IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ssi/jouesi/v8y2020i2p285-310.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A novel composite index for regional innovation assessment with an application to Egyptian governorates

Author

Listed:
  • Motaz Khorshid

    (Cairo University, Egypt)

  • Mohamed Ramadan A. Rezk

    (Academy of Scientific Research & Technology, Egypt)

  • Mohamed Ismail

    (Cairo University, Egypt)

  • Amr Radwan

    (Academy of Scientific Research & Technology, Egypt)

  • Mahmoud M. Sakr

    (Academy of Scientific Research & Technology, Egypt)

Abstract

Innovation can be classified based on the type of its outcome which includes knowledge and technology, creative and cultural outcomes in addition to intangible assets. Innovation composite index is generally designed with the purpose of estimating the innovation capabilities and competencies of different governorates or regions. In this work, a governorate innovation composite index (GICI) is constructed and applied to the Egyptian governorates to evaluate the efficiency and effectiveness of adopted innovation measures and policies in these regions along with the assessment of the societal impact. Considering standard type of innovation composite indicators, the Egyptian index proposed in this work is conceptually broken down into a set of innovation inputs and outputs composing its production function. Inputs are divided into factors which are used to produce innovation output while considering specific enabling factors. The application of the innovation governorate index to the Egyptian context has delineated general as well as specific results. First, Innovation performance of governorates measured by the value of the composite index, shows a moderate attitude, whereas input sub-pillars for governorates are however on the low side. In light of this finding, Egypt’s government needs to consolidate efforts towards enhancing the capacity of innovation inputs. Second, the mean value of the governorates output pillar ranged from 53 to 99 percent. Based on this finding, the Egyptian government needs to adopt an integrated policy package to achieve the balance between input and output parameters of innovation. Finally, this paper suggests that the difference in innovation performance between regions should be considered as an important part in developing national innovation strategies.

Suggested Citation

  • Motaz Khorshid & Mohamed Ramadan A. Rezk & Mohamed Ismail & Amr Radwan & Mahmoud M. Sakr, 2020. "A novel composite index for regional innovation assessment with an application to Egyptian governorates," Entrepreneurship and Sustainability Issues, VsI Entrepreneurship and Sustainability Center, vol. 8(2), pages 285-310, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:ssi:jouesi:v:8:y:2020:i:2:p:285-310
    DOI: 10.9770/jesi.2020.8.2(17)
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://jssidoi.org/jesi/uploads/articles/30/Khorshid_A_novel_composite_index_for_regional_innovation_assessment_with_an_application_to_Egyptian_governorates.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://jssidoi.org/jesi/article/699
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.9770/jesi.2020.8.2(17)?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. 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.
    2. Furman, Jeffrey L. & Porter, Michael E. & Stern, Scott, 2002. "The determinants of national innovative capacity," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 31(6), pages 899-933, August.
    3. Amr Radwan, 2018. "Science and innovation policies in North African Countries: Exploring challenges and opportunities," Entrepreneurship and Sustainability Issues, VsI Entrepreneurship and Sustainability Center, vol. 6(1), pages 268-282, September.
    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. Song, Malin & Peng, Licheng & Shang, Yuping & Zhao, Xin, 2022. "Green technology progress and total factor productivity of resource-based enterprises: A perspective of technical compensation of environmental regulation," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 174(C).

