IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/prs/ecstat/estat_0336-1454_1991_num_246_1_6299.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Recherche-développement : un avantage à l'Allemagne

Author

Listed:
  • Dominique Guellec
  • Catherine Zaidman

Abstract

[fre] Les dépenses en recherche-développement, source principale de l'innovation technologique, sont plus élevées d'un tiers en Allemagne qu'en France. Les financements publics ont un niveau similaire, mais les financements privés sont très inférieurs en France. Ceci peut s'expliquer, pour partie, par la taille plus faible de l'industrie française. Les deux pays diffèrent aussi par la répartition sectorielle . de leurs dépenses en recherche-développement et par les institutions publiques et privées supportant la recherche. Cet ensemble de facteurs permet une diffusion plus large de l'effort et des résultats dans l'industrie allemande qui manifeste, finalement, un plus grand dynamisme technologique. [spa] Investigacion-desarrollo : ventajas para Alemania - Los gastos en el rubro investigación-desarrollo, fuente principal de la innovación technológica son un tercio más elevados en Alemania que en Francia. El financiamiento público es similar en ambos países pero el privado es muy inferior en Francia. Tal situation puede explicarse, en parte, por la menor magnitud de la industria francesa. Los dos países difieren en lo que concierne a la distribución sectorial de sus presupuestos en investigacion-desarrollo y también en lo que atane a las instituciones públicas y privadas que financian la investigación. Este conjunto de factores permite una difusión más amplia del esfuerzo y de los resultados en la industria alemana, evidenciando así un mayor dinamismo technológico. [eng] Research and Development: an Advantage in Germany- Expenses for research and development, the major source of technological innovation, are a third higher in Germany than in France. Public financing is comparable, in the two countries, but private financing is much lower in France. This may, in part, be explained by the fact that French industry is smaller. The two countries also differ in the distribution of their spending in R & D between sectors, and in the public and private institutions which support research. These factors produce a wider circulation of the investment and results in the German industry which ends up revealing greater technological dynamism.

Suggested Citation

  • Dominique Guellec & Catherine Zaidman, 1991. "Recherche-développement : un avantage à l'Allemagne," Économie et Statistique, Programme National Persée, vol. 246(1), pages 91-97.
    • Handle: RePEc:prs:ecstat:estat_0336-1454_1991_num_246_1_6299
    DOI: 10.3406/estat.1991.6299
    Note: DOI:10.3406/estat.1991.6299
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.3406/estat.1991.6299
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.persee.fr/doc/estat_0336-1454_1991_num_246_1_6299
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.3406/estat.1991.6299?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Dixit, Avinash K & Stiglitz, Joseph E, 1977. "Monopolistic Competition and Optimum Product Diversity," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 67(3), pages 297-308, June.
    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. Adnan Haider Bukhari & Safdar Ullah Khan, 2008. "A Small Open Economy DSGE Model for Pakistan," The Pakistan Development Review, Pakistan Institute of Development Economics, vol. 47(4), pages 963-1008.
    2. Croce, M.M. & Nguyen, Thien T. & Raymond, S. & Schmid, L., 2019. "Government debt and the returns to innovation," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 132(3), pages 205-225.
    3. Paolo Epifani & Gino Gancia, 2008. "The Skill Bias of World Trade," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 118(530), pages 927-960, July.
    4. Cukierman, Alex & Lippi, Francesco, 2001. "Labour Markets and Monetary Union: A Strategic Analysis," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 111(473), pages 541-565, July.
    5. Lutz Arnold & Christian Bauer, 2009. "On the growth and welfare effects of monopolistic distortions," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 97(1), pages 19-40, May.
    6. Liliana Meza-González & Jaime Marie Sepulveda, 2019. "The impact of competition with China in the US market on innovation in Mexican manufacturing firms," Latin American Economic Review, Springer;Centro de Investigaciòn y Docencia Económica (CIDE), vol. 28(1), pages 1-21, December.
    7. Alexandre Janiak & Paulo Santos Monteiro, 2011. "Inflation and Welfare in Long‐Run Equilibrium with Firm Dynamics," Journal of Money, Credit and Banking, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 43(5), pages 795-834, August.
    8. de Groot, Henri L. F. & Nahuis, Richard, 1998. "Taste for diversity and the optimality of economic growth," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 58(3), pages 291-295, March.
    9. Colin Davis, 2013. "Regional integration and innovation offshoring with occupational choice and endogenous growth," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 108(1), pages 59-79, January.
    10. Masashige Hamano & Pierre M. Picard, 2017. "Extensive and intensive margins and exchange rate regimes," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 50(3), pages 804-837, August.
    11. Corsetti, Giancarlo & Martin, Philippe & Pesenti, Paolo, 2007. "Productivity, terms of trade and the `home market effect'," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 73(1), pages 99-127, September.
    12. Taran Fæhn & Elisabeth Thuestad Isaksen, 2014. "Diffusion of climate technologies in the presence of commitment problems," Discussion Papers 768, Statistics Norway, Research Department.
    13. Llanes Gastón & Trento Stefano, 2011. "Anticommons and Optimal Patent Policy in a Model of Sequential Innovation," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 11(1), pages 1-27, August.
    14. Knut Blind & Andre Jungmittag, 2008. "The impact of patents and standards on macroeconomic growth: a panel approach covering four countries and 12 sectors," Journal of Productivity Analysis, Springer, vol. 29(1), pages 51-60, February.
    15. Church, Jeffrey & Gandal, Neil, 1993. "Complementary network externalities and technological adoption," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 11(2), pages 239-260, June.
    16. Frédéric Reynès, 2011. "The cobb-douglas function as an approximation of other functions," SciencePo Working papers Main hal-01069515, HAL.
    17. Peter Egger & Douglas Nelson, 2011. "How Bad Is Antidumping? Evidence from Panel Data," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 93(4), pages 1374-1390, November.
    18. Brad E. Strum, 2010. "Inflation persistence, backward-looking firms, and monetary policy in an input-output economy," Finance and Economics Discussion Series 2010-55, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (U.S.).
    19. Robert Dekle & Jonathan Eaton, 1994. "Agglomeration and the Price of Land: Evidence from the Prefectures," NBER Working Papers 4781, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    20. Shioji, Etsuro, 2006. "Invoicing currency and the optimal basket peg for East Asia: Analysis using a new open economy macroeconomic model," Journal of the Japanese and International Economies, Elsevier, vol. 20(4), pages 569-589, December.

    More about this item

    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:prs:ecstat:estat_0336-1454_1991_num_246_1_6299. 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: Equipe PERSEE (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.persee.fr/collection/estat .

    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.