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.
    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. 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.
    6. 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.

    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. 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.
    3. 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.
    4. 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.
    5. 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.
    6. Esther Goya & Esther Vayá & Jordi Suriñach, 2011. "Productivity and innovation spillovers: Micro evidence from Spain," IREA Working Papers 201126, University of Barcelona, Research Institute of Applied Economics, revised Dec 2011.
    7. Dragan Tevdovski & Katerina Tosevska-Trpcevska & Elena Makrevska Disoska, 2017. "What is the role of innovation in productivity growth in Central and Eastern European countries?," The Economics of Transition, The European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, vol. 25(3), pages 527-551, July.
    8. Jaan Masso & Priit Vahter, 2008. "Technological innovation and productivity in late-transition Estonia: econometric evidence from innovation surveys," The European Journal of Development Research, Taylor and Francis Journals, vol. 20(2), pages 240-261.
    9. 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).
    10. Justin Doran & Declan Jordan & Eoin O’Leary, 2012. "The effects of the frequency of spatially proximate and distant interaction on innovation by Irish SMEs," Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 24(7-8), pages 705-727, September.
    11. Kaasa, Anneli, 2016. "Culture, religion and productivity: Evidence from European regions," Business and Economic Horizons (BEH), Prague Development Center (PRADEC), vol. 12(01), pages 1-18.
    12. Ramadani, Veland & Hisrich, Robert D. & Abazi-Alili, Hyrije & Dana, Léo-Paul & Panthi, Laxman & Abazi-Bexheti, Lejla, 2019. "Product innovation and firm performance in transition economies: A multi-stage estimation approach," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 140(C), pages 271-280.
    13. Hall, B.H., 2011. "Innovation and productivity," MERIT Working Papers 2011-028, United Nations University - Maastricht Economic and Social Research Institute on Innovation and Technology (MERIT).
    14. Martin Srholec, 2014. "Cooperation and Innovative Performance of Firms: Panel Data Evidence from the Czech Republic, Norway and the UK," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 5(1), pages 133-155, March.
    15. repec:lic:licosd:20308 is not listed on IDEAS
    16. Lhuillery, Stéphane & Pfister, Etienne, 2009. "R&D cooperation and failures in innovation projects: Empirical evidence from French CIS data," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(1), pages 45-57, February.
    17. Pierre Mohnen & Pierre Therrien, 2005. "Comparing the Innovation Performance in Canadian, French and German Manufacturing Enterprises," CIRANO Working Papers 2005s-33, CIRANO.
    18. Spyros Arvanitis & Thomas Bolli, 2009. "A comparison of firm-level innovation cooperation in five European countries," KOF Working papers 09-232, KOF Swiss Economic Institute, ETH Zurich.
    19. Doran, Justin & Ryan, Geraldine, 2019. "Does nanotechnology research generate an innovation premium over other types of research? Evidence from Ireland," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 59(C).
    20. Anneli Kaasa, 2018. "Intangible factors and productivity: Evidence from Europe at the regional level," Business and Economic Horizons (BEH), Prague Development Center, vol. 14(2), pages 300-325, April.
    21. Wladimir Raymond & Pierre Mohnen & Franz Palm & Sybrand Schim van der Loeff, 2010. "Persistence of Innovation in Dutch Manufacturing: Is It Spurious?," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 92(3), pages 495-504, August.

    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.