Publications
-
List item
PDF Distribution of industrial research and innovation activities: An application of the technology readiness levels
The Technology Readiness Levels (TRLs) approach is relevant to map the functional decomposition of companies' R&D value chains. TRLs matter… Show more for corporate location choices. Knowing what distinct types of R&D&I activities (or TRLs) stay, go and come back in EU territories – and why – is central for policies supporting local industrial and innovation ecosystems and clusters, and the identification and integration into strategic value chains. Fast-developing local strengths of Asian countries such as China, Japan and South Korea, in Automotive, and in Electronics and related fields are shaping companies' geographical decomposition of R&D&I activities. While the EU has strong value chains in e.g. automotive (network of combustion engine) and pharma (highly skilled labour force and strong research institutions), corporate R&D&I investments are finding their way to novel applications in emerging technologies in Asia. Show less
-
List item
PDF R&D and innovation activities in companies across Global Value Chains
The objective of the study is to better understand the geographical and organizational patterns of corporate R&D and innovation across… Show more Global Value Chains (GVCs) and their interactions with home and host-countries' economies and policy initiatives. In addition, a better understanding of the drivers and barriers to improving the location of high-value creation and knowledge-intensive activities in Europe and the competitive position of EU industry in strategic GVCs is aimed for. Show less
-
List item
PDF R&D Intensive corporations and the job market: The danish case
To boost job creation, the labour market role of big multinationals cannot be overlooked. Large R&D investing companies operating in… Show more Denmark act as agents of skill upgrading, rather than destroying mid-skill jobs through job polarisation. However, workers employed by these companies tend to move within such elite (i.e. remaining in the ‘Champion's League') rather than moving to other non-multinational indigenous firms. Scoreboard companies, domestic and foreign, pay higher wages for a given occupation compared to other firms; they also show a higher wage growth. Show less
-
List item
PDF Ten-year evolution of EU industrial R&D in the global context
More than a quarter of the industrial investment in global R&D is made by EU companies. In the last decade… Show more EU companies have increased their specialisation in medium-tech sectors, with a significant R&D share increase in the Automobile sector and a decrease in the Aerospace & Defence sector. Industrial dynamics at company level provide insights into policy strategies to strengthen EU corporate R&D and to improve the competitiveness of innovation-driven industries. Show less
-
List item
PDF Industrial R&D continued to grow substantially in 2017
R&D funded by the business sector increased in the EU by 5.6%, below the 6.1% global rate and the US… Show more R&D growth (7.2%). The worldwide growth of industrial R&D in 2017 is slightly higher than that recorded in 2016. This growth is largely driven by ICT and health industries. As in previous years, the industrial R&D growth in the EU is led by Germany, with France showing a stronger R&D increase compared to the previous year. In the EU, R&D inflows and outflows for Health industries were nearly equivalent in 2017 (€9.6bn versus €9.4bn) and showed a significant positive trend with respect to 2016. Show less
-
List item
PDF Global Innovation Networks: State of the art and issues at stake for GVCs
The objective of the study on "Literature review on Global Innovation Networks: State of the art and issues at stake… Show more for GVC" is to summarise the state of the art literature on Global Innovation Networks (GINs) in order to understand the patterns and evolution of these networks. Based on the review of the literature the study develops a conceptual framework on the relationship between GINs and global value chains (GVCs). The framework systematises the main commonalities and differences between GINs and GVCs and makes suggestions for further evidence collection to address the links between GINs and GVCs. Show less
-
List item
"Towards evidence-based industrial research and innovation policy"; Oxford Academic. Science and Public Policy, Volume 45, Issue 2, 1 April 2018, Pages 143–150
Calls for better use of scientific evidence to inform policy decisions stem from the belief that enhanced outcomes for the… Show more society can be expected. Yet, the introduction of evidence-based practices in innovation policymaking has not come without criticism. This introductory article sets the scene for the short collection of papers that address specific issues regarding the prospect of better evidence-based policy in the area of industrial research and innovation (IRI). It identifies and discusses key challenges for the transition towards evidence-based IRI policy. It then introduces the three papers, which build upon and depart from related assumptions or narratives reflecting the current state of practices in IRI policy. Show less
-
-
List item
PDF The 2018 EU Survey on Industrial R&D Investment Trends
