IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/iaae15/212449.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Are in-house and outsourcing innovation strategies interlinked? Evidence from the European agri-food sector

Author

Listed:
  • Materia, Valentina
  • Pascucci, Stefano
  • Dries, Liesbeth

Abstract

The paper investigates the determinants of innovation strategies in the agri-food sector and the potential complementarity of these strategies. Innovation strategies are distinguished as in-house and outsourcing. The choice between strategies is motivated by transaction cost minimization, property rights appropriation and optimization of firms’ resources and competences. A bivariate probit model is implemented using cross-section data on 1,393 agri-food firms in seven EU countries. Results show that: decisions to innovate in-house or to outsource are not interlinked; high quality human resources and the use of ICT influence both the decision to innovate in-house and outsourcing, while organizational aspects, especially those related to decision-making within the firm, are relevant only for in-house innovation. Finally, we also find that large and internationalized firms are more likely to innovate in-house.

Suggested Citation

  • Materia, Valentina & Pascucci, Stefano & Dries, Liesbeth, 2015. "Are in-house and outsourcing innovation strategies interlinked? Evidence from the European agri-food sector," 2015 Conference, August 9-14, 2015, Milan, Italy 212449, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
  • Handle: RePEc:ags:iaae15:212449
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/212449/files/Materia-Are%20in-house%20and%20outsourcing%20innovation%20strategies%20interlinked%20Evidence-465.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Carlo Altomonte & Tommaso Aquilante & Gábor Békés & Gianmarco I.P. Ottaviano, 2013. "Internationalization and innovation of firms: evidence and policy," Economic Policy, CEPR;CES;MSH, vol. 28(76), pages 663-700, October.
    2. James H. Love & Stephen Roper, 2005. "Economists' perceptions versus managers' decisions: an experiment in transaction-cost analysis," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 29(1), pages 19-36, January.
    3. John Hauser & Gerard J. Tellis & Abbie Griffin, 2006. "Research on Innovation: A Review and Agenda for," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 25(6), pages 687-717, 11-12.
    4. Ruth Rama & Adelheid Holl, 2013. "Subcontracting relationships," Chapters,in: Handbook of Economic Organization, chapter 28 Edward Elgar Publishing.
    5. Holger Görg & Aoife Hanley & Eric Strobl, 2008. "Productivity effects of international outsourcing: evidence from plant-level data," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 41(2), pages 670-688, May.
    6. Galende, Jesus & de la Fuente, Juan Manuel, 2003. "Internal factors determining a firm's innovative behaviour," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(5), pages 715-736, May.
    7. Spyros Arvanitis & Euripidis N. Loukis, 2013. "Outsourcing and firm performance--a comparative study of Swiss and Greek firms," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press, vol. 22(3), pages 771-806, June.
    8. Veugelers, Reinhilde & Cassiman, Bruno, 1999. "Make and buy in innovation strategies: evidence from Belgian manufacturing firms," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 28(1), pages 63-80, January.
    9. Gooroochurn, Nishaal & Hanley, Aoife, 2007. "A tale of two literatures: Transaction costs and property rights in innovation outsourcing," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(10), pages 1483-1495, December.
    10. Pascucci, Stefano & Royer, Annie & Bijman, Jos, 2012. "To Make or to Buy: Is this the Question?," International Food and Agribusiness Management Review, International Food and Agribusiness Management Association, vol. 15(3), pages 1-20, September.
    11. 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.
    12. Hagedoorn, John & Wang, Ning, 2012. "Is there complementarity or substitutability between internal and external R&D strategies?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(6), pages 1072-1083.
    13. Kenta Nakamura & Hiroyuki Odagiri, 2005. "R&D boundaries of the firm: An estimation of the double-hurdle model on commissioned R&D, joint R&D, and licensing in Japan," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 14(7), pages 583-615.
    14. Arora, Ashish & Gambardella, Alfonso, 1990. "Complementarity and External Linkages: The Strategies of the Large Firms in Biotechnology," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 38(4), pages 361-379, June.
    15. Ángela Triguero & David Córcoles & María C. Cuerva, 2013. "Differences in Innovation Between Food and Manufacturing Firms: An Analysis of Persistence," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 29(3), pages 273-292, June.
    16. 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 569-596, September.
    17. Han, Sang Yun & Bae, Sung Joo, 2014. "Internalization of R&D outsourcing: An empirical study," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 150(C), pages 58-73.
    18. Bart Nooteboom, 2004. "Governance and competence: how can they be combined?," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 28(4), pages 505-525, July.
    19. James H. Love & Stephen Roper, 2001. "articles: Outsourcing in the innovation process: Locational and strategic determinants," Papers in Regional Science, Springer;Regional Science Association International, vol. 80(3), pages 317-336.
    20. Jonathan Michie & Maura Sheehan, 2003. "Labour market deregulation, 'flexibility' and innovation," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 27(1), pages 123-143, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Consumer/Household Economics; Food Consumption/Nutrition/Food Safety;

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:ags:iaae15:212449. 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: (AgEcon Search). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/iaaeeea.html .

    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 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.

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.