IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/see/wpaper/2015135.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Dynamics of technology upgrading of the Central and East European countries in a comparative perspective: analysis based on patent data

Author

Listed:
  • Björn Jindra

    (Copenhagen Business School)

  • Iciar Dominguez Lacasa

    (University of Bremen)

  • Slavo Radosevic

    (UCL School of Slavonic and East European Studies)

Abstract

This working paper explores patterns of technology upgrading as a three-dimensional process which consists of (i) intensity of technology upgrading, (ii) structural change, and (iii) interaction with the global economy. The specificity of our report is that we depict patterns of technology upgrading by relying entirely on patent data. We derive patent indicators to capture the three dimensions. Patent indicators for intensity of technology upgrading trace technological capabilities at the technology frontier (transnational patents) and behind the technology frontier (domestic/resident direct applications to national offices). Structural change in technological knowledge is depicted by the share of transnational patent applications in high technology fields and knowledge-intensive activities and by calculating a technological diversification index. To capture interaction with global economy in the upgrading process indicators measure technological knowledge sourcing across countries and interactions between foreign and indigenous actors. Based on 7 patent indicators covering the three upgrading dimensions the comparative analysis focuses on EU27 and its subregions and on the BRICS countries. According to the results, in 2011 CEECs were quite homogenous in their upgrading paths. A typical CEE economy in 2011 is well behind EU12 in terms of frontier technology intensity, domestic technology intensity, share of high tech patents and technology sourcing abroad. Moreover, its organizational capabilities are often less advanced. The CEE profile is much less coherent in terms of technology diversification/specialization and share of joint inventions. However, differences among CEECs are not significant. Still there are some notable national features. Poland, Romania and Slovenia have above average domestic technological intensity which reflects partly their sizes (Romania and Poland) and specific model of innovation system reliant on domestic R&D intensive firms (Slovenia). Latvia and Lithuania are specific in terms of high share of HTKI patents. CEE technology upgrading as depicted by patents is within the BRIC pattern (with exception of China which in terms of technology upgrading has de facto delinked from BRICS). In the BRIC context, the CEE characterize very open innovation system with a high share of coinventions and foreign actors exploiting local inventions. This reveals weak organizational capabilities to commercialize its own inventions. According to the results CEE grew during 1990s/2008 based on production, not technological capability. Their future growth will increasingly depend on building technological capabilities at world frontier level. Our analysis shows that the basis for such growth exists only to a limited extent and that speed of upgrading towards world frontier activities is well beyond required for catching up. Equally, our analysis shows that solutions for improved technology upgrading will need to be found with their existing innovation model of small open economies integrated into the EU.

Suggested Citation

  • Björn Jindra & Iciar Dominguez Lacasa & Slavo Radosevic, 2015. "Dynamics of technology upgrading of the Central and East European countries in a comparative perspective: analysis based on patent data," UCL SSEES Economics and Business working paper series 135, UCL School of Slavonic and East European Studies (SSEES).
  • Handle: RePEc:see:wpaper:2015:135
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/1463371/1/Measuring%20Techcatch%20Up%20by%20patents_WP_135-BJIDSR.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Frietsch, Rainer & Jung, Taehyun, 2009. "Transnational patents: Structures, trends and recent developments," Studien zum deutschen Innovationssystem 7-2009, Expertenkommission Forschung und Innovation (EFI) - Commission of Experts for Research and Innovation, Berlin.
    2. Edward L. Glaeser & Rafael La Porta & Florencio Lopez-de-Silanes & Andrei Shleifer, 2004. "Do Institutions Cause Growth?," Journal of Economic Growth, Springer, vol. 9(3), pages 271-303, September.
    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. Fischer, Bruno Brandão & Schaeffer, Paola Rücker & Vonortas, Nicholas S., 2019. "Evolution of university-industry collaboration in Brazil from a technology upgrading perspective," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 145(C), pages 330-340.
    2. Bernat, Stefan & Karabag, Solmaz Filiz, 2019. "Strategic alignment of technology: Organising for technology upgrading in emerging economy firms," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 145(C), pages 295-306.
    3. Loredana Fattorini & Mahdi Ghodsi & Richard Grieveson & Sandra M. Leitner & Armando Rungi, 2017. "Monthly Report No. 9/2017," wiiw Monthly Reports 2017-09, The Vienna Institute for International Economic Studies, wiiw.
    4. Dey, Bidit L. & Babu, Mujahid Mohiuddin & Rahman, Mizan & Dora, Manoj & Mishra, Nishikant, 2019. "Technology upgrading through co-creation of value in developing societies: Analysis of the mobile telephone industry in Bangladesh," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 145(C), pages 413-425.
    5. Slavo Radosevic & Katerina Ciampi Stancova, 2018. "Internationalising Smart Specialisation: Assessment and Issues in the Case of EU New Member States," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 9(1), pages 263-293, March.
    6. Anwar Aridi & Christopher S. Hayter & Slavo Radosevic, 2021. "Windows of opportunities for catching up: an analysis of ICT sector development in Ukraine," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 46(3), pages 701-719, June.

