IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ces/ceswps/_1230.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

An Empirically-Based Taxonomy of Dutch Manufacturing: Innovation Policy Implications

Author

Listed:
  • Wladimir Raymond
  • Pierre Mohnen
  • Franz Palm
  • Sybrand Schim van der Loeff

Abstract

The paper studies the degree of homogeneity of innovative behavior in order to determine empirically an industry classification of Dutch manufacturing that can be used for policy purposes. We use a two-limit tobit model with sample selection, which explains the decisions by business enterprises to innovate and the impact these decisions have on the share of innovative sales. The model is estimated for eleven industries based on the Dutch Standard Industrial Classification (SBI 1993). A likelihood ratio test (LR) is then performed to test for equality of the parameters across industries. We find that Dutch manufacturing consists of three groups of industries in terms of innovative behavior, a high-tech group, a low-tech group and the industry of wood, where firms seem to have a rather different innovative behavior from the remaining industries. The same pattern shows up in the three Dutch Community Innovation Surveys.

Suggested Citation

  • Wladimir Raymond & Pierre Mohnen & Franz Palm & Sybrand Schim van der Loeff, 2004. "An Empirically-Based Taxonomy of Dutch Manufacturing: Innovation Policy Implications," CESifo Working Paper Series 1230, CESifo.
    • Handle: RePEc:ces:ceswps:_1230
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cesifo.org/DocDL/cesifo1_wp1230.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Spyros Arvanitis & Heinz Hollenstein, 1996. "Industrial Innovation in Switzerland: A Model-based Analysis with Survey Data," Palgrave Macmillan Books, in: Alfred Kleinknecht (ed.), Determinants of Innovation, chapter 2, pages 13-62, Palgrave Macmillan.
    2. Sabourin, David & Baldwin, John R. & Hanel, Peter, 2000. "Determinants of Innovative Activity in Canadian Manufacturing Firms: The Role of Intellectual Property Rights," Analytical Studies Branch Research Paper Series 2000122e, Statistics Canada, Analytical Studies Branch.
    3. Amemiya, Takeshi, 1978. "The Estimation of a Simultaneous Equation Generalized Probit Model," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 46(5), pages 1193-1205, September.
    4. John Baldwin & Petr Hanel & David Sabourin, 2002. "Determinants of Innovative Activity in Canadian Manufacturing Firms," Palgrave Macmillan Books, in: Alfred Kleinknecht & Pierre Mohnen (ed.), Innovation and Firm Performance, chapter 5, pages 86-111, Palgrave Macmillan.
    5. Alfred Kleinknecht & Pierre Mohnen (ed.), 2002. "Innovation and Firm Performance," Palgrave Macmillan Books, Palgrave Macmillan, number 978-0-230-59588-0, 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. 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.
    2. 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.
    3. Bert Diederen & Pierre Mohnen & Franz C. Palm & Sybrand Schim van der Loeff, 2006. "Innovation in Enterprise Clusters: Evidence from Dutch Manufacturing," Chapters, in: Louise Earl & Fred Gault (ed.), National Innovation, Indicators and Policy, chapter 4, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    4. Bi, Kexin & Huang, Ping & Wang, Xiangxiang, 2016. "Innovation performance and influencing factors of low-carbon technological innovation under the global value chain: A case of Chinese manufacturing industry," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 111(C), pages 275-284.
    5. de Jong, Jeroen P.J. & Marsili, Orietta, 2006. "The fruit flies of innovations: A taxonomy of innovative small firms," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(2), pages 213-229, March.
    6. 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.
    7. 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.
    8. 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.

