IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/ecinnt/v24y2015i1-2p140-158.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

European R&D efficiency

Author

Listed:
  • Börje Johansson
  • Hans Lööf
  • Maxim Savin

Abstract

This paper explores the capacity to produce new knowledge proxied by patents granted in 18 industries in 11 European economies. For each industry in each country, the number of granted U.S. Patent and Trademark Office patents is recorded over the 1991-2005 period. Controlling for research and development, industry composition, and institutional setting, the paper shows that systematic differences in patent intensity exist between the studied countries, such that almost all industries are affected by country-specific conditions, suggesting that the countries' innovation systems differ in efficiency. The countries with the highest R&D efficiency are Sweden and Finland, followed by the Netherlands and Germany.

Suggested Citation

  • Börje Johansson & Hans Lööf & Maxim Savin, 2015. "European R&D efficiency," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 24(1-2), pages 140-158, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:taf:ecinnt:v:24:y:2015:i:1-2:p:140-158
    DOI: 10.1080/10438599.2014.897857
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/10438599.2014.897857
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/10438599.2014.897857?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Danguy, Jérôme & de Rassenfosse, Gaétan & van Pottelsberghe de la Potterie, Bruno, 2010. "The R&D-patent relationship: An industry perspective," EIB Papers 7/2009, European Investment Bank, Economics Department.
    2. Giovanni Dosi & Christopher Freeman & Richard Nelson & Gerarld Silverberg & Luc Soete (ed.), 1988. "Technical Change and Economic Theory," LEM Book Series, Laboratory of Economics and Management (LEM), Sant'Anna School of Advanced Studies, Pisa, Italy, number dosietal-1988, April.
    3. List, Friedrich, 1885. "The National System of Political Economy," History of Economic Thought Books, McMaster University Archive for the History of Economic Thought, number list1885.
    4. Gaétan de Rassenfosse, 2010. "Productivity and Propensity: The Two Faces of the R&D-Patent Relationship," Working Papers ECARES ECARES 2010-025, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
    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. Tihana Škrinjarić, 2020. "R&D in Europe: Sector Decomposition of Sources of (in)Efficiency," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(4), pages 1-21, February.
    2. Esfandiar Maasoumi & Almas Heshmati & Inhee Lee, 2021. "Green innovations and patenting renewable energy technologies," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 60(1), pages 513-538, January.
    3. Haschka, Rouven E. & Herwartz, Helmut, 2020. "Innovation efficiency in European high-tech industries: Evidence from a Bayesian stochastic frontier approach," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(8).
    4. Beáta Gavurová & Martina Halásková & Samuel Koróny, 2019. "Research and Development Indicators of EU28 Countries from Viewpoint of Super-efficiency DEA Analysis," Acta Universitatis Agriculturae et Silviculturae Mendelianae Brunensis, Mendel University Press, vol. 67(1), pages 225-242.

