IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jmathe/v8y2020i5p797-d358106.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Multi-Criteria Reference Point Based Approach for Assessing Regional Innovation Performance in Spain

Author

Listed:
  • Ana Garcia-Bernabeu

    (Department of Economy and Social Sciences, Campus of Alcoi, Universitat Politècnica de València, 03801 Alcoi, Spain)

  • José Manuel Cabello

    (Department of Applied Economics (Mathematics), Universidad de Málaga, 29071 Málaga, Spain)

  • Francisco Ruiz

    (Department of Applied Economics (Mathematics), Universidad de Málaga, 29071 Málaga, Spain)

Abstract

The evaluation of regional innovation performance through composite innovation indices can serve as a valuable tool for policy-making. While discussion on the best methodology to construct composite innovation indices continues, we are interested in deepening the use of reference levels and the aggregation issue. So far, additive aggregation methods are, largely, the most widespread aggregation rule, thus allowing for full compensability among single indicators. In this paper, we present an integrated assessment methodology to evaluate regional innovation performance using the Multi-Reference Point based Weak and Strong Composite Indicator (MRP-WSCI) approach, which allows defining reference levels and different degrees of compensability. As an example of application to the Regional Innovation Scoreboard, the proposed technique is developed to measure the innovation performance of Spain’s regions taking into account Spanish and European reference levels. The main features of the proposed approach are: (i) absolute or relative reference levels could be previously defined by the decision maker; (ii) by establishing the reference levels, the resulting composite innovation index is an easy-to-interpret measure; and (iii) the non-compensatory strong composite indicator provides an additional layer of information for policy-making (iv) a visualization tool called Light-Diagram is proposed to track the specific strengths and weaknesses of the regions’ innovation performance.

