The effects of national and international interaction on innovation: evidence from the Irish CIS: 2004-6

Doran, Justin and Jordan, Declan and O'Leary, Eoin (2012): The effects of national and international interaction on innovation: evidence from the Irish CIS: 2004-6. Published in: Industry and Innovation , Vol. 19, No. 5 (2012): pp. 371-390.

Abstract

This paper analyses the importance of decisions to interact nationally and internationally on the likelihood of process and product innovation for a sample of Irish firms. The key contribution is to provide an empirical test of the relative importance of geographically proximate versus distant interaction, using a two-step procedure to remove potential endogeneity in interaction decisions. In doing so it finds that only national and only international interaction have the expected positive effects on the probability of innovation, while engaging in both national and international interaction has no effect. The findings support hypotheses on the importance of both geographically proximate and distant interaction for innovation, though the lack of significance for both national and international interaction means there is no evidence to support the proposition that these forms of interaction are complementary.

• Item Type: MPRA Paper
• Language: English
• Keywords: Innovation, Proximity, External Interaction, Ireland
• Subjects: O - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth > O3 - Innovation ; Research and Development ; Technological Change ; Intellectual Property Rights > O31 - Innovation and Invention: Processes and Incentives; R - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics > R1 - General Regional Economics; R - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics > R1 - General Regional Economics > R10 - General

References

Asheim, B. and A. Isaksen (2002). Regional Innovation Systems: The Integration of Local 'Stickey' and Global 'Ubiquitous' Knowledge. Journal of Technology Transfer 27(1): 77 - 86.

Bathelt, T., H. Malmberg and P. Maskell (2004). Clusters and Knowledge: Local Buzz, Global Pipelines and the Process of Knowledge Creation. Progress in Human Geography 28(1): 31-56.

Boschma, R. (2005). Proximity and Innovation: A Critical Assessment. Regional Studies39(1): 61-74.

Bramwell, A., J. Nelles and D. Wolfe (2008). Knowledge, Innovation and Institutions: Global and Local Dimensions of the ICT Cluster in Waterloo, Canada. Regional Studies42(1): 101-116.

Cameron, A. and P. Trivedi (2005). Microeconometrics: Methods and Applications.(New York, Cambridge University Press).

Central Statistics Office (2009). Community Innovation Survey: 2004-06.(Dublin, Ireland, Stationery Office).

Central Statistics Office. (2010). "People and Society." Retrieved 16th June 2010, from http://cso.ie/statistics/Population1901-2006.htm.

Cohen, W. and D. Levinthal (1990). Absorptive Capacity: A New Perspective on Learning and Innovation. Administrative Science Quarterly 35(1): 128-152.

Crépon, B., E. Duguest and J. Mairesse (1998). Research, Innovation and Productivity: An Econometric Analysis at the Firm Level. Economics of Innovation and New Technology 7(2): 115-158.

Doran, J. and E. O‟Leary (2011). External Interaction, Innovation and Productivity: An Application of the Innovation Value Chain for Ireland. Spatial Economic Analysis6(2): 199 - 222.

European Commission (2003). 2003 European Innovation Scoreboard: Technical Paper No 4 Sectoral Innovation Scoreboards. European Trend Chart on Innovation.

EuroStat. (2010a). "The NUTS Classification." Retrieved 16th June 2010, from http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/portal/page/portal/region_cities/regional_statistics/nuts_classification.

EuroStat. (2010b). "Regional Statistics." Retrieved 16th June 2010, from http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/portal/page/portal/region_cities/regional_statistics/data/database.

Forfás (2008). Community Innovation Survey 2004-2006 – First Findings.(Dublin, Forfás Statistics Bulletin ).

Freel, M. (2003). Sectoral Patterns of Small Firm Innovation, Networking and Proximity. Research Policy 32(5): 751-770.

Gertler, M. (2003). Tacit knowledge and the economic geography of context, or the undefinable tacitness of being (there). Journal of Economic Geography 3(1): 75-99.

Gertler, M. and Y. Levitte (2005). Local Nodes in Global Networks: The Geography of Knowledge Flows in Biotechnology Innovation. Industry and Innovation 12(4): 487-507.

Glaesar, E. L., H. D. Kallal, J. A. Scheinkman and A. Shleifer (1992). Growth in Cities. Journal of Political Economy 100(6): 1126-1152.

Gordon, I. and P. McCann (2005). Innovation, Agglomeration and Regional Development. Journal of Economic Geography 5(5): 523 - 543.

Greene, W. (2008). Econometric Analysis.(United States, Pearson-Prentice Hall).

Griffith, R., E. Huergo, J. Mairesse and B. Peters (2006). Innovation and Productivity Across Four European Countries. Oxford Review of Economic Policy 22(4): 483-498.

Griliches, Z. (1979). Issues in Assessing the Contribution of Research and Development to Productivity Growth. Bell Journal of Economics 10(1): 92-116.

Griliches, Z. (1992). The Search for R&D Spillovers. The Scandinavian Journal of Economics 94(Supplement): 29-47.

Hall, B., F. Lotti and J. Mairesse (2009). Innovation and Productivity in SMEs: Empirical Evidence from Italy. Small Business Economics 33(1): 13-33.

Horowitz, J. and N. Savin (2001). Binary Response Models: Logits, Probits and Semiparametrics. The Journal of Economic Perspectives 15(4): 43-56.

