IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/respol/v37y2008i10p1706-1716.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Currents and sub-currents in innovation flows: Explaining innovativeness using new-product announcements

Author

Listed:
  • Dolfsma, Wilfred
  • van der Panne, Gerben

Abstract

The creation of new knowledge is a haphazard process: not every sector in an economy is equally involved. The effect of industry structure on innovativeness has been a focus of attention for a long time by both academics and policymakers. In a much quoted article, using unique data - new-product announcements - Acs and Audretsch [Acs, Z.J., Audretsch, D.B., 1988. Innovation in large and small firms: an empirical analysis. American Economic Review 78(4), 678-690] identified several characteristics of industry structure and their effects on innovativeness. By analyzing a new and more consciously compiled database, we re-examine their original claims. Our results largely support their findings: industry concentration and degree of unionization for instance hamper innovation; skilled labor promotes it. Our findings diverge in one significant respect from theirs: we suggest that the large firms do not contribute more to an industry's innovativeness than small firms. At the industry level, we find strong support for the Schumpeter Mark I perspective of creative destruction by small firms rather than creative accumulation by large firms. In addition, we show that less dedicated innovators prove more susceptible to firm-external industry factors than more committed innovators. An unfavorable competitive environment decreases the likelihood that less successful innovators will announce new products.