Suggested Citation

  • Ana Garcia-Bernabeu & José Manuel Cabello & Francisco Ruiz, 2020. "A Multi-Criteria Reference Point Based Approach for Assessing Regional Innovation Performance in Spain," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 8(5), pages 1-21, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jmathe:v:8:y:2020:i:5:p:797-:d:358106
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2227-7390/8/5/797/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2227-7390/8/5/797/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Frane Adam, 2014. "Measuring National Innovation Performance," SpringerBriefs in Economics, Springer, edition 127, number 978-3-642-39464-5, October.
    2. Grupp, Hariolf & Mogee, Mary Ellen, 2004. "Indicators for national science and technology policy: how robust are composite indicators?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(9), pages 1373-1384, November.
    3. Wulong Gu & Jianmin Tang, 2004. "Link between innovation and productivity in Canadian manufacturing industries," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 13(7), pages 671-686.
    4. Buesa, Mikel & Heijs, Joost & Baumert, Thomas, 2010. "The determinants of regional innovation in Europe: A combined factorial and regression knowledge production function approach," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(6), pages 722-735, July.
    5. Edquist , Charles & Zabala-Iturriagagoitia , Jon Mikel, 2015. "The Innovation Union Scoreboard is Flawed: The case of Sweden – not being the innovation leader of the EU," Papers in Innovation Studies 2015/16, Lund University, CIRCLE - Centre for Innovation Research.
    6. F Ruiz & J M Cabello & M Luque, 2011. "An application of reference point techniques to the calculation of synthetic sustainability indicators," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 62(1), pages 189-197, January.
    7. Hauser, Christoph & Siller, Matthias & Schatzer, Thomas & Walde, Janette & Tappeiner, Gottfried, 2018. "Measuring regional innovation: A critical inspection of the ability of single indicators to shape technological change," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 129(C), pages 43-55.
    8. Teemu Makkonen & Robert P. Have, 2013. "Benchmarking regional innovative performance: composite measures and direct innovation counts," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 94(1), pages 247-262, January.
    9. Giarlotta, Alfio, 2001. "Multicriteria compensability analysis," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 133(1), pages 190-209, August.
    10. Hollenstein, Heinz, 1996. "A composite indicator of a firm's innovativeness. An empirical analysis based on survey data for Swiss manufacturing," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 25(4), pages 633-645, June.
    11. Giuseppe Munda & Michela Nardo, 2009. "Noncompensatory/nonlinear composite indicators for ranking countries: a defensible setting," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 41(12), pages 1513-1523.
    12. Edquist , Charles & Zabala-Iturriagagoitia , Jon Mikel, 2015. "The Innovation Union Scoreboard is flawed: The Case of Sweden – not the innovation leader of the EU – updated version," Papers in Innovation Studies 2015/27, Lund University, CIRCLE - Centre for Innovation Research.
    13. Andreas Schibany & Gerhard Streicher, 2008. "The European Innovation Scoreboard: drowning by numbers?," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 35(10), pages 717-732, December.
    14. Jianmin Tang & Can Le, 2007. "Multidimensional Innovation and Productivity," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 16(7), pages 501-516.
    15. Diaz-Balteiro, L & González-Pachón, J. & Romero, C., 2017. "Measuring systems sustainability with multi-criteria methods: A critical review," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 258(2), pages 607-616.
    16. Matteo Mazziotta & Adriano Pareto, 2018. "Measuring Well-Being Over Time: The Adjusted Mazziotta–Pareto Index Versus Other Non-compensatory Indices," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 136(3), pages 967-976, April.
    17. Mikel Navarro & Juan José Gibaja & Beñat Bilbao-Osorio & Ricardo Aguado, 2009. "Patterns of Innovation in EU-25 Regions: A Typology and Policy Recommendations," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 27(5), pages 815-840, October.
    18. Roberta Capello & Camilla Lenzi, 2013. "Territorial patterns of innovation: a taxonomy of innovative regions in Europe," The Annals of Regional Science, Springer;Western Regional Science Association, vol. 51(1), pages 119-154, August.
    19. Grupp, Hariolf & Schubert, Torben, 2010. "Review and new evidence on composite innovation indicators for evaluating national performance," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(1), pages 67-78, February.
    20. Simon Feeny & Mark Rogers, 2003. "Innovation and Performance: Benchmarking Australian Firms," Australian Economic Review, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research, vol. 36(3), pages 253-264, September.
    21. Di Cagno, Daniela & Fabrizi, Andrea & Meliciani, Valentina & Wanzenböck, Iris, 2016. "The impact of relational spillovers from joint research projects on knowledge creation across European regions," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 108(C), pages 83-94.
    22. Hugo Pinto, 2009. "The Diversity of Innovation in the European Union: Mapping Latent Dimensions and Regional Profiles," European Planning Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 17(2), pages 303-326, February.
    23. Carayannis, Elias G. & Goletsis, Yorgos & Grigoroudis, Evangelos, 2018. "Composite innovation metrics: MCDA and the Quadruple Innovation Helix framework," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 131(C), pages 4-17.
    24. Ruiz, Francisco & Cabello, José M. & Pérez-Gladish, Blanca, 2018. "Building Ease-of-Doing-Business synthetic indicators using a double reference point approach," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 131(C), pages 130-140.
    25. Salvatore Greco & Alessio Ishizaka & Menelaos Tasiou & Gianpiero Torrisi, 2019. "On the Methodological Framework of Composite Indices: A Review of the Issues of Weighting, Aggregation, and Robustness," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 141(1), pages 61-94, January.
    26. Bjorn Asheim & Helen Lawton Smith & Christine Oughton, 2011. "Regional Innovation Systems: Theory, Empirics and Policy," Regional Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 45(7), pages 875-891.
