IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wut/journl/v1y2019p5-15id1423.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Innovative advantages ranking. A new approach

Author

Listed:
  • Joseph Gogodze

Abstract

Assessing/ranking the innovative advantages of countries is a problem of current interest. However, the set of tools used for this purpose are very narrow and often prone to criticism. The aim of this study is to somewhat extend the arsenal of methods used to this end. For this purpose, based on a data set from the Global Innovation Index, this study develops a special multi-objective decision-making problem, the aim of which is to identify the “best countries” in the sense of their innovative advantage. Moreover, applying ranking methods (in our case the Markov-chain method and analytic hierarchy process) to this multi-objective decision-making problem, we obtain new alternative ratings/rankings of the innovative advantages of countries.

Suggested Citation

  • Joseph Gogodze, 2019. "Innovative advantages ranking. A new approach," Operations Research and Decisions, Wroclaw University of Science and Technology, Faculty of Management, vol. 29(1), pages 5-15.
    • Handle: RePEc:wut:journl:v:1:y:2019:p:5-15:id:1423
    DOI: 10.37190/ord190101
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ord.pwr.edu.pl/assets/papers_archive/1423%20-%20published.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.37190/ord190101?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Robert M. Solow, 1956. "A Contribution to the Theory of Economic Growth," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 70(1), pages 65-94.
    2. Thomas L. Saaty, 1986. "Axiomatic Foundation of the Analytic Hierarchy Process," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 32(7), pages 841-855, July.
    3. Julio González-Díaz & Ruud Hendrickx & Edwin Lohmann, 2014. "Paired comparisons analysis: an axiomatic approach to ranking methods," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 42(1), pages 139-169, January.
    4. Daron Acemoglu, 2015. "Localised and Biased Technologies: Atkinson and Stiglitz's New View, Induced Innovations, and Directed Technological Change," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 0(583), pages 443-463, March.
    5. Fagerberg, Jan & Srholec, Martin, 2008. "National innovation systems, capabilities and economic development," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(9), pages 1417-1435, October.
    6. Golany, B. & Kress, M., 1993. "A multicriteria evaluation of methods for obtaining weights from ratio-scale matrices," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 69(2), pages 210-220, September.
    7. Jiří Mazurek, 2018. "Some notes on the properties of inconsistency indices in pairwise comparisons," Operations Research and Decisions, Wroclaw University of Science and Technology, Faculty of Management, vol. 28(1), pages 27-42.
    8. Yoram Wind & Thomas L. Saaty, 1980. "Marketing Applications of the Analytic Hierarchy Process," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 26(7), pages 641-658, July.
    9. Daniele Archibugi & Francesco Crespi & Mario Denni & Andrea Filippetti, 2009. "The Technological Capabilities of Nations: A Survey of Composite Indicators," QA - Rivista dell'Associazione Rossi-Doria, Associazione Rossi Doria, issue 2, May.
    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. Joseph Gogodze, 2021. "Ranking Demographic Conditions: MCDM Approach," SN Operations Research Forum, Springer, vol. 2(2), pages 1-12, June.

