IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/iza/izadps/dp4301.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

How Do Young Innovative Companies Innovate?

Author

Listed:
  • Pellegrino, Gabriele

    () (EPFL, Lausanne)

  • Piva, Mariacristina

    () (Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore)

  • Vivarelli, Marco

    () (Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore)

Abstract

This paper discusses the determinants of product innovation in young innovative companies (YICs) by looking at in-house and external R&D and at the acquisition of external technology in embodied and disembodied components. These input-output relationships are tested on a sample of innovative Italian firms. A sample-selection approach is applied. Results show that in-house R&D is linked to the propensity to introduce product innovation both in mature firms and YICs; however, innovation intensity in the YICs is mainly dependent on embodied technical change from external sources, while − in contrast with the incumbent firms − in-house R&D does not play a significant role.

Suggested Citation

  • Pellegrino, Gabriele & Piva, Mariacristina & Vivarelli, Marco, 2009. "How Do Young Innovative Companies Innovate?," IZA Discussion Papers 4301, Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA).
  • Handle: RePEc:iza:izadps:dp4301
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://ftp.iza.org/dp4301.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Malerba, Franco, 2002. "Sectoral systems of innovation and production," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 31(2), pages 247-264, February.
    2. Storey, D. J. & Tether, B. S., 1998. "New technology-based firms in the European union: an introduction," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 26(9), pages 933-946, April.
    3. Malerba, Franco, 1992. "Learning by Firms and Incremental Technical Change," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 102(413), pages 845-859, July.
    4. Enrico Santarelli & Marco Vivarelli, 2007. "Entrepreneurship and the process of firms’ entry, survival and growth," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press, vol. 16(3), pages 455-488, June.
    5. Acs, Zoltan J & Audretsch, David B, 1988. "Innovation in Large and Small Firms: An Empirical Analysis," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 78(4), pages 678-690, September.
    6. Audretsch, David B & Vivarelli, Marco, 1993. "New-Firm Start-ups in Italy," CEPR Discussion Papers 864, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    7. Winter, Sidney G., 1984. "Schumpeterian competition in alternative technological regimes," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 5(3-4), pages 287-320.
    8. Bronwyn H. Hall & Adam Jaffe & Manuel Trajtenberg, 2005. "Market Value and Patent Citations," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 36(1), pages 16-38, Spring.
    9. Timothy F. Bresnahan & Erik Brynjolfsson & Lorin M. Hitt, 2002. "Information Technology, Workplace Organization, and the Demand for Skilled Labor: Firm-Level Evidence," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 117(1), pages 339-376.
    10. Hans Loof & Almas Heshmati, 2006. "On the relationship between innovation and performance: A sensitivity analysis," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 15(4-5), pages 317-344.
    11. repec:fth:harver:1473 is not listed on IDEAS
    12. Piva, Mariacristina & Santarelli, Enrico & Vivarelli, Marco, 2005. "The skill bias effect of technological and organisational change: Evidence and policy implications," Research Policy, Elsevier, pages 141-157.
    13. Pavitt, Keith, 1984. "Sectoral patterns of technical change: Towards a taxonomy and a theory," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 13(6), pages 343-373, December.
    14. Corinne Barlet & Emmanuel Duguet & David Encaoua & Jacqueline Pradel, 1998. "The Commercial Success of Innovations: an Econometric Analysis at the Firm Lebel in French Manufacturing," Annals of Economics and Statistics, GENES, issue 49-50, pages 457-478.
    15. Jorgenson, Dale W., 1966. "The Embodiment Hypothesis," Scholarly Articles 3403063, Harvard University Department of Economics.
    16. Conte, Andrea & Vivarelli, Marco, 2005. "One or Many Knowledge Production Functions? Mapping Innovative Activity Using Microdata," IZA Discussion Papers 1878, Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA).
    17. 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.
    18. Isabel Busom, 2000. "An Empirical Evaluation of The Effects of R&D Subsidies," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 9(2), pages 111-148.
    19. Claudio A . Piga & Marco Vivarelli, 2004. "Internal and External R&D: A Sample Selection Approach," Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, Department of Economics, University of Oxford, vol. 66(4), pages 457-482, September.
    20. Narula, Rajneesh & Zanfei, Antonello, 2003. "The international dimension of innovation," Research Memorandum 010, Maastricht University, Maastricht Economic Research Institute on Innovation and Technology (MERIT).
    21. Dale W. Jorgenson, 1966. "The Embodiment Hypothesis," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 74, pages 1-1.
    22. Bruno Crepon & Emmanuel Duguet & Jacques Mairesse, 1998. "Research, Innovation And Productivity: An Econometric Analysis At The Firm Level," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 7(2), pages 115-158.
    23. 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.
    24. Alessandro Arrighetti & Marco Vivarelli, 1999. "The Role of Innovation in the Postentry Performance of New Small Firms: Evidence from Italy," Southern Economic Journal, Southern Economic Association, vol. 65(4), pages 927-939, April.
    25. Fritsch, Michael & Franke, Grit, 2004. "Innovation, regional knowledge spillovers and R&D cooperation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(2), pages 245-255, March.
