IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/wiw/wiwrsa/ersa06p295.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Innovation and Peripherality: A Comparative Study in Six EU Member Countries

Author

Listed:
  • Andrew Copus

    ()

  • Dimitris Skuras

    ()

  • Kyriaki Tsegenidi

    ()

Abstract

The present work compares rates of innovative activity among firms located in peripheral dynamic and central lagging areas of the European Union. Data on 600 businesses located in twelve areas, in six countries of the EU were collected in the framework of an EU- funded research project (Aspatial Peripherality, Innovation and the Rural Economy- AsPIRE- QLK5-2000-00783). Empirical evidence shows that the regional rate of innovative activity is very well predicted by easily observable firm characteristics. Oaxaca-Blinder like decompositions between the difference in rates of innovative activity in peripheral and more central areas are undertaken. Decompositions show that the major part of the observed differential innovative activity rates is unobservable, i.e., it is due to unobserved characteristics and not due to observable firm characteristics. Unobserved characteristics may be either firm specific (human and entrepreneurial capital, etc.) or region specific (institutional environment, social capital, traditional economic factors, etc.) and constitute an unobserved type of innovation specific ‘untraded interdependencies’. This conclusion is important for planning policies to support innovation and especially to the regionalization of innovation policies. -

Suggested Citation

  • Andrew Copus & Dimitris Skuras & Kyriaki Tsegenidi, 2006. "Innovation and Peripherality: A Comparative Study in Six EU Member Countries," ERSA conference papers ersa06p295, European Regional Science Association.
  • Handle: RePEc:wiw:wiwrsa:ersa06p295
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www-sre.wu.ac.at/ersa/ersaconfs/ersa06/papers/295.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Raffaele Paci & Stefano Usai, 2000. "Technological Enclaves and Industrial Districts: An Analysis of the Regional Distribution of Innovative Activity in Europe," Regional Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 34(2), pages 97-114.
    2. Amnon Frenkel, 2000. "Can regional policy affect firms' innovation potential in lagging regions?," The Annals of Regional Science, Springer;Western Regional Science Association, vol. 34(3), pages 315-341.
    3. 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.
    4. David Smallbone & David North & Christos Kalantaridis, 1999. "Adapting to peripherality: a study of small rural manufacturing firms in northern England," Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 11(2), pages 109-127, April.
    5. Zoltán J. Ács & Pontus Braunerhjelm & David B. Audretsch & Bo Carlsson, 2015. "The knowledge spillover theory of entrepreneurship," Chapters,in: Global Entrepreneurship, Institutions and Incentives, chapter 7, pages 129-144 Edward Elgar Publishing.
    6. Dimitris Skuras & Efthalia Dimara, 2004. "Regional Image and the Consumption of Regionally Denominated Products," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 41(4), pages 801-815, April.
    7. Baldwin, John R. & Hanel, Peter & Sabourin, David, 2000. "Determinants of Innovative Activity in Canadian Manufacturing Firms: The Role of Intellectual Property Rights," Analytical Studies Branch Research Paper Series 2000122e, Statistics Canada, Analytical Studies Branch.
    8. Kenneth Arrow, 1962. "Economic Welfare and the Allocation of Resources for Invention," NBER Chapters,in: The Rate and Direction of Inventive Activity: Economic and Social Factors, pages 609-626 National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    9. Romijn, Henny & Albaladejo, Manuel, 2002. "Determinants of innovation capability in small electronics and software firms in southeast England," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 31(7), pages 1053-1067, September.
    10. Greenhalgh, C & Longland, M & Bosworth, D, 2001. "Technological Activity and Employment in a Panel of UK Firms," Scottish Journal of Political Economy, Scottish Economic Society, vol. 48(3), pages 260-282, August.
    11. Romer, Paul M, 1990. "Endogenous Technological Change," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 98(5), pages 71-102, October.
    12. Brian Ashcroft & Stephen Roper & Stewart Dunlop & James H. Love, 2000. "Industry and location effects on UK plants' innovation propensity," The Annals of Regional Science, Springer;Western Regional Science Association, vol. 34(4), pages 489-502.
    13. Beñat Bilbao-Osorio & Andrés Rodríguez-Pose, 2004. "From R&D to Innovation and Economic Growth in the EU," Growth and Change, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 35(4), pages 434-455.
    14. Valdemar Smith & Anni Lene Broberg & Jesper Overgaard, 2002. "Does Location Matter for Firms' R&D Behaviour? Empirical Evidence for Danish Firms," Regional Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 36(8), pages 825-832.
    15. Shane, Scott A., 1992. "Why do some societies invent more than others?," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 7(1), pages 29-46, January.
    16. Nola Hewitt-Dundas, 2006. "Resource and Capability Constraints to Innovation in Small and Large Plants," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 26(3), pages 257-277, April.
    17. Marcel Dagenais & Pierre Mohnen, 2000. "Towards an Innovation Intensity Index: The Case of CIS 1 in Denmark and Ireland," CIRANO Working Papers 2000s-20, CIRANO.
    18. Audretsch, David B. & Lehmann, Erik E., 2005. "Does the Knowledge Spillover Theory of Entrepreneurship hold for regions?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(8), pages 1191-1202, October.
    19. Alistair R. Anderson, 2000. "Paradox in the periphery: an entrepreneurial reconstruction?," Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 12(2), pages 91-109, April.
    20. 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.
    21. Andrés Rodríguez-Pose, 1998. "Social Conditions and Economic Performance: The Bond Between Social Structure and Regional Growth in Western Europe," International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 22(3), pages 443-459, September.
    22. Michael Fritsch, 2000. "Interregional Differences in R&D Activities—An Empirical Investigation," European Planning Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 8(4), pages 409-427, August.
    23. Shane, Scott, 1993. "Cultural influences on national rates of innovation," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 8(1), pages 59-73, January.
    24. Howells, Jeremy, 2005. "Innovation and regional economic development: A matter of perspective?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(8), pages 1220-1234, October.
    25. Dimitris Skuras & Efthalia Dimara & Anastasia Petrou, 2006. "Rural tourism and visitors' expenditures for local food products," Regional Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 40(7), pages 769-779.
    26. Audretsch, David B, 1998. "Agglomeration and the Location of Innovative Activity," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 14(2), pages 18-29, Summer.
    27. Mark Rogers, 2004. "Networks, Firm Size and Innovation," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 22(2), pages 141-153, March.
    28. Roper, Stephen & Hewitt-Dundas, Nola & Love, James H., 2004. "An ex ante evaluation framework for the regional benefits of publicly supported R&D projects," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(3), pages 487-509, April.
    29. Daniel McFadden, 1977. "Quantitative Methods for Analyzing Travel Behaviour of Individuals: Some Recent Developments," Cowles Foundation Discussion Papers 474, Cowles Foundation for Research in Economics, Yale University.
    30. Howitt, Peter & Aghion, Philippe, 1998. "Capital Accumulation and Innovation as Complementary Factors in Long-Run Growth," Journal of Economic Growth, Springer, vol. 3(2), pages 111-130, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    More about this item

    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:wiw:wiwrsa:ersa06p295. 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: (Gunther Maier). General contact details of provider: http://www.ersa.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.