Publications
-
List item
PDF Key Enabling Technologies and Smart Specialization Strategies. European Regional Evidence from Patent Data
The paper aims at investigating whether Key Enabling Technologies (KETs) can have a role in facilitating regional Smart Specialization Strategies… Show more (S3). Drawing on the economic geography approach to S3, we formulate some hypotheses about the impact that KETs-related knowledge can have on the construction of new regional technological advantages (RTAs). By crossing regional data on patent applications, in KETs-mapped classes of the International Patent Classification (IPC), with a number of regional economic indicators, we test these hypotheses on a panel of 26 European countries over the period 1980-2010. KETs show a positive impact on the construction of new RTAs, pointing to a new 'enabling' role for them. KETs also exert a negative moderating role on the RTAs impact of the density of related pre-existing technologies, pointing to the KETs capacity of making the latter less binding in pursuing S3. Overall, the net-impact of KETs is positive, pointing to a new case for plugging KETs in the S3 policy tool-box. Show less
-
List item
PDF Multinationality, R&D and Productivity Evidence from the top R&D investors worldwide
The paper investigates the impact that the multinational scope of firms' activities can have on their productivity. First, we argue… Show more that such an impact is both direct and indirect, and that the latter is channelled through higher incentives to invest in R&D. Second, we posit that the composition of these direct and indirect effects is different if multinationality is measured at the intensive margin (higher share of multinational on total activities) rather than at the extensive margin (greater geographical dispersion of multinational activities). Using a large sample of top R&D investors in the world, we propose an econometric model based on an R&D and a productivity equation, which are both allowed to depend on multinationality. With this model we can disentangle the direct and indirect effects of multinationality on productivity appropriately. We find i) a positive direct impact of multinational intensity on productivity, while the geographical dispersion of multinationality is negatively correlated with productivity; ii) multinationality (along both dimensions) has a positive indirect impact through higher investments in R&D; iii) this positive indirect effect is however not large enough to compensate the negative direct one at the extensive margin. Results are largely consistent with a theoretical approach that combines transaction cost theory with an economic analysis of how incentives to invest in R&D depend on multinationality. Show less
-
List item
PDF Macro-economic Models for R&D and Innovation Policies
This report compares R&D modelling approaches in four macroeconomic models used by the European Commission for ex-ante policy impact assessment:… Show more one Dynamic Stochastic General Equilibrium (DSGE) model - QUEST; one Spatial Computable General Equilibrium (SCGE) model - RHOMOLO; one Computable General Equilibrium (CGE) model - GEM-E3; and one macro-economic model - NEMESIS. The report critically compares particularly those parts of the four models that are relevant to R&D transmission mechanisms and interfaces for implementing policy shocks. Given than R&D investment decisions are inherently dynamic, QUEST appears to be the most suitable model for assessing the impact of R&D and innovation policies over time, as it is the only model with inter-temporal optimisation of economic agents. In order to addess questions related to geographic concentration of innovative activities and spatial knowledge spillovers, RHOMOLO has a comparative advantage, as it is the only one which models regional economies and spatial interactions between them explicitly. Due to its detailed treatment of energy sectors and environmental issues, GEM-E3 appears to be the most suitable model for assessing the impact of innovation in clean energy. For a more detailed modelling of different types of innovation measures, NEMESIS can provide valuable insights thanks to its richness in estimating and accounting for specific channels of innovation. We also identify avenues for future research, which in our view could improve the modelling of R&D and innovation policites both from a conceptual and empirical perspective. Show less
-
List item
PDF The 2015 EU Industrial R&D Investment Scoreboard
The 2015 EU R&D Scoreboard (the Scoreboard) reports economic and financial information on the world's top 2500 companies that invested… Show more €607.2 billion in R&D over the last fiscal year (2014). It comprises 608 companies based in the EU, 829 companies based in the US, 360 in Japan and 703 from the rest of the world. Show less
-
List item
PDF Innovation, competitiveness and growth without R&D? Analysis of corporate R&D investment - A country approach: Italy
The objective of this policy brief is to analyse the status of private R&D investment in Italy based on recent… Show more evidence and to indicate possible policy actions to boost private R&D investment. For our analysis, we rely on microdata from an unbalanced 10 years' panel data-set (2004-2013), built using several waves of the European Industrial R&D Investment Scoreboard. Moreover, we also take into consideration other sources of quantitative and qualitative information (e.g. OECD, ISTAT, EUROSTAT, ERAWATCH Country Report Italy 2013, State of the Innovation Union 2014), and recent academic literature on the topic. In this document we argue that: i) innovation in firms' without their engagement in R&D activities is not sustainable in the medium and long term; ii) the Italian R&D and innovation (and competitiveness) gap is due to 'systemic'/structural reasons and thus targeted high quality policies are needed to address these issues; iii) such policy interventions will have little positive impact without comprehensive reform aimed at improving the innovation environment as a whole. Careful design of an 'innovation strategy' that includes support for R&D is needed. This strategy should be fine-tuned to tackle the actual specificities of the Italian economic context and its R&D-led innovation difficulties. Show less
-
List item
PDF Boosting the EU Attractiveness to International R&D Investments: What matters? What works?
