Explaining Innovation : an Empirical Analysis of Industry Data from Norway

• Autorzy: Torbjørn Lorentzen , Stig-Erik Jakobsen
• Języki publikacji: EN

Abstrakty

EN

The objective of the paper is to analyse why some firms innovate while others do not. The paper combines different theories of innovation by relating innovation to internal, firm specific assets and external, regional factors. Hypotheses are derived from theories and tested empirically by using logistic regression. The empirical analysis indicates that internal funding of R&D and size of the firm are the most important firm specific attributes for successful innovation. External, regional factors are also important. The analysis shows that firms located in large urban regions have significantly higher innovation rates than firms located in the periphery, and firms involved in regional networking are more likely to innovate compared to firms not involved in networking. The analysis contributes to a theoretical and empirical understanding of factors that influence on innovation and the role innovation plays in the market economy. Innovation policy should be targeted at developing a tax system and building infrastructure which give firms incentives to invest and allocate internal resources to R&D-activities and collaborate with others in innovation. From an economic policy perspective, consideration should be given to allocating more public resources to rural areas in order to compensate for the asymmetric distribution of resources between the centre and periphery. The paper contributes to the scientific literature of innovation by combining the firm oriented perspective with weight on firm specific, internal resources and a system perspective which focuses on external resources and networking as the most important determinants of innovation in firms. (original abstract)

Celem artykułu jest analiza, dlaczego niektóre firmy są innowacyjne, a inne nie. Artykuł łączy różne teorie innowacji poprzez odniesienie do innowacji wewnętrznych, aktywów i zewnętrznych czynników regionalnych. Hipotezy są uzyskiwane z teorii i testowane empirycznie za pomocą regresji logistycznej. Analiza empiryczna wskazuje, że wewnętrzne finansowanie B+R i wielkość firmy są najważniejszymi firmowymi i specyficznymi atrybutami udanej innowacji. Zewnętrzne, regionalne czynniki są również ważne. Z analizy wynika, że firmy zlokalizowane w dużych obszarach miejskich mają znacznie wyższe wskaźniki niż innowacyjne firmy zlokalizowane na peryferiach, a firmy zaangażowane w sieci regionalnej są bardziej skłonne do innowacji w stosunku do firm nie uczestniczących w sieci. Analiza przyczynia się do teoretycznego i empirycznego zrozumienia czynników, które mają wpływ na innowacyjność i rolę, jaką odgrywa innowacja w gospodarce rynkowej. Polityka innowacji powinna być ukierunkowana na rozwój infrastruktury systemu podatkowego i budowlanego, które dają firmom zachęty do inwestowania i alokacji zasobów wewnętrznych w działalność R&D oraz współpracy z innymi w zakresie innowacji. Z punktu widzenia polityki gospodarczej, należy zwrócić uwagę na przeznaczenie większych środków publicznych na obszarach wiejskich, w celu zrekompensowania asymetrycznego podziału środków między centrum a peryferiami. Artykuł przyczynia się do rozwoju literatury naukowej z zakresu innowacyjności, łącząc specyficzną, firmową perspektywę z zasobami wewnętrznymi i perspektywą systemową, która koncentruje się na zasobach zewnętrznych i sieci jako najważniejszej determinanty innowacyjności w firmach. (abstrakt oryginalny)

Słowa kluczowe

EN

Innovations; Region; Industry; Regression models; Geolocalization

PL

Innowacje; Region; Przemysł; Modele regresji; Geolokalizacja

• Czasopismo: Journal of Entrepreneurship, Management and Innovation (JEMI)
• Rocznik: 2016
• Tom: 12
• Numer: nr 2 Innovation in Services or Industry and Entrepreneurial Intention
• Strony: 5--27