The 142 EU companies participating in the EU Survey on Industrial R&D Investment Trends expect R&D investment to increase by… Show more 5.4% per annum in 2018 and 2019. This is higher than last year's expectation (4.7%) and indeed the highest expected increase since the pre-crisis years (2007). Companies in the ‘ICT Producers' and ‘Automobile and Other Transport' sector groups expect their R&D to increase the most. These top EU R&D performers expect their R&D within the EU to increase by 4.5% p.a., while their R&D in China and India is expected to show double digit growth (+21.3% and +11.2% respectively). The proportion of R&D investment by EU firms within the EU shows a stable trend since 2006 (at around three-quarters), not showing signs of erosion or offshoring to other regions. In absolute terms, R&D investment levels are higher than ever in the EU. EU firms are increasingly becoming truly global in their R&D activities. In the 2006 survey, only about 15% of EU firms performed R&D in the main world regions. This figure has been constantly increasing, now representing 33% of all participating firms. This confirms both the increasingly global character of R&D and the growing need for top R&D investors to be present in the main R&D locations around the world. China is expected to become the third largest region for the location of R&D activities by EU firms by 2019, after the EU and the US. The proportion of R&D investment by EU firms performed in China is expected to grow to 3.4% in 2019 (from 2.6% in 2017). Since the start of the survey, the third largest region has been the Rest of the World. However, China and India show consistently high growth expectations in all editions of the survey, indicating interesting developments in these countries that are attracting the attention of the EU's main R&D performers. As in all previous surveys, low labour costs for researchers prove not to be an important factor of attractiveness in locating R&D activities. However, there is an important caveat to this finding: firms performing R&D in China or India rate low labour costs as much more important than firms without R&D activities in these countries. Also, companies that perform R&D in many countries rate this factor as much more important than firms performing R&D in only one or a few countries. India is gaining strength as a popular R&D location and is currently second after the US. Firms that perform R&D only in the EU rate the proximity to other activities within the company and the quality of public research as highly important for their location of R&D activities. Firms with R&D activities in the US rate the proximity to suppliers and access to specialised R&D knowledge much higher than firms without R&D activities in the US. The quality of researchers is a factor that is rated consistently highly by firms with R&D activities in the EU only, or that focus on either the US or on China or India, which implies that frontier research is geographically dispersed to all regions. The most highly rated factors for locating production by EU only firms are macroeconomic stability, access to its production infrastructure and quality of personnel. Overall, the factors most often rated as (highly) attractive by firms are access to markets, quality and availability of personnel and macroeconomic stability. Low labour costs are perceived as much more important by firms that produce in China or India than firms that do not. China, Brazil, Italy and Russia remain the countries more frequently mentioned as a production location, as in last year's survey. Access to markets is an important factor for locating production activities in China or India, but not R&D. The average non-R&D expenditure of the respondents is €54 million: 29% of their R&D expenditure or a non-R&D intensity (non-R&D expenditure over net sales) of 0.5%. Firms invest mainly in applied research activities, rather than basic research. This finding is consistent over many editions of the survey and suggests that the European Innovation system has to rely on other actors (i.e. universities and public research institutes, but also start-ups and disruptive companies) for investment in basic research. The main motivation for firms to allow their employees to publish articles in scientific journals is to build the firm's reputation. This helps them to send out a message to two types of audience: venture capital funds (that may be interested in investing in a firm where relevant scientific work is produced) and other talented scientists (who may be interested in working in a scientifically stimulating environment). However, strong differences emerge when comparing firms with high publishing output to those with low output. Companies do not specifically ask for less regulation, but ask for it to be simplified. When asked what public policies should be implemented to boost private R&D and innovation activities, firms call on public authorities to complement their own action through funding research projects and increasing public-private cooperation. Show less
-
List item
PDF From R&D to market: using trademarks to capture the market capability of top R&D investors
This paper investigates the links between the market capability of top corporate R&D investors (EU Industrial R&D Investment Scoreboards), as… Show more captured by trademark data and their economic performance in terms of net sales growth. It provides empirical evidence to better understand the extent to which companies, operating in different industrial sectors, combine technological capabilities with commercialization efforts to generate and appropriate the economic returns of their R&D investments. This paper shows how different dimensions of firms' market capabilities can be captured through trademark indicators. The results suggest that complementing R&D efforts and patenting activities with strong and specific market capabilities can indeed yield significant growth premiums. Moreover, offering services seems to pay off depending on the intensity of R&D investments. Yet, a quantile regression approach and a series of robustness checks indicate that such effects differ across the quantiles of the conditional sales growth distribution. Show less