Innovation on demand-Can public procurement drive market success of innovations?

Research Policy

Volumn 38, Issue 8, 2009, Pages 1235-1247

  Aschhoff, Birgit ^a,b   Sofka, Wolfgang ^a,c  

^a CENTRE FOR EUROPEAN ECONOMIC RESEARCH ZEW   (Germany)

^b FRIEDRICH SCHILLER UNIVERSITY JENA   (Germany)

^c TILBURG UNIVERSITY   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

Comparison of instruments; Innovation policy; Innovation success; Public procurement

Indexed keywords

BASIC RESEARCH; COMPARISON OF INSTRUMENTS; GERMANY; INNOVATION POLICIES; INNOVATION POLICY; KNOWLEDGE SPILLOVERS; MARKET SUCCESS; ON-DEMAND; PUBLIC PROCUREMENT; SMALLER FIRMS;

LAWS AND LEGISLATION;

INNOVATION;

EID: 68949173805     PISSN: 00487333     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.respol.2009.06.011     Document Type: Article

References (66)

1. Aerts K., Czarnitzki D., and Fier A. Evaluación econométrica de la política pública de I+D: estado del arte. In: Heijs J., and Buesa M. (Eds). Cooperación en innovación en España: El papel del Estado (2007), Instituto de Estudios Fiscales, Madrid, Spain 79-104
2. Almus M., and Czarnitzki D. The effects of public R&D subsidies on firms' innovation activities: the case of Eastern Germany. Journal of Business and Economic Statistics 21 2 (2003) 226-236
3. Andrews R.L., and Currim I.S. A comparison of segment retention criteria for finite mixture logit models. Journal of Marketing Research 40 2 (2003) 235-243
4. Aschhoff B., and Schmidt T. Empirical evidence on the success of R&D cooperation-happy together?. Review of Industrial Organization 33 1 (2008) 41-62
5. Belderbos R., Carree M., and Lokshin B. Cooperative R&D and firm performance. Research Policy 33 (2004) 1477-1492
6. Bertrand M., and Mullainathan S. Do people mean what they say? Implications for subjective survey data. American Economic Review 91 2 (2001) 67-72
7. Blind K. Can regulation be good for innovation?. Euroabstracts 42 2 (2004) 8-9
8. BMBF, 2006. Hightech-Strategie für Deutschland. Bonn/Berlin.
9. BMBF, 2007. Pressemitteilung 20. September 2007, 186/2007, Berlin.
10. Cohen W.M., and Levinthal D.A. Absorptive capacity: a new perspective on learning and innovation. Administrative Science Quarterly 35 1 (1990) 128-152
11. Cohen W.M., Nelson R.R., and Walsh J.P. Links and impacts: the influence of public research on industrial R&D. Management Science 48 1 (2002) 1-23
12. Cohen L.R., and Noll R.G. The Technological Pork Barrel (1991), The Brookings Institution, Washington, DC
13. Caloghirou Y., Tsakanikas A., and Vonortas N.S. University-industry cooperation in the context of the European framework programmes. Journal of Technology Transfer 26 (2001) 153-161
14. Criscuolo, C., Haskel, J.E., Slaughter, M.J., 2005. Global Engagement and the Innovation Activities of Firms. NBER Working Paper No. 11479. Cambridge, MA.
15. Czarnitzki D., and Fier A. Do innovation subsidies crowd out private investment? Evidence from the German service sector. Konjunkturpolitik (Applied Economics Quarterly) 48 1 (2002) 1-25
16. Czarnitzki, D., Hussinger, K., 2004. The Link Between R&D Subsidies, R&D Input and Technological Performance. ZEW Discussion Paper No. 04-56. Mannheim.
17. Czarnitzki D., and Licht G. Additionality of public R&D grants in a transition economy: the case of Eastern Germany. Economics of Transition 14 1 (2006) 101-131
18. Dalpé R. Effects of government procurement on industrial innovation. Technology in Society 16 1 (1994) 65-83
19. David P.A., Hall B.H., and Toole A.A. Is public R&D a complement or substitute for private R&D? A review of the econometric evidence. Research Policy 29 4-5 (2000) 497-529
20. Duguet E. Are R&D subsidies a substitute or a complement to privately funded R&D? Evidence from France using propensity score methods for non experimental data. Revue d'Economie Politique 114 2 (2004) 263-292
