IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/cgs/wpaper/33.html

The impact of technological regimes on patterns of sustained and sporadic innovation activities in UK industries

Author

Listed:
  • Marion Frenz
  • Martha Prevezer

Abstract

This paper brings together ideas about technological regimes and looks at their influence on patterns of sustained or persistent innovation across UK manufacturing and services industries using two waves of the UK Community Innovation Surveys. It builds a link between technological regimes and Schumpeterian patterns of innovation, and tests these on the CIS databases. It creates a model using the variables within the technological regime to see whether these can explain sustained patterns of innovation. These variables include appropriability, cumulativeness, technological opportunity and closeness to the science base as well as enterprise size. The paper finds that strong appropriability, a high degree of cumulativeness, and closeness to the applied science base are strong predictors of sustained innovation activities. The results on technological opportunity are ambiguous. High tech manufacturing industries, i.e. chemicals and scientific instruments as well as some high tech services i.e. telecoms are more likely to register persistent innovation.

Suggested Citation

  • Marion Frenz & Martha Prevezer, 2010. "The impact of technological regimes on patterns of sustained and sporadic innovation activities in UK industries," Working Papers 33, Queen Mary, University of London, School of Business and Management, Centre for Globalisation Research.
    • Handle: RePEc:cgs:wpaper:33
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://cgr.sbm.qmul.ac.uk/CGRWP33.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Jaffe, Adam B, 1988. "Demand and Supply Influences in R&D Intensity and Productivity Growth," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 70(3), pages 431-437, August.
    2. John Scott, 1984. "Firm versus Industry Variability in R&D Intensity," NBER Chapters, in: R&D, Patents, and Productivity, pages 233-248, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    3. Cefis, Elena & Orsenigo, Luigi, 2001. "The persistence of innovative activities: A cross-countries and cross-sectors comparative analysis," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 30(7), pages 1139-1158, August.
    4. 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.
    5. Shrieves, Ronald E, 1978. "Market Structure and Innovation: A New Perspective," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 26(4), pages 329-347, June.
    6. Kamien,Morton I. & Schwartz,Nancy L., 1982. "Market Structure and Innovation," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521293853, December.
    7. Breschi, Stefano & Malerba, Franco & Orsenigo, Luigi, 2000. "Technological Regimes and Schumpeterian Patterns of Innovation," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 110(463), pages 388-410, April.
    8. Ariel Pakes & Mark Schankerman, 1984. "An Exploration into the Determinants of Research Intensity," NBER Chapters, in: R&D, Patents, and Productivity, pages 209-232, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    9. Jaffe, Adam B., 1989. "Characterizing the "technological position" of firms, with application to quantifying technological opportunity and research spillovers," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 18(2), pages 87-97, April.
    10. Malerba, Franco & Orsenigo, Luigi, 1995. "Schumpeterian Patterns of Innovation," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 19(1), pages 47-65, February.
    11. Geroski, P. A. & Van Reenen, J. & Walters, C. F., 1997. "How persistently do firms innovate?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 26(1), pages 33-48, March.
    12. Malerba, Franco & Orsenigo, Luigi & Peretto, Pietro, 1997. "Persistence of innovative activities, sectoral patterns of innovation and international technological specialization," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 15(6), pages 801-826, October.
    13. Cefis, Elena, 2003. "Is there persistence in innovative activities?," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 21(4), pages 489-515, April.
    14. Spence, Michael, 1984. "Cost Reduction, Competition, and Industry Performance," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 52(1), pages 101-121, January.
    15. Geroski, P A, 1990. "Innovation, Technological Opportunity, and Market Structure," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 42(3), pages 586-602, July.
    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. 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.
    2. Bianchini, Stefano & Pellegrino, Gabriele, 2019. "Innovation persistence and employment dynamics," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(5), pages 1171-1186.
    3. Mañez, J.A. & Love, J.H., 2020. "Quantifying sunk costs and learning effects in R&D persistence," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(7).
    4. Anna Laura Baraldi & Claudia Cantabene & Giulio Perani, 2014. "Reverse causality in the R&D-patents relationship: an interpretation of the innovation persistence," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 23(3), pages 304-326, April.
    5. Juan Máñez & María Rochina-Barrachina & Amparo Sanchis-Llopis & Juan Sanchis-Llopis, 2015. "The determinants of R&D persistence in SMEs," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 44(3), pages 505-528, March.
    6. Cefis, Elena & Orsenigo, Luigi, 2001. "The persistence of innovative activities: A cross-countries and cross-sectors comparative analysis," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 30(7), pages 1139-1158, August.
    7. Show-Ling Jang & Jennifer H. Chen, 2011. "What determines how long an innovative spell will last?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 86(1), pages 65-76, January.
    8. Cefis, Elena & Marsili, Orietta, 2015. "Crossing the innovation threshold through mergers and acquisitions," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(3), pages 698-710.
    9. Lee, Chang-Yang, 2009. "Competition favors the prepared firm: Firms' R&D responses to competitive market pressure," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(5), pages 861-870, June.
    10. Triguero, Ángela & Córcoles, David, 2013. "Understanding innovation: An analysis of persistence for Spanish manufacturing firms," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(2), pages 340-352.
    11. Stefano Brusoni & Elena Cefis & Luigi Orsenigo, 2006. "Innovate or Die? A critical review of the literature on innovation and performance," KITeS Working Papers 179, KITeS, Centre for Knowledge, Internationalization and Technology Studies, Universita' Bocconi, Milano, Italy, revised Sep 2006.
    12. M. Capasso & E. Cefis & K. Frenken, 2009. "Do some firms persistently outperform?," Working Papers 09-, Utrecht School of Economics.
    13. William R. Latham & Christian Le Bas, 2005. " Persistence of Firm Innovative Behavior: Towards an Evolutionary Theory," Working Papers 05-14, University of Delaware, Department of Economics.
    14. Richa Shukla, 2020. "Market Structure, Entry Barriers, and Firms’ R&D Intensity: Panel Data Evidence from Electronics Goods Sector in India," Journal of Industry, Competition and Trade, Springer, vol. 20(1), pages 115-137, March.
    15. Erika Raquel Badillo & Rosina Moreno, 2014. "“Are R&D collaborative agreements persistent at the firm level? Empirical evidence for the Spanish case”," IREA Working Papers 201410, University of Barcelona, Research Institute of Applied Economics, revised Mar 2014.
    16. Archibugi, Daniele & Filippetti, Andrea & Frenz, Marion, 2013. "Economic crisis and innovation: Is destruction prevailing over accumulation?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(2), pages 303-314.
    17. E. Cefis & M. Ghita, 2008. "Post Merger Innovative Patterns in Small and Medium Firms," Working Papers 08-09, Utrecht School of Economics.
    18. Lee, Chang-Yang, 2010. "A theory of firm growth: Learning capability, knowledge threshold, and patterns of growth," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(2), pages 278-289, March.
    19. Sven-Olov Daunfeldt & Niklas Elert & Dan Johansson, 2016. "Are high-growth firms overrepresented in high-tech industries?," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 25(1), pages 1-21.
    20. Fulvio Castellacci, 2007. "Technological regimes and sectoral differences in productivity growth ," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 16(6), pages 1105-1145, December.

    More about this item

    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:cgs:wpaper:33. 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: Pedro S. Martins (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cgqmwuk.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.