IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bpj/bjafio/v12y2014i1p20n7.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Open Innovation in the Food and Drink Industry

Author

Listed:
  • Pellegrini Luisa

    (Department of Engineering of Energy, Systems, Territory and Construction, University of Pisa, Largo Lucio Lazzarino, Pisa 56122, Italy)

  • Lazzarotti Valentina

    (LIUC, University Carlo Cattaneo, Varese, Italy)

  • Manzini Raffaella

    (LIUC, University Carlo Cattaneo, Varese, Italy)

Abstract

The subject of this paper is Open Innovation (OI) in the food and drink industry (FDI). Both academics and managers are pushing for improved knowledge in the practice of OI. To this end they have invited researchers to include traditional, low-tech industries in their analyses, since these have been poorly investigated (Gassmann, Enkel, and Chesbrough. 2010. “The Future of Open Innovation.” R&D Management 40(3):213–21). In accepting this invitation, we shall be focusing our attention on the FDI, which is going through a transition phase. Although traditionally characterized by a low propensity towards OI, FDI has recently started to open up its innovation processes on account of developments in the competitive context. Hence, a survey involving 284 companies from three countries (UK, Italy and Spain) was carried out. Results show that FDI can be indicated as a sector under increasing pressure to open up. This is an important result that will add to the literature on this topical debate, more especially as the role exerted by the industry in OI choices still remains ambiguous.

