IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/csc/cerisp/201010.html

A responsiveness-based (composite) indicator with an application to countries’ innovative performance

Author

Abstract

The aim of this paper is twofold: on one hand, from a methodological-statistical perspective, it develops a responsiveness-based index for a series of input factors on a specific target variable (assumed to capture the phenomenon the analyst wishes to look at), by means of an extended version of a random coefficient regression approach; on the other hand, it applies this methodology to the case of countries’ innovation performance, where the target variable is the country number of patents (as proxy of “innovativeness”), and where inputs are chosen according to the literature dealing with the measurement of country technological capabilities. The novelty of the approach presented in the paper regards the possibility of extracting from data a country-specific “reactivity effect” or “responsiveness” (that is, mathematically, a derivative) to each single input feeding into the regression. Thus, the paper provides a promising approach for ranking countries according to their responsiveness to specific inputs, an approach that can be complementary to the analysis on “level” performed, for instance, in the canonical composite indicators’ literature. As for results on countries’ innovation function, besides a (new) ranking of countries, this approach allows also for testing - in an original and straightforward way - the (possible) presence of increasing (decreasing) returns. Two years are considered and compared, 1995 and 2007, on 42 countries. Our tests conclude that in both years innovative increasing returns are at work, although in 2007 their strength drops considerably compared to 1995. According to a huge literature on the subject (both neoclassical and evolutionary), we conclude that a self-reinforcing mechanism in new knowledge production, absorption and diffusion is at the basis of these results. As for the structural change found between 1995 and 2007, we deem it to depend on the growing globalization of production and innovation processes and on the brilliant growth of some developing countries worldwide, with a remarkable role played – according to our results – by post-communist economies.

