IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/bwu/schdps/sdp16003.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

An Alternative Approach towards the Knowledge Production Function on a Regional Level - Applications for the USA and Russia

Author

Listed:
  • Jens K. Perret

    (European Institute for International Economic Relations at the University of Wuppertal)

Abstract

The present study picks up on the aspect of knowledge generation - a key part of every national innovation system - in the context of the USA and the Russian Federation. Following Fritsch and Slavtchev (2006) a knowledge production function can be used to account for the efficiency of an innovation systems. In detail this study provides a quantile regression estimation of the knowledge production function to account for a possible non-linear relationship between knowledge inputs and knowledge output. Using regional data for researchers, expenditures on R\& D and patent grants for the USA and the Russian Federation - motivated by the results of a kernel density estimation and transition matrices - a quantile regression is performed for a basic knowledge production function design; for Russia as well for an extended design. The results show that in both countries there exist groups of regions with smaller sized research systems that report significantly different dynamics and thus knowledge production functions than regions with larger sized research systems.

Suggested Citation

  • Jens K. Perret, 2016. "An Alternative Approach towards the Knowledge Production Function on a Regional Level - Applications for the USA and Russia," Schumpeter Discussion Papers SDP16003, Universitätsbibliothek Wuppertal, University Library.
  • Handle: RePEc:bwu:schdps:sdp16003
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://elpub.bib.uni-wuppertal.de/edocs/dokumente/fbb/wirtschaftswissenschaft/sdp/sdp16/sdp16003.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Wang, Eric C. & Huang, Weichiao, 2007. "Relative efficiency of R&D activities: A cross-country study accounting for environmental factors in the DEA approach," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(2), pages 260-273, March.
    2. Daria Podmetina & Juha Vaatanen & Marko T. Torkkeli & Maria M. Smirnova, 2011. "Open innovation in Russian firms: an empirical investigation of technology commercialisation and acquisition," International Journal of Business Innovation and Research, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 5(3), pages 298-317.
    3. Armando Silva & Ana Paula Africano & Óscar Afonso, 2010. "Learning-by-exporting: what we know and what we would like to know," FEP Working Papers 364, Universidade do Porto, Faculdade de Economia do Porto.
    4. Yasser Abdih & Frederick Joutz, 2006. "Relating the Knowledge Production Function to Total Factor Productivity: An Endogenous Growth Puzzle," IMF Staff Papers, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 53(2), pages 1-3.
    5. Ivan Savin & Peter Winker, 2012. "Heuristic Optimization Methods for Dynamic Panel Data Model Selection: Application on the Russian Innovative Performance," Computational Economics, Springer;Society for Computational Economics, vol. 39(4), pages 337-363, April.
    6. Lichtenberg, Frank R. & Pottelsberghe de la Potterie, Bruno v., 1998. "International R&D spillovers: A comment," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 42(8), pages 1483-1491, September.
    7. Branstetter, Lee G., 2001. "Are knowledge spillovers international or intranational in scope?: Microeconometric evidence from the U.S. and Japan," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 53(1), pages 53-79, February.
    8. Liana Marina Ranga & Koenraad Debackere & Nick von Tunzelmann, 2003. "Entrepreneurial universities and the dynamics of academic knowledge production: A case study of basic vs. applied research in Belgium," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 58(2), pages 301-320, October.
    9. Jaan Masso & Priit Vahter, 2008. "Technological innovation and productivity in late-transition Estonia: econometric evidence from innovation surveys," The European Journal of Development Research, Taylor and Francis Journals, vol. 20(2), pages 240-261.
    10. Michael Fritsch & Viktor Slavtchev, 2007. "Universities and Innovation in Space," Industry and Innovation, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 14(2), pages 201-218.
    11. Wagner, Joachim, 2006. "International Firm Activities and Innovation: Evidence from Knowledge Production Functions for German Firms," HWWA Discussion Papers 344, Hamburg Institute of International Economics (HWWA).
    12. Fritsch, Michael & Franke, Grit, 2004. "Innovation, regional knowledge spillovers and R&D cooperation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(2), pages 245-255, March.
    13. Zucker, Lynne G. & Darby, Michael R. & Furner, Jonathan & Liu, Robert C. & Ma, Hongyan, 2007. "Minerva unbound: Knowledge stocks, knowledge flows and new knowledge production," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(6), pages 850-863, July.
    14. Jakob Madsen, 2008. "Semi-endogenous versus Schumpeterian growth models: testing the knowledge production function using international data," Journal of Economic Growth, Springer, vol. 13(1), pages 1-26, March.
    15. Michael Fritsch, 2002. "Measuring the Quality of Regional Innovation Systems: A Knowledge Production Function Approach," International Regional Science Review, , vol. 25(1), pages 86-101, January.
    16. Fingleton, Bernard, 1997. "Specification and Testing of Markov Chain Models: An Application to Convergence in the European Union," Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, Department of Economics, University of Oxford, vol. 59(3), pages 385-403, August.
    17. Ramani, Shyama V. & El-Aroui, Mhamed-Ali & Carrère, Myriam, 2008. "On estimating a knowledge production function at the firm and sector level using patent statistics," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(9), pages 1568-1578, October.
    18. Roper, Stephen & Hewitt-Dundas, Nola, 2015. "Knowledge stocks, knowledge flows and innovation: Evidence from matched patents and innovation panel data," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(7), pages 1327-1340.
    19. Shyama Ramani & Mhamed-Ali El-Aroui & Myriam Carrère, 2008. "On estimating a knowledge production function at the firm and sectoral level using patent statistics," Post-Print hal-00365396, HAL.
    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. Chatterjee, Diti & Dinar, Ariel & González-Rivera, Gloria, 2018. "An empirical knowledge production function of agricultural research and extension: The case of the University of California Cooperative Extension," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 134(C), pages 290-297.

