IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/unm/umamer/2001032.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

How Innovative are Canadian Firms Compared to Some European Firms? A Comparative Look at Innovation Surveys

Author

Listed:
  • Mohnen, Pierre
  • Therrien, Pierre

    (MERIT)

Abstract

This paper investigates the comparability of the 1999 Canadian Survey of Innovation with the European Community Innovation Surveys for 1997/1998 (CIS2). Four European countries are compared to Canada: France, Germany, Ireland, and Spain. Differences in terms of design and implementation of the survey and formulation of the questionnaire are pointed out. Proposals are made to harmonize the two datatsets and make them comparable as much as possible. Different innovation indicators -- percentage of innovators, sale of innovative products – show different results across countries. Canada leads the pack by far if we consider the percentage of innovating firms in the respective country samples, however it ranks last if we consider the share in sales of innovative products. Canada, Germany and Ireland seem to be relatively similar regarding the percentage of first-innovators (a narrower definition of innovation). France and Spain lag behind in this regard but seem to have a high intensity of first-innovators among the innovators. Results also show some common trends for all countries studied. Firms in high-tech sectors are more frequently innovative and reach a greater share of revenue from innovation than firms in other sectors. Large firms are more often innovative but size is not always a good predictor for the percentage of revenue from innovation.

Suggested Citation

  • Mohnen, Pierre & Therrien, Pierre, 2001. "How Innovative are Canadian Firms Compared to Some European Firms? A Comparative Look at Innovation Surveys," Research Memorandum 032, Maastricht University, Maastricht Economic Research Institute on Innovation and Technology (MERIT).
    • Handle: RePEc:unm:umamer:2001032
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://unu-merit.nl/publications/rmpdf/2001/rm2001-032.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Jacques Mairesse & Pierre Mohnen, 2001. "To Be or Not To Be Innovative: An Exercise in Measurement," NBER Working Papers 8644, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    2. Thomas Hatzichronoglou, 1997. "Revision of the High-Technology Sector and Product Classification," OECD Science, Technology and Industry Working Papers 1997/2, OECD Publishing.
    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. Emilie-Pauline Gallié & Diègo Legros, 2012. "Firms’ human capital, R&D and innovation: a study on French firms," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 43(2), pages 581-596, October.
    2. Pierre Mohnen & Pierre Therrien, 2002. "Comparing the Innovation Performance of Canadian Firms and those of Selected European Countries: An Econometric Analysis," CIRANO Working Papers 2002s-80, CIRANO.
    3. 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.
    4. Urem, Branka & Alcorta, Ludovico & An, Tongliang, 2008. "The Innovativeness of Foreign Firms in China," MERIT Working Papers 2008-019, United Nations University - Maastricht Economic and Social Research Institute on Innovation and Technology (MERIT).
    5. Julia Cohen & Carina Marques & Joana Lameira & Maria José Sousa & Manuel Au-Yong-Oliveira, 2020. "The Interrelationship between Corporate Social Responsibility and Strategic Innovation In Aveiro-based Startups," International Journal of Business Research and Management (IJBRM), Computer Science Journals (CSC Journals), vol. 11(3), pages 65-86, December.
    6. Galia, Fabrice & Legros, Diego, 2004. "Complementarities between obstacles to innovation: evidence from France," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(8), pages 1185-1199, October.
    7. repec:dau:papers:123456789/5018 is not listed on IDEAS
    8. Jorge Alcaide-Marzal & Enrique Tortajada-Esparza, 2007. "Innovation assessment in traditional industries. A proposal of aesthetic innovation indicators," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 72(1), pages 33-57, July.
    9. repec:dau:papers:123456789/6964 is not listed on IDEAS
    10. Jennifer Percival & Brian Cozzarin, 2008. "Complementarities Affecting the Returns to Innovation," Industry and Innovation, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 15(4), pages 371-392.
    11. van Moorsel, Daryl & Cranfield, John A.L. & Sparling, David, 2005. "Factors Affecting Biotechnology Innovation in Canada: Analysis of the 2001 Biotechnology Use and Development Survey," Working Papers 34121, University of Guelph, Department of Food, Agricultural and Resource Economics.
