IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v13y2021i23p13426-d694769.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Innovativeness, Work Flexibility, and Place Characteristics: A Spatial Econometric and Machine Learning Approach

Author

Listed:
  • Mehmet Güney Celbiş

    (Department of Economics, Yeditepe University, Istanbul 34755, Turkey
    United Nations University-Maastricht Economic and Social Research Institute on Innovation and Technology (UNU-MERIT), 6211 Maastricht, The Netherlands
    These authors contributed equally to this work.)

  • Pui-Hang Wong

    (United Nations University-Maastricht Economic and Social Research Institute on Innovation and Technology (UNU-MERIT), 6211 Maastricht, The Netherlands
    Maastricht Graduate School of Governance, School of Business and Economics, Maastricht University, 6211 Maastricht, The Netherlands
    These authors contributed equally to this work.)

  • Karima Kourtit

    (Faculty of Management, Open University, 6419 Heerlen, The Netherlands
    Centre for European Studies, Alexandru Ioan Cuza University, 700506 Iași, Romania
    School of Architecture, Planning and Design, Polytechnic University, Ben Guerir 43150, Morocco
    These authors contributed equally to this work.)

  • Peter Nijkamp

    (Faculty of Management, Open University, 6419 Heerlen, The Netherlands
    Centre for European Studies, Alexandru Ioan Cuza University, 700506 Iași, Romania
    School of Architecture, Planning and Design, Polytechnic University, Ben Guerir 43150, Morocco
    These authors contributed equally to this work.)

Abstract

This paper seeks to study work-related and geographical conditions under which innovativeness is stimulated through the analysis of individual and regional data dating from just prior to the smartphone age. As a result, by using the ISSP 2005 Work Orientations Survey, we are able to examine the role of work flexibility, among other work-related conditions, in a relatively more traditional context that mostly excludes modern, smartphone-driven, remote-working practices. Our study confirms that individual freedom in the work place, flexible work hours, job security, living in suburban areas, low stress, private business activity, and the ability to take free time off work are important drivers of innovation. In particular, through a spatial econometric model, we identified an optimum level for weekly work time of about 36 h, which is supported by our findings from tree-based ensemble models. The originality of the present study is particularly due to its examination of innovative output rather than general productivity through the integration of person-level data on individual work conditions, in addition to its novel methodological approach which combines machine learning and spatial econometric findings.

