Advanced Search
MyIDEAS: Login to save this paper or follow this series

Die Evolution der bundesdeutschen Forschungs- und Technologiepolitik: Rückblick und Bestandsaufnahme

Contents:

Author Info

  • Fier, Andreas
  • Harhoff, Dietmar

Abstract

In Deutschland beanspruchen gleich zwei Ressorts, das Bundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung (BMBF) sowie das Bundesministerium für Wirtschaft und Technologie (BMWi) die Zuständigkeit für die deutsche Innovationspolitik. Dieses für den Bund offensichtlich bedeutsame Politikfeld eröffnet zum einen die Frage, auf welchen Prinzipien die gegenwärtige Forschungs-und Technologiepolitik aufgebaut ist und zum anderen, wie es gelingen soll, die wissenschaftlichen und wirtschaftlichen Rahmenbedingungen für FuE-Aktivitäten zu verbessern. Dieser Beitrag widmet sich der industrieökonomischen Innovationsforschung und der Umsetzung ihrer Ergebnisse in der Wirtschaftspolitik. Ausgangspunkt ist ein Rückblick auf theoretische Konzepte, die seit den grundlegenden Studien von Arrows (1962) in der Literatur entwickelt worden sind. Dazu gehören die Entwicklung von Patentrennenmodellen, Modellen präemptiven Verhaltens und Überlegungen zur Funktionsweise von Wissensexternalitäten. Gerade das Konzept der "absorptiven Kapazität", Ende der 80er Jahre von Cohen und Levinthal vorgeschlagen, hat sich nicht nur in der volkswirtschaftlichen Forschung als wichtig erwiesen, sondern auch in der Betriebswirtschaftslehre. Den Fortschritten in der Wissenschaft steht eine Entwicklung in der Forschungs- und Innovationspolitik gegenüber, die nur mäßig von ökonomischen Konzepten beeinflusst worden ist. Nach Darstellung des Entwicklungsverlaufs der bundesdeutschen Innovationspolitik kommt eine Analyse des Förderinstrumentariums zu dem Schluss, dass insbesondere die Wirkungsforschung in Deutschland noch unterentwickelt ist und vor neuen Herausforderungen steht. -- We consider the development of German federal research and technology (R&T) policies since the 1960s and sketch the evolution of today?s highly differentiated and complex set of policy instruments. Advances from economic theory and empirical results are reflected in this evolution, but have not necessarily been the driving force. In some instances, innovative policy instruments have been introduced in order to accomodate the state of the art in economic analysis; in other cases, such innovations have preceded a thorough analysis of the respective policy instruments. A major point of concern is the lack of comprehensive evaluation and cost-benefit analyses in R&T policies. In this regard, German policy practice lags behind well-established procedures in other countries.

Download Info

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
File URL: http://econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/24482/1/dp0161.pdf
Download Restriction: no

Bibliographic Info

Paper provided by ZEW - Zentrum für Europäische Wirtschaftsforschung / Center for European Economic Research in its series ZEW Discussion Papers with number 01-61.

as in new window
Length:
Date of creation: 2001
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:zbw:zewdip:5417

Contact details of provider:
Postal: L 7,1; D - 68161 Mannheim
Phone: +49/621/1235-01
Fax: +49/621/1235-224
Email:
Web page: http://www.zew.de/
More information through EDIRC

Related research

Keywords: Innovation; Public R&D Subsidies; Policy Evaluation;

Other versions of this item:

Find related papers by JEL classification:

References

References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
as in new window
  1. Dietmar Harhoff & Pierre Régibeau & Katharine Rockett, 2001. "Some simple economics of GM food," Economic Policy, CEPR & CES & MSH, vol. 16(33), pages 263-299, October.
  2. Haller, H. & Chou, T., 1995. "The Division of Profit in Sequential Innovation Reconsidered," Papers 9564, Tilburg - Center for Economic Research.
  3. Chou, T. & Haller, H., 1995. "The Division of Profit in Sequential Innovation Reconsidered," Discussion Paper 1995-64, Tilburg University, Center for Economic Research.
  4. Dohse, Dirk, 2000. "Regionen als Innovationsmotoren: zur Neuorientierung in der deutschen Technologiepolitik," Kiel Discussion Papers 366, Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW).
  5. Lichtenberg, Frank R & Siegel, Donald, 1991. "The Impact of R&D Investment on Productivity--New Evidence Using Linked R&D-LRD Data," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 29(2), pages 203-29, April.
  6. James D. Adams & Adam B. Jaffe, 1996. "Bounding the Effects of R&D: An Investigation Using Matched Establishment-Firm Data," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 27(4), pages 700-721, Winter.
  7. Lee, Tom & Wilde, Louis L, 1980. "Market Structure and Innovation: A Reformulation," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, MIT Press, vol. 94(2), pages 429-36, March.
  8. Czarnitzki, Dirk & Fier, Andreas, 2001. "Do R&D subsidies matter? Evidence for the German service sector," ZEW Discussion Papers 01-19, ZEW - Zentrum für Europäische Wirtschaftsforschung / Center for European Economic Research.
  9. Francesca Cornelli & Mark Schankerman, 1999. "Patent Renewals and R&D Incentives," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 30(2), pages 197-213, Summer.
  10. Glenn C. Loury, 1976. "Market Structure and Innovation," Discussion Papers 256, Northwestern University, Center for Mathematical Studies in Economics and Management Science.
  11. Reinganum, Jennifer F, 1983. "Uncertain Innovation and the Persistence of Monopoly," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 73(4), pages 741-48, September.
  12. Tor Klette & David de Meza, 1986. "Is the Market Biased Against Risky R&D?," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 17(1), pages 133-139, Spring.
  13. Paul A. David, 2005. "FROM MARKET MAGIC TO CALYPSO SCIENCE POLICY A Review of Terence Kealey's The Economic Laws of Scientific Research," Development and Comp Systems 0502013, EconWPA.
  14. Spence, Michael, 1984. "Cost Reduction, Competition, and Industry Performance," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 52(1), pages 101-21, January.
  15. Gilbert, Richard J & Newbery, David M G, 1982. "Preemptive Patenting and the Persistence of Monopoly," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 72(3), pages 514-26, June.
  16. James Cardon & Dan Sasaki, 1998. "Preemptive Search and R&D Clustering," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 29(2), pages 324-338, Summer.
  17. Mansfield, Edwin, et al, 1977. "Social and Private Rates of Return from Industrial Innovations," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, MIT Press, vol. 91(2), pages 221-40, May.
  18. Heidrun C. Hoppe & Wilhelm Pfähler, 2001. "Oekonomie der Grundlagenforschung und Wissenschaftspolitik," Perspektiven der Wirtschaftspolitik, Verein für Socialpolitik, vol. 2(2), pages 125-144, 05.
  19. Davis, Steven J & Haltiwanger, John & Schuh, Scott, 1996. " Small Business and Job Creation: Dissecting the Myth and Reassessing the Facts," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 8(4), pages 297-315, August.
  20. Klette, T.J. & Moen, J. & Griliches, Z., 1999. "Do Subsidies to Commercial R&D Reduce Market Failures? Microeconometric Evaluation Studies," Papers 16/99, Norwegian School of Economics and Business Administration-.
  21. Luukkonen, Terttu, 1998. "The difficulties in assessing the impact of EU framework programmes," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 27(6), pages 599-610, September.
  22. Cohen, Wesley M & Levinthal, Daniel A, 1989. "Innovation and Learning: The Two Faces of R&D," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 99(397), pages 569-96, 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 in new window

Cited by:
  1. Czarnitzki, Dirk & Fier, Andreas, 2003. "Publicly Funded R&D Collaborations and Patent Outcome in Germany," ZEW Discussion Papers 03-24, ZEW - Zentrum für Europäische Wirtschaftsforschung / Center for European Economic Research.
  2. Stephen Bond & Dietmar Harhoff & John Van Reenen, 2003. "Corporate R&D and productivity in Germany and the United Kingdom," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 770, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
  3. Hujer, Reinhard & Radić, Dubravko, 2005. "Evaluating the Impacts of Subsidies on Innovation Activities in Germany," ZEW Discussion Papers 05-43, ZEW - Zentrum für Europäische Wirtschaftsforschung / Center for European Economic Research.
  4. Schmiele, Anja & Sofka, Wolfgang, 2007. "Internationalizing R&D Co-opetition: Dress for the Dance with the Devil," ZEW Discussion Papers 07-045, ZEW - Zentrum für Europäische Wirtschaftsforschung / Center for European Economic Research.

Lists

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

Statistics

Access and download statistics

Corrections

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:zbw:zewdip:5417. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (ZBW - German National Library of Economics).

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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

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