    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. Jens K. Perret, 2019. "Re-Evaluating the Knowledge Production Function for the Regions of the Russian Federation," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 10(2), pages 670-694, June.
    2. Jens K. Perret, 2016. "A Spatial Knowledge Production Function Approach for the Regions of the Russian Federation," EIIW Discussion paper disbei217, Universitätsbibliothek Wuppertal, University Library.
    3. Luintel, Kul B. & Khan, Mosahid, 2017. "Ideas production and international knowledge spillovers: Digging deeper into emerging countries," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(10), pages 1738-1754.
    4. Chatterjee, Diti & Dinar, Ariel & González-Rivera, Gloria, 2018. "An empirical knowledge production function of agricultural research and extension: The case of the University of California Cooperative Extension," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 134(C), pages 290-297.
    5. Neves, Pedro Cunha & Sequeira, Tiago Neves, 2018. "Spillovers in the production of knowledge: A meta-regression analysis," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(4), pages 750-767.
    6. Lili Wang & Zexia Li, 2021. "Knowledge flows from public science to industrial technologies," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 46(4), pages 1232-1255, August.
    7. Capolupo, Rosa, 2009. "The New Growth Theories and Their Empirics after Twenty Years," Economics - The Open-Access, Open-Assessment E-Journal (2007-2020), Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW Kiel), vol. 3, pages 1-72.
    8. Markus Eberhardt & Christian Helmers & Hubert Strauss, 2013. "Do Spillovers Matter When Estimating Private Returns to R&D?," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 95(2), pages 436-448, May.
    9. Arkady Trachuk & Natalia Linder, 2018. "Innovation and Performance: An Empirical Study of Russian Industrial Companies," International Journal of Innovation and Technology Management (IJITM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 15(03), pages 1-22, June.
    10. Crescenzi, Riccardo & Gagliardi, Luisa, 2018. "The innovative performance of firms in heterogeneous environments: The interplay between external knowledge and internal absorptive capacities," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(4), pages 782-795.
    11. James B. Ang & Jakob B. Madsen, 2011. "Can Second-Generation Endogenous Growth Models Explain the Productivity Trends and Knowledge Production in the Asian Miracle Economies?," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 93(4), pages 1360-1373, November.
    12. Yang, Chih-Hai & Lee, Wen-Chieh, 2021. "Establishing science parks everywhere? Misallocation in R&D and its determinants of science parks in China," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 67(C).
    13. Herzer, Dierk, 2022. "The impact of domestic and foreign R&D on TFP in developing countries," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 151(C).
    14. Herzer Dierk, 2022. "Semi-endogenous Versus Schumpeterian Growth Models: A Critical Review of the Literature and New Evidence," Review of Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 73(1), pages 1-55, April.
    15. Cristian Barra & Nazzareno Ruggiero, 2022. "On the impact of knowledge and institutional spillovers on RIS efficiency. Evidence from Italian regional level," Growth and Change, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 53(2), pages 702-752, June.
    16. Quatraro, Francesco, 2008. "Regional Knowledge Base and Productivity Growth: The Evidence of Italian Manufacturing," Department of Economics and Statistics Cognetti de Martiis LEI & BRICK - Laboratory of Economics of Innovation "Franco Momigliano", Bureau of Research in Innovation, Complexity and Knowledge, Collegio 200810, University of Turin.
    17. Quatraro, Francesco, 2010. "Knowledge coherence, variety and economic growth: Manufacturing evidence from Italian regions," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(10), pages 1289-1302, December.
    18. Thomas Brenner & Matthias Duschl, 2015. "Causal dynamic effects in regional systems of technological activities: a SVAR approach," The Annals of Regional Science, Springer;Western Regional Science Association, vol. 55(1), pages 103-130, October.
    19. Montresor, Sandro & Vezzani, Antonio, 2015. "The production function of top R&D investors: Accounting for size and sector heterogeneity with quantile estimations," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(2), pages 381-393.
    20. Jakob B. Madsen, 2009. "The Anatomy of Growth in the OECD since 1870: the Transformation from the Post-Malthusian Growth Regime to the Modern Growth Epoch," Monash Economics Working Papers 14-09, Monash University, Department of Economics.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Russian Federation; USA; Innovation System; Knowledge Production Function; Knowledge Generation; Quantile Regression; Regional Economics;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • P25 - Economic Systems - - Socialist Systems and Transition Economies - - - Urban, Rural, and Regional Economics
    • O31 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Innovation and Invention: Processes and Incentives
    • O57 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Economywide Country Studies - - - Comparative Studies of Countries

    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:bwu:schdps:sdp16003. 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: . General contact details of provider: http://elpub.bib.uni-wuppertal.de .

    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: Frank Hoffmann (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://elpub.bib.uni-wuppertal.de .

    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.