Suggested Citation

  • Mehmet Güney Celbiş & Pui-Hang Wong & Karima Kourtit & Peter Nijkamp, 2021. "Innovativeness, Work Flexibility, and Place Characteristics: A Spatial Econometric and Machine Learning Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(23), pages 1-29, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:23:p:13426-:d:694769
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/23/13426/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/23/13426/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Suominen, Arho & Toivanen, Hannes & Seppänen, Marko, 2017. "Firms' knowledge profiles: Mapping patent data with unsupervised learning," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 115(C), pages 131-142.
    2. Pablo D'Este & Francesco Rentocchini & Jaider Vega-Jurado, 2014. "The Role of Human Capital in Lowering the Barriers to Engaging in Innovation: Evidence from the Spanish Innovation Survey," Industry and Innovation, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 21(1), pages 1-19, January.
    3. Hoxha, Sergei & Kleinknecht, Alfred, 2020. "When labour market rigidities are useful for innovation. Evidence from German IAB firm-level data," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(7).
    4. Roderik Ponds & Frank van Oort & Koen Frenken, 2010. "Innovation, spillovers and university--industry collaboration: an extended knowledge production function approach," Journal of Economic Geography, Oxford University Press, vol. 10(2), pages 231-255, March.
    5. Natalia Strobel & Jan Kratzer, 2017. "OBSTACLES TO INNOVATION FOR SMEs: EVIDENCE FROM GERMANY," International Journal of Innovation Management (ijim), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 21(03), pages 1-28, April.
    6. Xiong, Ailun & Xia, Senmao & Ye, Zhen Peter & Cao, Dongmei & Jing, Yanguo & Li, Hongyi, 2020. "Can innovation really bring economic growth? The role of social filter in China," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 50-61.
    7. Cooke, Philip & Gomez Uranga, Mikel & Etxebarria, Goio, 1997. "Regional innovation systems: Institutional and organisational dimensions," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 26(4-5), pages 475-491, December.
    8. Spyros Arvanitis, 2005. "Modes of labor flexibility at firm level: Are there any implications for performance and innovation? Evidence for the Swiss economy," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 14(6), pages 993-1016, December.
    9. Jonathan Michie & Maura Sheehan, 2003. "Labour market deregulation, 'flexibility' and innovation," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 27(1), pages 123-143, January.
    10. Yanzhang Gu & Longying Hu & Hongjin Zhang & Chenxuan Hou, 2021. "Innovation Ecosystem Research: Emerging Trends and Future Research," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(20), pages 1-21, October.
    11. Buesa, Mikel & Heijs, Joost & Baumert, Thomas, 2010. "The determinants of regional innovation in Europe: A combined factorial and regression knowledge production function approach," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(6), pages 722-735, July.
    12. Beñat Bilbao‐Osorio & Andrés Rodríguez‐Pose, 2004. "From R&D to Innovation and Economic Growth in the EU," Growth and Change, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 35(4), pages 434-455, September.
    13. Karima Kourtit & Peter Nijkamp & Steef Lowik & Frans van Vught & Paul Vulto, 2011. "From islands of innovation to creative hotspots," Regional Science Policy & Practice, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 3(3), pages 145-161, August.
    14. Asheim, Bjorn T. & Coenen, Lars, 2005. "Knowledge bases and regional innovation systems: Comparing Nordic clusters," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(8), pages 1173-1190, October.
    15. Manfred M. Fischer, 2009. "Regions, Technological Interdependence And Growth In Europe," Romanian Journal of Regional Science, Romanian Regional Science Association, vol. 3(2), pages 1-17, DECEMBER.
    16. Bloch, Carter & Bugge, Markus M., 2013. "Public sector innovation—From theory to measurement," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 27(C), pages 133-145.
    17. Haibo Zhou & Ronald Dekker & Alfred Kleinknecht, 2011. "Flexible labor and innovation performance: evidence from longitudinal firm-level data," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 20(3), pages 941-968, June.
    18. Mourad Dakhli & Dirk De Clercq, 2004. "Human capital, social capital, and innovation: a multi-country study," Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 16(2), pages 107-128, March.
