IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/wfo/wpaper/y2016i529.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The EU 2020 Innovation Indicator. A Step Forward in Measuring Innovation Outputs and Outcomes?

Author

Listed:
  • Jürgen Janger

    (WIFO)

  • Torben Schubert
  • Petra Andries
  • Christian Rammer
  • Machteld Hoskens

Abstract

In October 2013, the European Commission presented a new indicator intended to capture innovation outputs and outcomes and thereby "support policy-makers in establishing new or reinforced actions to remove bottlenecks that prevent innovators from translating ideas into products and services that can be successful on the market". This paper aims to evaluate the usefulness of the new indicator against the background of the difficulties in measuring innovation outputs and outcomes. We develop a unique conceptual framework for measuring innovation outcomes that distinguishes structural change and structural upgrading as two key dimensions in both manufacturing and services. We conclude that the new indicator is biased towards a somewhat narrowly defined "high-tech" understanding of innovation outcomes. We illustrate our framework proposing a broader set of outcome indicators capturing also structural upgrading. We find that the results for the modified indicator differ substantially for a number of countries, with potentially wide-ranging consequences for innovation and industrial policies.

Suggested Citation

  • Jürgen Janger & Torben Schubert & Petra Andries & Christian Rammer & Machteld Hoskens, 2016. "The EU 2020 Innovation Indicator. A Step Forward in Measuring Innovation Outputs and Outcomes?," WIFO Working Papers 529, WIFO.
  • Handle: RePEc:wfo:wpaper:y:2016:i:529
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.wifo.ac.at/wwa/pubid/59096
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: no