21. Edler, J., Ruhland, S., Hafner, S., Rigby, J., Georghiou, L., Hommen, L., Rolfstam, M., Edquist, C., Tsipouri, L., Papadakou, M., 2005. Innovation and Public Procurement. Review of Issues at Stake: Study for the European Commission No. ENTR/03/24. Final Report. Fraunhofer ISI, Karlsruhe.
22. Edler J., and Georghiou L. Public procurement and innovation-resurrecting the demand side. Research Policy 36 (2007) 949-963
23. Edquist, C., Hommen, L., 2000. Public technology procurement and innovation theory. In: Edquist, C., Hommen, L., Tsipouri, L. (Eds.), Public Technology Procurement and Innovation. Economics of Science, Technology and Innovation, Kluwer Academic Publishers, vol. 16. pp. 5-70.
24. Edquist, C., Hommen, L., Tsipouri, L., 2000. Introduction. In: Edquist, C., Hommen, L., Tsipouri, L. (Eds.), Public Technology Procurement and Innovation. Economics of Science, Technology and Innovation, Kluwer Academic Publishers, vol. 16. pp. 1-4.
25. European Commission, 2003. Investing in Research: An Action Plan for Europe. Communication COM(2003) 266 final/2. Brussels.
26. European Commission, 2004. Innobarometer 2004, Flash Eurobarometer 164. Brussels.
27. European Commission, 2006. Creating an Innovative Europe-Report of the Independent Expert Group on R&D and innovation appointed following the Hampton Court Summit and chaired by Mr. Esko Aho. EUR 22005. Luxembourg.
28. Fier A. Staatliche Förderung industrieller Forschung in Deutschland vol. 62 (2002), ZEW Wirtschaftsanalysen, Baden-Baden
29. Fontana R., Geuna A., and Matt M. Factors affecting university-industry R&D projects: the importance of searching, screening and signalling. Research Policy 35 2 (2006) 309-323
30. Fraunhofer Institute for Systems and Innovation Research, 2004. New Products and Services: Analysis of Regulations Shaping New Markets-Final Report for European Commission. Luxembourg.
31. Georghiou L., Amanatidou E., Belitz H., Cruz L., Edler J., Edquist C., Granstrand O., Guinet J., Leprince E., Orsenigo L., Rigby J., Romanainen J., Stampfer M., and van den Biesen J. Raising EU R&D Intensity: Improving the Effectiveness of Public Support Mechanisms for Private Sector Research and Development: Direct Measures, EUR 20716 (2003)
32. Geroski P.A. Procurement policy as a tool of industrial policy. International Review of Applied Economics 4 2 (1990) 182-198
33. Grimpe C., and Sofka W. Search patterns and absorptive capacity: low- and high-technology sectors in European countries. Research Policy 38 3 (2009) 495-506
34. Hagenaars, J.A., McCutcheon, A.L., 2002. Applied Latent Class Analysis. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
35. Heckman J.J., Ichimura H., and Todd P.E. Matching as an econometric evaluation estimator: evidence from evaluating a job training programme. Review of Economic Studies 64 (1997) 605-654
36. Heckman, J.J., Lalonde, R.J., Smith, J.A., 1999. The economics and econometrics of active labor market programs. In: Ashenfelter, A., Card, D. (Eds.), Handbook of Labor Economics, vol. 3. North Holland, Amsterdam, pp. 1866-2097.
37. Jaffe A.B., Peterson S.R., and Portney P.R. Environmental regulation and the competitiveness of U.S. manufacturing: what the evidence tell us?. Journal of Economic Literature XXXIII (1995) 132-163
38. James, A.D., 2004. U.S. Defence R&D Spending: An Analysis of the Impacts-Rapporteur's Report for the EURAB Working Group ERA Scope and Vision, EURAB 04.11. Manchester.
39. Jensen M.B., Johnson B., Lorenz E., and Lundvall B.A. Forms of knowledge and modes of innovation. Research Policy 36 5 (2007) 680-693
40. Kaiser U. An empirical test of models explaining research expenditures and research cooperation: evidence for the German service sector. International Journal of Industrial Organization 20 6 (2002) 747-774