Howells, J. (2002). Tacit Knowledge, Innovation and Economic Geography. Urban Studies39(5-6): 871-884.

Janz, N., H. Lööf and B. Peters (2003). Firm Level Innovation and Productivity: Is there a Common Story Across Countries? C.F.E.E. Research.

Johansson, B. and H. Lööf (2009). Innovation, R&D and Productivity. Centre of Excellence for Science and Innovation Studies Electronic Working Paper Series 159(January).

Jordan, D. and E. O'Leary (2005). The Roles of Interaction and Proximity for Innovation by Irish High-Technology Businesses: Policy Implications. Quarterly Economic Commentary(2): 86 - 100.

Jordan, D. and E. O‟Leary (2008). Is Irish Innovation Policy Working? Evidence from Irish High-Technology Businesses. Journal of the Statistical and Social Inquiry Society of Ireland 37: 1-44.

Kline, J. and N. Rosenberg, Eds. (1986). An Overview of Innovation. The Positive Sum Strategy: Harnessing Technology for Economic Growth.(Washington, National Academy Press).

Krugman, P. (1991). Increasing Returns and Economic Geography. The Journal of Political Economy 99(3): 483 - 499.

Lissoni, F. (2001). Knowledge Codification and the Geography of Innovation: The Case of Brescia Mechanical Cluster. Research Policy 30(9): 1479 - 1500.

Love, J. and M. Mansury (2007). External Linkages, R&D and Innovation Performance in US Business Services. Industry and Innovation 14(5): 477-496.

Lundvall, B. (1995). National Systems of Innovation: Towards a Theory of Innovation and Interactive Learning.(London, Pinter).

Lundvall, B. E., Ed. (1988). Innovation as an interactive process: From user-producer interaction to the national system of innovation. Technical Change and Economic Theory.(London, Pinter Publishers).

Marshall, A. (1920). Principles of Economics.(London, MacMillan).

McFadden, D. (1974). Conditional Logit Analysis of Qualitative Choice Behavior.in: P. ZarembkaEds. Frontiers in Econometric. (New York, Academic Press.

National Competitiveness Council (2009). Driving Export Growth: Statement on Export Competitiveness.(Dublin Forfás).

Nonaka, I., R. Toyama and N. Konno, Eds. (2001). SECI, Ba and Leadership: a Unified Model of Dynamic Knowledge Creation. Managing Industrial Knowledge: Creation, Transfer and Utilisation.(Thousand Oaks, Ca, Sage).

OECD (2005). The Measurement of Scientific and Technological Activities Oslo Manual: Guidelines for Collecting and Interpreting Innovation Data.(France, OECD Publication).

Oerlemans, L., M. Meeus and F. Boekema (1998). Do Networks Matter for Innovation? The Usefullness of the Economic Network Approach in Analysing Innovation. Journal of Economic and Social Geography 89(3): 298-309.

Pavitt, K. (1984). Sectoral Patterns of Technical change: towards a taxonomy and theory. Research Policy 13(6): 343-374.

Pittaway, L., M. Robertson, K. Munir, D. Denyer and A. Neely (2004). Networking and Innovation: A Systematic Review of the Evidence. International Journal of Management Reviews 5/6(3&4): 137-168.

Polanyi, M. (1966). The Tacit Dimension.(London, Routledge and Kegan Paul).

Porter, M. (1990). The Competitive Advantage of Nations.(United States of America, The Free Press).

Porter, M. E. (1998). Clusters and the New Economics of Competition. Harvard Business Review 76 (6): 77 - 90.

Rallet, A. and A. Torre (1999). Is Geographical Proximity Necessary in the Innovation Networks in the Era of Global Economy? Geojournal 49(4): 373 - 380.

Romijin, H. and M. Albu (2002). Innovation, Networking and Proximity: Lessons from Small High Technology Firms in the UK. Regional Studies 36(1): 81 - 86.

Roper, S. (2001). Innovation, Networks and Plant Location: some evidence from Ireland. Regional Studies 35(3): 215-228.

Roper, S., J. Du and J. Love (2008). Modeling the innovation value chain. Research Policy37(6-7): 961-977.

Roper, S., J. Youtie, P. Shapira and A. Fernández-Ribas (2010). Knowledge, Capabilities and Manufacturing Innovation: A USA-Europe Comparison. Regional Studies 44(3): 253 - 279.

Schumpeter, J. (1934). The Theory of Economic Development.(Cambridge, U.S., Harvard University Press).

Scott, A. (1988). New Industrial Spaces.(United States of America., Pion).

Storper, M. and A. Venables (2004). Buzz: face-to-face contact and the urban economy. Journal of Economic Geography 4(4): 351 - 370.

Swann, P. (2009). The Economics of Innovation: An Introduction.(Cheltenham, UK, Edward Elgar).

Weterings, A. and R. Boschma (2009). Does spatial proximity to customers matter for innovative performance?: Evidence from the Dutch software sector. Research Policy38(5): 746-755.

Weterings, A. and R. Ponds (2009). Do regional and non-regional knowledge flows differ? An empirical study on clustered firms in life sciences and computing services. Industry and Innovation 16(1): 11 - 31.

Wolfe, D., C. Davis and M. Lucas (2005). Global Networks and Local Linkages.(Kingston, McGill-Queen's University Press).