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Nicholas Bloom & Mirko Draca & John Van Reenen, 2016. "Trade Induced Technical Change? The Impact of Chinese Imports on Innovation, IT and Productivity," Review of Economic Studies, Oxford University Press, vol. 83(1), pages 87-117.
    2. Grupp, Hariolf & Schubert, Torben, 2010. "Review and new evidence on composite innovation indicators for evaluating national performance," Research Policy, Elsevier, pages 67-78.
    3. Crepon, B. & Duguet, E. & Mairesse, J., 1998. "Research Investment, Innovation and Productivity: An Econometric Analysis at the Firm Level," Papiers d'Economie Mathématique et Applications 98.15, Université Panthéon-Sorbonne (Paris 1).
    4. Kleinknecht, Alfred & Reijnen, Jeroen O. N., 1993. "Towards literature-based innovation output indicators," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 4(1), pages 199-207, June.
    5. Hölzl, Werner & Janger, Jürgen, 2014. "Distance to the frontier and the perception of innovation barriers across European countries," Research Policy, Elsevier, pages 707-725.
    6. Michael Peneder, 2002. "special issue: Intangible investment and human resources," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, pages 107-134.
    7. Peneder, Michael, 2003. "Industrial structure and aggregate growth," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 14(4), pages 427-448, December.
    8. Gene M. Grossman & Elhanan Helpman, 1991. "Quality Ladders in the Theory of Growth," Review of Economic Studies, Oxford University Press, vol. 58(1), pages 43-61.
    9. Peneder, Michael, 2010. "Technological regimes and the variety of innovation behaviour: Creating integrated taxonomies of firms and sectors," Research Policy, Elsevier, pages 323-334.
    10. Aiginger, Karl, 1997. "The Use of Unit Values to Discriminate between Price and Quality Competition," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 21(5), pages 571-592, September.
    11. Ghosal, Vivek & Nair-Reichert, Usha, 2009. "Investments in modernization, innovation and gains in productivity: Evidence from firms in the global paper industry," Research Policy, Elsevier, pages 536-547.
    12. Godin, Benoit, 2003. "The emergence of S&T indicators: why did governments supplement statistics with indicators?," Research Policy, Elsevier, pages 679-691.
    13. Brouwer, Erik & Kleinknecht, Alfred, 1999. "Innovative output, and a firm's propensity to patent.: An exploration of CIS micro data," Research Policy, Elsevier, pages 615-624.
    14. Jürgen Janger, 2012. "Structural Change and Competitiveness in the EU," WIFO Monatsberichte (monthly reports), WIFO, vol. 85(8), pages 625-640, August.
    15. Christian Rammer & Dirk Czarnitzki & Alfred Spielkamp, 2009. "Innovation success of non-R&D-performers: substituting technology by management in SMEs," Small Business Economics, Springer, pages 35-58.
    16. Martin Srholec, 2007. "High-Tech Exports from Developing Countries: A Symptom of Technology Spurts or Statistical Illusion?," Review of World Economics (Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv), Springer;Institut für Weltwirtschaft (Kiel Institute for the World Economy), pages 227-255.
    17. Alfred Kleinknecht & Kees Van Montfort & Erik Brouwer, 2002. "The Non-Trivial Choice between Innovation Indicators," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 11(2), pages 109-121.
    18. Roper, Stephen & Du, Jun & Love, James H., 2008. "Modelling the innovation value chain," Research Policy, Elsevier, pages 961-977.
    19. Azele Mathieu & Bruno van Pottelsberghe de la Potterie, 2010. "A Note on the Drivers of R&D Intensity," Research in World Economy, Research in World Economy, Sciedu Press, vol. 1(1), pages 56-65, November.
    20. 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, pages 101-128.
    21. Freeman, Christopher & Soete, Luc, 2009. "Developing science, technology and innovation indicators: What we can learn from the past," Research Policy, Elsevier, pages 583-589.
    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. Edquist , Charles & Zabala-Iturriagagoitia , Jon Mikel, 2015. "The Innovation Union Scoreboard is Flawed: The case of Sweden – not being the innovation leader of the EU," Papers in Innovation Studies 2015/16, Lund University, CIRCLE - Center for Innovation, Research and Competences in the Learning Economy.
    24. Christian Rammer & Dirk Czarnitzki & Alfred Spielkamp, 2009. "Innovation success of non-R&D-performers: substituting technology by management in SMEs," Small Business Economics, Springer, pages 35-58.
    25. Dosi, Giovanni & Nelson, Richard R., 2010. "Technical Change and Industrial Dynamics as Evolutionary Processes," Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, Elsevier.
    26. McLaughlin, John A. & Jordan, Gretchen B., 1999. "Logic models: a tool for telling your programs performance story," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, pages 65-72.
    27. Bronzini, Raffaello & Piselli, Paolo, 2016. "The impact of R&D subsidies on firm innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, pages 442-457.
    28. Reinganum, Jennifer F, 1983. "Uncertain Innovation and the Persistence of Monopoly," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, pages 741-748.
    29. Jacques Mairesse & Pierre Mohnen, 2002. "Accounting for Innovation and Measuring Innovativeness: An Illustrative Framework and an Application," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, pages 226-230.
    30. Godin, Benoit, 2007. "Science, accounting and statistics: The input-output framework," Research Policy, Elsevier, pages 1388-1403.
    31. Peter K. Schott, 2008. "The relative sophistication of Chinese exports," Economic Policy, CEPR;CES;MSH, vol. 23, pages 5-49, January.
    32. Dosi, Giovanni, 1988. "Sources, Procedures, and Microeconomic Effects of Innovation," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, pages 1120-1171.
    33. Saviotti, P. P. & Metcalfe, J. S., 1984. "A theoretical approach to the construction of technological output indicators," Research Policy, Elsevier, pages 141-151.