41. Laursen K., and Salter A. Open for innovation: the role of openness in explaining innovation performance among U.K. manufacturing firms. Strategic Management Journal 27 2 (2006) 131-150
42. Lazarsfeld, P.F., 1950. The logical and mathematical foundations of latent structure analysis. In: Stouffer, S.A. (Ed.), Measurement and Prediction. Volume IV of the American Soldier: Studies in Social Psychology in World War II. Princeton University Press, Princeton, pp. 362-412.
43. Lichtenberg F.R. The impact of the strategic defense initiative on US civilian R&D investment and industrial competitiveness. Social Studies of Science 19 2 (1989) 265-282
44. Lööf H., and Broström A. Does knowledge diffusion between university and industry increase innovativeness?. Journal of Technology Transfer 33 (2008) 73-90
45. Mansfield E. Academic research and industrial innovation. Research Policy 20 (1991) 1-12
46. Miotti L., and Sachwald F. Co-operative R&D: why and with whom? An integrated framework of analysis. Research Policy 32 (2003) 1481-1499
47. Nelson, R.R., Rosenberg, N., 1993. Technical innovation and national systems. In: Nelson, R.R. (Ed.), National Innovation Systems: A Comparative Analysis. Oxford University Press, New York, pp. 3-21.
48. Neter, J., Wasserman, W., Kutner, M.H., 1990. Applied Linear Statistical Models: Regression, Analysis of Variance, and Experimental Designs, 3rd ed. Irwin, Homewood/Boston.
49. OECD, 1997. The OECD Report on Regulatory Reform: Synthesis. Paris.
50. OECD, 2005. Oslo Manual: Guidelines for Collecting and Interpreting Innovation Data. Paris.
51. Palmberg C. The sources of innovations-looking beyond technological opportunities. Economics of Innovation and New Technology 13 2 (2004) 183-197
52. Perkmann M., and Walsh K. University-industry relationships and open innovation: towards a research agenda. International Journal of Management Review 9 4 (2007) 259-280
53. Pavitt K. What makes basic research economically useful?. Research Policy 20 (1991) 109-119
54. Porter M.E. America's green strategy. Scientific American 264 4 (1991) 168
55. Rabe-Hesketh, S., Everitt, B.S., 2007. A Handbook of Statistical Analyses Using Stata, 4th ed. Chapman & Hall/CRC, Boca Raton, FL.
56. Rammer C., Peters B., Schmidt T., Aschhoff B., Doherr T., and Niggemann H. Innovationen in Deutschland - Ergebnisse der Innovationserhebung 2003 in der deutschen Wirtschaft vol. 78 (2005), ZEW Wirtschaftsanalysen, Baden-Baden
57. Rothwell, R., Zegveld, W., 1981. Industrial Innovation and Public Policy: Preparing for the 1980s and the 1990s. Pinter, London.
58. Rothwell R. Technology based small firms and regional innovation potential: the role of public procurement. Journal of Public Policy 4 4 (1984) 307-332
59. Schartinger D., Rammer C., Fischer M.M., and Fröhlich J. Knowledge interactions between universities and industry in Austria: sectoral patterns and determinants. Research Policy 31 3 (2002) 303-328
60. Sianesi B. An evaluation of the Swedish system of active labor market programs in the 1990s. The Review of Economics and Statistics 86 1 (2004) 133-155
61. Stoneman, P., 1987. The Economics Analysis of Technology Policy. Clarendon Pr., Oxford.
62. TAB, 2006. Summary of TAB Working Report No. 99-Demand-oriented Innovation Policy. Berlin.
63. Tidd, J., Bessant, J., Pavitt, K., 1997. Managing Innovation: Integrating Technological, Market and Organisational Change. John Wiley & Sons Inc, Chichester.
64. Vermunt, J.K., Magidson, J., 2005. Technical Guide for Latent Gold 4.0: Basic and Advanced. Statistical Innovations Inc., Belmont, MA.
65. Viscusi W.K., and Moore M.J. Product liability, research and development, and innovation. The Journal of Political Economy 101 1 (1993) 161-184
66. Von Hippel E. Lead users: a source of novel product concepts. Management Science 32 7 (1986) 791-805