IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/ijecbs/v5y1998i3p295-309.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Objects and Subjects in Technological Interdependence. Towards a Framework to Monitor Innovation

Author

Listed:
  • Daniele Archibugi
  • Roberto Simonetti

Abstract

Technology, even more than other aspects of economic life, is characterized by a strong interdependence across both sectors and organizations. However, we still know little about the determinants and impact of technological interdependence. The standard input-output analysis is unable to explain interdependence in technological life since a large proportion of innovations are either untraded or are disembodied from products. Innovations which are not appropriated by the innovators are not signalled by prices. Moreover, input-output tables do not systematically consider exchanges within economic organizations, such as firms. This paper proposes a more complex accounting framework for innovation which would monitor the technological field of the innovation and the product where it is used, as well as the producer-user interrelationship.

Suggested Citation

  • Daniele Archibugi & Roberto Simonetti, 1998. "Objects and Subjects in Technological Interdependence. Towards a Framework to Monitor Innovation," International Journal of the Economics of Business, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 5(3), pages 295-309.
    • Handle: RePEc:taf:ijecbs:v:5:y:1998:i:3:p:295-309
    DOI: 10.1080/13571519884404
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.tandfonline.com/10.1080/13571519884404
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/13571519884404?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. M.A. Utton, 1979. "Diversification and Competition," National Institute Economic Review, National Institute of Economic and Social Research, vol. 89(1), pages 53-55, August.
    2. Kenneth Arrow, 1962. "Economic Welfare and the Allocation of Resources for Invention," NBER Chapters, in: The Rate and Direction of Inventive Activity: Economic and Social Factors, pages 609-626, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    3. Zvi Griliches, 1998. "Patent Statistics as Economic Indicators: A Survey," NBER Chapters, in: R&D and Productivity: The Econometric Evidence, pages 287-343, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    4. Murray Brown, 1967. "The Theory and Empirical Analysis of Production," NBER Books, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc, number brow67-1, March.
    5. Giavazzi, Francesco & Spaventa, Luigi, 1990. "The `New' EMS," CEPR Discussion Papers 369, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    6. Murray Brown & Alfred H. Conrad, 1967. "The Influence of Research and Education on CES Production Relations," NBER Chapters, in: The Theory and Empirical Analysis of Production, pages 341-394, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    7. Granstrand, Ove & Sjolander, Soren, 1990. "Managing innovation in multi-technology corporations," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 19(1), pages 35-60, February.
    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. Martin Meyer, 2007. "What do we know about innovation in nanotechnology? Some propositions about an emerging field between hype and path-dependency," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 70(3), pages 779-810, March.
    2. Taalbi, Josef, 2015. "Development Blocks in Innovation Networks. The Swedish Manufacturing Industry, 1970-2007," MPRA Paper 64549, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 23 May 2015.
    3. Josef Taalbi, 2017. "Development blocks in innovation networks," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 27(3), pages 461-501, July.

    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. Shah, Anwar & DEC, 1994. "The economics of research and development : how research and development capital affects production and markets and is affected by tax incentives," Policy Research Working Paper Series 1325, The World Bank.
    2. Panayotis Dessyllas & Alan Hughes, 2005. "R&D and Patenting Activity and the Propensity to Acquire in High Technology Industries," Industrial Organization 0507008, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    3. 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.
    4. Aiello, Francesco & Albanese, Giuseppe & Piselli, Paolo, 2019. "Good value for public money? The case of R&D policy," Journal of Policy Modeling, Elsevier, vol. 41(6), pages 1057-1076.
    5. Thomas Bolli & Martin Woerter, 2013. "Technological Diversification and Innovation Performance," KOF Working papers 13-336, KOF Swiss Economic Institute, ETH Zurich.
    6. Ujjayant Chakravorty & Runjuan Liu & Ruotao Tang, 2017. "Firm Innovation under Import Competition from Low-Wage Countries," CESifo Working Paper Series 6569, CESifo.
    7. Lorenz, Steffi, 2015. "Diversität und Verbundenheit der unternehmerischen Wissensbasis: Ein neuartiger Messansatz mit Indikatoren aus Innovationsprojekten," Discussion Papers on Strategy and Innovation 15-01, Philipps-University Marburg, Department of Technology and Innovation Management (TIM).
    8. Cristiano Antonelli & Christophe Feder, 2022. "Knowledge properties and the creative response in the global economy: European evidence for the years 1990–2016," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 47(2), pages 459-475, April.
    9. Eduardo Gonçalves & Fernando Salgueiro Perobelli & Inácio Fernandes Araújo, 2017. "Estimating intersectoral technology spillovers for Brazil," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 42(6), pages 1377-1406, December.
    10. Cristiano, Antonelli & Scellato, Giuseppe, 2007. "Complexity and Innovation: Social Interactions and Firm Level Total Factor Productivity," Department of Economics and Statistics Cognetti de Martiis LEI & BRICK - Laboratory of Economics of Innovation "Franco Momigliano", Bureau of Research in Innovation, Complexity and Knowledge, Collegio 200709, University of Turin.
    11. Cantner, Uwe & Graf, Holger, 2006. "The network of innovators in Jena: An application of social network analysis," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(4), pages 463-480, May.
    12. Figueroa, Nicolás & Serrano, Carlos J., 2019. "Patent trading flows of small and large firms," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(7), pages 1601-1616.
    13. Paul R. Blackley, 1986. "Urban-Rural Variations in the Structure of Manufacturing Production," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 23(6), pages 471-483, December.
    14. Tom Broekel & Lars Mewes, 2017. "Analyzing the impact of R&D policy on regional diversification," Papers in Evolutionary Economic Geography (PEEG) 1726, Utrecht University, Department of Human Geography and Spatial Planning, Group Economic Geography, revised Sep 2017.
    15. David Audretsch & Max Keilbach, 2004. "Entrepreneurship Capital and Economic Performance," Regional Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 38(8), pages 949-959.
    16. Nicola Lacetera, 2003. "Incentives and spillovers in R&D activities: an agency-theoretic analysis of industry-university relations," Microeconomics 0312004, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    17. Dirk Czarnitzki & Cindy Lopes-Bento, 2014. "Innovation Subsidies: Does the Funding Source Matter for Innovation Intensity and Performance? Empirical Evidence from Germany," Industry and Innovation, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 21(5), pages 380-409, July.
    18. Rajeev Goel & Devrim Göktepe-Hultén, 2013. "Nascent entrepreneurship and inventive activity: a somewhat new perspective," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 38(4), pages 471-485, August.
    19. Douglas Hanley, 2014. "Innovation, Technological Interdependence, and Economic Growth," Working Paper 533, Department of Economics, University of Pittsburgh, revised Jan 2014.
    20. Zoltán J. Ács & Pontus Braunerhjelm & David B. Audretsch & Bo Carlsson, 2015. "The knowledge spillover theory of entrepreneurship," Chapters, in: Global Entrepreneurship, Institutions and Incentives, chapter 7, pages 129-144, Edward Elgar Publishing.

    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:ijecbs:v:5:y:1998:i:3:p:295-309. 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/CIJB20 .

    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.