IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/decono/v154y2006i1p85-105.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Classification of Dutch Manufacturing based on a Model of Innovation

Author

Listed:
  • Wladimir Raymond
  • Pierre Mohnen
  • Franz Palm
  • Sybrand Loeff

Abstract

No abstract is available for this item.

Suggested Citation

  • Wladimir Raymond & Pierre Mohnen & Franz Palm & Sybrand Loeff, 2006. "A Classification of Dutch Manufacturing based on a Model of Innovation," De Economist, Springer, vol. 154(1), pages 85-105, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:kap:decono:v:154:y:2006:i:1:p:85-105
    DOI: 10.1007/s10645-006-0005-z
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/s10645-006-0005-z
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10645-006-0005-z?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Raymond, W. & Mohnen, P. & Palm, F.C. & Schim van der Loeff, S., 2004. "An emprically-based taxonomy of Dutch manufacturing: innovation policy implications," Research Memorandum 024, Maastricht University, Maastricht Research School of Economics of Technology and Organization (METEOR).
    2. Peters, Bettina & Lööf, Hans & Janz, Norbert, 2003. "Firm Level Innovation and Productivity: Is there a Common Story Across Countries?," ZEW Discussion Papers 03-26, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    3. Thomas Hatzichronoglou, 1997. "Revision of the High-Technology Sector and Product Classification," OECD Science, Technology and Industry Working Papers 1997/2, OECD Publishing.
    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. Francesco Bogliacino & Mario Pianta, 2016. "The Pavitt Taxonomy, revisited: patterns of innovation in manufacturing and services," Economia Politica: Journal of Analytical and Institutional Economics, Springer;Fondazione Edison, vol. 33(2), pages 153-180, August.
    2. Movahedi, Mohammad & Shahbazi, Kiumars & Gaussens, Olivier, 2017. "Innovation and willingness to export: Is there an effect of conscious self-selection?," Economics - The Open-Access, Open-Assessment E-Journal (2007-2020), Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW Kiel), vol. 11, pages 1-22.
    3. Ángela Vásquez-Urriago & Andrés Barge-Gil & Aurelia Rico & Evita Paraskevopoulou, 2014. "The impact of science and technology parks on firms’ product innovation: empirical evidence from Spain," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 24(4), pages 835-873, September.
    4. Andræs Barge-Gil, 2013. "Open Strategies and Innovation Performance," Industry and Innovation, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 20(7), pages 585-610, October.
    5. Vokoun Marek, 2017. "Characteristics of the innovation activities of firms in Europe: a critical review of international differences," Review of Economic Perspectives, Sciendo, vol. 17(3), pages 239-262, September.
    6. Alberto Albahari & Andrés Barge‐Gil & Salvador Pérez‐Canto & Aurelia Modrego, 2018. "The influence of science and technology park characteristics on firms' innovation results," Papers in Regional Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 97(2), pages 253-279, 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. Martin Woerter, 2009. "Industry diversity and its impact on the innovation performance of firms," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 19(5), pages 675-700, October.
    2. Raquel Ortega-Argilés & Lesley Potters & Marco Vivarelli, 2011. "R&D and productivity: testing sectoral peculiarities using micro data," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 41(3), pages 817-839, December.
    3. Mairesse, Jacques & Mohnen, Pierre, 2010. "Using Innovation Surveys for Econometric Analysis," Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, in: Bronwyn H. Hall & Nathan Rosenberg (ed.), Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, edition 1, volume 2, chapter 0, pages 1129-1155, Elsevier.
    4. Subal Kumbhakar & Raquel Ortega-Argilés & Lesley Potters & Marco Vivarelli & Peter Voigt, 2012. "Corporate R&D and firm efficiency: evidence from Europe’s top R&D investors," Journal of Productivity Analysis, Springer, vol. 37(2), pages 125-140, April.
