IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/zbw/iwhdps/iwh-145.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Braucht Ostdeutschland eine neue Technologiepolitik? - Implikationen aus der Funktionsfähigkeit des Marktes für FuE nach der Transformation

Author

Listed:
  • Müller, Ralf

Abstract

Technology policy is a major part of government's efforts in contributing to East Ger-many's economic recovery. However, even a decade after unification East Germany does not produce sufficient technology goods. Thus, the question is whether technology policy is either not suitable or inefficient in tackling East Germany's deficits. A special technology policy for East Germany is justified by the lack of regional networks for technology firms; without a compensating policy East Germany would continue to lag behind West Germany also with respect to incomes. Yet only a few of the policy in-struments applied so far are efficiently dealing with these deficits. Thus, a future technology policy for East Germany should - mainly by the supply of R&D-infrastructure - support implementation of these kinds of networks.

Suggested Citation

  • Müller, Ralf, 2001. "Braucht Ostdeutschland eine neue Technologiepolitik? - Implikationen aus der Funktionsfähigkeit des Marktes für FuE nach der Transformation," IWH Discussion Papers 145/2001, Halle Institute for Economic Research (IWH).
    • Handle: RePEc:zbw:iwhdps:iwh-145
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/77040/1/145.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Dirk Engel & Andreas Fier, 2001. "Does R&D Infrastructure Attract High-Tech Start-Ups?," Advances in Spatial Science, in: Manfred M. Fischer & Josef Fröhlich (ed.), Knowledge, Complexity and Innovation Systems, chapter 19, pages 402-421, Springer.
    2. Gittleman, Maury B & Wolff, Edward N, 1995. "R&D Activity and Cross-Country Growth Comparisons," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 19(1), pages 189-207, February.
    3. Cohen, Wesley M & Klepper, Steven, 1996. "A Reprise of Size and R&D," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 106(437), pages 925-951, July.
    4. 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.
    5. Felder, Johannes & Spielkamp, Alfred, 1998. "Innovationsstrategien und Forschungsaktivitäten ostdeutscher Unternehmen," ZEW Discussion Papers 98-14, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    6. Richard R. Nelson, 1959. "The Simple Economics of Basic Scientific Research," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 67(3), pages 297-297.
    7. Almeida, Paul & Kogut, Bruce, 1997. "The Exploration of Technological Diversity and the Geographic Localization of Innovation," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 9(1), pages 21-31, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Liu, Xiaolu & Li, Xiaoyu & Li, Honglin, 2016. "R&D subsidies and business R&D: Evidence from high-tech manufacturing firms in Jiangsu," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 41(C), pages 1-22.
    2. Sharon Poczter, 2017. "Rethinking the government as innovator: Evidence from Asian firms," Asia Pacific Journal of Management, Springer, vol. 34(2), pages 367-397, June.
    3. Mickey Folkeringa & Andre van Stel & Joris Meijaard, 2005. "Innovation, strategic renewal and its effect on small firm performance," Papers on Entrepreneurship, Growth and Public Policy 2005-36, Max Planck Institute of Economics, Entrepreneurship, Growth and Public Policy Group.
    4. Naomi R. Lamoreaux & Kenneth L. Sokoloff & Dhanoos Sutthiphisal, 2008. "The Reorganization of Inventive Activity in the United States during the Early Twentieth Century," NBER Chapters, in: Understanding Long-Run Economic Growth: Geography, Institutions, and the Knowledge Economy, pages 235-274, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    5. René Belderbos & Leo Sleuwaegen & Reinhilde Veugelers, 2010. "Market Integration and Technological Leadership in Europe," European Economy - Economic Papers 2008 - 2015 403, Directorate General Economic and Financial Affairs (DG ECFIN), European Commission.
    6. repec:izm:wpaper:1207 is not listed on IDEAS
    7. Choi, Jin-Uk & Lee, Chang-Yang, 2022. "The differential effects of basic research on firm R&D productivity: The conditioning role of technological diversification," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 118(C).
    8. Sara Amoroso & Simone Vannuccini, 2019. "Teaming up with Large R&D Investors: Good or Bad for Knowledge Production and Diffusion?," SPRU Working Paper Series 2019-20, SPRU - Science Policy Research Unit, University of Sussex Business School.
    9. Nobuya Fukugawa, 2013. "University spillovers into small technology-based firms: channel, mechanism, and geography," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 38(4), pages 415-431, August.
    10. Raquel Ortega-Argilés & Marco Vivarelli & Peter Voigt, 2009. "R&D in SMEs: a paradox?," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 33(1), pages 3-11, June.
    11. Mauro Soto Rubio & Vicente Germán-Soto & Luis Gutiérrez Flores, 2023. "Patentes, tamaño de empresa y financiamiento público en México: análisis regional con modelos de datos de conteo," Remef - Revista Mexicana de Economía y Finanzas Nueva Época REMEF (The Mexican Journal of Economics and Finance), Instituto Mexicano de Ejecutivos de Finanzas, IMEF, vol. 18(1), pages 1-26, Enero - M.
    12. Lee, Honggi, 2023. "The heterogeneous effects of patent scope on licensing propensity," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(3).
    13. Choi, Joonhwan & Lee, Jaegul, 2017. "Repairing the R&D market failure: Public R&D subsidy and the composition of private R&D," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(8), pages 1465-1478.
    14. Cohen, Wesley M., 2010. "Fifty Years of Empirical Studies of Innovative Activity and Performance," Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, in: Bronwyn H. Hall & Nathan Rosenberg (ed.), Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 0, pages 129-213, Elsevier.
    15. Inglesi-Lotz, Roula, 2017. "Social rate of return to R&D on various energy technologies: Where should we invest more? A study of G7 countries," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 101(C), pages 521-525.
    16. Daniel P. Gross & Bhaven N. Sampat, 2021. "The Economics of Crisis Innovation Policy: A Historical Perspective," AEA Papers and Proceedings, American Economic Association, vol. 111, pages 346-350, May.
    17. Barge-Gil, Andrés & López, Alberto, 2014. "R&D determinants: Accounting for the differences between research and development," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(9), pages 1634-1648.
    18. Bronwyn Hall & Alessandro Maffioli, 2008. "Evaluating the impact of technology development funds in emerging economies: evidence from Latin America," The European Journal of Development Research, Taylor and Francis Journals, vol. 20(2), pages 172-198.
    19. Antonelli, Cristiano, 2017. "Digital knowledge generation and the appropriability trade-off," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(10), pages 991-1002.
    20. Carayol, Nicolas & Dalle, Jean-Michel, 2007. "Sequential problem choice and the reward system in Open Science," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 18(2), pages 167-191, June.
    21. Valérie Revest & Alessandro Sapio, 2012. "Financing technology-based small firms in Europe: what do we know?," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 39(1), pages 179-205, July.

    More about this item

    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:zbw:iwhdps:iwh-145. 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: ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/iwhhhde.html .

    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.