can be compatible with sustained economic growth. |
| Date: | 2025–05 |
| URL: | https://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:dpr:wpaper:1286r |
| By: | Roth, Felix; Rammer, Christian |
| Abstract: | Intangible assets have increasingly been identified as a main source of productivity gains. Since the pioneering work by Corrado, Hulten, and Sichel (2005), empirical research has largely focused on macro and industry-level studies, while firm-level studies have often been confined to a limited set of intangible assets, especially Research and Development (R&D). This paper employs a unique firm-level panel database that contains information on four types of intangible assets: R&D, software & databases (S&D), firm-specific human capital (HC), and brand value (BV). For R&D, we find much lower productivity returns than for S&D and HC. R&D even loses significance once controlling for other intangibles, except for high-tech manufacturing. In contrast to R&D, we find that S&D and HC tend to be the primary drivers of productivity gains, particularly in services. Our findings have implications for research policy, suggesting a stronger focus on supporting investment in non-R&D intangibles, including S&D and HC. |
| Keywords: | Non-R&D intangibles, productivity, R&D, digitalisation, firm-specific human capital, brand value, firm-level panel data |
| JEL: | E22 O33 O38 D24 |
| Date: | 2025 |
| URL: | https://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:zbw:zewdip:333901 |
| By: | Tadhg Ryan-Charleton (Motu Economic and Public Policy Research); Conor O’Kane (University of Otago); Dean Hyslop (Motu Economic and Public Policy Research); David C. Maré (Motu Economic and Public Policy Research); Amelia Blamey (Motu Economic and Public Policy Research) |
| Abstract: | The Research and Development Tax Incentive (RDTI) was introduced on 1 April 2019 to encourage business innovation, by offering a 15% tax credit on eligible research and development (R&D) expenditure. It replaced the R&D Growth Grants scheme, which closed to new applicants in 2019 and was phased out in 2021. The legislation introducing the RDTI specifies that an objective and independent evaluation of the scheme must be laid before the House of Representatives every five years. Motu Research was engaged by MBIE to lead the first five-year evaluation. Motu Research worked with the University of Otago, who contributed qualitative and subject-specific expertise to the evaluation. Our team was asked to address five questions focusing on the impact of the RDTI (and of other types of government R&D support to businesses), as well as the RDTI’s compliance costs, administrative processes and legal requirements. We were also asked to consider a sixth question — how certain conclusions from our evaluation would be affected by changes to three specific policy settings. We addressed these questions using a mixed methods approach, combining quantitative analysis of survey and administrative data with qualitative insights from interviews with key stakeholders. The quantitative approach relied primarily on statistical analysis of data from Statistics New Zealand’s Longitudinal Business Database, with our descriptive analysis also drawing on other administrative data sources. The qualitative analysis used data from 67 semi-structured interviews we conducted with 84 participants. This includes 41 interviews with firms, 10 with RDTI operational team members, 5 with policy experts and 11 with professional tax advisors. Our quantitative analysis found firms supported by the RDTI spent more on R&D than they would have in the absence of RDTI support. The difference was stronger for smaller firms. Annual R&D expenditure was on average $274, 000 higher per firm because of RDTI support. The total additional R&D expenditure generated by the RDTI was $1.83 billion. For every $1 of government spend, firms invested $1.40 in additional R&D, which is similar to OECD benchmarks. The additional R&D stimulated by the RDTI was estimated to generate an impact on New Zealand’s GDP of $6.77 billion (mid-point of a range estimate), which suggests an overall economic impact of 4.2 times government investment. Our qualitative analysis suggested significant RDTI compliance costs were more than offset by the ability to access greater levels of R&D support. Most firms indicated the RDTI had a positive impact on their R&D activities and business outcomes. Several firms with international operations explained the RDTI is influential in attracting and retaining R&D work in Aotearoa New Zealand. There was also a strong indication that businesses prefer policy stability, with the implication that instability leads to lower R&D expenditure and lower uptake. |
| Keywords: | Public funding for business R&D, business innovation, technology and innovation policy, RDTI, New Zealand |
| JEL: | O38 O31 D22 |
| Date: | 2025–12–19 |
| URL: | https://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:mtu:wpaper:25_11 |
| By: | Julius Koschnick |
| Abstract: | What was the origin of modern economic growth? Joel Mokyr has argued that self-sustained modern economic growth originated from a feedback loop between propositional (theoretical) and prescriptive (applied) knowledge, which turned positive in the eighteenth century during the "Industrial Enlightenment". While influential, this thesis has never been directly tested. This paper provides the first quantitative evidence by estimating the impact of knowledge spillovers between propositional and prescriptive knowledge on innovation in England, 1600-1800. For this, it introduces two new text-based measures for 1) the innovativeness of publications and 2) knowledge spillovers. The paper finds strong evidence that a feedback loop between propositional and prescriptive knowledge became positive during the second half of the eighteenth century. It also documents that this process had positive effects on the real economy as measured through patents. Overall, the findings provide empirical support for Mokyr's original hypothesis. |
| Date: | 2025–12 |
| URL: | https://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:arx:papers:2512.16587 |
| By: | Dreier, Lukas (University of Jena); Göthner, Maximilian (University of Twente); Lawson, Cornelia (University of Manchester) |
| Abstract: | Academically trained scientists play a pivotal role in innovation by advancing the knowledge frontier across industries, prompting firms to increasingly engage in proactive recruitment. This paper investigates academic scientists’ career transitions into industry by jointly examining two often separately studied mechanisms: scientists’ intentions to leave academia (the supply side) and firms’ recruitment efforts (the demand side). We conceptualize intersectoral mobility as the outcome of how these two mechanisms align or diverge. Using survey data from 469 scientists in Germany linked to follow-up information on their actual career outcomes more than three years later, our results show that exit intentions are the predominant predictor of subsequent transitions into industry jobs. Job offers reinforce the impact of existing exit intentions. By contrast, scientists who receive a job offer but do not intend to leave academia are the least likely to transition to private-sector employment. Implications for firms’ active recruiting strategies and for universities seeking to retain scientific staff are discussed. |
| Keywords: | exit intentions, knowledge transfer, industry transition, career mobility, academic scientists, job offers |
| JEL: | J63 O31 J24 |
| Date: | 2025–12 |
| URL: | https://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:iza:izadps:dp18347 |