IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/astaws/v12y2018i2d10.1007_s11943-018-0226-z.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Technologien statt Branchen: Eine Neuauswertung der FuE-Erhebung 2015
[Technologies instead of sectors: a re-evaluation of the 2015 R&D survey]

Author

Listed:
  • Andreas Kladroba

    (FOM Hochschule für Oekonomie und Management)

  • Muhamed Kudic

    (Universität Bremen)

  • Katharina Friz

    (Universität Bremen)

  • Tobias Buchmann

    (Zentrum für Sonnenenergie- und Wasserstoff-Forschung)

  • Patrick Wolf

    (Zentrum für Sonnenenergie- und Wasserstoff-Forschung)

Abstract

Zusammenfassung Die Daten der Erhebung zu Forschung und Entwicklung sind gemäß den Vorgaben des Frascati-Handbuchs und der EU-Verordnung 995/2012 nach Branchen strukturiert. Viele Maßnahmen der Forschungs- und Forschungsförderpolitik orientieren sich aber nach Technologien, also nach einem Querschnitt verschiedener Branchen. Zu dieser Betrachtung liegen aber nur wenige statistische Informationen vor. Die vorliegende Arbeit versucht daher auf der Basis der FuE-Erhebung 2015 eine Neuauswertung der Daten gemäß den Technologien/Forschungsfeldern der Leistungsplansystematik des Bundes vorzunehmen.

Suggested Citation

  • Andreas Kladroba & Muhamed Kudic & Katharina Friz & Tobias Buchmann & Patrick Wolf, 2018. "Technologien statt Branchen: Eine Neuauswertung der FuE-Erhebung 2015 [Technologies instead of sectors: a re-evaluation of the 2015 R&D survey]," AStA Wirtschafts- und Sozialstatistisches Archiv, Springer;Deutsche Statistische Gesellschaft - German Statistical Society, vol. 12(2), pages 87-104, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:astaws:v:12:y:2018:i:2:d:10.1007_s11943-018-0226-z
    DOI: 10.1007/s11943-018-0226-z
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11943-018-0226-z
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11943-018-0226-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. Czarnitzki, Dirk & Kraft, Kornelius & Thorwarth, Susanne, 2009. "The knowledge production of 'R' and 'D'," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 105(1), pages 141-143, October.
    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. Timo Schmid & Markus Zwick, 2018. "Vorwort der Herausgeber," AStA Wirtschafts- und Sozialstatistisches Archiv, Springer;Deutsche Statistische Gesellschaft - German Statistical Society, vol. 12(2), pages 83-85, 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. Dirk Czarnitzki & Hanna Hottenrott & Susanne Thorwarth, 2011. "Industrial research versus development investment: the implications of financial constraints," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 35(3), pages 527-544.
    2. Aiello, Francesco & Albanese, Giuseppe & Piselli, Paolo, 2019. "Good value for public money? The case of R&D policy," Journal of Policy Modeling, Elsevier, vol. 41(6), pages 1057-1076.
    3. Tamay Besiroglu & Nicholas Emery-Xu & Neil Thompson, 2022. "Economic impacts of AI-augmented R&D," Papers 2212.08198, arXiv.org, revised Jan 2023.
    4. Barge-Gil, Andrés & López, Alberto, 2014. "R&D determinants: Accounting for the differences between research and development," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(9), pages 1634-1648.
    5. Horbach, Jens & Rammer, Christian, 2020. "Labor shortage and innovation," ZEW Discussion Papers 20-009, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    6. Andrés Barge-Gil & Alberto López, 2015. "R versus D: estimating the differentiated effect of research and development on innovation results," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 24(1), pages 93-129.
    7. Kancs, d’Artis & Siliverstovs, Boriss, 2016. "R&D and non-linear productivity growth," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(3), pages 634-646.
    8. Pilar Beneito & Mari´a E. Rochina-Barrachina & Amparo Sanchis, 2017. "The determinants of international patenting decisions of Spanish firms," Working Papers 1708, Department of Applied Economics II, Universidad de Valencia.
    9. Montresor, Sandro & Vezzani, Antonio, 2015. "The production function of top R&D investors: Accounting for size and sector heterogeneity with quantile estimations," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(2), pages 381-393.
    10. Danguy, Jérôme & de Rassenfosse, Gaétan & van Pottelsberghe de la Potterie, Bruno, 2010. "The R&D-patent relationship: An industry perspective," EIB Papers 7/2009, European Investment Bank, Economics Department.
    11. Becker, Annette & Hottenrott, Hanna & Mukherjee, Anwesha, 2022. "Division of labor in R&D? Firm size and specialization in corporate research," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 194(C), pages 1-23.
    12. FUKUGAWA Nobuya, 2019. "Determinants and Impacts of Incorporation of Local Public Technology Transfer Organizations: Evidence from Japan's Kohsetsushi," Discussion papers 19095, Research Institute of Economy, Trade and Industry (RIETI).
    13. Pablo D’Este & Alberto Marzucchi & Francesco Rentocchini, 2014. "Exploring and yet failing less: Learning from exploration, exploitation and human capital in R&D," SPRU Working Paper Series 2014-23, SPRU - Science Policy Research Unit, University of Sussex Business School.
    14. Albert N. Link & Martijn Hasselt, 2020. "Exploring the impact of R&D on patenting activity in small women-owned and minority-owned entrepreneurial firms," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 54(4), pages 1061-1066, April.
    15. Anna Laura Baraldi & Claudia Cantabene & Giulio Perani, 2014. "Reverse causality in the R&D-patents relationship: an interpretation of the innovation persistence," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 23(3), pages 304-326, April.
    16. Albert N. Link & John T. Scott, 2021. "Scientific publications at U.S. federal research laboratories," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(3), pages 2227-2248, March.
    17. Chatterjee, Diti & Dinar, Ariel & González-Rivera, Gloria, 2018. "An empirical knowledge production function of agricultural research and extension: The case of the University of California Cooperative Extension," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 134(C), pages 290-297.
    18. FUJIKAWA Naoto & MOTOHASHI Kazuyuki, 2016. "Absorptive Capacity and External Technology Sourcing: Empirical investigation of vertical and horizontal relationships in the research and development process," Discussion papers 16102, Research Institute of Economy, Trade and Industry (RIETI).
    19. Grazia Cecere & Sascha Rexhäuser & Patrick Schulte, 2019. "From less promising to green? Technological opportunities and their role in (green) ICT innovation," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 28(1), pages 45-63, January.
    20. Beneito, Pilar & Rochina-Barrachina, María Engracia & Sanchis, Amparo, 2015. "The path of R&D efficiency over time," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 57-69.

    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:spr:astaws:v:12:y:2018:i:2:d:10.1007_s11943-018-0226-z. 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.