Weryfikacja hipotezy schumpeterowskiej na przykładzie polskiego przemysłu przetwórczego

• Autorzy: Anna Kozłowska , Agnieszka Szczepkowska-Flis

Warianty tytułu

Empirical Testing of Schumpeterian Hypothesis in Polish Manufacturing

• Języki publikacji: PL

Abstrakty

Celem zaprezentowanego badania była weryfikacja hipotezy schumpeterowskiej na przykładzie branż polskiego przemysłu przetwórczego. Branże produkcyjne zostały podzielone na dwa sektory: wysokiej i niskiej technologii, dla których przeprowadzono analizę związku między koncentracją produkcji i działalnością innowacyjną. W badaniu wykorzystano dane roczne dla lat 1997-2007, publikowane przez GUS.

EN

The purpose of our study was verification of Schumpeterian hypothesis in Polish manufacturing between 1997 and 2007. Branches of manufacturing were divided into two sectors: of high and low technology, for which Granger tests were conducted and regression equations were estimated. In the estimated regression equations the dependent variable was synthetic innovation indicator WSDI, and the independent variable was concentration coefficient G. Econometric analyses revealed that: - Variable WSDI was Granger caused by variable G with two year lag in both sectors; - In low technology sector the relationship between WSDI and G was described by negative linear function; - In high technology sector the relationship between WSDI and G was a third degree polynomial. The research should be treated as the point of departure for further research which should include structural and technological characteristics of the analyzed units.(original abstract)

Słowa kluczowe

PL

Przemysł przetwórczy; Analiza ekonometryczna; Teoria ekonomii

EN

Processing industry; Econometric analysis; Economic theory

• Czasopismo: Prace Naukowe Uniwersytetu Ekonomicznego we Wrocławiu
• Rocznik: 2009
• Numer: nr 39, t. 1 Problemy ekonomii, polityki ekonomicznej i finansów publicznych
• Strony: 680--691