Suggested Citation

  • Dolfsma, Wilfred & van der Panne, Gerben, 2008. "Currents and sub-currents in innovation flows: Explaining innovativeness using new-product announcements," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(10), pages 1706-1716, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:respol:v:37:y:2008:i:10:p:1706-1716
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0048-7333(08)00189-3
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    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. Deirdre N. McCloskey & Stephen T. Ziliak, 1996. "The Standard Error of Regressions," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 34(1), pages 97-114, March.
    2. Santarelli, Enrico & Piergiovanni, Roberta, 1996. "Analyzing literature-based innovation output indicators: the Italian experience," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 25(5), pages 689-711, August.
    3. Philippe Aghion & Nick Bloom & Richard Blundell & Rachel Griffith & Peter Howitt, 2005. "Competition and Innovation: an Inverted-U Relationship," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 120(2), pages 701-728.
    4. Mark A. Lemley & Carl Shapiro, 2005. "Probabilistic Patents," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 19(2), pages 75-98, Spring.
    5. Gerben Van Der Panne & Wilfred Dolfsma, 2003. "The odd role of proximity in knowledge relations: high‐tech in the Netherlands," Tijdschrift voor Economische en Sociale Geografie, Royal Dutch Geographical Society KNAG, vol. 94(4), pages 453-462, September.
    6. Aghion, Philippe & Howitt, Peter, 1992. "A Model of Growth through Creative Destruction," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 60(2), pages 323-351, March.
    7. William J. Baumol, 2004. "Four Sources of Innovation and Stimulation of Growth in the Dutch Economy," De Economist, Springer, vol. 152(3), pages 321-351, September.
    8. Feldman, Maryann P. & Audretsch, David B., 1999. "Innovation in cities:: Science-based diversity, specialization and localized competition," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 43(2), pages 409-429, February.
    9. Jan Boone, 2000. "Competitive Pressure: The Effects on Investments in Product and Process Innovation," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 31(3), pages 549-569, Autumn.
    10. Zoltan J. Acs & David B. Audretsch, 2008. "Innovation in Large and Small Firms: An Empirical Analysis," Chapters, in: Entrepreneurship, Growth and Public Policy, chapter 1, pages 3-15, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    11. Zoltan J. Acs & David B. Audretsch & Maryann P. Feldman, 2008. "R&D Spillovers and Recipient Firm Size," Chapters, in: Entrepreneurship, Growth and Public Policy, chapter 8, pages 88-94, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    12. Acs, Zoltan J. & Audretsch, David B., 1987. "Innovation in large and small firms," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 23(1), pages 109-112.
    13. Cohen, Wesley M. & Levin, Richard C., 1989. "Empirical studies of innovation and market structure," Handbook of Industrial Organization, in: R. Schmalensee & R. Willig (ed.), Handbook of Industrial Organization, edition 1, volume 2, chapter 18, pages 1059-1107, Elsevier.
    14. Zoltan J. Acs & David B. Audretsch, 2008. "Innovation, Market Structure, and Firm Size," Chapters, in: Entrepreneurship, Growth and Public Policy, chapter 2, pages 16-23, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    15. Kamien, Morton I & Schwartz, Nancy L, 1975. "Market Structure and Innovation: A Survey," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 13(1), pages 1-37, March.
    16. Paul Geroski & Steve Machin & John Van Reenen, 1993. "The Profitability of Innovating Firms," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 24(2), pages 198-211, Summer.
    17. Markus Balzat & Horst Hanusch, 2004. "Recent trends in the research on national innovation systems," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 14(2), pages 197-210, June.
    18. Symeonidis, George, 2001. "Price Competition, Innovation and Profitability: Theory and UK Evidence," CEPR Discussion Papers 2816, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    19. Cameron, A Colin & Trivedi, Pravin K, 1986. "Econometric Models Based on Count Data: Comparisons and Applications of Some Estimators and Tests," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 1(1), pages 29-53, January.
    20. Arundel, Anthony, 2001. "The relative effectiveness of patents and secrecy for appropriation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 30(4), pages 611-624, April.
    21. 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.
    22. Cohen, Wesley M & Klepper, Steven, 1996. "A Reprise of Size and R&D," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 106(437), pages 925-951, July.
    23. Gerosky, P A & Pomroy, R, 1990. "Innovation and the Evolution of Market Structure," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 38(3), pages 299-314, March.
    24. Wilfred Dolfsma, 2004. "The Process Of New Service Development — Issues Of Formalization And Appropriability," International Journal of Innovation Management (ijim), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 8(03), pages 319-337.
    25. Acs,Zoltan J. & Audretsch,David B. (ed.), 2008. "Small Firms and Entrepreneurship," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521062046.
    26. Symeonidis, George, 2001. "Price Competition, Innovation and Profitability: Theory and UK Evidence," CEPR Discussion Papers 2816, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    27. Leydesdorff, Loet & Dolfsma, Wilfred & Van der Panne, Gerben, 2006. "Measuring the knowledge base of an economy in terms of triple-helix relations among 'technology, organization, and territory'," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(2), pages 181-199, March.
    28. Wilfred Dolfsma & Luc Soete (ed.), 2006. "Understanding the Dynamics of a Knowledge Economy," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 3799.
    29. Unknown, 1986. "Letters," Choices: The Magazine of Food, Farm, and Resource Issues, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 1(4), pages 1-9.
    30. Wagner, Alfred, 1891. "Marshall's Principles of Economics," History of Economic Thought Articles, McMaster University Archive for the History of Economic Thought, vol. 5, pages 319-338.
    31. Blundell, Richard & Griffith, Rachel & Van Reenen, John, 1995. "Dynamic Count Data Models of Technological Innovation," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 105(429), pages 333-344, March.
    32. Garnsey, Elizabeth, 1998. "A Theory of the Early Growth of the Firm," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 7(3), pages 523-556, September.
    33. Klepper, Steven, 1997. "Industry Life Cycles," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 6(1), pages 145-181.
    34. Gerben Panne, 2004. "Agglomeration externalities: Marshall versus Jacobs," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 14(5), pages 593-604, December.
    35. Geroski, P. A., 1995. "What do we know about entry?," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 13(4), pages 421-440, December.
    36. Reinganum, Jennifer F., 1989. "The timing of innovation: Research, development, and diffusion," Handbook of Industrial Organization, in: R. Schmalensee & R. Willig (ed.), Handbook of Industrial Organization, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 14, pages 849-908, Elsevier.
    37. Geroski, P A, 1990. "Innovation, Technological Opportunity, and Market Structure," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 42(3), pages 586-602, July.
    38. Dolfsma, W.A., 2006. "IPRs, Technological Development, and Economic Development," ERIM Report Series Research in Management ERS-2006-004-ORG, Erasmus Research Institute of Management (ERIM), ERIM is the joint research institute of the Rotterdam School of Management, Erasmus University and the Erasmus School of Economics (ESE) at Erasmus University Rotterdam.
    39. Love, James H & Ashcroft, Brian, 1999. "Market versus Corporate Structure in Plant-Level Innovation Performance," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 13(2), pages 97-109, September.
    40. John B. Davis & Wilfred Dolfsma (ed.), 2008. "The Elgar Companion to Social Economics," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 3765.
    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. Candi, Marina, 2016. "Contributions of design emphasis, design resources and design excellence to market performance in technology-based service innovation," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 55, pages 33-41.
    2. Joern H. Block & Christian O. Fisch & Mirjam van Praag, 2017. "The Schumpeterian entrepreneur: a review of the empirical evidence on the antecedents, behaviour and consequences of innovative entrepreneurship," Industry and Innovation, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 24(1), pages 61-95, January.
    3. Laforet, Sylvie, 2013. "Organizational innovation outcomes in SMEs: Effects of age, size, and sector," Journal of World Business, Elsevier, vol. 48(4), pages 490-502.
    4. Ozer, Muammer, 2009. "The roles of product lead-users and product experts in new product evaluation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(8), pages 1340-1349, October.