    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. Andrew Copus & Dimitris Skuras & Kyriaki Tsegenidi, 2006. "Innovation and Peripherality: A Comparative Study in Six EU Member Countries," ERSA conference papers ersa06p295, European Regional Science Association.
    2. Isabel Freitas & Tommy Clausen & Roberto Fontana & Bart Verspagen, 2011. "Formal and informal external linkages and firms’ innovative strategies. A cross-country comparison," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 21(1), pages 91-119, February.
    3. Andreas Ziegler, 2008. "Disentangling Specific Subsets of Innovations : A Micro-Econometric Analysis of their Determinants," CER-ETH Economics working paper series 08/100, CER-ETH - Center of Economic Research (CER-ETH) at ETH Zurich.
    4. Wittkopp, Antje, 2002. "Marktstruktur, Innovationsaktivität und Profitabilität der deutschen Ernährungswirtschaft: Das Beispiel Functional Food," FE Working Papers 0205, Christian-Albrechts-University of Kiel, Department of Food Economics and Consumption Studies.
    5. Chialin Chang & Stéphane Robin, 2006. "Doing R&D and/or Importing Technologies: The Critical Importance of Firm Size in Taiwan’s Manufacturing Industries," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 29(3), pages 253-278, November.
    6. Carine Peeters & Bruno Pottelsberghe de la Potterie, 2007. "Innovation strategy and the patenting behavior of firms," Springer Books, in: Uwe Cantner & Franco Malerba (ed.), Innovation, Industrial Dynamics and Structural Transformation, pages 345-371, Springer.
    7. Chudnovsky, Daniel & Lopez, Andres & Pupato, German, 2006. "Innovation and productivity in developing countries: A study of Argentine manufacturing firms' behavior (1992-2001)," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(2), pages 266-288, March.
    8. Wales, W. & Shirokova, G. & Bogatyreva, K. & Germain, R., 2018. "Foreign Motivations: How International Exposure Shapes Firms' Entrepreneurial Orientation in Emerging Market," Working Papers 15121, Graduate School of Management, St. Petersburg State University.
    9. Juan Mañez & María Rochina-Barrachina & Amparo Sanchis & Juan Sanchis, 2013. "Do process innovations boost SMEs productivity growth?," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 44(3), pages 1373-1405, June.
    10. Murat Yildizoglu & Mohamed AYADI & Mohieddine RAHMOUNI, 2007. "Sectoral patterns of innovation in a developing country: The Tunisian case," Cahiers du GREThA (2007-2019) 2007-19, Groupe de Recherche en Economie Théorique et Appliquée (GREThA).
    11. Spyros Arvanitis & Nora Sydow & Martin Woerter, 2008. "Is there any Impact of University–Industry Knowledge Transfer on Innovation and Productivity? An Empirical Analysis Based on Swiss Firm Data," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 32(2), pages 77-94, March.
    12. Ghosh, Saibal, 2006. "R&D in Indian public enterprises: An assessment," MPRA Paper 32073, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    13. Sabourin, David & Baldwin, John R., 1999. "Innovative Activity in Canadian Food Processing Establishments: the Importance of Engineering Practices," Analytical Studies Branch Research Paper Series 1999101e, Statistics Canada, Analytical Studies Branch.
    14. Baldwin, John R., 2004. "Productivité : l'évolution du programme de Statistique Canada," Analyse économique : documents sur la méthodologie - Comptes nationaux 2004002f, Statistics Canada, Division de l'analyse économique.
    15. Lee, Cassey, 2004. "The Determinants of Innovation in the Malaysian Manufacturing Sector: An Econometric Analysis at the Firm Level," Centre on Regulation and Competition (CRC) Working papers 30670, University of Manchester, Institute for Development Policy and Management (IDPM).
    16. Baldwin, John R., 2004. "Productivity: The Evolution of Statistics Canada's Program," Economic Analysis Methodology Paper Series: National Accounts 2004002e, Statistics Canada, Economic Analysis Division.
    17. Santos, David Ferreira Lopes & Basso, Leonardo Fernando Cruz & Kimura, Herbert & Kayo, Eduardo Kazuo, 2014. "Innovation efforts and performances of Brazilian firms," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 67(4), pages 527-535.
    18. Baldwin, John R. Gellatly, Guy, 2007. "Global Links: Multinationals in Canada: An Overview of Research at Statistics Canada," The Canadian Economy in Transition 2007014e, Statistics Canada, Economic Analysis Division.
    19. Gordon Dahl, 2010. "Early teen marriage and future poverty," Demography, Springer;Population Association of America (PAA), vol. 47(3), pages 689-718, August.
    20. repec:zbw:rwirep:0200 is not listed on IDEAS
    21. José Monteiro-Barata, 2005. "Innovation in the Portuguese Manufacturing Industry: Analysis of a Longitudinal Company Panel," International Advances in Economic Research, Springer;International Atlantic Economic Society, vol. 11(3), pages 301-314, August.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    generalized tobit; high-tech industry; homogeneity; innovation policy; likelihood ratio test; model of friction; sample selection; two-limit tobit model; TPP innovator;
    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

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:ces:ceswps:_1230. 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: Klaus Wohlrabe (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cesifde.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.