IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ise/isegwp/wp242012.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Schumpeterian Patterns of Innovation and the Sources of Breakthrough Inventions: Evidence from a Data-Set of R&D Awards

Author

Listed:
  • Roberto Fontana
  • Alessandro Nuvolari
  • Hiroshi Shimitzu
  • Andrea Vezzulli

Abstract

This paper examines the relationship between Schumpeterian patterns of innovation and the generation of breakthrough inventions. Our data source for breakthrough inventions is the “R&D 100 awards” competition organized each year by the magazine Research & Development. Since 1963, this magazine has been awarding this prize to 100 most technologically significant new products available for sale or licensing in the year preceding the judgment. We use instead USPTO patent data to measure the relevant dimensions of the technological regimes prevailing in each sector and, on this basis of this information, we provide a characterization of each sector in terms of the Schumpeter Mark I/Schumpeter Mark II archetypes. Our main finding is that breakthrough inventions are more likely to emerge in “turbulent” Schumpeter Mark I type of contexts.

Suggested Citation

  • Roberto Fontana & Alessandro Nuvolari & Hiroshi Shimitzu & Andrea Vezzulli, 2012. "Schumpeterian Patterns of Innovation and the Sources of Breakthrough Inventions: Evidence from a Data-Set of R&D Awards," Working Papers Department of Economics 2012/24, ISEG - Lisbon School of Economics and Management, Department of Economics, Universidade de Lisboa.
    • Handle: RePEc:ise:isegwp:wp242012
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://depeco.iseg.ulisboa.pt/wp/wp242012.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. David M. Drukker & Richard Gates, 2006. "Generating Halton sequences using Mata," Stata Journal, StataCorp LP, vol. 6(2), pages 214-228, June.
    2. Geweke, John, 1989. "Bayesian Inference in Econometric Models Using Monte Carlo Integration," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 57(6), pages 1317-1339, November.
    3. Silverberg, Gerald & Verspagen, Bart, 2007. "The size distribution of innovations revisited: An application of extreme value statistics to citation and value measures of patent significance," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 139(2), pages 318-339, August.
    4. Keane, Michael P & Wolpin, Kenneth I, 1994. "The Solution and Estimation of Discrete Choice Dynamic Programming Models by Simulation and Interpolation: Monte Carlo Evidence," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 76(4), pages 648-672, November.
    5. Hall, B. & Jaffe, A. & Trajtenberg, M., 2001. "The NBER Patent Citations Data File: Lessons, Insights and Methodological Tools," Papers 2001-29, Tel Aviv.
    6. Pavitt, Keith, 1984. "Sectoral patterns of technical change: Towards a taxonomy and a theory," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 13(6), pages 343-373, December.
    7. Carpenter, Mark P. & Narin, Francis & Woolf, Patricia, 1981. "Citation rates to technologically important patents," World Patent Information, Elsevier, vol. 3(4), pages 160-163, October.
    8. Bronwyn H. Hall & Nathan Rosenberg (ed.), 2010. "Handbook of the Economics of Innovation," Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, Elsevier, edition 1, volume 1, number 1.
    9. Cohen, Wesley M., 2010. "Fifty Years of Empirical Studies of Innovative Activity and Performance," 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 129-213, Elsevier.
    10. Freeman, C., 1991. "Networks of innovators: A synthesis of research issues," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 20(5), pages 499-514, October.
    11. Vassilis A. Hajivassiliou & Daniel L. McFadden, 1998. "The Method of Simulated Scores for the Estimation of LDV Models," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 66(4), pages 863-896, July.
    12. Lars Bo Jeppesen & Karim R. Lakhani, 2010. "Marginality and Problem-Solving Effectiveness in Broadcast Search," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 21(5), pages 1016-1033, October.
    13. Breschi, Stefano & Malerba, Franco & Orsenigo, Luigi, 2000. "Technological Regimes and Schumpeterian Patterns of Innovation," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 110(463), pages 388-410, April.
    14. Malerba, Franco & Orsenigo, Luigi, 1995. "Schumpeterian Patterns of Innovation," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 19(1), pages 47-65, February.
    15. Gautam Ahuja & Curba Morris Lampert, 2001. "Entrepreneurship in the large corporation: a longitudinal study of how established firms create breakthrough inventions," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 22(6‐7), pages 521-543, June.
    16. Schoenmakers, Wilfred & Duysters, Geert, 2010. "The technological origins of radical inventions," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(8), pages 1051-1059, October.
    17. Orietta Marsili & Bart Verspagen, 2002. "Technology and the dynamics of industrial structures: an empirical mapping of Dutch manufacturing," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 11(4), pages 791-815, August.
    18. Malerba, Franco & Orsenigo, Luigi, 1997. "Technological Regimes and Sectoral Patterns of Innovative Activities," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 6(1), pages 83-117.
    19. Mowery,David C. & Nelson,Richard R. (ed.), 1999. "Sources of Industrial Leadership," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521645201, September.
    20. Malerba, Franco & Orsenigo, Luigi, 1996. "Schumpeterian patterns of innovation are technology-specific," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 25(3), pages 451-478, May.
    21. Fulvio Castellacci, 2007. "Technological regimes and sectoral differences in productivity growth ," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 16(6), pages 1105-1145, December.
    22. Scherer, F. M. & Harhoff, Dietmar, 2000. "Technology policy for a world of skew-distributed outcomes," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 29(4-5), pages 559-566, April.
    23. Granstrand, O & Alange, S, 1995. "The Evolution of Corporate Entrepreneurship in Swedish Industry--Was Schumpeter Wrong?," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 5(2), pages 133-156, June.
    24. Corrocher, Nicoletta & Malerba, Franco & Montobbio, Fabio, 2007. "Schumpeterian patterns of innovative activity in the ICT field," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(3), pages 418-432, April.
    25. van Dijk, Machiel, 2000. "Technological Regimes and Industrial Dynamics: The Evidence from Dutch Manufacturing," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 9(2), pages 173-194, June.
    26. Jasjit Singh & Lee Fleming, 2010. "Lone Inventors as Sources of Breakthroughs: Myth or Reality?," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 56(1), pages 41-56, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    RePEc Biblio mentions

