|
on Knowledge Management and Knowledge Economy |
|
Issue of 2019‒02‒18
six papers chosen by Laura Ştefănescu Centrul European de Studii Manageriale în Administrarea Afacerilor |
| By: | Marie-Laure Cabon-Dhersin (CREAM - Centre de Recherche en Economie Appliquée à la Mondialisation - UNIROUEN - Université de Rouen Normandie - NU - Normandie Université - IRIHS - Institut de Recherche Interdisciplinaire Homme et Société - UNIROUEN - Université de Rouen Normandie - NU - Normandie Université); Romain Gibert (CREAM - Centre de Recherche en Economie Appliquée à la Mondialisation - UNIROUEN - Université de Rouen Normandie - NU - Normandie Université - IRIHS - Institut de Recherche Interdisciplinaire Homme et Société - UNIROUEN - Université de Rouen Normandie - NU - Normandie Université) |
| Abstract: | In this paper, we compare the distributions of socially optimal public funding between private and public research sectors in cooperative and non-cooperative R&D settings in the presence of externalities. We show that the proportion of public funding allocated to the private sector research always increases with the level of inter-firm spillovers but decreases with the concentration of the industry. This share is smaller (larger) when firms cooperate in R&D than when they do not for high (low) spillovers. Moreover, increases in public knowledge externalities to the private sector due to a closer proximity between the two research sectors increase the share allocated to the public sector regardless of whether firms cooperate or not in R&D. |
| Keywords: | Oligopoly,R&D Cooperation,Spillovers,Knowledge public exter-nalities,public and private research,proximity,Public policy |
| Date: | 2019–02–04 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:hal:wpaper:hal-02006489&r=all |
| By: | Damián Tojeiro-Rivero (AQR-IREA Research Group, University of Barcelona. Department of Econometrics, Statistics and Applied Economics. Av. Diagonal 690, 08034 Barcelona, Spain. Tel.(+34) 934 021 412.); Rosina Moreno (AQR-IREA Research Group, University of Barcelona. Av. Diagonal 690 - 08034 Barcelona (Spain). Tel. +34934021823 - Fax +34934021821.) |
| Abstract: | Much has been said about the role that technological networking activities play on the innovative performance of firms, but little is known about the relevance of the context where the firm is locate shaping the efficiency of such networking activities. In this article we hypothesize that the transformation of firms' networking activities into innovation may vary depending on the regional environment in which the firm is located. For Spanish manufactures in the period 2000-12 and through the use of a multilevel framework, we obtain that after controlling for the firm's characteristics, the regional context has not only a direct effect on firms' innovation performance, but it also conditions the returns to firms' networking activities, although differently in the case of cooperation and outsourcing. Cooperating in innovation activities is more beneficial for those firms located in a knowledge intensive region, whereas R&D outsourcing seems to be more profitable for firms in regions with a low knowledge pool. |
| Keywords: | Technological cooperation, R&D Outsourcing, Local Knowledge Spillovers; Multilevel; Panel data; Spanish Firms, Manufactures. JEL classification: D21, D22, O31, R10, R15 |
| Date: | 2019–02 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:ira:wpaper:201904&r=all |
| By: | Jakub Growiec |
| Abstract: | The article proposes a new conceptual framework for capturing production, R&D, and economic growth in aggregative models which extend their horizon into the digital era. Two key factors of production are considered: hardware, including physical labor, traditional physical capital and programmable hardware, and software, encompassing human cognitive work, pre-programmed software, and artificial intelligence (AI). Hardware and software are complementary in production whereas their constituent components are mutually substitutable. The framework generalizes, among others, the standard model of production with capital and labor, models with capital–skill complementarity and skill-biased technical change, and unified growth theories embracing also the pre-industrial period. It offers a clear conceptual distinction between mechanization and automation as well as between robotization and the development of AI. It delivers sharp, economically intuitive predictions for long-run growth, the evolution of factor shares, and the direction of technical change |
| Keywords: | production function, R&D equation, technological progress, complementarity, automation, artificial intelligence. |
| JEL: | O30 O40 O41 |
| Date: | 2019–02 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:sgh:kaewps:2019042&r=all |
| By: | suhardi, suhardi |
| Abstract: | This study aims to examine the effect of the knowledge of government internal supervisors through the intuition of government internal supervisors to detect irregularities. The sample in this study was the auditor who served at the Regency and municipal Inspectorates in Bangka Belitung totaling 122 respondents. This study uses path analysis to examine the relationship between hypothesized variables. The results of the study concluded that the experience and knowledge of government internal supervisors had a significant effect on deviation detection. In addition to the knowledge of government internal supervisors through government intuition, internal supervisors influence the detection of irregularities. This research needs to be further developed, to get stronger empirical results, such as by adding other variables from deviation detection, further research can also expand the object of research, and use the experimental method. |
| Keywords: | Experience, Knowledge, Intuition, Fraud detection. |
| JEL: | M40 |
| Date: | 2018–12 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:pra:mprapa:92160&r=all |
| By: | Gavrilut, Darie |
| Abstract: | Abstract: The importance and the long term added value of innovation are vital to the success and maturing of each region, country and union. The purpose of this paper is to present several topics related to innovation and to assess the differences, if any, between different European regions as regards their innovation output. It is worth stating the obvious: not all innovation is equally important and not all translates into economic and social wellbeing. Even so, a constant flow of research output is vital for the general socio-economic enhancement. The overall efforts are concentrated in the following areas: renewable energy, education, fin-tech, bio-tech and security. How can regions tap and increase their innovative and creative output are elements that shall be dealt with through this paper. |
| Keywords: | innovation; regional development; knowledge; open source |
| JEL: | O31 Q56 R11 |
| Date: | 2018–12–17 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:pra:mprapa:92084&r=all |
| By: | Ch. BELLÉGO (Insee, Crest); V. DORTET-BERNADET (Insee); M. TÉPAUT (Direction générale des entreprises) |
| Abstract: | In 2005, two mechanisms were set up to support collaborative research and development (R & D) between companies and research organizations. One carried by the National Research Agency (ANR) subsidizes projects that are more oriented towards basic research. The other supported by the Interministerial Fund (FUI) supports R & D activities that are more applied. This study presents a first exploitation of a database concerning these two schemes over the 2007-2014 period. This analysis allows to describe the selected projects, to examine the determinant of the participation of companies, and to investigate the decision of the two organizations to finance or not a project. This work confirms that the ANR and FUI mechanisms pursued different objectives: on average, the projects supported by the ANR are smaller than those supported by the FUI, they involve relatively more public research organizations, and R & D spending per partner is almost three times lower. In addition, in line with the policy of the competitiveness clusters (‘‘Pôles de Compétitivité’’), the FUI program seems to have favored more projects involving partners of the same territory whereas the ANR has more financed distant collaborations and projects with partners located in Ile-de-France. However, the selection process decreases the difference between the two devices: the ANR selects rather large projects, while the FUI rather retains those granting more to research organizations. In addition, the two schemes are aimed at the same very specific population of companies: companies that are already innovative, that carry out more R & D than others, that are more frequently members of a competitiveness cluster, and that have a better knowledge of the public support system for innovation. This last point raises the question of the redundancy of the other devices supporting collaborative R & D created in 2010, which are addressed in principle to the same population of companies. |
| Keywords: | R&D, Innovation, Collaborative R&D, public subsidizes |
| JEL: | D31 L38 O31 O38 |
| Date: | 2018 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:nse:doctra:g2018-10&r=all |