    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. Dutrénit, Gabriela & Natera, José Miguel & Puchet Anyul, Martín & Vera-Cruz, Alexandre O., 2019. "Development profiles and accumulation of technological capabilities in Latin America," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 145(C), pages 396-412.
    2. Jan Fagerberg & Martin Srholec, 2017. "Global Dynamics, Capabilities and the Crisis," Economic Complexity and Evolution, in: Andreas Pyka & Uwe Cantner (ed.), Foundations of Economic Change, pages 83-106, Springer.
    3. Banai, Reza, 2010. "Evaluation of land use-transportation systems with the Analytic Network Process," The Journal of Transport and Land Use, Center for Transportation Studies, University of Minnesota, vol. 3(1), pages 85-112.
    4. Jan Fagerberg & Maryann Feldman & Martin Srholec, 2011. "Technological Dynamics and Social Capability: Comparing U.S. States and European Nations," Working Papers on Innovation Studies 20111114, Centre for Technology, Innovation and Culture, University of Oslo.
    5. Hoene, Andreas & Jawale, Mandar & Neukirchen, Thomas & Bednorz, Nicole & Schulz, Holger & Hauser, Simon, 2019. "Bewertung von Technologielösungen für Automatisierung und Ergonomieunterstützung der Intralogistik," ild Schriftenreihe 64, FOM Hochschule für Oekonomie & Management, Institut für Logistik- & Dienstleistungsmanagement (ild).
    6. Wenshuai Wu & Gang Kou, 2016. "A group consensus model for evaluating real estate investment alternatives," Financial Innovation, Springer;Southwestern University of Finance and Economics, vol. 2(1), pages 1-10, December.
    7. Hartvigsen, David, 2005. "Representing the strengths and directions of pairwise comparisons," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 163(2), pages 357-369, June.
    8. Fagerberg , Jan & Srholec , Martin, 2015. "Capabilities, Competitiveness, Nations," Papers in Innovation Studies 2015/2, Lund University, CIRCLE - Centre for Innovation Research.
    9. Fatma M. Utku-İsmihan, 2019. "Knowledge, technological convergence and economic growth: a dynamic panel data analysis of Middle East and North Africa and Latin America," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 53(2), pages 713-733, March.
    10. Liu Fang & Peng Yanan & Zhang Weiguo & Pedrycz Witold, 2017. "On Consistency in AHP and Fuzzy AHP," Journal of Systems Science and Information, De Gruyter, vol. 5(2), pages 128-147, April.
    11. Pascoe, Sean & Doshi, Amar & Kovac, Mladen & Austin, Angelica, 2019. "Estimating coastal and marine habitat values by combining multi-criteria methods with choice experiments," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 38(C), pages 1-1.
    12. Aull-Hyde, Rhonda & Erdogan, Sevgi & Duke, Joshua M., 2006. "An experiment on the consistency of aggregated comparison matrices in AHP," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 171(1), pages 290-295, May.
    13. Jan Fagerberg, 2010. "The Changing Global Economic Landscape: The Factors that Matter," Chapters, in: Robert M. Solow & Jean-Philippe Touffut (ed.), The Shape of the Division of Labour, chapter 1, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    14. Reinsberger, Kathrin & Brudermann, Thomas & Hatzl, Stefanie & Fleiß, Eva & Posch, Alfred, 2015. "Photovoltaic diffusion from the bottom-up: Analytical investigation of critical factors," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 159(C), pages 178-187.
    15. May, Jerrold H. & Shang, Jennifer & Tjader, Youxu Cai & Vargas, Luis G., 2013. "A new methodology for sensitivity and stability analysis of analytic network models," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 224(1), pages 180-188.
    16. Jan Fagerberg & Martin Srholec, 2017. "Capabilities, economic development, sustainability," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 41(3), pages 905-926.
    17. Georges Bresson & Jean-Michel Etienne & Pierre Mohnen, 2011. "How important is innovation? A Bayesian factor-augmented productivity model on panel data," Working Papers halshs-00812155, HAL.
    18. József Temesi, 2011. "Pairwise comparison matrices and the error-free property of the decision maker," Central European Journal of Operations Research, Springer;Slovak Society for Operations Research;Hungarian Operational Research Society;Czech Society for Operations Research;Österr. Gesellschaft für Operations Research (ÖGOR);Slovenian Society Informatika - Section for Operational Research;Croatian Operational Research Society, vol. 19(2), pages 239-249, June.
    19. Kang Xu & Jiuping Xu, 2020. "A direct consistency test and improvement method for the analytic hierarchy process," Fuzzy Optimization and Decision Making, Springer, vol. 19(3), pages 359-388, September.
    20. Song-Kyoo Kim, 2014. "Explicit Design of Innovation Performance Metrics by Using Analytic Hierarchy Process Expansion," International Journal of Mathematics and Mathematical Sciences, Hindawi, vol. 2014, pages 1-7, May.

    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:wut:journl:v:1:y:2019:p:5-15:id:1423. 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: Adam Kasperski (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/iopwrpl.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.