    19. Maryann Feldman, 1999. "The New Economics Of Innovation, Spillovers And Agglomeration: Areview Of Empirical Studies," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 8(1-2), pages 5-25.
    20. Cui, Dan & Wei, Xiang & Wu, Dianting & Cui, Nana & Nijkamp, Peter, 2019. "Leisure time and labor productivity: A new economic view rooted from sociological perspective," Economics - The Open-Access, Open-Assessment E-Journal (2007-2020), Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW Kiel), vol. 13, pages 1-24.
    21. Friedman, Jerome H., 2002. "Stochastic gradient boosting," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 38(4), pages 367-378, February.
    22. Athey, Susan & Imbens, Guido W., 2019. "Machine Learning Methods Economists Should Know About," Research Papers 3776, Stanford University, Graduate School of Business.
    23. Laura de Dominicis & Raymond J.G.M. Florax & Henri L.F. de Groot, 2013. "Regional clusters of innovative activity in Europe: are social capital and geographical proximity key determinants?," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 45(17), pages 2325-2335, June.
    24. Hal R. Varian, 2014. "Big Data: New Tricks for Econometrics," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 28(2), pages 3-28, Spring.
    25. Olivier Collignon & Jeongseop Han & Hyungmi An & Seungyoung Oh & Youngjo Lee, 2018. "Comparison of the modified unbounded penalty and the LASSO to select predictive genes of response to chemotherapy in breast cancer," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(10), pages 1-15, October.
    26. Krammer, Sorin, 2021. "Human Resource Policies And Firm Innovation: The Moderating Effects Of Economic And Institutional Context," MPRA Paper 109486, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    27. Santamara, Llus & Nieto, Mara Jess & Barge-Gil, Andrs, 2009. "Beyond formal R&D: Taking advantage of other sources of innovation in low- and medium-technology industries," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(3), pages 507-517, April.
    28. Eva Thulin & Bertil Vilhelmson & Martina Johansson, 2019. "New Telework, Time Pressure, and Time Use Control in Everyday Life," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(11), pages 1-17, May.
    29. Andrea Caragliu & Peter Nijkamp, 2016. "Space and knowledge spillovers in European regions: the impact of different forms of proximity on spatial knowledge diffusion," Journal of Economic Geography, Oxford University Press, vol. 16(3), pages 749-774.
    30. Fagerberg, Jan & Srholec, Martin, 2008. "National innovation systems, capabilities and economic development," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(9), pages 1417-1435, October.
    31. Cem Ertur & Wilfried Koch, 2007. "Growth, technological interdependence and spatial externalities: theory and evidence," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 22(6), pages 1033-1062.
    32. Szirmai, Adam & Naude, Wim & Goedhuys, Micheline (ed.), 2011. "Entrepreneurship, Innovation, and Economic Development," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780199596515.
    33. Mehmet G. Celbis & Serdar Turkeli, 2015. "Does Too Much Work Hamper Innovation? Evidence for Diminishing Returns of Work Hours for Patent Grants," Journal Global Policy and Governance, Transition Academia Press, vol. 4(1), pages 97-116.
    34. Hervás-Oliver, José-Luis & Parrilli, Mario Davide & Rodríguez-Pose, Andrés & Sempere-Ripoll, Francisca, 2021. "The drivers of SME innovation in the regions of the EU," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(9).
    35. Keld Laursen & Nicolai J. Foss, 2003. "New human resource management practices, complementarities and the impact on innovation performance," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 27(2), pages 243-263, March.
    36. Richard Shearmur & David Doloreux, 2016. "How open innovation processes vary between urban and remote environments: slow innovators, market-sourced information and frequency of interaction," Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 28(5-6), pages 337-357, May.
    37. Andrea Caragliu & Peter Nijkamp, 2012. "The impact of regional absorptive capacity on spatial knowledge spillovers: the Cohen and Levinthal model revisited," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 44(11), pages 1363-1374, April.
    38. Kianto, Aino & Sáenz, Josune & Aramburu, Nekane, 2017. "Knowledge-based human resource management practices, intellectual capital and innovation," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 81(C), pages 11-20.
