IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/csc/cerisp/201010.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

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, Institute for Economic Research on Firms and Growth - Moncalieri (TO) ITALY -NOW- Research Institute on Sustainable Economic Growth - Moncalieri (TO) ITALY.
  • Handle: RePEc:csc:cerisp:201010
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.digibess.it/fedora/repository/object_download/openbess:TO094-00003/PDF/openbess_TO094-00003.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. 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..
    2. Godin, Benoit, 2007. "Science, accounting and statistics: The input-output framework," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(9), pages 1388-1403, November.
    3. Angrist, J.D. & Imbens, G.W., 1992. "Average causal response with variable treatment intensity," Discussion Paper 1992-34, Tilburg University, Center for Economic Research.
    4. 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.
    5. 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.
    6. Romer, Paul M, 1990. "Endogenous Technological Change," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 98(5), pages 71-102, October.
    7. 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.
    8. 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.
    9. repec:fth:harver:1473 is not listed on IDEAS
    10. 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.
    11. 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..
    12. Fagerberg, Jan & Srholec, Martin, 2008. "National innovation systems, capabilities and economic development," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(9), pages 1417-1435, October.
    13. 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.
    14. 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.
    15. 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.
    16. Malerba, Franco & Orsenigo, Luigi, 1996. "The Dynamics and Evolution of Industries," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press, vol. 5(1), pages 51-87.
    17. Schmookler, Jacob, 1962. "Economic Sources of Inventive Activity," The Journal of Economic History, Cambridge University Press, vol. 22(1), pages 1-20, 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. 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.
    4. 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.
    5. 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.
    6. João Prates Romero, 2016. "Increasing Returns To Scale, Technological Catch-Up And Research Intensity: An Industry-Level Investigation Combining Eu Klems Productivity Data With Patent Data," Anais do XLIII Encontro Nacional de Economia [Proceedings of the 43rd Brazilian Economics Meeting] 102, ANPEC - Associação Nacional dos Centros de Pós-Graduação em Economia [Brazilian Association of Graduate Programs in Economics].
    7. Cirillo, Valeria & Martinelli, Arianna & Nuvolari, Alessandro & Tranchero, Matteo, 2019. "Only one way to skin a cat? Heterogeneity and equifinality in European national innovation systems," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(4), pages 905-922.
    8. Castellacci, Fulvio & Natera, Jose Miguel, 2013. "The dynamics of national innovation systems: A panel cointegration analysis of the coevolution between innovative capability and absorptive capacity," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(3), pages 579-594.
    9. 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.
    10. Alessandra Venturini & Claudio Fassio & Fabio Montobbio, 2015. "How do Native and Migrant Workers Contribute to Innovation? A Study on France, Germany and the UK," Discussion Papers 30, Central European Labour Studies Institute (CELSI).
    11. Gancia, Gino & Zilibotti, Fabrizio, 2005. "Horizontal Innovation in the Theory of Growth and Development," Handbook of Economic Growth, in: Philippe Aghion & Steven Durlauf (ed.), Handbook of Economic Growth, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 3, pages 111-170, Elsevier.
    12. Michael Roach & Wesley M. Cohen, 2012. "Lens or Prism? Patent Citations as a Measure of Knowledge Flows from Public Research," NBER Working Papers 18292, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    13. Marco Vivarelli, 2016. "The middle income trap: a way out based on technological and structural change," Economic Change and Restructuring, Springer, vol. 49(2), pages 159-193, August.
    14. Krafft Jackie & Quatraro Francesco & Colombelli Alessandra, 2011. "High Growth Firms and Technological Knowledge: Do gazelles follow exploration or exploitation strategies?," 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 201114, University of Turin.
    15. Xavier Vives, 2008. "Innovation And Competitive Pressure," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 56(3), pages 419-469, December.
    16. Crass, Dirk & Schwiebacher, Franz, 2013. "Do trademarks diminish the substitutability of products in innovative knowledge-intensive services?," ZEW Discussion Papers 13-061, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    17. Hasan, Iftekhar & Tucci, Christopher L., 2010. "The innovation-economic growth nexus: Global evidence," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(10), pages 1264-1276, December.
    18. Petra Moser, 2005. "How Do Patent Laws Influence Innovation? Evidence from Nineteenth-Century World's Fairs," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 95(4), pages 1214-1236, September.
    19. Marco Vivarelli, 2015. "Structural Change and Innovation in Developing Economies: A Way Out of the Middle Income Trap ?," LEM Papers Series 2015/09, Laboratory of Economics and Management (LEM), Sant'Anna School of Advanced Studies, Pisa, Italy.
    20. Óscar Afonso, 2001. "The Impact of International Trade on Economic Growth," FEP Working Papers 106, Universidade do Porto, Faculdade de Economia do Porto.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Responsiveness; Country indicators; Random coefficient regression; Innovation function;
    All these 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.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Anna Perin) or (Giancarlo Birello). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/cerisit.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.