IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ris/uncgec/2019_007.html

Creativity-Enhancing Technological Change in the Production of Scientific Knowledge

Author

Listed:
  • Al Link

    (University of North Carolina at Greensboro, Department of Economics)

  • John Scott

    (Dartmouth College)

Abstract

We view scientific publications as a measure of technical knowledge. Using the Solow method of functional decomposition and scientific publication data from the National Institute of Standards and Technology, we find that 79 percent if the increase of scientific publications per unit of scientific personnel is explained by an increase in federal R&D capital per unit of scientific personnel. We describe the unexplained or residual 21 percent as a measure of creativity-enhancing technological change, a phenomenon that offers a way to reverse the perceived slowing of the productivity of science. The explained 79 percent offers a possible metric for federal laboratories' mandated reporting of a ROI to federal R&D. Understanding the drivers of the residual 21 percent could enable public policy to mitigate the resource constraints caused by the breakdown of exponential growth of the resources devoted to science.

Suggested Citation

  • Al Link & John Scott, 2019. "Creativity-Enhancing Technological Change in the Production of Scientific Knowledge," UNCG Economics Working Papers 19-7, University of North Carolina at Greensboro, Department of Economics.
    • Handle: RePEc:ris:uncgec:2019_007
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://bryan.uncg.edu/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/19-07-Creativity-Enhancing-Technological-Change-in-the-Production-of-Scientific-Knowledge.pdf
    File Function: Full text
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Nicholas Bloom & Charles I. Jones & John Van Reenen & Michael Webb, 2020. "Are Ideas Getting Harder to Find?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 110(4), pages 1104-1144, April.
    2. Robert D. Shelton, 2008. "Relations between national research investment and publication output: Application to an American Paradox," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 74(2), pages 191-205, February.
    3. John Bound & Clint Cummins & Zvi Griliches & Bronwyn H. Hall & Adam B. Jaffe, 1984. "Who Does R&D and Who Patents?," NBER Chapters, in: R&D, Patents, and Productivity, pages 21-54, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    4. Zvi Griliches, 1998. "Issues in Assessing the Contribution of Research and Development to Productivity Growth," NBER Chapters, in: R&D and Productivity: The Econometric Evidence, pages 17-45, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    5. Scherer, F. M., 1983. "The propensity to patent," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 1(1), pages 107-128, March.
    6. Zvi Griliches, 1984. "R&D, Patents, and Productivity," NBER Books, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc, number gril84-1, February.
    7. James Adams & Zvi Griliches, 1996. "Measuring Science: An Exploration," Harvard Institute of Economic Research Working Papers 1749, Harvard - Institute of Economic Research.
    8. Hall, Bronwyn H & Ziedonis, Rosemarie Ham, 2001. "The Patent Paradox Revisited: An Empirical Study of Patenting in the U.S. Semiconductor Industry, 1979-1995," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 32(1), pages 101-128, Spring.
    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. Cauwels, Peter & Sornette, Didier, 2022. "Are ‘flow of ideas’ and ‘research productivity’ in secular decline?," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 174(C).
    2. Albert N. Link, 2021. "Knowledge transfers from federally supported R&D," International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, Springer, vol. 17(1), pages 249-260, March.
    3. Hans Löfsten & Magnus Klofsten, 2024. "Exploring dyadic relationships between Science Parks and universities: bridging theory and practice," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 49(5), pages 1914-1934, October.
    4. David B. Audretsch & Albert N. Link & Martijn Hasselt, 2019. "Knowledge begets knowledge: university knowledge spillovers and the output of scientific papers from U.S. Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) projects," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 121(3), pages 1367-1383, December.
    5. Albert N. Link & John T. Scott, 2021. "Technological change in the production of new scientific knowledge: a second look," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 30(4), pages 371-381, May.
    6. Albert N. Link & John T. Scott, 2021. "Scientific publications at U.S. federal research laboratories," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(3), pages 2227-2248, March.
    7. Antonelli, Cristiano & Tubiana, Matteo, 2023. "The rate and direction of technological change and wealth and income inequalities in advanced countries," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 191(C).
    8. Kamilla Kohn Rådberg & Hans Löfsten, 2023. "Developing a knowledge ecosystem for large-scale research infrastructure," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 48(1), pages 441-467, February.
    9. David Bruce Audretsch & Maksim Belitski & Rosa Caiazza, 2021. "Start-ups, Innovation and Knowledge Spillovers," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 46(6), pages 1995-2016, December.

