Innovation Performance Of Countries Research Articles

G20 Ülkelerinin İnovasyon Performans Analizi: COVID-19 Dönemini İçeren Yeni Bütünleşik LOPCOW-MAIRCA ÇKKV Yaklaşımı

Purpose: This study aims to examine the innovation performance of G20 countries in 2018-2022 with multi criteria decision making methods. When the 5-year performance was analyzed, it was also revealed whether the COVID-19 outbreak has an impact on the innovation performance of the countries.
 Methodology: An integrated LOPCOW (Logarithmic Percentage Change-driven Objective Weighting) - MAIRCA (Multi Attribute Ideal-Real Comparative Analysis) method was applied in the study. First, the indicators representing innovation performance (institutions, human capital, and research, infrastructure, market sophistication, business sophistication, knowledge and technology outputs, creative outputs) was objectively weighted by the LOPCOW method. Then, the innovation performance of G20 countries was calculated with the MAIRCA method. Finally, a comparative analysis was also presented to support the findings.
 Findings: As a result of the innovation performance analysis using multi criteria decision making methods, human capital, and research were found to be the most important indicators, and the United States was found to be the country with the best innovation performance. In the sensitivity and comparative analysis, it was concluded that the integrated LOPCOW-MAIRCA method provides robust outputs.
 Originality: This study makes original contributions by analyzing the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the innovation performance of countries considering the 2018-2022 period and the integrated multi criteria decision making methods it uses that have not yet been applied in the literature.

What nurtures fourth industrial revolution? An investigation of economic and social determinants of technological innovation in advanced economies

The Fourth Industrial Revolution is characterized by technological transformations, artificial intelligence, and the digital revolution. The technological innovation in the Fourth Industrial Revolution is expected to be a supply-side miracle, with long term gains in the efficiency, as well as production. The widespread variability in the innovation performance of countries has led to the development of many underlining theoretical explanations. These explanations primarily revolve around the role of international trade, research and development, foreign direct investment, human capital, and the financial development in the Fourth Industrial Revolution. Previous studies, however, have only looked at the micro-level determinants of technological innovation. Also, previous studies have tended to ignore the cross-sectional dependency among countries, and the heterogeneity in analysing the issues that pertain to technological innovation. This study examines the macroeconomic indicators of technological innovation in G-7 countries from the year 1996 to 2017. The results show that globalization, R&D, GDP, financial development, and human capital are important factors in explaining technological innovation. Furthermore, the results of the panel causality test suggest that there is bidirectional causality from economic globalization, financial development, human capital index, research and development expenditure, and real GDP to technological innovation, and vice versa. The findings from this study may be helpful when designing policies that are related to globalization, financial development, and innovation.

Comparative Analysis of High Technology Exports and Selected Innovation Indicators for Serbia and CEE Countries

The article reports on comparative analysis of high technology exports and selected innovation indicators for Serbia and three CEE countries – Hungary, Romania and Bulgaria for the 2011-2015 period, with an aim to provide an insight on the innovation potential of Serbia. The analysis is based on data publicly available at Eurostat and the Global Innovation Index rankings. The selection of countries for country comparison is based on many similarities such as historical circumstances and geographical position. HTP exports are exports of high technology products as a share of total exports. As for innovation indicators, the article considers the Global Innovation Index (GII) which provides metrics about innovation performance of countries and economies, as well as values of selected inputs contained in the innovation pillar of the GII such as costs, R&D investment (total by sector) and number of researchers (in total and by sector). The analysis shows that there are considerable differences between Serbia and the three CEE countries. The analysis results are divided into three groups according to impact on the HTP export. The first group refers to innovation indicators with significant impact on HTP exports such as GDP, number of researchers, the GII rank and R&D costs in the business enterprise sector. The second group are innovation indicators with significant impact on HTP export such as total R&D costs, and finally the third group are innovation indicators with little impact on HTP export.

Innovation in firms, resilience and the economic downturn: Insights from CIS data in Portugal

AbstractThere is an interest in understanding the effect of economic crises such as the one that hit the financial markets in the late 2000s, on the innovation performance of countries and regions. This paper introduces the concept of “resilience of innovation” to illustrate how the economic slowdown affects firms' behaviour in terms of their ability to maintain and develop innovative activities and deploy product and process innovation. Using Portugal as a case study—an EU member‐state that was heavily affected by the economic downturn—this paper explores the data collected from four waves of the Community Innovation Survey from 2006 to 2012. It presents two‐stage limited dependent variable models to understand the changing impacts of structural factors, innovative activities and strategies in terms of exploration and exploitation of knowledge on the development of product and process innovation. We find knowledge exploration to be particularly important for product innovation, while exploitation is a strong determinant for process innovation. Size, market knowledge sources and public funding for innovation are positively associated with both types of innovation in the peak of the crisis. This reiterates the importance of innovation support efforts to mitigate the effects of economic shocks and boost recovery.