Suggested Citation

  • Pellegrini Luisa & Lazzarotti Valentina & Manzini Raffaella, 2014. "Open Innovation in the Food and Drink Industry," Journal of Agricultural & Food Industrial Organization, De Gruyter, vol. 12(1), pages 75-94, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:bpj:bjafio:v:12:y:2014:i:1:p:20:n:7
    DOI: 10.1515/jafio-2013-0023
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1515/jafio-2013-0023
    Download Restriction: For access to full text, subscription to the journal or payment for the individual article is required.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1515/jafio-2013-0023?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. David J. TEECE, 2008. "Profiting from technological innovation: Implications for integration, collaboration, licensing and public policy," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: The Transfer And Licensing Of Know-How And Intellectual Property Understanding the Multinational Enterprise in the Modern World, chapter 5, pages 67-87, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    2. Henkel, Joachim, 2006. "Selective revealing in open innovation processes: The case of embedded Linux," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(7), pages 953-969, September.
    3. Bruno Cassiman & Reinhilde Veugelers, 2002. "R&D Cooperation and Spillovers: Some Empirical Evidence from Belgium," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 92(4), pages 1169-1184, September.
    4. Sofka, Wolfgang & Grimpe, Christoph, 2008. "Managing Search Strategies for Open Innovation: The Role of Environmental Munificence as well as Internal and External R&D," ZEW Discussion Papers 08-075, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    5. de Faria, Pedro & Sofka, Wolfgang, 2010. "Knowledge protection strategies of multinational firms--A cross-country comparison," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(7), pages 956-968, September.
    6. Nancy T. Gallini, 2002. "The Economics of Patents: Lessons from Recent U.S. Patent Reform," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 16(2), pages 131-154, Spring.
    7. Wesley M. Cohen & Richard R. Nelson & John P. Walsh, 2000. "Protecting Their Intellectual Assets: Appropriability Conditions and Why U.S. Manufacturing Firms Patent (or Not)," NBER Working Papers 7552, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    8. Muge Ozman, 2008. "The Two Faces of Open Innovation: NetworkExternalities and Learning," Working Papers of BETA 2008-24, Bureau d'Economie Théorique et Appliquée, UDS, Strasbourg.
    9. A. Spithoven & B. Clarysse & M. Knockaert, 2009. "Building Absorptive Capacity to Organise Inbound Open Innovation in Low Tech Industries," Working Papers of Faculty of Economics and Business Administration, Ghent University, Belgium 09/606, Ghent University, Faculty of Economics and Business Administration.
    10. Magnus Lagnevik & Ingegerd Sjöholm & Anders Lareke & Jacob Östberg, 2003. "The Dynamics of Innovation Clusters," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 3067.
    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. Laursen, Keld & Salter, Ammon J., 2014. "The paradox of openness: Appropriability, external search and collaboration," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(5), pages 867-878.
    2. de Faria, Pedro & Sofka, Wolfgang, 2010. "Knowledge protection strategies of multinational firms--A cross-country comparison," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(7), pages 956-968, September.
    3. Belderbos, René & Lee, Geon Ho & Mudambi, Ram & Du, Helen S. & Somers, Dieter, 2024. "When does international knowledge connectivity of global cities attract R&D investments? The role of concentrated ownership through organizational pipelines," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 53(9).
    4. 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.
    5. Gambardella, Alfonso & Giuri, Paola & Luzzi, Alessandra, 2007. "The market for patents in Europe," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(8), pages 1163-1183, October.
    6. Arora, Ashish & Athreye, Suma & Huang, Can, 2016. "The paradox of openness revisited: Collaborative innovation and patenting by UK innovators," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(7), pages 1352-1361.
    7. Andrea Fosfuri & Marco S. Giarratana & Alessandra Luzzi, 2008. "The Penguin Has Entered the Building: The Commercialization of Open Source Software Products," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 19(2), pages 292-305, April.
    8. Barirani, Ahmad & Beaudry, Catherine & Agard, Bruno, 2017. "Can universities profit from general purpose inventions? The case of Canadian nanotechnology patents," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 271-283.
    9. Robin Cowan & Nicolas Jonard & Ruth Samson, 2024. "Strategies of search and patenting under different IPR regimes," Working Papers of BETA 2024-20, Bureau d'Economie Théorique et Appliquée, UDS, Strasbourg.
    10. Giovanni Dosi & Luigi Marengo & Corrado Pasquali, 2010. "How Much Should Society Fuel the Greed of Innovators? On the Relations between Appropriability, Opportunities and Rates of Innovation," Chapters, in: Riccardo Viale & Henry Etzkowitz (ed.), The Capitalization of Knowledge, chapter 4, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    11. Bronwyn H. Hall & Vania Sena, 2017. "Appropriability mechanisms, innovation, and productivity: evidence from the UK," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 26(1-2), pages 42-62, February.
    12. Emeric Henry & Carlos J. Ponce, 2011. "Waiting to Imitate: On the Dynamic Pricing of Knowledge," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 119(5), pages 959-981.
    13. Carolina Castaldi, 2021. "Sustainable innovation and intellectual property rights: friends, foes or perfect strangers?," LEM Papers Series 2021/11, Laboratory of Economics and Management (LEM), Sant'Anna School of Advanced Studies, Pisa, Italy.
    14. Bos, Brenda & Broekhuizen, Thijs L.J. & de Faria, Pedro, 2015. "A dynamic view on secrecy management," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 68(12), pages 2619-2627.
    15. Adrián Kovács & Bart Looy & Bruno Cassiman, 2015. "Exploring the scope of open innovation: a bibliometric review of a decade of research," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 104(3), pages 951-983, September.
    16. Ayerbe, Cécile & Boulos, Caroline & Castellaneta, Francesco, 2024. "Navigating protection mechanisms and innovation models: A literature-based configurational framework of intellectual property strategies," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 137(C).
    17. Schwiebacher, Franz, 2013. "Does fragmented or heterogeneous IP ownership stifle investments in innovation?," ZEW Discussion Papers 13-096, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    18. Barros, Henrique M., 2021. "Neither at the cutting edge nor in a patent-friendly environment: Appropriating the returns from innovation in a less developed economy," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(1).
    19. André Spithoven & Wim Vanhaverbeke & Nadine Roijakkers, 2013. "Open innovation practices in SMEs and large enterprises," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 41(3), pages 537-562, October.
    20. Rockett, Katharine, 2010. "Property Rights and Invention," 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 315-380, Elsevier.

    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:bpj:bjafio:v:12:y:2014:i:1:p:20:n:7. 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: Peter Golla (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.degruyter.com .

    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.