    As found on the RePEc Biblio, the curated bibliography for Economics:
    1. > Economic Development Technological Change, and Growth > Innovation and Invention: Processes and Incentives

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Epicoco, Marianna, 2016. "Patterns of innovation and organizational demography in emerging sustainable fields: An analysis of the chemical sector," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(2), pages 427-441.
    2. Verhoeven, Dennis & Bakker, Jurriën & Veugelers, Reinhilde, 2016. "Measuring technological novelty with patent-based indicators," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(3), pages 707-723.
    3. Esposito, Christopher R., 2023. "The geography of breakthrough invention in the United States over the 20th century," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(7).
    4. Antonio Malva & Stijn Kelchtermans & Bart Leten & Reinhilde Veugelers, 2015. "Basic science as a prescription for breakthrough inventions in the pharmaceutical industry," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 40(4), pages 670-695, August.
    5. Singh, Anuraag & Triulzi, Giorgio & Magee, Christopher L., 2021. "Technological improvement rate predictions for all technologies: Use of patent data and an extended domain description," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(9).
    6. Alberto Botta, 2017. "The Complex Inequality–Innovation–Public Investment Nexus: What We (Don’t) Know, What We Should Know and What We Have to Do," Forum for Social Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 46(3), pages 275-298, July.
    7. Daniele Tumidei & Constantinos Alexiou & Michael Bourne, 2021. "A choice and inevitability framework in strategic management: empirical evidence of its real-life existence," Review of Managerial Science, Springer, vol. 15(6), pages 1729-1766, August.
    8. Anuraag Singh & Giorgio Triulzi & Christopher L. Magee, 2020. "Technological improvement rate estimates for all technologies: Use of patent data and an extended domain description," Papers 2004.13919, arXiv.org.
    9. Nuvolari, Alessandro & Russo, Emanuele, 2019. "Technical progress and structural change: a long-term view," MERIT Working Papers 2019-022, United Nations University - Maastricht Economic and Social Research Institute on Innovation and Technology (MERIT).
    10. Marianna Epicoco, 2016. "Patterns of innovation and organizational demography in emerging sustainable fields: An analysis of the chemical sector," Post-Print hal-03381224, HAL.
    11. Buchmann, Tobias & Wolf, Patrick, 2024. "Breakthrough inventions in solar PV and wind technologies: The role of scientific discoveries," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 198(C).
    12. Ortiz-Villajos, José M. & Sotoca, Sonia, 2018. "Innovation and business survival: A long-term approach," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(8), pages 1418-1436.
    13. Ortiz-Villajos, José M., 2024. "Dynamics of innovation over time: Evidence from the Spanish business elite," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 378-394.
    14. Capponi, Giovanna & Criscuolo, Paola & Martinelli, Arianna & Nuvolari, Alessandro, 2019. "Profiting from innovation: Evidence from a survey of Queen's Awards winners," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 155-169.
    15. Roberto Fontana & Arianna Martinelli & Alessandro Nuvolari, 2021. "Regimes reloaded! A reappraisal of Schumpeterian patterns of innovation, 1977–2011," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 31(5), pages 1495-1519, November.
    16. Jürgen Janger & Agnes Kügler & Andreas Reinstaller & Peter Reschenhofer & Fabian Unterlass, 2017. "Austria 2025 – A New Strategic Innovation Policy Framework. Addressing Structural Change and Upgrading," WIFO Studies, WIFO, number 59290.