Twórcy

autor

Torbjørn Lorentzen

• University of Bergen

autor

Stig-Erik Jakobsen

• Bergen University College

Bibliografia

• Allison, P. (2012). Logistic Regression Using SAS: Theory and Application.
• Carry, NC: SAS Institute 2012. Audretsch, D. B., & Feldman, M. P. (1996). R&D spillovers and the geography of innovation and production. American Economic Review, 86, 630-640.
• Audretsch, D. B., & Feldman, M. P. (2004). Knowledge spillovers and the geography of innovation. In J. V. Henderson, & J.-F. Thisse (Eds.), Handbook of Urban and Regional Economics: Cities and Geography (pp. 2713-2739). Amsterdam: Elsevier.
• Autio, E. (1998). Evaluation of RTD in regional systems of innovation. European Planning Studies, 6, 131-140.
• Chandler, A. D., Jr. (1966). Strategy and Structure. New York (US): Anchor Books.
• Christensen, C. M., & Raynor, M. E. (2003). Six Keys to Creating New-Growth Businesses. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.
• Clausen, T. H. (2013). External knowledge sourcing from innovation cooperation and the role of absorptive capacity: empirical evidence from Norway and Sweden. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 25, 57-70.
• Cooke, P. (1992). Regional innovation systems: Competitive regulation in the new Europe. Geoforum, 23, 365-382.
• Cooke, P. (2001). Regional innovation systems, clusters and the knowledge economy. Industrial and Corporate Change, 10, 945-974.
• Cooke, P. (2012). Knowledge economy spillovers, proximity and specialization. In B. T. Asheim, & M.D. Parrilli (Eds.), Interactive Learning for Innovation. A Key Driver Within Cluster and Innovation System (pp. 100-114). Basingstoke (UK): Palgrave Macmillan.
• Enkel, E., Gassmann, O., & Chesbrough, H. (2009). Open R&D and open innovation: Exploring the phenomenon. R&D Management, 39, 311- 16.
• Fabrizio, K. R., & Thomas, L.G. (2011). The impact of local demand on innovation in a global industry. Strategic Management Journal, 33, 4264.
• Fagerberg, J. (2005). Innovation: A guide to the literature. In J. Fagerberg, D. Mowery, & T. R. Nelson (Eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Innovation (pp. 1-27). Oxford (UK): Oxford University Press.
• Fagerberg, J. (2009). Introduction: Innovation in Norway. In J. Fagerberg, D. C. Mowery, & B. Verspagen (Eds.), Innovation. Path Dependency and Policy (pp. 1-32). Oxford (UK): Oxford University Press.
• Fløysand, A., & Jakobsen, S.-E. (2011). The complexity of innovation. A relational turn. Progress in Human Geography, 35, 328-344.
• Fløysand, A., & Jakobsen, S-E. (2016). In the footprints of evolutionary economic geography. Norwegian Journal of Geography, 70, 137-139.
• Fløysand, A., Jakobsen, S-E., & Bjarnar, O. (2012). The dynamism of clustering: Interweaving material and discursive processes. Geoforum, 43, 948-958.
• Fløysand, A., Jakobsen, S-E., & Sánchez-Hernández, J. L. (2014). Regional industrial policy in Norway and Spain. In R. Baptista, & J. Leitao (Eds.), Entreprenurship, Human Capital and Regional Development - Labour Networks, Knowledge Flows and Industry Growth (pp. 309-331). New York (US): Springer.
• Foss, N. J., Knudsen, C., & Montgomery, C. A. (1995). An exploration of common ground: Integrating evolutionary and strategic theories of the firm. In C. A. Montgomery (Ed.), Resource-Based and Evolutionary Theories of the Firm: Toward a Synthesis (pp. 1-17). Boston (US): Kluwer Academic Publishers.
• Freeman, C. (1987). Technology Policy and Economic Performance: Lessons from Japan. London (UK): Pinter.
• Fritsch, M. (2003). Does R&D-cooperation behavior differ between regions?. Industry and Innovation, 10, 25-39.
• Hoover, E. M. (1954). Location Theory and the Shoe and Leather Industries. Cambridge (US): Harvard University Press.
• Isaksen, A., & Onsager, K. (2010). Regions, networks and innovative performance. The case of knowledge-intensive industries in Norway. European Urban and Regional Studies, 17, 227-243.
• Isaksen, A., & Trippl, M. (2014). Regional industrial path development in different regional innovation systems: A conceptual analysis. Papers in innovation studies, paper no. 2014/17, CIRCLE, Lund University.
• Jakobsen, S-E., & Lorentzen, T. (2015). Between bonding and bridging: Regional differences in innovative collaboration in Norway. Norwegian Journal of Geography, 69(2), 80-89.
• Jakobsen, S-E., Byrkjeland, M., Batevik, F. O., Pettersen, I. B., Skogseid, I., & Yttredal E. R. (2012). Continuity and change in path dependent regional policy development: The regional implementation of the Norwegian VRI programme. Norwegian Journal of Geography, 66, 133-143.
