|
on Knowledge Management and Knowledge Economy |
|
Issue of 2025–07–14
five papers chosen by Laura Nicola-Gavrila, Centrul European de Studii Manageriale în Administrarea Afacerilor |
| By: | Joshua S. Gans |
| Abstract: | This paper develops a transparent, simplified version of Carnehl and Schneider (2025)’s model of knowledge creation. Our tractable framework, which yields closed-form solutions for key welfare trade-offs, preserves the essential economic mechanisms while eliminating mathematical complexity. We derive four main insights. First, contrary to the original model’s emphasis on “moonshots, ” our analysis demonstrates that expanding knowledge and then deepening it (the moonshot approach) is never socially optimal under direct welfare comparisons. The original model’s case for moonshots relies on second-best arguments involving research costs and dynamic externalities, not on direct welfare considerations. Second, we identify a novel misalignment between private and social incentives in multidisciplinary research contexts. Even without research costs — where the original model predicts perfect alignment — researchers bridging large knowledge gaps between disciplines choose locations that create suboptimal knowledge structures. Third, we analyse how citation-based incentive systems affect knowledge creation trajectories. We show that systems privileging unique contributions over shared ones align private behaviour with social welfare objectives, while those rewarding shared contributions lead to excessive knowledge deepening. Fourth, our analysis provides precise characterisations of optimal knowledge creation paths under various initial conditions and offers clear guidance for science policy. By clarifying when interventions can address misalignments between researchers’ incentives and social welfare, our simplified model offers practical insights for the design of research funding mechanisms. |
| JEL: | D83 O31 |
| Date: | 2025–05 |
| URL: | https://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:nbr:nberwo:33815 |
| By: | Amitabh Chandra; Connie Xu |
| Abstract: | Fundamental knowledge in the life sciences has consequential implications for medicine and subsequent medical innovations. Using publications in leading life science journals to measure fundamental knowledge, we document large agglomerations in the institutions where it is discovered and a robust correlation between knowledge and subsequent citations in patents. We assess whether the institution where research is produced affects the output of scientists by using a scientist-mover design, which compares annual research output before and after a move for the same scientist. Between 50 − 60% of a scientist’s research output is attributable to the institution where they work, and two thirds of this effect is driven by the presence of star researchers. The magnitude of these effects has not decreased in more recent time periods, in the wake of technologies that make cross-institution collaborations easier, nor is it larger for moves to larger agglomerations, nor concentrated in particular scientific fields. We discuss the implications of these findings for research allocations in science and scientists’ leaving one institution for another. |
| JEL: | H5 I2 O3 |
| Date: | 2025–07 |
| URL: | https://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:nbr:nberwo:33996 |
| By: | James Driver |
| Abstract: | I analyze whether a change in patent systems differentially affects firm-level innovation investments at patent-valuing firms of different sizes. Using legally required, economically representative, U.S. Census Bureau microdata, I separate firms into groups based on a firm’s response to a question asking it to rank the degree of patent importance to its business and firm-size. I then measure how firms’ innovation inputs/outputs respond to the America Invents Act (AIA). Results show the AIA reduced innovation investments at smaller, patent-valuing firms while increasing innovation investments at larger, patent-valuing firms, highlighting differential firm-size effects of patent policy and policy’s importance to investments. |
| Keywords: | Investments, innovation, patents, firm size |
| JEL: | L25 O3 O51 |
| Date: | 2025–05 |
| URL: | https://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:cen:wpaper:25-31 |
| By: | Salmi, Jamil; Amegah, Alice; Shinde, Aarya Rajendra |
| Abstract: | This study explores the link between digital skills, innovation, and economic transformation in the context of Africa, focusing on the role and potential contribution of higher education institutions in the development of advanced skills for the digital transition. It documents relevant global case studies from Asia, Australia, Europe, and North America that showcase good examples of investment in skills development through higher education and their impact on innovation and economic growth. The study investigates the evolving global demand for digital skills and explores how advanced digital skills can create new economic development opportunities for Africa and help solve the big challenges faced by the subcontinent, such as food security, health threats, learning poverty, and climate change. It takes stock of existing capacities for digital skills training in Sub-Saharan Africa and proposes a bold vision for improving and expanding digital skills education programs. |
| Date: | 2025–06–30 |
| URL: | https://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:wbk:hdgens:203093 |
| By: | Nobuya FUKUGAWA |
| Abstract: | This study investigates the impact of Technology Extension Services (TES) on the productivity of small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) in Japan, using an Endogenous Switching Regression model and firm-level panel data covering both the pre-pandemic (2016–2019) and pandemic (2020–2023) periods. Focusing on Kohsetsushi , Japan’s extensive network of public support institutes for SMEs, the analysis finds that TES adoption significantly improves firm productivity across both periods, highlighting its role as a locally embedded innovation intermediary. Firms with higher levels of intangible capital benefited more, with complementary effects particularly pronounced during the pandemic—suggesting that absorptive capacity became critical under crisis conditions. Selection estimates reveal that more productive firms were more likely to adopt TES, although some equally capable firms opted out—consistent with comparative advantage shaping self-selection patterns. Geographic proximity to service providers constrained TES access in stable periods but became less critical during the pandemic due to the expansion of digital service delivery. These findings underscore how firm capabilities, external shocks, and spatial access jointly influence the effectiveness of public technology support programs. |
| Date: | 2025–07 |
| URL: | https://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:eti:dpaper:25064 |