    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. Wilfred Dolfsma & Gerben Velde, 2014. "Industry innovativeness, firm size, and entrepreneurship: Schumpeter Mark III?," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 24(4), pages 713-736, September.
    2. W.A. Dolfsma & G. van der Panne, 2007. "Innovations from SMEs or Large Firms? Sector Structure and Dynamics," Working Papers 07-30, Utrecht School of Economics.
    3. Dolfsma, W.A. & van der Panne, G., 2006. "Currents and Sub-currents in the River of Innovations - Explaining Innovativeness using New-Product Announcements," ERIM Report Series Research in Management ERS-2006-036-ORG, Erasmus Research Institute of Management (ERIM), ERIM is the joint research institute of the Rotterdam School of Management, Erasmus University and the Erasmus School of Economics (ESE) at Erasmus University Rotterdam.
    4. Cohen, Wesley M., 2010. "Fifty Years of Empirical Studies of Innovative Activity and Performance," Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, in: Bronwyn H. Hall & Nathan Rosenberg (ed.), Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 0, pages 129-213, Elsevier.
    5. Shastitko. Andrey (Шаститко, Андрей) & Komkova, Anastasia Andreevna (Комкова, Анастасия Андреевна) & Kurdin, Alexander (Курдин, Александр) & Shastitko, Anastasia (Шаститко, Анастасия), 2016. "Competition Policy and Incentives for Innovation [Конкурентная Политика И Стимулы К Инновационной Деятельности]," Working Papers 1447, Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration.
    6. Harris, Richard & Moffat, John, 2011. "Plant-level determinants of total factor productivity in Great Britain, 1997-2006," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 33561, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    7. Brouwer, E. & van der Wiel, H.P., 2010. "Competition and Innovation : Pushing Productivity Up or Down?," Discussion Paper 2010-52, Tilburg University, Center for Economic Research.
    8. Brouwer, E. & van der Wiel, H.P., 2010. "Competition and Innovation : Pushing Productivity Up or Down?," Other publications TiSEM 9efe62df-d940-4471-8bc7-e, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    9. 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.
    10. Baptista, Rui & Swann, Peter, 1998. "Do firms in clusters innovate more?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 27(5), pages 525-540, September.
    11. Iritié, B. G. Jean-Jacques, 2014. "Enjeux des politiques industrielles basées sur les clusters d'innovation: cas des pôles de compétitivité [Issues of Innovative Clusters-based Industrial Policy: Case of Pole of Competitiveness]," MPRA Paper 54429, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    12. Laincz, Christopher A., 2005. "Market structure and endogenous productivity growth: how do R&D subsidies affect market structure?," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 29(1-2), pages 187-223, January.
    13. Gilbert Richard J, 2006. "Competition and Innovation," Journal of Industrial Organization Education, De Gruyter, vol. 1(1), pages 1-23, December.
    14. Smolny, Werner, 1997. "Endogenous innovations in a model of the firm: Theory and empirical application for West-German manufacturing firms," Discussion Papers 39, University of Konstanz, Center for International Labor Economics (CILE).
    15. Yagi, Michiyuki & Managi, Shunsuke, 2016. "Time-period and industry heterogeneity of innovation activity in Japan," Economic Analysis and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 100-119.
    16. Okada, Yosuke, 2005. "Competition and productivity in Japanese manufacturing industries," Journal of the Japanese and International Economies, Elsevier, vol. 19(4), pages 586-616, December.
    17. Alfred Haid & Markus Thomas Münter, 1999. "Neuere Entwicklungen in der industrieökonomischen Forschung und die aktuelle Berichterstattung über die technologische Leistungsfähigkeit Deutschlands," Discussion Papers of DIW Berlin 188, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research.
    18. E. Cefis & A. Sabidussi & E.J.J Schenk, 2007. "Do mergers of potentially dominant firms foster innovation? An empirical analysis for the manufacturing sector," Working Papers 07-20, Utrecht School of Economics.
    19. Andrea Vaona & Mario Pianta, 2008. "Firm Size and Innovation in European Manufacturing," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 30(3), pages 283-299, March.
    20. Carlino, Gerald & Kerr, William R., 2015. "Agglomeration and Innovation," Handbook of Regional and Urban Economics, in: Gilles Duranton & J. V. Henderson & William C. Strange (ed.), Handbook of Regional and Urban Economics, edition 1, volume 5, chapter 0, pages 349-404, Elsevier.

    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:eee:respol:v:37:y:2008:i:10:p:1706-1716. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/respol .

    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.