    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. Roberto Fontana & Arianna Martinelli & Alessandro Nuvolari, 2021. "Regimes reloaded! A reappraisal of Schumpeterian patterns of innovation, 1977–2011," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 31(5), pages 1495-1519, November.
    2. Fulvio Castellacci, 2007. "Technological regimes and sectoral differences in productivity growth ," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 16(6), pages 1105-1145, December.
    3. Castellacci, Fulvio, 2008. "Innovation and the competitiveness of industries: comparing the mainstream and the evolutionary approaches," MPRA Paper 27523, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    4. Dosi, Giovanni & Nelson, Richard R., 2010. "Technical Change and Industrial Dynamics as Evolutionary Processes," 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 51-127, Elsevier.
    5. Castellacci, Fulvio, 2008. "Technological paradigms, regimes and trajectories: Manufacturing and service industries in a new taxonomy of sectoral patterns of innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(6-7), pages 978-994, July.
    6. Apa, Roberta & De Noni, Ivan & Orsi, Luigi & Sedita, Silvia Rita, 2018. "Knowledge space oddity: How to increase the intensity and relevance of the technological progress of European regions," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(9), pages 1700-1712.
    7. Fulvio Castellacci & Jinghai Zheng, 2010. "Technological regimes, Schumpeterian patterns of innovation and firm-level productivity growth," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 19(6), pages 1829-1865, December.
    8. Dario Diodato & Andrea Morrison, 2019. "Technological regimes and the geography of innovation: a long-run perspective on US inventions," Papers in Evolutionary Economic Geography (PEEG) 1924, Utrecht University, Department of Human Geography and Spatial Planning, Group Economic Geography, revised Jul 2019.
    9. Mirella Daminai & Fabrizio Pompei, 2008. "Mergers, acquisitions and technological regimes: the European experience over the period 2002-2005," Quaderni del Dipartimento di Economia, Finanza e Statistica 46/2008, Università di Perugia, Dipartimento Economia.
    10. Liu, Xiaohui & Hodgkinson, Ian R. & Chuang, Fu-Mei, 2014. "Foreign competition, domestic knowledge base and innovation activities: Evidence from Chinese high-tech industries," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(2), pages 414-422.
    11. Lee, Jeongwon & Hwang, Junseok & Kim, Hana, 2022. "Different government support effects on emerging and mature ICT sectors," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 174(C).
    12. Giovanni Dosi & Richard Nelson, 2013. "The Evolution of Technologies: An Assessment of the State-of-the-Art," Eurasian Business Review, Springer;Eurasia Business and Economics Society, vol. 3(1), pages 3-46, June.
    13. 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.
    14. Martin Kalthaus, 2020. "Knowledge recombination along the technology life cycle," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 30(3), pages 643-704, July.
    15. Fassio Claudio, 2011. "Sectoral invariances or distance-from-the-frontier effect among European mid-low tech sectors," Department of Economics and Statistics Cognetti de Martiis LEI & BRICK - Laboratory of Economics of Innovation "Franco Momigliano", Bureau of Research in Innovation, Complexity and Knowledge, Collegio 201115, University of Turin.
    16. Antonio Malva & Stijn Kelchtermans & Bart Leten & Reinhilde Veugelers, 2015. "Basic science as a prescription for breakthrough inventions in the pharmaceutical industry," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 40(4), pages 670-695, August.
    17. Muscio, Alessandro & Nardone, Gianluca & Stasi, Antonio, 2012. "Perceived Technological Regimes: An Empirical Analysis of the Apulian Wine Industry," 2012 International European Forum, February 13-17, 2012, Innsbruck-Igls, Austria 144969, International European Forum on System Dynamics and Innovation in Food Networks.
    18. Franco Malerba & Fabio Montobbio, 2000. "Knowledge Flows, Structure of Innovative Activity and International Specialization," KITeS Working Papers 119, KITeS, Centre for Knowledge, Internationalization and Technology Studies, Universita' Bocconi, Milano, Italy, revised Nov 2000.
    19. Jan de Kok & O Som & P Neuhäusler, 2014. "The impact of the 2008 financial crisis on European enterprises: the role of innovation systems," Scales Research Reports H201411, EIM Business and Policy Research.
    20. Fang Wang & Zhaoyuan Xu & Xiaoyong Dai, 2023. "Is learning by exporting technology specific? Evidence from Chinese firms," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 32(2), pages 275-304, February.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • O31 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Innovation and Invention: Processes and Incentives
    • O33 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Technological Change: Choices and Consequences; Diffusion Processes

    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:ise:isegwp:wp242012. 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: Vitor Escaria (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://aquila.iseg.ulisboa.pt/aquila/departamentos/EC .

    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.