IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/cir/cirwor/2000s-60.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Technological Paradigms and the Measurement of Innovation

Author

Listed:
  • Bernard Sinclair-Desgagné

Abstract

No abstract is available for this item.

Suggested Citation

  • Bernard Sinclair-Desgagné, 2000. "Technological Paradigms and the Measurement of Innovation," CIRANO Working Papers 2000s-60, CIRANO.
    • Handle: RePEc:cir:cirwor:2000s-60
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://cirano.qc.ca/files/publications/2000s-60.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Meyer, Martin, 2000. "Does science push technology? Patents citing scientific literature," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 29(3), pages 409-434, March.
    2. Giovanni Dosi, 2000. "Sources, Procedures, and Microeconomic Effects of Innovation," Chapters, in: Innovation, Organization and Economic Dynamics, chapter 2, pages 63-114, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    3. Philippe Aghion & Jean Tirole, 1994. "The Management of Innovation," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 109(4), pages 1185-1209.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Stefan Ambec & Michel Poitevin, 2000. "Organizational Design of R & D Activities," Econometric Society World Congress 2000 Contributed Papers 0190, Econometric Society.
    2. Bruno Cassiman, 1998. "The organization of research corporations and researcher ability," Economics Working Papers 327, Department of Economics and Business, Universitat Pompeu Fabra.
    3. Maurseth, Per Botolf & Svensson, Roger, 2020. "The Importance of Tacit Knowledge: Dynamic Inventor Activity in the Commercialization Phase," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(7).
    4. Sterzi, Valerio, 2013. "Patent quality and ownership: An analysis of UK faculty patenting," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(2), pages 564-576.
    5. Keld Laursen & Solon Moreira & Toke Reichstein & Maria Isabella Leone, 2017. "Evading the Boomerang Effect: Using the Grant-Back Clause to Further Generative Appropriability from Technology Licensing Deals," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 28(3), pages 514-530, June.
    6. Hyytinen, Ari & Pajarinen, Mika, 2005. "Financing of technology-intensive small businesses: some evidence on the uniqueness of the ICT sector," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 17(1), pages 115-132, January.
    7. Chang-Yang Lee & Ji-Hwan Lee & Ajai S. Gaur, 2017. "Are large business groups conducive to industry innovation? The moderating role of technological appropriability," Asia Pacific Journal of Management, Springer, vol. 34(2), pages 313-337, June.
    8. Philip Cooke, 2002. "Biotechnology Clusters as Regional, Sectoral Innovation Systems," International Regional Science Review, , vol. 25(1), pages 8-37, January.
    9. Nahuis, Richard & Smulders, Sjak, 2002. "The Skill Premium, Technological Change and Appropriability," Journal of Economic Growth, Springer, vol. 7(2), pages 137-156, June.
    10. Michael Peneder, 2003. "Industry Classifications: Aim, Scope and Techniques," Journal of Industry, Competition and Trade, Springer, vol. 3(1), pages 109-129, March.
    11. Avellar, Ana Paula & Kupfer, David, 2011. "Innovation and cooperation: evidence from the Brazilian innovation survey," Documentos de Proyectos 3900, Naciones Unidas Comisión Económica para América Latina y el Caribe (CEPAL).
    12. Lorenzo Ciapetti, 2011. "Technological Change, Knowledge Integration and Adaptive Processes: The Mechatronic Evolution of the Reggio Emilia District," Chapters, in: Paul L. Robertson & David Jacobson (ed.), Knowledge Transfer and Technology Diffusion, chapter 5, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    13. Heredia Pérez, Jorge A. & Geldes, Cristian & Kunc, Martin H. & Flores, Alejandro, 2019. "New approach to the innovation process in emerging economies: The manufacturing sector case in Chile and Peru," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 79(C), pages 35-55.
    14. Kibaek Lee & Jaeheung Yoo & Munkee Choi & Hangjung Zo & Andrew P Ciganek, 2016. "Does External Knowledge Sourcing Enhance Market Performance? Evidence from the Korean Manufacturing Industry," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(12), pages 1-19, December.
    15. Mueller-Langer, Frank & Fecher, Benedikt & Harhoff, Dietmar & Wagner, Gert G., 2019. "Replication studies in economics—How many and which papers are chosen for replication, and why?," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 48(1), pages 62-83.
    16. 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.
    17. Stephanie Rosenkranz & Patrick W. Schmitz, 2007. "Can Coasean Bargaining Justify Pigouvian Taxation?," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 74(296), pages 573-585, November.
    18. Sudipto Bhattacharya & Sergei Guriev, 2008. "Control Rights over Intellectual Property: Corporate Venturing and Bankruptcy Regimes," Working Papers w0118, Center for Economic and Financial Research (CEFIR).
    19. Patrick Legros & Andrew F. Newman & Eugenio Proto, 2014. "Smithian Growth through Creative Organization," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 96(5), pages 796-811, December.
    20. Lerner, Josh & Shane, Hilary & Tsai, Alexander, 2003. "Do equity financing cycles matter? evidence from biotechnology alliances," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 67(3), pages 411-446, March.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Lattice theory; Galois connections; concept lattices; modularity; Théorie des treillis; connections de Galois; treillis de concepts; modularité;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • O31 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Innovation and Invention: Processes and Incentives
    • C60 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Mathematical Methods; Programming Models; Mathematical and Simulation Modeling - - - General

    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:cir:cirwor:2000s-60. 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: Webmaster (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ciranca.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.