    39. Edward L. Glaeser & Joshua D. Gottlieb, 2009. "The Wealth of Cities: Agglomeration Economies and Spatial Equilibrium in the United States," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 47(4), pages 983-1028, December.
    40. Bernard Fingleton & Enrique López‐Bazo, 2006. "Empirical growth models with spatial effects," Papers in Regional Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 85(2), pages 177-198, June.
    41. Susan Athey & Guido W. Imbens, 2019. "Machine Learning Methods That Economists Should Know About," Annual Review of Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 11(1), pages 685-725, August.
    42. Kimberly D. Elsbach & Andrew B. Hargadon, 2006. "Enhancing Creativity Through “Mindless” Work: A Framework of Workday Design," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 17(4), pages 470-483, August.
    43. Loet Leydesdorff & Henry Etzkowitz, 1998. "The Triple Helix as a model for innovation studies," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 25(3), pages 195-203, June.
    44. Kratzer, Jan & Meissner, Dirk & Roud, Vitaly, 2017. "Open innovation and company culture: Internal openness makes the difference," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 119(C), pages 128-138.
    45. Sendhil Mullainathan & Jann Spiess, 2017. "Machine Learning: An Applied Econometric Approach," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 31(2), pages 87-106, Spring.
    46. Kim, Tae San & Sohn, So Young, 2020. "Machine-learning-based deep semantic analysis approach for forecasting new technology convergence," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 157(C).
    47. Mehmet Güney Celbis & Denis de Crombrugghe, 2018. "Internet infrastructure and regional convergence: Evidence from Turkey," Papers in Regional Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 97(2), pages 387-409, June.
    48. Jones, Charles I, 1995. "R&D-Based Models of Economic Growth," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 103(4), pages 759-784, August.
    49. Gordon Burtch & Seth Carnahan & Brad N. Greenwood, 2018. "Can You Gig It? An Empirical Examination of the Gig Economy and Entrepreneurial Activity," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 64(12), pages 5497-5520, December.
    50. Ballestar, María Teresa & Doncel, Luis Miguel & Sainz, Jorge & Ortigosa-Blanch, Arturo, 2019. "A novel machine learning approach for evaluation of public policies: An application in relation to the performance of university researchers," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 149(C).
    51. J. Paul Elhorst, 2003. "Specification and Estimation of Spatial Panel Data Models," International Regional Science Review, , vol. 26(3), pages 244-268, July.
    52. Cristina Ponsiglione & Ivana Quinto & Giuseppe Zollo, 2018. "Regional Innovation Systems as Complex Adaptive Systems: The Case of Lagging European Regions," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(8), pages 1-19, August.
    53. Matthias Schonlau, 2005. "Boosted regression (boosting): An introductory tutorial and a Stata plugin," Stata Journal, StataCorp LP, vol. 5(3), pages 330-354, September.
    54. J. Elhorst, 2010. "Applied Spatial Econometrics: Raising the Bar," Spatial Economic Analysis, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 5(1), pages 9-28.
    55. Chris Freeman & Luc Soete, 1997. "The Economics of Industrial Innovation, 3rd Edition," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 3, volume 1, number 0262061953, December.
    56. Gao, Yang & Zhao, Xin & Xu, Xiaobo & Ma, Fei, 2021. "A study on the cross level transformation from individual creativity to organizational creativity," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 171(C).
    57. Spyros Arvanitis & Florian Seliger & Tobias Stucki, 2016. "The relative importance of human resource management practices for innovation," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 25(8), pages 769-800, November.
    58. Camps, Susanna & Marques, Pilar, 2014. "Exploring how social capital facilitates innovation: The role of innovation enablers," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 88(C), pages 325-348.
    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. Lily Davies & Mark Kattenberg & Benedikt Vogt, 2023. "Predicting Firm Exits with Machine Learning: Implications for Selection into COVID-19 Support and Productivity Growth," CPB Discussion Paper 444, CPB Netherlands Bureau for Economic Policy Analysis.
    2. de Blasio, Guido & D'Ignazio, Alessio & Letta, Marco, 2022. "Gotham city. Predicting ‘corrupted’ municipalities with machine learning," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 184(C).