    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. Lööf, Hans & Savin, Maxim, 2012. "Cross-country difference in R&D productivity Comparison of 11 European economies," Working Paper Series in Economics and Institutions of Innovation 294, Royal Institute of Technology, CESIS - Centre of Excellence for Science and Innovation Studies, revised 13 Mar 2013.
    2. Andre Nassif & Carmem Aparecida Feijo & Eliane Araújo, 2016. "Structural change, catching up and falling behind in the BRICS: A comparative analysis based on trade pattern and Thirlwall’s Law," PSL Quarterly Review, Economia civile, vol. 69(279), pages 373-421.
    3. Swati Mehta, 2018. "National Innovation System of India: An Empirical Analysis," Millennial Asia, , vol. 9(2), pages 203-224, August.
    4. Nnaemeka Vincent Emodi & Girish Panchakshara Murthy & Chinenye Comfort Emodi & Adaeze Saratu Augusta Emodi, 2017. "A Literature Review on the Factors Influencing Patent Propensity," International Journal of Innovation and Technology Management (IJITM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 14(03), pages 1-30, June.
    5. Jhon Wilder Zartha Sossa & Oscar Hernán López Montoya & Julio Cesar Acosta Prado, 2021. "Determinants of a sustainable innovation system," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 30(2), pages 1345-1356, February.
    6. Pedro López-Rubio & Norat Roig-Tierno & Francisco Mas-Verdú, 2022. "Assessing the Origins, Evolution and Prospects of National Innovation Systems," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 13(1), pages 161-184, March.
    7. Heijs, Joost, 2003. "Freerider behaviour and the public finance of R&D activities in enterprises: the case of the Spanish low interest credits for R&D," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(3), pages 445-461, March.
    8. Dirk Boehe & Luciano Barin Cruz, 2010. "Corporate Social Responsibility, Product Differentiation Strategy and Export Performance," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 91(2), pages 325-346, February.
    9. Colin Wessendorf & Alexander Kopka & Dirk Fornahl, 2021. "The impact of the six European Key Enabling Technologies (KETs) on regional knowledge creation," Papers in Evolutionary Economic Geography (PEEG) 2127, Utrecht University, Department of Human Geography and Spatial Planning, Group Economic Geography, revised Sep 2021.
    10. Rajah Rasiah, 2005. "Trade-related Investment Liberalization under the WTO: The Malaysian Experience," Global Economic Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 34(4), pages 453-471.
    11. Michael J. Radzicki, 2003. "Mr. Hamilton, Mr. Forrester, and a Foundation for Evolutionary Economics," Journal of Economic Issues, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 37(1), pages 133-173, March.
    12. Matthias Firgo & Peter Mayerhofer, 2015. "Wissens-Spillovers und regionale Entwicklung - welche strukturpolitische Ausrichtung optimiert des Wachstum?," Working Paper Reihe der AK Wien - Materialien zu Wirtschaft und Gesellschaft 144, Kammer für Arbeiter und Angestellte für Wien, Abteilung Wirtschaftswissenschaft und Statistik.
    13. Paul Tae-Woo Lee & Jasmine Siu Lee Lam, 2017. "A review of port devolution and governance models with compound eyes approach," Transport Reviews, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 37(4), pages 507-520, July.
    14. Ben Clift, 2012. "Comparative Capitalisms, Ideational Political Economy and French Post- Dirigiste Responses to the Global Financial Crisis," New Political Economy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 17(5), pages 565-590, November.
    15. José Monteiro-Barata, 2005. "Innovation in the Portuguese Manufacturing Industry: Analysis of a Longitudinal Company Panel," International Advances in Economic Research, Springer;International Atlantic Economic Society, vol. 11(3), pages 301-314, August.
    16. C Lanciano & M Maurice & H Nohara & J J Silvestre, 1992. "Societal Analysis of Innovation: Genesis and Development [Analyse Sociétale de l'Innovation : Genèse et Développement]," Working Papers halshs-03388659, HAL.
    17. Alessandro Muscio, 2007. "THE IMPACT OF ABSORPTIVE CAPACITY ON SMEs' COLLABORATION," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 16(8), pages 653-668.
    18. Jan Ende & Wilfred Dolfsma, 2004. "Technology-push, demand-pull and the shaping of technological paradigms - Patterns in the development of computing technology," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 15(1), pages 83-99, January.
    19. Mark Knell & Simone Vannuccini, 2022. "Tools and concepts for understanding disruptive technological change after Schumpeter," Jena Economics Research Papers 2022-005, Friedrich-Schiller-University Jena.
    20. González, Norberto, 2001. "The motive ideas behind three industrialization processes," Revista CEPAL, Naciones Unidas Comisión Económica para América Latina y el Caribe (CEPAL), December.

    More about this item

    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:taf:ecinnt:v:24:y:2015:i:1-2:p:140-158. 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: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/GEIN20 .

    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.