The Policy Brief discusses recent evidence on patterns and trends in the internationalisation of EU corporate R&D activities and the… Show more factors which drive location choices. This evidence suggests that boosting international investment in R&D activities requires a combination of policy measures aimed at enhancing the knowledge base of locations, and investment promotion policies tailored to investors from different countries. The policy mix should include measures aiming at improving the efficiency of national and regional innovation systems, particularly through: a) Increasing the quality of education systems and skills, to enable the emergence of centres of research excellence, b) Facilitating the clustering of R&D activities, given the importance of proximity for knowledge spillovers. Show less
-
List item
PDF How do companies 'perceive' their intangibles? New statistical evidence from the INNOBAROMETER 2013
The report provides a statistical analysis of the way European companies have shown to perceive their Intangibles in the recent… Show more Innobarometer 2013. The report is intended to complement the evidence presented in the FLASH EUROBAROMETER 369 ("Investing in Intangibles") with a deeper investigation of both the characteristics of the available micro-data and the regularities emerging from their statistical analysis. A special focus is placed on the extent to which companies perceive their intangibles as strategic and on that to which the relative investment interplay with their innovative projects. The role of context conditions vs. that of business incentives in motivating their intangible investments is also addressed. Show less
-
List item
PDF Intangible investments and innovation propensity. Evidence from the Innobarometer 2013
This paper investigates the innovation impact of intangibles by considering the decision of firms to invest in a comprehensive set… Show more of them. By using a new survey on a large sample of firms in 28 EU (plus 8 non-EU) countries, we first identify the principal components of the resources firms invest in six kinds of intangibles. Their contribution to the firms' propensity to introduce new products and/or processes is then estimated with a two-step model, which addresses the endogeneity of the focal regressors through theoretically consistent instruments. A firm's innovativeness depends on its choice of using internal vs. external resources for its intangible investments more than on their actual amount, and on the kind of assets these investments are directed to. Intangibles need to be managed strategically in order to have an innovation impact and the policy support of this type of investment must take this strategic use into account. Show less
-
List item
PDF The 2014 Survey on R&D Investment Business Trends
This report contains the main findings of the ninth European Commission survey on industrial research and development (R&D) investment trends.… Show more It analyses the responses of 186 mainly very large enterprises from a subsample of 1 000 EU-based companies in the 2013 EU Industrial R&D Investment Scoreboard. These 186 companies invested almost € 60 billion in R&D from their own resources, corresponding to 36 % of the total R&D investment by the 1 000 EU Scoreboard companies. The main findings are as follows: The main conclusion is that the responding companies expect R&D investment to increase by on average 4.2 % per year during 2014–16. This is about 50 % higher than the increase anticipated in the previous survey (2.6 %) and mainly reflects the shift in expectations in the automobiles and parts sector, which returns to the level of previous years (4.6 %) after last year's reported stagnation (–0.4 %). Activities related to Key Enabling Technologies (KETs) are highly diverse and often concentrated among few companies, mainly from high and medium R&D-intensity sectors. The 166 companies which provided information make one-fifth of their R&D outside the EU. The largest share of R&D investment made outside the EU is in the United States and Canada (8.4 %), followed by China (4.3 %), the rest of the world (3.6 %), India (1.9 %), other European countries (1.6 %) and Japan (1.2 %). The responding companies' expectations for R&D investment for the next three years show the ongoing participation of European companies in the global economy. While maintaining the focus of their R&D investment in the EU, they reap opportunities for growth in emerging economies. Two out of three of the responding EU-based companies consider their home country the most attractive location for R&D. The United States, Germany, China and India are the most attractive locations mentioned outside the home country. Human resources, knowledge-sharing and proximity to other company sites are the criteria that make countries attractive for R&D activity. For the countries where companies have the greatest R&D activity, the criteria most influencing attractiveness were said to be R&D personnel in the labour market (quality, quantity and labour costs), knowledge-sharing and collaboration opportunities (with universities and public research organisations) and proximity (to other company sites, technology poles and incubators, and suppliers). In a separate comparison of attractiveness factors among R&D sites within the EU, quality of R&D personnel and knowledge-sharing opportunities with universities and public organisations are by far the most frequently stated in the top three. Comparing R&D attractiveness factors within the EU with those for the United States, the 38 respondents point to knowledge-sharing opportunities and quality and quantity of R&D personnel as the leading factors for both world regions. Comparing R&D attractiveness factors within the EU with those for China and India, the 13 respondents reveal significant differences between the two world areas. R&D within the company is the most important component of innovation, followed by market research, product demonstration and training to support innovation activities. Show less
-
List item
PDF Financing R&D and Innovation for Corporate Growth. What new evidence should policymakers know?
The Policy Brief addresses the results of a recent European Conference on the Financing R&D and Innovation (CONCORDi-2013: http://iri.jrc.ec.europa.eu/concord/2013/index.html). It… Show more presents recent empirical evidence on the topic and attempts to draw a number of policy-relevant messages to be brought to the attention of policymakers, as well as open questions requiring further research to address policy needs. Show less