    34. Dosi, Giovanni, 1982. "Technological paradigms and technological trajectories : A suggested interpretation of the determinants and directions of technical change," Research Policy, Elsevier, pages 147-162.
    35. Ariel Pakes & Zvi Griliches, 1980. "Patents and R and D at the Firm Level: A First Look," NBER Working Papers 0561, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    36. Ariel Pakes & Zvi Griliches, 1984. "Patents and R&D at the Firm Level: A First Look," NBER Chapters,in: R&D, Patents, and Productivity, pages 55-72 National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    37. Scherer, F. M., 1983. "The propensity to patent," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 1(1), pages 107-128, March.
    38. Robertson, Paul & Smith, Keith & von Tunzelmann, Nick, 2009. "Innovation in low- and medium-technology industries," Research Policy, Elsevier, pages 441-446.
    39. Godin, Benoit, 2004. "The obsession for competitiveness and its impact on statistics: the construction of high-technology indicators," Research Policy, Elsevier, pages 1217-1229.
    40. Coombs, R. & Narandren, P. & Richards, A., 1996. "A literature-based innovation output indicator," Research Policy, Elsevier, pages 403-413.
    41. Grupp, Hariolf, 1994. "The measurement of technical performance of innovations by technometrics and its impact on established technology indicators," Research Policy, Elsevier, pages 175-193.
    42. Blind, Knut & Edler, Jakob & Frietsch, Rainer & Schmoch, Ulrich, 2006. "Motives to patent: Empirical evidence from Germany," Research Policy, Elsevier, pages 655-672.
    43. Kenneth J. Arrow, 1962. "The Economic Implications of Learning by Doing," Review of Economic Studies, Oxford University Press, vol. 29(3), pages 155-173.
    44. Reinganum, Jennifer F, 1983. "Uncertain Innovation and the Persistence of Monopoly," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, pages 741-748.
    45. Kirner, Eva & Kinkel, Steffen & Jaeger, Angela, 2009. "Innovation paths and the innovation performance of low-technology firms--An empirical analysis of German industry," Research Policy, Elsevier, pages 447-458.
    46. Dosi, Giovanni, 1993. "Technological paradigms and technological trajectories : A suggested interpretation of the determinants and directions of technical change," Research Policy, Elsevier, pages 102-103.
    47. Andreas Reinstaller & Fabian Unterlass, 2012. "Comparing business R&D across countries over time: a decomposition exercise using data for the EU 27," Applied Economics Letters, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 19(12), pages 1143-1148, August.
    48. Martin Srholec, 2007. "High-Tech Exports from Developing Countries: A Symptom of Technology Spurts or Statistical Illusion?," Review of World Economics (Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv), Springer;Institut für Weltwirtschaft (Kiel Institute for the World Economy), pages 227-255.
    49. Pakes, Ariel & Griliches, Zvi, 1980. "Patents and R&D at the firm level: A first report," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 5(4), pages 377-381.
    50. Chris Freeman & Luc Soete, 1997. "The Economics of Industrial Innovation, 3rd Edition," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 3, volume 1, number 0262061953, January.
    51. Edquist , Charles & Zabala-Iturriagagoitia , Jon Mikel, 2015. "The Innovation Union Scoreboard is flawed: The Case of Sweden – not the innovation leader of the EU – updated version," Papers in Innovation Studies 2015/27, Lund University, CIRCLE - Center for Innovation, Research and Competences in the Learning Economy.
    52. Martin, Julien & Mejean, Isabelle, 2014. "Low-wage country competition and the quality content of high-wage country exports," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, pages 140-152.
    53. Ghosal, Vivek & Nair-Reichert, Usha, 2009. "Investments in modernization, innovation and gains in productivity: Evidence from firms in the global paper industry," Research Policy, Elsevier, pages 536-547.
    54. Arundel, Anthony & Kabla, Isabelle, 1998. "What percentage of innovations are patented? empirical estimates for European firms," Research Policy, Elsevier, pages 127-141.
    55. Acs, Zoltan J & Audretsch, David B, 1989. "Patents as a Measure of Innovative Activity," Kyklos, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 42(2), pages 171-180.
    56. Petra Moser, 2013. "Patents and Innovation: Evidence from Economic History," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 27(1), pages 23-44, Winter.
    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. Pietro Moncada-Paternò-Castello, 2016. "Sector dynamics and demographics of top R&D firms in the global economy," JRC Working Papers on Corporate R&D and Innovation 2016-06, Joint Research Centre (Seville site).
    2. Rammer, Christian & Schubert, Torben, 2016. "Concentration on the few? R&D and innovation in German firms 2001 to 2013," ZEW Discussion Papers 16-005, ZEW - Zentrum für Europäische Wirtschaftsforschung / Center for European Economic Research.
    3. repec:gam:jsusta:v:9:y:2017:i:12:p:2284-:d:122252 is not listed on IDEAS

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Innovation Output; Innovation Outcome; Innovation Measurement; Structural Change; Structural Upgrading; EU 2020 Strategy; Innovation Policy;

    JEL classification:

    • O25 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Development Planning and Policy - - - Industrial Policy
    • O31 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Innovation and Invention: Processes and Incentives
    • O38 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Government Policy
    • O52 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Economywide Country Studies - - - Europe

    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:wfo:wpaper:y:2016:i:529. 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: (Ilse Schulz). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/wifooat.html .

    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.