On Measuring Countries' Innovation Performance: Organisational Level Perspective

Innovation performance of countries is an important input for the governmental policy‑making. However, currently popular rankings such as Eurostat’s Summary Innovation Index instil one‑approach‑fits‑all perspective by clearly specifying success conditions without considering contingency factors that make each country’s situation unique. Our aim is to contrast current approach for innovation performance measurement on both country and organisational levels. We believe that the organisational level perspective can offer an inspiration for a change in the country level indicators themselves. Our study raises several concerns about the current state of the country level innovation measurement, notably exclusion of a higher number of innovation process indicators and omission of specific internal and external factors of measured countries. We propose that indicators accounting for these areas would offer more a realistic and useful picture of innovation performance.

Inovacijska izvedba zemalja članica Europske unije

Cilj ovoga rada je prikazati rezultate inovacijske izvedbe zemalja članica Europske unije. Najsveobuhvatniji uvid u inovacijsku izvedbu zemalja daju Globalni indeks inovacija, Bloombergov indeks inovacija i Europska ljestvica uspjeha u inovacijama. Navedeni indeksi imaju različite metodologije izračuna inovacijske izvedbe zemalja, a ovisno o vrsti indeksa i metodologiji zemlje ostvaruju različite rezultate. Komparativna analiza indeksa inovacija pokazala je da su, ovisno o vrsti indeksa i metodologiji izračuna, vodeće zemlje svijeta Švicarska i Južna Koreja, a najinovativnije zemlje članice Europske unije Švedska i Nizozemska. Unatoč tome, prema sva tri indeksa i metodologije, neke zemlje članice Europske unije pokazuju slabu inovacijsku izvedbu, poput Hrvatske, Bugarske i Rumunjske. Komparativna analiza predmetnih indeksa upućuje na najslabije karike ekonomije koje je nužno jačati kako bi se poboljšala razina inovativnosti, a posljedično i konkurentnost, zbog čega su navedeni rezultati smjernice vođenja te definiranja ciljeva, prioriteta i mjera inovacijskih politika.

The impact of internationalization on innovation at countries’ level: the role of absorptive capacity

This paper analyses the impact of internationalization on the innovation performance of 40 countries. Internationalization variables are represented by outward and inward foreign direct investment, and by imports and exports; innovation is proxied with triadic patent applications. We take account of the influence of absorptive capacity—in both a linear and non-linear form—in the relationship between internationalization and innovation. Our results suggest that outward FDI is positively associated with patenting. Countries with high absorptive capacity benefit more, though there are diminishing returns. We find there is a negative association between inward FDI and patenting in countries with low absorptive capacity where FDI may displace local infant activities and stun further development of related local knowledge. We find support for the view that the innovation performance of countries with low absorptive capacity benefits from imports as well as from exports.

VLIV INSTITUCIONÁLNÍ KVALITY NA INOVAČNÍ VÝKONNOST

One of the most important attributes of a competitive economy is the ability to innovate. This ability depends not only on technological progress and capital, but also on the environment in which innovation is implemented. Activities leading to innovations are costly and very risky. Companies are therefore looking for a stable environment. A stable environment can provide quality institutions, which include: the conditions for starting a business (so-called start-up), clear and transparent rules when dealing with public administration, investor protection, tax burden, low corruption, competence of public administration and its integrity, the same access to information, etc. Comparison of selected indices and their analysis shows that the trends in these indices have an impact on the innovation performance of countries. The last part will compare these selected indexes and scores together, show the results for EU 27, analyze them and confirm or refuse the relationships between these variables.

Influence of government R&D support and inter-firm collaborations on innovation in Korean biotechnology SMEs

Although the development of biotechnology industry has been a national agenda, particularly in developing countries, few studies address factors that influence innovation performance in countries with unfavorable environments for biotechnology development. This paper examines the effects of inter-firm collaborations as well as the direct and indirect effects of government R&D support on innovation outputs. It is predicated on the national innovation system approach and the resource-based view. Data from 2005 through 2007 were obtained from a survey of small- and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) in biotechnology in South Korea. Findings show that upstream partnerships were significantly associated with the innovation output of biotechnology SMEs, and international linkages were much stronger than domestic connections. The government support through project funding directly and indirectly affects firms' innovation by stimulating internal R&D and domestic upstream and downstream collaborations. The study findings imply the importance of governmental R&D funding and networking with foreign universities and research institutions as well as downstream partners. These Korea specific findings seem particularly relevant for countries where private investment firms are not well developed and knowledge bases and markets lag behind leading nations.