• Jukvam, D. (2002). Inndeling i bo-og arbeidsmarkedsregioner. NIBR-Rapport 2002:20. Norsk Institutt for by-og Regionsforsking (In Norwegian). Oslo.
• Laursen, K. Masciarelli, F., & Prencipe, A. (2012). Regions matter: how localized social capital affects innovation and external knowledge acquisition. Organization Science, 23, 177-193.
• Lawson, B., & Samson, D. (2001). Developing innovation capability in organisation: A dynamic capability approach. International Journal of Innovation Management, 5, 377-400.
• Lazonick, W. (2005). The innovative firm. In J. Fagerberg, D. Mowery, & T. R. Nelson (Eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Innovation (pp. 29-55). Oxford (UK): Oxford University Press.
• Lundvall, B. Á. (1992). Introduction. In B. Á. Lundvall (Ed.), Systems of Innovations (pp. 1-19). London (UK): Pinter Publishers.
• Malecki, E. J. (2012). Regional Social Capital: Why it Matters. Regional Studies, 46(8), 1023- 1039.
• Marshall, A. (1920). Principles of Economics: An Introductory Volume, 8th edition. London (UK): Macmillan.
• Martin, R. (2010). Roepke lecture in economic geography - rethinking regional path dependence: Beyond lock-in to evolution. Economic Geography, 86, 1-27.
• Martin, R., & Sunley, P. (2006). Path dependence and regional economic evolution. Journal of Economic Geography, 6, 395-437.
• Nelson, R. R. (1991). Why do firms differ, and how does it matter?. Strategic Management Journal, 12, 61-74.
• Nelson, R. R., & Winter, S. G. (1982). An Evolutionary Theory of Economic Change. Cambridge (US): The Belknap Press.
• Newell, R. G., Jaffe A. B., & Stavins, R. N. (1999). The induced innovation hypothesis and energy-saving technological change. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 114, 941 -975.
• Njøs, R., Jakobsen, S-E., & Rosnes, V. (2016). Market-driven organizational lock-in. A case study of a former first mover. Norwegian Journal of Geography, 70, 140-151.
• Njøs, R., Jakobsen, S-E., Fosse J. K., & Engelsen, C. (2013). Challenges to Bridging Discrepant Knowledge Bases: A Case Study of the Norwegian Centre for Offshore Wind Energy. European Planning Studies, 22 (11), 2389-2410.
• Penrose, E. T. (1959). The Theory of the Growth of the Firm. Oxford (UK): Basil Blackwell.
• Porter, M. (2000). Location, competition and economic development: local clusters in a global economy. Economic Development Quarterly, 14, 1534.
• Rangone, A. (1999). A resource-based approach to strategy analysis in small-medium sized enterprises. Small Business Economics, 12, 233- 248.
• Schumpeter, J. (1934). The Theory of Economic Development. Cambridge (US): Harvard University Press.
• Schumpeter, J. (1943). Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy. New York (US): Harper.
• Simmie, J. (2003). Innovation and urban regions and national and international nodes for the transfer and sharing of knowledge. Regional Studies, 37, 607-620.
• Teece, D. J., & Pisano, G. (1994). The dynamic capabilities of firms: An introduction. Industrial and Corporate Change, 3, 537-556.
• Teece, D. J., Pisano, G., & Shuen, A. (1997). Dynamic capabilities and strategic management. Strategic Management Journal, 18, 509-533.
• Tödtling, F., & Trippl, M. (2005). One size fits all? Towards a differentiated regional innovation policy approach. Research Policy, 34, 1203 -1219.
• Tödtling, F., & Trippl, M. (2007). Knowledge links in high-technology industries. Markets, networks or milieu? The case of the Vienna biotechnology cluster. International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Innovation Management, 7, 345-365.
• Trott, P. (2012). Innovation Management and New Product Development. 5th Edition. London (UK): Prentice Hall.
• Tushman, M. L., & O'Reilly III, C.A. (2002). Winning through innovation. A practical guide to leading organizational change and renewal. Boston (US): Harvard Business School Press.
• Vatne, E. (2011). Regional agglomeration and growth: the classical approach. In P. Cooke, B. T. Asheim, R. Boschma, R. Martin, D. Schwartz, & F. Tödtling (Eds.), Handbook of Regional Innovation and Growth (pp. 5466). Cheltenham (UK): Edward Elgar.
• Wernerfelt, B. (1984). A resource-based view of the firm. Strategic Management Journal, 5, 171-180.
• Whistler, D., White, K., Bates, D., & Golding M. (2011). Shazam: We have applied SHAZAM software package, Version 11, for statisticians to estimate the model. SHAZAM Analytics, Ltd. Retrieved from www. shazamanalytics.com/

Identyfikatory

DOI

10.7341/20161221