Suggested Citation

  • Giovanni Cerulli, 2010. "A responsiveness-based (composite) indicator with an application to countries’ innovative performance," CERIS Working Paper 201010, CNR-IRCrES Research Institute on Sustainable Economic Growth - Torino (TO) ITALY - former Institute for Economic Research on Firms and Growth - Moncalieri (TO) ITALY.
  • Handle: RePEc:csc:cerisp:201010
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.byterfly.eu/islandora/object/librib:348469
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Godin, Benoit, 2007. "Science, accounting and statistics: The input-output framework," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(9), pages 1388-1403, November.
    2. Angrist, J.D. & Imbens, G.W., 1992. "Average causal response with variable treatment intensity," Discussion Paper 1992-34, Tilburg University, Center for Economic Research.
    3. A. Filippetti & A. Peyrache, 2010. "The Globalization of Technological Capabilities of Countries: A Dual Approach Using Composite Indicators & Data Envelopment Analysis," CEPA Working Papers Series WP102010, School of Economics, University of Queensland, Australia.
    4. Romer, Paul M, 1990. "Endogenous Technological Change," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 98(5), pages 71-102, October.
    5. Archibugi, Daniele & Coco, Alberto, 2005. "Measuring technological capabilities at the country level: A survey and a menu for choice," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(2), pages 175-194, March.
    6. 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.
    7. Wesley M. Cohen & Richard R. Nelson & John P. Walsh, 2000. "Protecting Their Intellectual Assets: Appropriability Conditions and Why U.S. Manufacturing Firms Patent (or Not)," NBER Working Papers 7552, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    8. repec:fth:harver:1473 is not listed on IDEAS
    9. Jeffrey James, 2006. "An Institutional Critique of Recent Attempts to Measure Technological Capabilities across Countries," Journal of Economic Issues, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 40(3), pages 743-766, September.
    10. Francisco L. Rivera-Batiz & Luis A. Rivera-Batiz, 2018. "International Trade with Endogenous Technological Change," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Francisco L Rivera-Batiz & Luis A Rivera-Batiz (ed.), International Trade, Capital Flows and Economic Development, chapter 2, pages 33-70, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    11. Giovanni Dosi & Franco Malerba (ed.), 1996. "Organization and Strategy in the Evolution of the Enterprise," Palgrave Macmillan Books, Palgrave Macmillan, number 978-1-349-13389-5, December.
    12. Nathan ROSENBERG, 2009. "Why do firms do basic research (with their own money)?," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Nathan Rosenberg (ed.), Studies On Science And The Innovation Process Selected Works of Nathan Rosenberg, chapter 11, pages 225-234, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    13. Joshua D. Angrist, 1991. "Instrumental Variables Estimation of Average Treatment Effects in Econometrics and Epidemiology," NBER Technical Working Papers 0115, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    14. James, M.J., 2006. "An institutional critique of recent attempts to measure technological capabilities across countries," Other publications TiSEM 05175942-7ecf-410c-9e17-b, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    15. Zvi Griliches, 1998. "Patent Statistics as Economic Indicators: A Survey," NBER Chapters, in: R&D and Productivity: The Econometric Evidence, pages 287-343, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    16. Wooldridge, Jeffrey M., 1997. "On two stage least squares estimation of the average treatment effect in a random coefficient model," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 56(2), pages 129-133, October.
    17. Wyplosz, Charles, 1991. "International trade with endogenous technological change : by L.A. Rivera-Batiz and P.M. Romer," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 35(4), pages 1002-1004, May.
    18. Malerba, Franco & Orsenigo, Luigi, 1996. "The Dynamics and Evolution of Industries," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 5(1), pages 51-87.
    19. Peter Howitt, 2000. "Endogenous Growth and Cross-Country Income Differences," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 90(4), pages 829-846, September.
    20. Schmookler, Jacob, 1962. "Economic Sources of Inventive Activity," The Journal of Economic History, Cambridge University Press, vol. 22(1), pages 1-20, March.
    21. Fagerberg, Jan & Srholec, Martin, 2008. "National innovation systems, capabilities and economic development," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(9), pages 1417-1435, October.
    22. Daniel Levinthal, 1996. "Learning and Schumpeterian Dynamics," Palgrave Macmillan Books, in: Giovanni Dosi & Franco Malerba (ed.), Organization and Strategy in the Evolution of the Enterprise, chapter 1, pages 27-41, Palgrave Macmillan.
    23. Barro, Robert J & Sala-i-Martin, Xavier, 1997. "Technological Diffusion, Convergence, and Growth," Journal of Economic Growth, Springer, vol. 2(1), pages 1-26, March.
    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. Giovanni Cerulli, 2012. "Are R&D Subsidies Provided Optimally? Evidence from a Simulated Agency-Firm Stochastic Dynamic Game," Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, vol. 15(1), pages 1-7.
    2. Cerulli, Giovanni, 2014. "The Impact of Technological Capabilities on Invention: An Investigation Based on Country Responsiveness Scores," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 147-165.
    3. Filippetti, Andrea & Peyrache, Antonio, 2011. "The Patterns of Technological Capabilities of Countries: A Dual Approach using Composite Indicators and Data Envelopment Analysis," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 39(7), pages 1108-1121, July.
    4. 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.
    5. Grafström, Jonas & Poudineh, Rahmat, 2023. "No evidence of counteracting policy effects on European solar power invention and diffusion," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 172(C).
    6. Rebecca Williams & Les Oxley, 2016. "The Geography of Inventiveness in the Primary Sector: Some Initial Results for New Zealand, 1880–1895," Australian Economic History Review, Economic History Society of Australia and New Zealand, vol. 56(2), pages 151-173, July.
    7. Proksch, Dorian & Haberstroh, Marcus Max & Pinkwart, Andreas, 2017. "Increasing the national innovative capacity: Identifying the pathways to success using a comparative method," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 116(C), pages 256-270.
    8. Gong, Guan & Keller, Wolfgang, 2003. "Convergence and polarization in global income levels: a review of recent results on the role of international technology diffusion," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(6), pages 1055-1079, June.
    9. Choi, Jin-Uk & Lee, Chang-Yang, 2022. "The differential effects of basic research on firm R&D productivity: The conditioning role of technological diversification," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 118(C).
    10. Simon Wiederhold, 2012. "The Role of Public Procurement in Innovation: Theory and Empirical Evidence," ifo Beiträge zur Wirtschaftsforschung, ifo Institute - Leibniz Institute for Economic Research at the University of Munich, number 43.
    11. Voxi Heinrich Amavilah & Antonio Rodríguez Andrés, 2024. "Knowledge Economy and the Economic Performance of African Countries: A Seemingly Unrelated and Recursive Approach," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 15(1), pages 110-143, March.
    12. Bernardes, Americo Tristao & Albuquerque, Eduardo da Motta e, 2003. "Cross-over, thresholds, and interactions between science and technology: lessons for less-developed countries," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(5), pages 865-885, May.
    13. Michael A. Verba, 2022. "Growth and innovation in the presence of knowledge and R&D accumulation dynamics," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 31(6), pages 485-510, August.
    14. Anja Breitwieser & Neil Foster-McGregor, 2012. "Intellectual Property Rights, Innovation and Technology Transfer: A Survey," wiiw Working Papers 88, The Vienna Institute for International Economic Studies, wiiw.
    15. Gombau, Verònica & Segarra Blasco, Agustí, 2011. "Innovation and absorptive capacity: What is the role of technological frontier?," Working Papers 2072/179622, Universitat Rovira i Virgili, Department of Economics.
    16. Vivarelli, Marco, 2014. "Structural Change and Innovation as Exit Strategies from the Middle Income Trap," IZA Discussion Papers 8148, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    17. Michele Cincera, 2005. "Firms' productivity growth and R&D spillovers: An analysis of alternative technological proximity measures," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 14(8), pages 657-682.
    18. Vivarelli, Marco, 2018. "Globalisation, structural change and innovation in emerging economies: The impact on employment and skills," MERIT Working Papers 2018-037, United Nations University - Maastricht Economic and Social Research Institute on Innovation and Technology (MERIT).
    19. Banerjee, Rajabrata & Roy, Saikat Sinha, 2014. "Human capital, technological progress and trade: What explains India's long run growth?," Journal of Asian Economics, Elsevier, vol. 30(C), pages 15-31.
    20. 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.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    JEL classification:

    • C21 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Single Equation Models; Single Variables - - - Cross-Sectional Models; Spatial Models; Treatment Effect Models
    • O31 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Innovation and Invention: Processes and Incentives
    • Q01 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - General - - - Sustainable Development

    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:csc:cerisp:201010. 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: Anna Perin or Giancarlo Birello (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cerisit.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.