    3. Mehmet Güney Celbiş, 2021. "A machine learning approach to rural entrepreneurship," Papers in Regional Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 100(4), pages 1079-1104, August.
    4. Mehmet Güney Celbiş & Pui‐hang Wong & Karima Kourtit & Peter Nijkamp, 2023. "Impacts of the COVID‐19 outbreak on older‐age cohorts in European Labor Markets: A machine learning exploration of vulnerable groups," Regional Science Policy & Practice, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 15(3), pages 559-584, April.
    5. Akash Malhotra, 2021. "A hybrid econometric–machine learning approach for relative importance analysis: prioritizing food policy," Eurasian Economic Review, Springer;Eurasia Business and Economics Society, vol. 11(3), pages 549-581, September.
    6. Sophie-Charlotte Klose & Johannes Lederer, 2020. "A Pipeline for Variable Selection and False Discovery Rate Control With an Application in Labor Economics," Papers 2006.12296, arXiv.org, revised Jun 2020.
    7. Barzin,Samira & Avner,Paolo & Maruyama Rentschler,Jun Erik & O’Clery,Neave, 2022. "Where Are All the Jobs ? A Machine Learning Approach for High Resolution Urban Employment Prediction inDeveloping Countries," Policy Research Working Paper Series 9979, The World Bank.
    8. Mona Aghdaee & Bonny Parkinson & Kompal Sinha & Yuanyuan Gu & Rajan Sharma & Emma Olin & Henry Cutler, 2022. "An examination of machine learning to map non‐preference based patient reported outcome measures to health state utility values," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 31(8), pages 1525-1557, August.
    9. Paola Rucker Schaeffer & Bruno Fischer & Sergio Queiroz, 2018. "Beyond Education: The Role of Research Universities in Innovation Ecosystems," Foresight and STI Governance (Foresight-Russia till No. 3/2015), National Research University Higher School of Economics, vol. 12(2), pages 50-61.
    10. Filmer,Deon P. & Nahata,Vatsal & Sabarwal,Shwetlena, 2021. "Preparation, Practice, and Beliefs : A Machine Learning Approach to Understanding Teacher Effectiveness," Policy Research Working Paper Series 9847, The World Bank.
    11. Matthias Siller & Christoph Hauser & Janette Walde & Gottfried Tappeiner, 2015. "Measuring regional innovation in one dimension: More lost than gained?," Working Papers 2015-14, Faculty of Economics and Statistics, Universität Innsbruck.
    12. Dario Sansone & Anna Zhu, 2023. "Using Machine Learning to Create an Early Warning System for Welfare Recipients," Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, Department of Economics, University of Oxford, vol. 85(5), pages 959-992, October.
    13. James T. E. Chapman & Ajit Desai, 2023. "Macroeconomic Predictions Using Payments Data and Machine Learning," Forecasting, MDPI, vol. 5(4), pages 1-32, November.
    14. Ajit Desai, 2023. "Machine Learning for Economics Research: When What and How?," Papers 2304.00086, arXiv.org, revised Apr 2023.
    15. Byron Botha & Rulof Burger & Kevin Kotzé & Neil Rankin & Daan Steenkamp, 2023. "Big data forecasting of South African inflation," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 65(1), pages 149-188, July.
    16. Elena Ivona DUMITRESCU & Sullivan HUE & Christophe HURLIN & Sessi TOKPAVI, 2020. "Machine Learning or Econometrics for Credit Scoring: Let’s Get the Best of Both Worlds," LEO Working Papers / DR LEO 2839, Orleans Economics Laboratory / Laboratoire d'Economie d'Orleans (LEO), University of Orleans.
    17. Yulin Liu & Luyao Zhang, 2022. "Cryptocurrency Valuation: An Explainable AI Approach," Papers 2201.12893, arXiv.org, revised Jul 2023.
    18. Kristof Lommers & Ouns El Harzli & Jack Kim, 2021. "Confronting Machine Learning With Financial Research," Papers 2103.00366, arXiv.org, revised Mar 2021.
    19. Nicolas Gavoille & Anna Zasova, 2021. "What we pay in the shadows: Labor tax evasion, minimum wage hike and employment," SSE Riga/BICEPS Research Papers 6, Baltic International Centre for Economic Policy Studies (BICEPS);Stockholm School of Economics in Riga (SSE Riga).
    20. Matthew A. Cole & Robert J R Elliott & Bowen Liu, 2020. "The Impact of the Wuhan Covid-19 Lockdown on Air Pollution and Health: A Machine Learning and Augmented Synthetic Control Approach," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 76(4), pages 553-580, August.

    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:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:23:p:13426-:d:694769. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.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.