IDEAS home Printed from
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this paper

Inovação Incremental ou Radical: Há Motivos para Diferenciar? Uma Abordagem com Dados da PINTEC

Listed author(s):
  • Luís F. Tironi
  • Bruno de O. Cruz
Registered author(s):

    Pesquisas de inovação, como a Pesquisa Industrial de Inovação Tecnológica (Pintec), permitem melhor conhecimento sobre o processo de inovação e são importantes para o aprimoramento das políticas públicas que visem à sua promoção. Este trabalho explora a Pintec a partir do grau de novidade da inovação e da distinção inovação radical vis-à-vis inovação incremental. Examina a relação entre grau de novidade e seus determinantes, destacando a absorção de ativos intangíveis. Analisa também a relação entre o grau de novidade e a produtividade total dos fatores (PTF) da indústria. O trabalho mostra que nas análises e na formulação de políticas é relevante distinguir a inovação segundo o grau de novidade devido à complexidade do tema e às diferentes conseqüências econômicas. Aponta para a necessidade de se formularem políticas para a minimização do risco da inovação, crescente com o aumento do grau de novidade e o emprego de ativos intangíveis. Indica, ainda, que a Pintec oferece informações úteis para tal. The availability of innovation surveys as Pintec provides better understanding about the innovation process and shall contribute to better design of public policies aiming at the boast in the innovation activities. This work exploits the Brazilian innovation survey, Pintec, departing from the concept of innovation height or novelty, distinguishing between radical and incremental innovations, assessing their relationship with some determinants and shedding light on the role of intagibles. The effect of the innovation height on productivity measures shows that innovation height has a strong and important impact on productivity growth. This paper indicates that in analysis and policy making it is relevant to distinguish innovation regarding novelty, due to the complexity of the issue and the different consequences to the economy. Points out the necessity of policies aiming at minimizing the risk of the innovation process which increases with novelty. And indicates too the Pintec provides valid information to do that.

    If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: no

    Paper provided by Instituto de Pesquisa Econômica Aplicada - IPEA in its series Discussion Papers with number 1360.

    in new window

    Length: 39 pages
    Date of creation: Oct 2008
    Handle: RePEc:ipe:ipetds:1360
    Contact details of provider: Postal:
    SBS - Quadra 01 - Bloco J - Ed. BNDES, Brasília, DF - 70076-90

    Phone: +55(061)315-5000
    Fax: +55(61)321-1597
    Web page:

    More information through EDIRC

    References listed on IDEAS
    Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:

    in new window

    1. Jason G. Cummins, 2005. "A New Approach to the Valuation of Intangible Capital," NBER Chapters,in: Measuring Capital in the New Economy, pages 47-72 National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    2. Emmanuel Duguet, 2006. "Innovation height, spillovers and tfp growth at the firm level: Evidence from French manufacturing," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 15(4-5), pages 415-442.
    3. Michael L. Darby & Lynne G. Zucker, 2010. "Grilichesian Breakthroughs: Inventions of Methods of Inventing and Firm Entry in Nanotechnology," NBER Chapters,in: Contributions in Memory of Zvi Griliches, pages 143-164 National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    4. Mark Doms & Eric J. Bartelsman, 2000. "Understanding Productivity: Lessons from Longitudinal Microdata," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 38(3), pages 569-594, September.
    5. Philippe Aghion & Stephen Bond & Alexander Klemm & Ioana Marinescu, 2004. "Technology and Financial Structure: Are Innovative Firms Different?," Journal of the European Economic Association, MIT Press, vol. 2(2-3), pages 277-288, 04/05.
    6. Solow Robert M., 2006. "Comments on Papers by Saint-Paul, Aghion, and Bhidé," Capitalism and Society, De Gruyter, vol. 1(1), pages 1-5, May.
    7. Bruno de Oliveira Cruz & Raouf Boucekkine, 2006. "Technological Progress and Investment Microeconomic Foundations and Macroeconomic Implications," Discussion Papers 1170, Instituto de Pesquisa Econômica Aplicada - IPEA.
    8. Dosi, Giovanni, 1993. "Technological paradigms and technological trajectories : A suggested interpretation of the determinants and directions of technical change," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 22(2), pages 102-103, April.
    9. Masako Ueda, 2004. "Banks versus Venture Capital: Project Evaluation, Screening, and Expropriation," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 59(2), pages 601-621, April.
    10. James Levinsohn & Amil Petrin, 2003. "Estimating Production Functions Using Inputs to Control for Unobservables," Review of Economic Studies, Oxford University Press, vol. 70(2), pages 317-341.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ipe:ipetds:1360. 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: (Fabio Schiavinatto)

    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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

    If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 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.

    This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.