    27. El Gibari, Samira & Gómez, Trinidad & Ruiz, Francisco, 2018. "Evaluating university performance using reference point based composite indicators," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 12(4), pages 1235-1250.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Antonio Jiménez-Martín, 2022. "Special Issue “Recent Advances and Applications in Multi Criteria Decision Analysis”," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 10(13), pages 1-3, July.
    2. Yaliu Yang & Yuan Wang & Yingyan Zhang & Conghu Liu, 2022. "Data-Driven Coupling Coordination Development of Regional Innovation EROB Composite System: An Integrated Model Perspective," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 10(13), pages 1-25, June.
    3. Matheus Pereira Libório & Lívia Maria Leite Silva & Petr Iakovlevitch Ekel & Letícia Ribeiro Figueiredo & Patrícia Bernardes, 2022. "Consensus-Based Sub-Indicator Weighting Approach: Constructing Composite Indicators Compatible with Expert Opinion," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 164(3), pages 1073-1099, December.
    4. Ana Garcia-Bernabeu & José Manuel Cabello & Francisco Ruiz, 2022. "A Reference Point-Based Proposal to Build Regional Quality of Life Composite Indicators," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 164(1), pages 11-30, November.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Hauser, Christoph & Siller, Matthias & Schatzer, Thomas & Walde, Janette & Tappeiner, Gottfried, 2018. "Measuring regional innovation: A critical inspection of the ability of single indicators to shape technological change," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 129(C), pages 43-55.
    2. Teemu Makkonen & Robert P. Have, 2013. "Benchmarking regional innovative performance: composite measures and direct innovation counts," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 94(1), pages 247-262, January.
    3. Edquist , Charles & Zabala-Iturriagagoitia , Jon Mikel, 2015. "The Innovation Union Scoreboard is flawed: The Case of Sweden – not the innovation leader of the EU – updated version," Papers in Innovation Studies 2015/27, Lund University, CIRCLE - Centre for Innovation Research.
    4. Bresciani, Stefano & Puertas, Rosa & Ferraris, Alberto & Santoro, Gabriele, 2021. "Innovation, environmental sustainability and economic development: DEA-Bootstrap and multilevel analysis to compare two regions," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 172(C).
    5. Ruiz, Francisco & El Gibari, Samira & Cabello, José M. & Gómez, Trinidad, 2020. "MRP-WSCI: Multiple reference point based weak and strong composite indicators," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 95(C).
    6. Ganau, Roberto & Grandinetti, Roberto, 2021. "Disentangling regional innovation capability: what really matters?," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 114921, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    7. José Manuel Cabello & Francisco Ruiz & Blanca Pérez-Gladish, 2021. "An Alternative Aggregation Process for Composite Indexes: An Application to the Heritage Foundation Economic Freedom Index," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 153(2), pages 443-467, January.
    8. Paredes-Frigolett, Harold & Pyka, Andreas & Leoneti, Alexandre Bevilacqua, 2021. "On the performance and strategy of innovation systems: A multicriteria group decision analysis approach," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 67(C).
    9. Matthias Siller & Christoph Hauser & Janette Walde & Gottfried Tappeiner, 2015. "Measuring regional innovation in one dimension: More lost than gained?," Working Papers 2015-14, Faculty of Economics and Statistics, Universität Innsbruck.
    10. Nasierowski Wojciech, 2019. "Reflections on Discussions About Technical Efficiency of Innovativeness of Countries," Foundations of Management, Sciendo, vol. 11(1), pages 165-176, January.
    11. Milica Maricic & Jose A. Egea & Veljko Jeremic, 2019. "A Hybrid Enhanced Scatter Search—Composite I-Distance Indicator (eSS-CIDI) Optimization Approach for Determining Weights Within Composite Indicators," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 144(2), pages 497-537, July.
    12. Eva Švandová & Michal Jirásek, 2019. "On Measuring Countries' Innovation Performance: Organisational Level Perspective," Acta Universitatis Agriculturae et Silviculturae Mendelianae Brunensis, Mendel University Press, vol. 67(3), pages 871-881.
    13. Dziallas, Marisa & Blind, Knut, 2019. "Innovation indicators throughout the innovation process: An extensive literature analysis," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 80, pages 3-29.
    14. Khatab Alqararah, 2023. "Assessing the robustness of composite indicators: the case of the Global Innovation Index," Journal of Innovation and Entrepreneurship, Springer, vol. 12(1), pages 1-22, December.
    15. Carayannis, Elias G. & Goletsis, Yorgos & Grigoroudis, Evangelos, 2018. "Composite innovation metrics: MCDA and the Quadruple Innovation Helix framework," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 131(C), pages 4-17.
    16. Zofio, Jose Luis & Aparicio, Juan & Barbero, Javier & Zabala-Iturriagagoitia, Jon Mikel, 2023. "The influence of bottlenecks on innovation systems performance: Put the slowest climber first," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 193(C).
    17. Janger, Jürgen & Schubert, Torben & Andries, Petra & Rammer, Christian & Hoskens, Machteld, 2017. "The EU 2020 innovation indicator: A step forward in measuring innovation outputs and outcomes?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(1), pages 30-42.
    18. Marek Walesiak & Grażyna Dehnel, 2023. "A Measurement of Social Cohesion in Poland’s NUTS2 Regions in the Period 2010–2019 by Applying Dynamic Relative Taxonomy to Interval-Valued Data," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(4), pages 1-21, February.
    19. Carayannis, Elias G. & Grigoroudis, Evangelos & Wurth, Bernd, 2022. "OR for entrepreneurial ecosystems: A problem-oriented review and agenda," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 300(3), pages 791-808.
    20. Salvatore Greco & Alessio Ishizaka & Menelaos Tasiou & Gianpiero Torrisi, 2019. "On the Methodological Framework of Composite Indices: A Review of the Issues of Weighting, Aggregation, and Robustness," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 141(1), pages 61-94, January.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jmathe:v:8:y:2020:i:5:p:797-:d:358106. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.