IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/wai/econwp/04-01.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Biotechnology in New Zealand

Author

Abstract

This paper provides a detailed description of the New Zealand biotechnology sector based on a re-analysis of the first comprehensive (1998/99) survey of biotechnology in New Zealand, data from an original (2002) survey conducted by the author and a detailed review of secondary sources. It provides the background for a study of the determinants of innovation reported elsewhere (Marsh, 2004). A review of alternative data sources on sector size and characteristics is followed by a comparison of New Zealand and international biotech indicators. Data is presented on enterprise type and size and the age distribution of New Zealand biotech enterprises. This is followed by an analysis of innovative output using data on new products, processes and patents. Data is also presented on partnerships and alliances, information sources and other factors affecting innovative performance.

Suggested Citation

  • Dan Marsh, 2004. "Biotechnology in New Zealand," Working Papers in Economics 04/01, University of Waikato.
    • Handle: RePEc:wai:econwp:04/01
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://repec.its.waikato.ac.nz/wai/econwp/0401.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Stéphane Malo & Aldo Geuna, 2000. "Science-Technology Linkages in an Emerging Research Platform: The Case of Combinatorial Chemistry and Biology," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 47(2), pages 303-321, February.
    2. repec:fth:harver:1473 is not listed on IDEAS
    3. Jeremy Foltz & Bradford Barham & Kwansoo Kim, 2000. "Universities and agricultural biotechnology patent production," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 16(1), pages 82-95.
    4. McMillan, G. Steven & Narin, Francis & Deeds, David L., 2000. "An analysis of the critical role of public science in innovation: the case of biotechnology," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 29(1), pages 1-8, January.
    5. Andrew Devlin, 2003. "An Overview of Biotechnology Statistics in Selected Countries," OECD Science, Technology and Industry Working Papers 2003/13, OECD Publishing.
    6. Joly, Pierre-Benoit & de Looze, Marie-Angele, 1996. "An analysis of innovation strategies and industrial differentiation through patent applications: the case of plant biotechnology," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 25(7), pages 1027-1046, October.
    7. Dan Marsh, 2002. "Does New Zealand have an Innovation System for Biotechnology?," Working Papers in Economics 02/03, University of Waikato.
    8. 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.
    9. Romer, Paul M, 1990. "Endogenous Technological Change," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 98(5), pages 71-102, October.
    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. Marsh, Dan & Oxley, Les, 2005. "Modelling innovative activity in the New Zealand biotechnology sector," Mathematics and Computers in Simulation (MATCOM), Elsevier, vol. 69(1), pages 103-112.

    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. Dan Marsh, 2000. "Fostering Innovation in a Small Open Economy: The Case of the New Zealand Biotechnology Sector," Working Papers in Economics 00/01, University of Waikato.
    2. Burhan, Muqbil & Singh, Anil K. & Jain, Sudhir K., 2017. "Patents as proxy for measuring innovations: A case of changing patent filing behavior in Indian public funded research organizations," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 123(C), pages 181-190.
    3. Dan Marsh, 2002. "Does New Zealand have an Innovation System for Biotechnology?," Working Papers in Economics 02/03, University of Waikato.
    4. Alex Bell & Raj Chetty & Xavier Jaravel & Neviana Petkova & John Van Reenen, 2019. "Who Becomes an Inventor in America? The Importance of Exposure to Innovation," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 134(2), pages 647-713.
    5. Madsen, Jakob B., 2010. "The anatomy of growth in the OECD since 1870," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 57(6), pages 753-767, September.
    6. Daniel Nepelski & Giuditta De Prato, 2020. "Technological complexity and economic development," Review of Development Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 24(2), pages 448-470, May.
    7. Maria Manuela Natario & Joao Pedro Couto & Ascensao Maria Braga & Teresa Maria Tiago, 2011. "Evaluating The Determinants Of National Innovative Capacity Among European Countries," ERSA conference papers ersa10p1342, European Regional Science Association.
    8. Feldman, Maryann P. & Audretsch, David B., 1996. "Location, location, location: The geography of innovation and knowledge spillovers," Discussion Papers, various Research Units FS IV 96-28, WZB Berlin Social Science Center.
    9. Quatraro, Francesco & Scandura, Alessandra, 2019. "Academic Inventors and the Antecedents of Green Technologies. A Regional Analysis of Italian Patent Data," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 156(C), pages 247-263.
    10. Meyer, Martin, 2006. "Are patenting scientists the better scholars?: An exploratory comparison of inventor-authors with their non-inventing peers in nano-science and technology," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(10), pages 1646-1662, December.
    11. James P. LeSage & Manfred M. Fischer, 2012. "Estimates of the Impact of Static and Dynamic Knowledge Spillovers on Regional Factor Productivity," International Regional Science Review, , vol. 35(1), pages 103-127, January.
    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. Ugo Rizzo & Nicolò Barbieri & Laura Ramaciotti & Demian Iannantuono, 2020. "The division of labour between academia and industry for the generation of radical inventions," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 45(2), pages 393-413, April.
    14. Arnold, Lutz G., 1998. "Growth, Welfare, and Trade in an Integrated Model of Human-Capital Accumulation and Research," Journal of Macroeconomics, Elsevier, vol. 20(1), pages 81-105, January.
    15. Tomás del Barrio-Castro & José García-Quevedo, 2009. "The determinants of university patenting: Do incentives matter?," Working Papers 2009/13, Institut d'Economia de Barcelona (IEB).
    16. James B. Ang & Rajabrata Banerjee & Jakob B. Madsen, 2010. "Innovation, Technological Change And The British Agricultural Revolution," CAMA Working Papers 2010-11, Centre for Applied Macroeconomic Analysis, Crawford School of Public Policy, The Australian National University.
    17. John Hagedoorn & Boris Lokshin & Stéphane Malo, 2018. "Alliances and the innovation performance of corporate and public research spin-off firms," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 50(4), pages 763-781, April.
    18. Heide Fier & Andreas Pyka, 2014. "Against the one-way-street: analyzing knowledge transfer from industry to science," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 39(2), pages 219-246, April.
    19. Rong, Zhao & Wu, Xiaokai & Boeing, Philipp, 2017. "The effect of institutional ownership on firm innovation: Evidence from Chinese listed firms," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(9), pages 1533-1551.
    20. Simeth, Markus & Raffo, Julio D., 2013. "What makes companies pursue an Open Science strategy?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(9), pages 1531-1543.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    JEL classification:

    • L65 - Industrial Organization - - Industry Studies: Manufacturing - - - Chemicals; Rubber; Drugs; Biotechnology; Plastics
    • L66 - Industrial Organization - - Industry Studies: Manufacturing - - - Food; Beverages; Cosmetics; Tobacco
    • O31 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Innovation and Invention: Processes and Incentives
    • O32 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Management of Technological Innovation and R&D

    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:wai:econwp:04/01. 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: Geua Boe-Gibson (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/dewaknz.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.