IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/fau/aucocz/au2008_041.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Growth and Employment Potentials of Chosen Technology Fields

Author

Abstract

The development of European technology platforms is a valuable building block of European science and technology policy. Out of the range of technology platforms, seven technology fields were chosen and investigated for their potential impacts on selected economies of the European Union. The study is based on input-output analysis, thus enabling us to account for the complex interrelationships between the sectors related to technology fields, either as origin or as user sectors, and the other sectors of the economy. Multiplier analysis is used to quantify the impacts of demand for goods produced by the sectors related to technology fields. Key sector analysis yields suggestions as to whether these sectors play a key role within the network of intermediate inputs. By linking the input-output tables with data on business enterprise R&D technology flow matrices are calculated and evaluated with respect to the sectors related to technology fields. Subsystem minimal flow analysis (SMFA) is carried out in order to find out whether these sectors are part of growth bipols. Due to the principal difficulty to relate technologies which are not yet applied to actual economic data the results require great care in interpretation. Nevertheless, some patterns emerge from the analysis that suggest that some technology fields seem promising areas for future R&D efforts.

Suggested Citation

  • Mikuláš Luptáčik & Wolfgang Koller & Bernhard Mahlberg & Herwig W. Schneider, 2008. "Growth and Employment Potentials of Chosen Technology Fields," Czech Economic Review, Charles University Prague, Faculty of Social Sciences, Institute of Economic Studies, vol. 2(1), pages 041-075, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:fau:aucocz:au2008_041
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://auco.fsv.cuni.cz/storage/32_2008_01_041.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Erik Dietzenbacher & Bart Los, 2002. "Externalities of R&D Expenditures," Economic Systems Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 14(4), pages 407-425, December.
    2. Riccardo Leoncini & Sandro Montresor, 2003. "Technological Systems and Intersectoral Innovation Flows," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 2402, March.
    3. DiMasi, Joseph A. & Hansen, Ronald W. & Grabowski, Henry G., 2003. "The price of innovation: new estimates of drug development costs," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 22(2), pages 151-185, March.
    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. Świeczewska Iwona, 2014. "The Externalities of Enterprises’ Innovative Activity – An Input-Output Approach," Folia Oeconomica Stetinensia, Sciendo, vol. 13(2), pages 146-157, July.
    2. Cresti, Lorenzo & Dosi, Giovanni & Fagiolo, Giorgio, 2023. "Technological interdependencies and employment changes in European industries," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 64(C), pages 41-57.
    3. Brautzsch, Hans-Ulrich & Günther, Jutta & Loose, Brigitte & Ludwig, Udo & Nulsch, Nicole, 2015. "Can R&D subsidies counteract the economic crisis? – Macroeconomic effects in Germany," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(3), pages 623-633.
    4. Maarten Ijzerman & Lotte Steuten, 2011. "Early assessment of medical technologies to inform product development and market access," Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, Springer, vol. 9(5), pages 331-347, September.
    5. Holger Patzelt & Dean A. Shepherd, 2009. "Strategic Entrepreneurship at Universities: Academic Entrepreneurs’ Assessment of Policy Programs," Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, , vol. 33(1), pages 319-340, January.
    6. Patzelt, Holger & zu Knyphausen-Aufseß, Dodo & Fischer, Heiko T., 2009. "Upper echelons and portfolio strategies of venture capital firms," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 24(6), pages 558-572, November.
    7. Bernard COUTROT & Jean H.P. PAELINCK & Alain SALLEZ & Ryan SUTTER, 2009. "On Potentialized Partial Finite Difference Equations: Analyzing The Complexity Of Knowledge-Based Spatial Economic Developments," Region et Developpement, Region et Developpement, LEAD, Universite du Sud - Toulon Var, vol. 29, pages 237-264.
    8. Darius Lakdawalla & Neeraj Sood, 2007. "The Welfare Effects of Public Drug Insurance," NBER Working Papers 13501, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    9. Dosis, Anastasios & Muthoo, Abhinay, 2019. "Experimentation in Dynamic R&D Competition," CRETA Online Discussion Paper Series 52, Centre for Research in Economic Theory and its Applications CRETA.
    10. Lorenz, Steffi, 2015. "Diversität und Verbundenheit der unternehmerischen Wissensbasis: Ein neuartiger Messansatz mit Indikatoren aus Innovationsprojekten," Discussion Papers on Strategy and Innovation 15-01, Philipps-University Marburg, Department of Technology and Innovation Management (TIM).
    11. Scherer, F.M., 2010. "Pharmaceutical Innovation," 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 539-574, Elsevier.
    12. Branstetter, Lee & Chatterjee, Chirantan & Higgins, Matthew J., 2022. "Generic competition and the incentives for early-stage pharmaceutical innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(10).
    13. Garavaglia Christian & Malerba Franco & Orsenigo Luigi & Pezzoni Michele, 2014. "Innovation and Market Structure in Pharmaceuticals: An Econometric Analysis on Simulated Data," Journal of Economics and Statistics (Jahrbuecher fuer Nationaloekonomie und Statistik), De Gruyter, vol. 234(2-3), pages 274-298, April.
    14. Tomas J. Philipson & Eric Sun, 2008. "Is the Food And Drug Administration Safe And Effective?," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 22(1), pages 85-102, Winter.
    15. Grabowski, Henry & Vernon, John & DiMasi, Joseph, 2002. "Returns on R&D for 1990s New Drug Introductions," Working Papers 02-21, Duke University, Department of Economics.
    16. Ming Liu & Sumner LaCroix, 2011. "The Impact of Stronger Property Rights in Pharmaceuticals on Innovation in Developed and Developing Countries," Working Papers 201116, University of Hawaii at Manoa, Department of Economics.
    17. Bhardwaj, Ramesh, 2015. "Restraining High and Rising Cancer Drug Prices: Need for Accelerating R&D Productivity and Aligning Prices with Value," MPRA Paper 63405, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    18. Abe C. Dunn & Lasanthi Fernando & Eli Liebman, 2024. "How Much Are Medical Innovations Worth? A Detailed Analysis Using Cost-Effectiveness Studies," BEA Papers 0132, Bureau of Economic Analysis.
    19. Edouard Debonneuil & Anne Eyraud-Loisel & Frédéric Planchet, 2018. "Can Pension Funds Partially Manage Longevity Risk by Investing in a Longevity Megafund?," Risks, MDPI, vol. 6(3), pages 1-27, July.
    20. Eric Budish & Benjamin Roin & Heidi Williams, 2013. "Do fixed patent terms distort innovation? Evidence from cancer clinical trials," Discussion Papers 13-001, Stanford Institute for Economic Policy Research.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    technology fields; input-output analysis; key sector analysis; technology flows; subsystem;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C67 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Mathematical Methods; Programming Models; Mathematical and Simulation Modeling - - - Input-Output Models
    • O33 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Technological Change: Choices and Consequences; Diffusion Processes

    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:fau:aucocz:au2008_041. 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: Lenka Stastna (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/icunicz.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.