    5. Li, Xiaogang, 2020. "Innovation, market valuations, policy uncertainty and trade: Theory and evidence," ISU General Staff Papers 202001010800009179, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    6. Spyros Arvanitis & Juliette von Arx, 2004. "Bestimmungsfaktoren der Innovationstätigkeit und deren Einfluss auf Arbeitsproduktivität, Beschäftigung und Qualifikationsstruktur," KOF Working papers 04-91, KOF Swiss Economic Institute, ETH Zurich.
    7. Woerter, Martin & Roper, Stephen, 2010. "Openness and innovation--Home and export demand effects on manufacturing innovation: Panel data evidence for Ireland and Switzerland," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(1), pages 155-164, February.
    8. Oleg Mariev & Natalia Davidson & Karina Nagieva, 2020. "The Impact of Management Quality on Firms' Innovation and Productivity in Russia," Central European Business Review, Prague University of Economics and Business, vol. 2020(3), pages 38-55.
    9. Michael Peneder, 2003. "Industry Classifications: Aim, Scope and Techniques," Journal of Industry, Competition and Trade, Springer, vol. 3(1), pages 109-129, March.
    10. Teimuraz Gogokhia & George Berulava, 2021. "Business environment reforms, innovation and firm productivity in transition economies," Eurasian Business Review, Springer;Eurasia Business and Economics Society, vol. 11(2), pages 221-245, June.
    11. Sanjib Pohit & Sanjukta Basu, 2012. "High Technology Merchandise Exports: Where does India Stand?," South Asia Economic Journal, Institute of Policy Studies of Sri Lanka, vol. 13(2), pages 183-206, September.
    12. Elif Bascavusoglu & Maria Pluvia Zuniga, 2005. "The effects of intellectual property protection on international knowledge contracting," Cahiers de la Maison des Sciences Economiques bla05009, Université Panthéon-Sorbonne (Paris 1).
    13. Dzikowski Piotr, 2016. "The Importance of Vertical Linkages for the Innovation Activity of Medium-High and High Technology Industries in Poland," International Journal of Management and Economics, Warsaw School of Economics, Collegium of World Economy, vol. 51(1), pages 90-103, September.
    14. Francesco Bogliacino & Marco Vivarelli, 2012. "The Job Creation Effect Of R&D Expenditures," Australian Economic Papers, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 51(2), pages 96-113, June.
    15. Ortega-Argilés, Raquel & Piva, Mariacristina & Vivarelli, Marco, 2011. "Productivity Gains from R&D Investment: Are High-Tech Sectors Still Ahead?," IZA Discussion Papers 5975, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    16. Haeri, Ali & Arabmazar, Abbas, 2018. "Designing an Industrial Policy for Developing Countries: a New Approach," MPRA Paper 89048, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    17. Peter Wierts & Henk Van Kerkhoff & Jakob De Haan, 2014. "Composition of Exports and Export Performance of Eurozone Countries," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 52(4), pages 928-941, July.
    18. Sotiris Blanas & Adnan Seric, 2018. "Determinants of intra‐firm trade: Evidence from foreign affiliates in Sub‐Saharan Africa," Review of International Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 26(4), pages 917-956, September.
    19. Rainer Walz & Wolfgang Eichhammer, 2012. "Benchmarking green innovation," Mineral Economics, Springer;Raw Materials Group (RMG);Luleå University of Technology, vol. 24(2), pages 79-101, June.
    20. Jože P. Damijan & Črt Kostevc & Matija Rojec, 2011. "Innovation and Firms’ Productivity Growth in Slovenia: Sensitivity of Results to Sectoral Heterogeneity and to Estimation Method," Advances in Spatial Science, in: Peter Nijkamp & Iulia Siedschlag (ed.), Innovation, Growth and Competitiveness, chapter 0, pages 165-193, Springer.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    CIS; industry classification; innovation policy; two-limit tobit model; C34; C51; O33; O38;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C34 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Multiple or Simultaneous Equation Models; Multiple Variables - - - Truncated and Censored Models; Switching Regression Models
    • C51 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric Modeling - - - Model Construction and Estimation
    • 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

    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:kap:decono:v:154:y:2006:i:1:p:85-105. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.