    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. Slavo Radosevic & Imogen Wade, 2014. "Modernization through large S&T projects: Assessing Russia’s Drive for Innovation-Led Development via Skolkovo Innovation Centre," UCL SSEES Economics and Business working paper series 131, UCL School of Slavonic and East European Studies (SSEES).
    2. Nicolai J. Foss, 2012. "Linking Ethics and Economic Growth: a Comment on Hunt," Contemporary Economics, University of Economics and Human Sciences in Warsaw., vol. 6(3), September.
    3. Vieira, Flávio & MacDonald, Ronald & Damasceno, Aderbal, 2012. "The role of institutions in cross-section income and panel data growth models: A deeper investigation on the weakness and proliferation of instruments," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 40(1), pages 127-140.
    4. He, Qichun, 2018. "Inflation and innovation with a cash-in-advance constraint on human capital accumulation," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 171(C), pages 14-18.
    5. Grossmann, Volker, 2008. "Risky human capital investment, income distribution, and macroeconomic dynamics," Journal of Macroeconomics, Elsevier, vol. 30(1), pages 19-42, March.
    6. Scott Gehlbach & Konstantin Sonin & Ekaterina Zhuravskaya, 2010. "Businessman Candidates," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 54(3), pages 718-736, July.
    7. Tiago Neves Sequeira & Marcelo Santos, 2019. "Technology in 1500 and genetic diversity," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 56(4), pages 1145-1165, April.
    8. Juan Pineiro Chousa & Haider Ali Khan & Davit N. Melikyan & Artur Tamazian, 2005. "Institutional and Financial Determinants of Development: New Evidence from Advanced and Emerging Markets," CIRJE F-Series CIRJE-F-326, CIRJE, Faculty of Economics, University of Tokyo.
    9. Rode, Martin & Gwartney, James D., 2012. "Does democratization facilitate economic liberalization?," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 28(4), pages 607-619.
    10. Knut Blind & Andre Jungmittag, 2008. "The impact of patents and standards on macroeconomic growth: a panel approach covering four countries and 12 sectors," Journal of Productivity Analysis, Springer, vol. 29(1), pages 51-60, February.
    11. Johannes W. Fedderke & John M. Luiz, 2005. "Does Human Generate Social and Institutional Capital? Exploring Evidence From Time Series Data in a Middle Income Country," Working Papers 029, Economic Research Southern Africa.
    12. Iyigun, Murat, 2006. "Ottoman Conquests and European Ecclesiastical Pluralism," IZA Discussion Papers 1973, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    13. Litina, Anastasia, 2012. "Unfavorable land endowment, cooperation, and reversal of fortune," MPRA Paper 39702, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    14. Ahmet Faruk Aysan & …mer Faruk Baykal & Marie-Ange Véganzonès–Varoudakis, 2011. "The Effects of Convergence in Governance on Capital Accumulation in the Black Sea Economic Cooperation Countries," Chapters, in: Mehmet Ugur & David Sunderland (ed.), Does Economic Governance Matter?, chapter 6, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    15. Kaufmann, Daniel & Kraay, Aart & Mastruzzi, Massimo, 2007. "The worldwide governance indicators project : answering the critics," Policy Research Working Paper Series 4149, The World Bank.
    16. Steven N. Durlauf & Andros Kourtellos & Chih Ming Tan, 2012. "Is God in the details? A reexamination of the role of religion in economic growth," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 27(7), pages 1059-1075, November.
    17. Una Okonkwo Osili & Anna L. Paulson, 2006. "What can we learn about financial access from U.S. immigrants?," Working Paper Series WP-06-25, Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago.
    18. Baltrunaite, Audinga & Bello, Piera & Casarico, Alessandra & Profeta, Paola, 2014. "Gender quotas and the quality of politicians," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 62-74.
    19. Ahmet Faruk AYSAN & Mustapha Kamel NABLI & Marie‐Ange VÉGANZONÈS‐VAROUDAKIS, 2007. "Governance Institutions And Private Investment: An Application To The Middle East And North Africa," The Developing Economies, Institute of Developing Economies, vol. 45(3), pages 339-377, September.
    20. Knack, Steve & Xu, Lixin Colin, 2017. "Unbundling institutions for external finance: Worldwide firm-level evidence," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 44(C), pages 215-232.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Technology upgrading; Central Europe; Eastern Europe;
    All these keywords.

    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:see:wpaper:2015:135. 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: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/csescuk.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.