    12. repec:dau:papers:123456789/6962 is not listed 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. Raquel Ortega-Argilés & Lesley Potters & Marco Vivarelli, 2011. "R&D and productivity: testing sectoral peculiarities using micro data," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 41(3), pages 817-839, December.
    2. Gabriele Pellegrino & Mariacristina Piva & Marco Vivarelli, 2019. "Beyond R&D: the role of embodied technological change in affecting employment," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 29(4), pages 1151-1171, September.
    3. Laura Barbieri & Mariacristina Piva & Marco Vivarelli, 2019. "R&D, embodied technological change, and employment: evidence from Italian microdata," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 28(1), pages 203-218.
    4. Subal Kumbhakar & Raquel Ortega-Argilés & Lesley Potters & Marco Vivarelli & Peter Voigt, 2012. "Corporate R&D and firm efficiency: evidence from Europe’s top R&D investors," Journal of Productivity Analysis, Springer, vol. 37(2), pages 125-140, April.
    5. Michele Cincera & Claudio Cozza & Alexander Tübke, 2014. "Main drivers for local and global R&D sourcing of European Multinational Enterprises," Eurasian Business Review, Springer;Eurasia Business and Economics Society, vol. 4(2), pages 227-245, December.
    6. Michael Peneder, 2003. "Industry Classifications: Aim, Scope and Techniques," Journal of Industry, Competition and Trade, Springer, vol. 3(1), pages 109-129, March.
    7. Carlos S Baradello & Andrea Salazzaro, 2012. "The Role of Imitation in Global High-Tech Product Development," Symphonya. Emerging Issues in Management, Niccolò Cusano University, issue 1 Innovat, pages 57-71.
    8. Sanjib Pohit & Sanjukta Basu, 2012. "High Technology Merchandise Exports: Where does India Stand?," South Asia Economic Journal, Institute of Policy Studies of Sri Lanka, vol. 13(2), pages 183-206, September.
    9. Elif Bascavusoglu & Maria Pluvia Zuniga, 2005. "The effects of intellectual property protection on international knowledge contracting," Cahiers de la Maison des Sciences Economiques bla05009, Université Panthéon-Sorbonne (Paris 1).
    10. Thorbecke, Willem & Chen, Chen & Salike, Nimesh, 2021. "China’s exports in a protectionist world," Journal of Asian Economics, Elsevier, vol. 77(C).
    11. Seppä, Elina, 2007. "Innovation Performance of Firms in Manufacturing Industry: Evidence from Belgium, Finland and Germany in 1998-2000," Discussion Papers 414, VATT Institute for Economic Research.
    12. Francesco Bogliacino & Marco Vivarelli, 2012. "The Job Creation Effect Of R&D Expenditures," Australian Economic Papers, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 51(2), pages 96-113, June.
    13. Kancs, d’Artis & Siliverstovs, Boriss, 2016. "R&D and non-linear productivity growth," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(3), pages 634-646.
    14. Gourdon, Julien & Monjon, Stéphanie & Poncet, Sandra, 2016. "Trade policy and industrial policy in China: What motivates public authorities to apply restrictions on exports?," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 40(C), pages 105-120.
    15. 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).
    16. 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).
    17. Ida D'Attoma & Silvia Pacei, 2018. "Evaluating the Effects of Product Innovation on the Performance of European Firms by Using the Generalised Propensity Score," German Economic Review, Verein für Socialpolitik, vol. 19(1), pages 94-112, February.
    18. Haeri, Ali & Arabmazar, Abbas, 2018. "Designing an Industrial Policy for Developing Countries: a New Approach," MPRA Paper 89048, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    19. Frenz, Marion & Ietto-Gillies, Grazia, 2009. "The impact on innovation performance of different sources of knowledge: Evidence from the UK Community Innovation Survey," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(7), pages 1125-1135, September.
    20. Mohnen, Pierre & Roller, Lars-Hendrik, 2005. "Complementarities in innovation policy," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 49(6), pages 1431-1450, August.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    economics of technology ;

    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

    Lists

    This item is featured on the following reading lists, Wikipedia, or ReplicationWiki pages:
    1. Socio-Economics of Innovation

    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:unm:umamer:2001032. 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: Leonne Portz (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/meritnl.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.