Twórcy

autor

Anna Kozłowska

• Uniwersytet Ekonomiczny w Poznaniu

autor

Agnieszka Szczepkowska-Flis

• Uniwersytet Ekonomiczny w Poznaniu

Bibliografia

• „Rocznik Statystyczny Przemysłu", GUS, Warszawa 2002.
• „Rocznik Statystyczny Przemysłu", GUS, Warszawa 2007.
• Acs Z.J., Audretsch D.B., Innovation and size at the firm level, „Southern Economic Journal" 1991, vol. 57, no. 3, s. 739-744.
• Acs Z.J., Audretsch D.B., Innovation, market structure, and firm size, [w:] M. Casson (ed.), Entrepreneurship, Edward Elgar Publishing, Aldershot-Brookfield 1987, s. 305-312.
• Acs Z.J., Audretsch D.B., Testing the Schumpeterian hypothesis, „Eastern Economic Journal" 1988, vol. XIV, no. 2, s. 129-140.
• Adams W., Dirlam J.B., Big steel, invention, and innovation: Reply, „Quarterly Journal of Economics" 1967, vol. 81, no. 3, s. 475-482.
• Aghion P., Tirole J., The management of innovation, „The Quarterly Journal of Economics" 1994, vol. 109, no. 4, s. 1185-1209.
• Amato L.H., Amato C.H., Productivity, innovation and antitrust policy, „Academy of Marketing Studies Journal" 2004, vol. 8, no. 2, s. 45-56.
• Baldwin J., Hanel P., Sabourin D., Determinants of innovative activity in Canadian manufacturing firms: The role of intellectual property rights, Statistics Canada Working Paper nr 122, 2000.
• Baltagi B.H., Econometric Analysis of Panel Data, Wiley & Sons, Chichester 2001.
• Benavente J.M., The role of research and innovation in promoting productivity in Chile, „Economics of Innovation and New Technology" 2006, vol. 15, no. 4/5, s. 301-315.
• Broadberry S., Crafts N., Competition and innovation in 1950s Britain, „Business History" 2001, vol. 43, no. l, s.97-118.
• Davidson R., MacKinnon J.G., Econometric Theory and Methods, Oxford University Press, Oxford 1999.
• Fisher P.M., Temin P., Returns to scale in research and development: What does the Schumpeterian hypothesis imply ?, „The Journal of Political Economy" 1973, vol. 81, no. 1, s. 56-70.
• George K.D., The changing structure of competitive industry, „The Economic Journal", Special Issue: In Honor of E.A.G. Robinson, 1972, vol. 82, no. 325, s. 353-368.
• Geweke J., Inference and causality in economic time series model, [w:] Z. Griliches, M.D. Intriligator (eds.), Handbook of Econometrics, vol. 2, North-Holland, Amsterdam 1984.
• Greene W.H., Econometric Analysis, Prentice, Upper Saddle River 2003.
• Hashmi A.R., Competition and innovation: The inverted-U relationship revisited, University of Toronto Working Paper, 2005.
• Hospers G.-J., Joseph Schumpeter and his legacy in innovation studies, „Knowledge, Technology and Policy" 2005, vol. 18, no. 3, s. 20-37.
• Hsiao C., Analysis of Panel Data, Cambridge University Press, New York 2003.
• Hughes A., 2000, Innovation and business performance: Small entrepreneurial firms in the UK and the EU, http://www.hm-treasury.gov.uk/media/F76/F3/257.pdf.
• Kasibhatla K.M., Steward D.B., Khojasteh M., The role of FDI in high medium, low medium and low income countries during 1970-2005: Empirical tests and evidence, „Journal of Business and Economic Studies" 2008, vol. 14, no. 2, s. 60-72.
• Kennedy P., A Guide to Econometrics, MIT Press, Cambridge 1998.
• Kohn M., Scott J.T., Scale economies in research and development: The Schumpeterian hypothesis, „The Journal of Industrial Economics" 1982, vol. XXX, no. 3, s. 239-249.
• Kozłowska A., Szczepkowska-Flis A., Działalność innowacyjna i zmiany technologii w polskim przemyśle przetwórczym, [w:] D. Kopycińska (red.), Konkurencyjność podmiotów rynkowych, Uniwersytet Szczeciński, Szczecin 2008, s. 17-27.
• Lee M.-H., Hwang I. J., Determinants of corporate R&D investment: An empirical study comparing Korea's IT industry with its non-IT industry, „ETRI Journal" 2003, vol. 25, no. 4, s. 258-265.
• Levin R. C., Technical change, barriers to entry, and market structure, „Economica", New Series, 1978, vol. 45, no. 180, s. 347-361.
• Levin R.C., Cohen W.M., Mowery D.C., R&D appropriability, opportunity, and market structure: New evidence on some Schumpeterian hypotheses, „AEA Papers and Proceedings" 1985, vol. 75, no. 2, s. 20-24.
• Loeb P.D., Further evidence of the determinants of industrial research and development using single and simultaneous equation models, „Empirical Economics" 1983, vol. 8, s. 203-214.
• Maddala G.S., Introduction to Econometrics, Macmillan, New York 1992.
• Mukhopadhyay A.K., Returns to scale in B&D and the Schumpeterian hypothesis: A comment, „The Journal of Industrial Economics" 1985, vol. XXXIII, no. 3, s. 359-361.
• Nauka i technika w 2002 roku, GUS, Warszawa 2004.
• Nelson R.A., Productivity growth, scale economies and the Schumpeterian hypothesis, „Southern Economic Journal" 1990, vol. 57, no. 2, s. 521-527.
• Pires-Alves C., Rocha F., Testing the Schumpeterian Hypotheses for the Brazilian Manufacturing Industry, Brazilian Association of Graduate Programs in Economics, Working Paper nr 200807091629490, 2008.
• Rodriguez C.A., A comment on Fisher and Temin on the Schumpeterian hypothesis, „Journal of Political Economy" 1979, vol. 87, no. 21, s. 383-385.
• Schumpeter J. A., Business Cycles. A Theoretical, Historical, and Statistical Analysis of the Capitalist Process, McGraw-Hill, New York-London 1939.
• Schumpeter J.A., Kapitalizm, socjalizm, demokracja, Wydawnictwo Naukowe PWN, Warszawa 1995.
• Smith V., Madsen E.S., Do R&D investments affect export performance?, CIE Discussion Paper nr 2002-09, http://www.econ.ku.dk/CIE/Discussion%20Papers/2002/Abstracts/2002-09.htm.
• Studenmund A.H., Using Econometrics. A Practical Guide, Pearson, London 2006.
• Sung T.-K., Carlsson B., Network effects, technological opportunity, and innovation: Evidence from the Korean manufacturing firms, „Asian Journal of Technology Innovation" 2007, vol. 15, no. 1, s. 91-108.
• Symeonidis G., Innovation, firm size and market structure: Schumpeterian hypotheses and some new themes, OECD Economic Department Working Paper nr 161, OECD Publishing, 1996.
• Tsai K.-H., Wang J.-C., The R&D performance in Taiwan s electronic industry: A longitudinal examination, „R&D Management" 2004, vol. 34, no. 2, s. 179-189.
• Venet B., Hurlin C., Granger causality tests in panel data Models with fixed coefficients, EURIsCO Working Paper no. 2001-09.
• Wooldridge J.M., Introductory Econometrics. A Modern Approach, South-West Thomson Learning 2002.
• Wooldridge J.M., Econometric Analysis of Cross Section and Panel Data, MIT Press, Cambridge 2001.