    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. 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.
    2. Proksch, Dorian & Haberstroh, Marcus Max & Pinkwart, Andreas, 2017. "Increasing the national innovative capacity: Identifying the pathways to success using a comparative method," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 116(C), pages 256-270.
    3. 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).
    4. Barbero, Javier & Zabala-Iturriagagoitia, Jon Mikel & Zofío, José L., 2021. "Is more always better? On the relevance of decreasing returns to scale on innovation," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 107(C).
    5. Bruno Brandão Fischer & Maxim Kotsemir & Dirk Meissner & Ekaterina Streltsova, 2020. "Patents for evidence-based decision-making and smart specialisation," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 45(6), pages 1748-1774, December.
    6. Alejandro Barragán-Ocaña & Gerardo Reyes-Ruiz & Samuel Olmos-Peña & Hortensia Gómez-Viquez, 2020. "Approach to the identification of an alternative technological innovation index," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 122(1), pages 23-45, January.
    7. Lichtenthaler, Ulrich & Ernst, Holger, 2007. "Developing reputation to overcome the imperfections in the markets for knowledge," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(1), pages 37-55, February.
    8. Bruno Ferreira Oliveira & Rodolfo Tomás Fonseca Nicolay, 2022. "Does innovative capacity affect the deindustrialization process? A panel data analysis," Journal of Economic Structures, Springer;Pan-Pacific Association of Input-Output Studies (PAPAIOS), vol. 11(1), pages 1-36, December.
    9. Jon Mikel Zabala-Iturriagagoitia & Fernando Jiménez-Sáez & Elena Castro-Martínez & Antonio Gutiérrez-Gracia, 2007. "What indicators do (or do not) tell us about Regional Innovation Systems," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 70(1), pages 85-106, January.
    10. Kumar, Sanjesh & Singh, Baljeet, 2019. "Barriers to the international diffusion of technological innovations," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 82(C), pages 74-86.
    11. Sari Pekkala Kerr & William R. Kerr & William F. Lincoln, 2015. "Skilled Immigration and the Employment Structures of US Firms," Journal of Labor Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 33(S1), pages 147-186.
    12. Herzer Dierk, 2022. "Semi-endogenous Versus Schumpeterian Growth Models: A Critical Review of the Literature and New Evidence," Review of Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 73(1), pages 1-55, April.
    13. Sapir, Andre & Aghion, Philippe & Bertola, Giuseppe & Hellwig, Martin & Pisani-Ferry, Jean & Rosati, Dariusz & Vinals, Jose & Wallace, Helen, 2004. "An Agenda for a Growing Europe: The Sapir Report," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780199271498.
    14. Arie Y Lewin & Silvia Massini & Carine Peeters, 2020. "Absorptive capacity, socially enabling mechanisms, and the role of learning from trial and error experiments: A tribute to Dan Levinthal’s contribution to international business research," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 51(9), pages 1568-1579, December.
    15. de Rassenfosse, Gaétan & Schoen, Anja & Wastyn, Annelies, 2014. "Selection bias in innovation studies: A simple test," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 81(C), pages 287-299.
    16. Anil K. Gupta & Paul E. Tesluk & M. Susan Taylor, 2007. "Innovation At and Across Multiple Levels of Analysis," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 18(6), pages 885-897, December.
    17. Hunt, Jennifer & Garant, Jean-Philippe & Herman, Hannah & Munroe, David J., 2012. "Why Don't Women Patent?," IZA Discussion Papers 6886, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    18. T. Gries & R. Grundmann & I. Palnau & M. Redlin, 2017. "Innovations, growth and participation in advanced economies - a review of major concepts and findings," International Economics and Economic Policy, Springer, vol. 14(2), pages 293-351, April.
    19. Ricardo Moutinho & Manuel Au-Yong-Oliveira & Arnaldo Coelho & José Pires Manso, 2016. "Determinants of knowledge-based entrepreneurship: an exploratory approach," International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, Springer, vol. 12(1), pages 171-197, March.
    20. Lin, Jenny X. & Lincoln, William F., 2017. "Pirate's treasure," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 109(C), pages 235-245.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    innovation production function; composite index; regional innovation; benchmarking; innovation metrics;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • O31 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Innovation and Invention: Processes and Incentives
    • O32 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Management of Technological Innovation and R&D
    • O38 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Government Policy

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:ssi:jouesi:v:8:y:2020:i:2:p:285-310. 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: Manuela Tvaronaviciene (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    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.