    26. Gilbert, Richard J & Newbery, David M G, 1982. "Preemptive Patenting and the Persistence of Monopoly," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 72(3), pages 514-526, June.
    27. Jacques Mairesse & Pierre Mohnen, 2002. "Accounting for Innovation and Measuring Innovativeness: An Illustrative Framework and an Application," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 92(2), pages 226-230, May.
    28. Hulten, Charles R, 1992. "Growth Accounting When Technical Change Is Embodied in Capital," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 82(4), pages 964-980, September.
    29. Bruno Cassiman & Reinhilde Veugelers, 2002. "R&D Cooperation and Spillovers: Some Empirical Evidence from Belgium," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 92(4), pages 1169-1184, September.
    30. Malerba, Franco & Orsenigo, Luigi, 1995. "Schumpeterian Patterns of Innovation," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 19(1), pages 47-65, February.
    31. Dosi, Giovanni, 1988. "Sources, Procedures, and Microeconomic Effects of Innovation," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 26(3), pages 1120-1171, September.
    32. repec:adr:anecst:y:1998:i:49-50:p:17 is not listed on IDEAS
    33. Greenwood, Jeremy & Hercowitz, Zvi & Krusell, Per, 1997. "Long-Run Implications of Investment-Specific Technological Change," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, pages 342-362.
    34. Colombo, Massimo G. & Grilli, Luca, 2005. "Founders' human capital and the growth of new technology-based firms: A competence-based view," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(6), pages 795-816, August.
    35. Parisi, Maria Laura & Schiantarelli, Fabio & Sembenelli, Alessandro, 2006. "Productivity, innovation and R&D: Micro evidence for Italy," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 50(8), pages 2037-2061, November.
    36. Harhoff, Dietmar & Scherer, Frederic M. & Vopel, Katrin, 2003. "Citations, family size, opposition and the value of patent rights," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(8), pages 1343-1363, September.
    37. Archibugi, Daniele & Iammarino, Simona, 1999. "The policy implications of the globalisation of innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 28(2-3), pages 317-336, March.
    38. C. Piga & M. Vivarelli, 2003. "Sample selection in estimating the determinants of cooperative R&D," Applied Economics Letters, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 10(4), pages 243-246.
    39. Elena Huergo & Jordi Jaumandreu, 2004. "How Does Probability of Innovation Change with Firm Age?," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 22(3_4), pages 193-207, April.
    40. repec:adr:anecst:y:1998:i:49-50:p:18 is not listed on IDEAS
    41. Santamara, Llus & Nieto, Mara Jess & Barge-Gil, Andrs, 2009. "Beyond formal R&D: Taking advantage of other sources of innovation in low- and medium-technology industries," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(3), pages 507-517, April.
    42. Charles R. Hulten, 1992. "Growth Accounting When Technical Change is Embodied in Capital," NBER Working Papers 3971, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    43. Schneider, Cedric & Veugelers, Reinhilde, 2008. "On Young Innovative Companies: Why they matter and how (not) to policy support them," Working Papers 04-2008, Copenhagen Business School, Department of Economics.
    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. Alicia Mas-Tur & Domingo Ribeiro Soriano, 2014. "The level of innovation among young innovative companies: the impacts of knowledge-intensive services use, firm characteristics and the entrepreneur attributes," Service Business, Springer;Pan-Pacific Business Association, vol. 8(1), pages 51-63, March.
    2. Roig-Tierno, Norat & Alcázar, Joaquín & Ribeiro-Navarrete, Samuel, 2015. "Use of infrastructures to support innovative entrepreneurship and business growth," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 68(11), pages 2290-2294.
    3. José García-Quevedo & Gabriele Pellegrino & Marco Vivarelli, 2011. "The determinants of YIc's R&D activity," Working Papers XREAP2011-20, Xarxa de Referència en Economia Aplicada (XREAP), revised Dec 2011.
    4. Paulo Nunes & Marco Gonçalves & Zélia Serrasqueiro, 2013. "The influence of age on SMEs’ growth determinants: empirical evidence," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 40(2), pages 249-272, February.
    5. Stéphane Lhuillery & Julio Raffo & Intan Hamdan-Livramento, 2016. "Measuring creativity: Learning from innovation measurement," WIPO Economic Research Working Papers 31, World Intellectual Property Organization - Economics and Statistics Division.
    6. Segarra Blasco, Agustí, 1958- & Gombau, Verònica, 2013. "Young innovative firms and R&D strategies: is the Spanish case different?," Working Papers 2072/222200, Universitat Rovira i Virgili, Department of Economics.
    7. Michele Cincera & Reinhilde Veugelers, 2013. "Exploring Europe's R&D deficit relative to the US: Differences in the rates of return to R&D of young leading R&D firms," iCite Working Papers 2013 - 001, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
    8. Cincera, Michele & Veugelers, Reinhilde, 2014. "Differences in the rates of return to R&D for European and US young leading R&D firms," Research Policy, Elsevier, pages 1413-1421.
    9. Mas-Tur, Alicia & Simón Moya, Virginia, 2015. "Young innovative companies (YICs) and entrepreneurship policy," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 68(7), pages 1432-1435.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    R&D; product innovation; embodied technical change; CIS 3; sample selection;

    JEL classification:

    • O31 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Innovation and Invention: Processes and Incentives

    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:iza:izadps:dp4301. 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: (Mark Fallak). General contact details of provider: http://www.iza.org .

    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.