    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. Burak Dindaroglu, 2011. "R&D Productivity and Firm Size in Semiconductors and Pharmaceuticals: Evidence from Citation Yields," Working Papers 1101, Izmir University of Economics.
    2. Doh, Soogwan & Kim, Byungkyu, 2014. "Government support for SME innovations in the regional industries: The case of government financial support program in South Korea," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(9), pages 1557-1569.
    3. Albert N. Link & John T. Scott, 2021. "Scientific publications at U.S. federal research laboratories," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(3), pages 2227-2248, March.
    4. Kim, Jinyoung, 2022. "Teamwork in innovation under time pressure," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 75(C).
    5. Choi, Mincheol & Lee, Chang-Yang, 2021. "Technological diversification and R&D productivity: The moderating effects of knowledge spillovers and core-technology competence," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 104(C).
    6. Junghee Han & Almas Heshmati, 2021. "Innovation and SMEs patent propensity in Korea," International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Small Business, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 42(1/2), pages 51-68.
    7. 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.
    8. Stavins, Robert & Jaffe, Adam & Newell, Richard, 2000. "Technological Change and the Environment," Working Paper Series rwp00-002, Harvard University, John F. Kennedy School of Government.
    9. Ernst, Holger, 1998. "Industrial research as a source of important patents," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 27(1), pages 1-15, May.
    10. Janger, Jürgen & Schubert, Torben & Andries, Petra & Rammer, Christian & Hoskens, Machteld, 2017. "The EU 2020 innovation indicator: A step forward in measuring innovation outputs and outcomes?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(1), pages 30-42.
    11. Albert N. Link & Martijn Hasselt, 2020. "Exploring the impact of R&D on patenting activity in small women-owned and minority-owned entrepreneurial firms," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 54(4), pages 1061-1066, April.
    12. Kornelius Kraft & Jörg Stank & Ralf Dewenter, 2011. "Co-determination and innovation," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 35(1), pages 145-172.
    13. Konstantinos Konstantakis & Panayotis G. Michaelides & Theofanis Papageorgiou, 2014. "Sector size, technical change and stability in the USA (1957-2006): a Schumpeterian approach," International Journal of Social Economics, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 41(10), pages 956-974, October.
    14. Bannò, Mariasole, 2016. "Propensity to patent by family firms," Journal of Family Business Strategy, Elsevier, vol. 7(4), pages 238-248.
    15. Westerberg, Hans Seerar, 2014. "The Return to R&D and Seller-buyer Interactions: A Quantile Regression Approach," Ratio Working Papers 231, The Ratio Institute.
    16. Nicolas van Zeebroeck & Bruno van Pottelsberghe de la Potterie, 2011. "Filing strategies and patent value," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 20(6), pages 539-561, February.
    17. Chia Lin, CHANG & Stephane, ROBIN, 2004. "Doing R&D and Importing Technology : an Empirical Investigation on Taiwan’s manufacturing firms," LIDAM Discussion Papers IRES 2004006, Université catholique de Louvain, Institut de Recherches Economiques et Sociales (IRES).
    18. Cardinal, Laura B. & Opler, Tim C., 1995. "Corporate diversification and innovative efficiency an empirical study," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 19(2-3), pages 365-381, April.
    19. Dr Chiara Rosazza Bondibene, 2012. "A Study of Patent Thickets," National Institute of Economic and Social Research (NIESR) Discussion Papers 401, National Institute of Economic and Social Research.
    20. Bettina Becker, 2013. "The Determinants of R&D Investment: A Survey of the Empirical Research," Discussion Paper Series 2013_09, Department of Economics, Loughborough University, revised Sep 2013.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    JEL classification:

    • O33 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Technological Change: Choices and Consequences; Diffusion Processes
    • O38 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Government Policy

    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:ris:uncgec:2019_007. 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: Albert Link (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/edncgus.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.