Innovation panel surveys in Germany

Handbook of Innovation Indicators and Measurement

Volumn , Issue , 2013, Pages 135-177

  Peters, Bettina ^a   Rammer, Christian ^a  

^a CENTRE FOR EUROPEAN ECONOMIC RESEARCH ZEW   (Germany)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84944578378     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: None     Document Type: Editorial

References (50)

1. Aghion, P. and P. Howitt (1992), ‘A model of growth through creative destruction’, Econometrica, 60, 323–51.
2. Aschhoff, B. (2010), ‘Who gets the money? The dynamics of R&D project subsidies in Germany’, Jahrbücher für Nationalökonomie und Statistik, 230, 522–46.
3. Becker, S.O. and P.H. Egger (2009), ‘Endogenous product versus process innovation and a firm’s propensity to export’, Empirical Economics, online version: DOI: 10.1007/ s00181-009-0322-6.
4. Cefis, E. (2003), ‘Is there persistence in innovative activities?’, International Journal of Industrial Organization, 21, 489–515.
5. Cefis, E. and L. Orsenigo (2001), ‘The persistence of innovative activities. A cross-countries and cross-sectors comparative analysis’, Research Policy, 30, 1139–58.
6. Cockburn, I.M., M.J. MacGarvie and E. Müller (2010), ‘Patent thickets, licensing and inno- vative performance’, Industrial and Corporate Change, 19, 899–925.
7. Crépon, B., E. Duguet and J. Mairesse (1998), ‘Research, innovation and productivity: An econometric analysis at the firm level’, Economics of Innovation and New Technology, 7, 115–58.
8. Criscuolo, C. and J. Haskel (2003), ‘Innovations and productivity growth in the UK: Evi- dence from CIS2 and CIS3’, CeRiBA Discussion Paper EBPF03-3(10), London: Office of National Statistics.
9. Czarnitzki, D. and K. Kraft (2010), ‘On the profitability of innovative assets’, Applied Economics, 42, 1941–53.
10. Czarnitzki, D. and K. Kraft (2012), ‘Spillovers of innovation activities and their profitabil- ity’, Oxford Economic Papers, 64, 302–22.
11. Czarnitzki, D., B. Ebersberger and A. Fier (2007), ‘The relationship between R&D collabo- ration, subsidies and R&D performance: empirical evidence from Finland and Germany’, Journal of Applied Econometrics, 22, 1347–66.
12. Dobbelaere, S., R.I. Luttens and B. Peters (2009), ‘Starting an R&D project under uncer- tainty’, Tinbergen Institute Discussion Paper 2009-044/3, Amsterdam and Rotterdam: Tinbergen Institute.
13. Dodgson, M. (2000), The Management of Technological Innovation: An International and Strategic Approach, New York: Oxford University Press.
14. Flaig, G. and M. Stadler (1994), ‘Success breeds success: The dynamics of the innovation process’, Empirical Economics, 19, 55–68.
15. Griffith, R., E. Huergo, J. Mairesse and B. Peters (2006), ‘Innovation and productivity across four European countries’, Oxford Review of Economic Policy, 22, 483–98.
16. Hall, B.H. (2011), ‘Innovation and productivity’, UNU-MERIT Working Paper Series 2011- 028, Maastricht: UNU-MERIT.
17. Hall, B.H., F. Lotti and J. Mairesse (2008), ‘Employment, innovation and productivity: Evi- dence from Italian microdata’, Industrial and Corporate Change, 17, 813–39.
18. Hollanders, H. and A. van Cruysen (2008), ‘Rethinking the European Innovation Scoreboard: A new methodology for 2008–2010’, Maastricht: UNU-MERIT.
19. Hussinger, K. (2008), ‘R&D and subsidies at the firm level: An application of parametric and semi-parametric two-step selection models’, Journal of Applied Econometrics, 23, 729–47.
20. Janz, N., H. Lööf and B. Peters (2004), ‘Firm level innovation and productivity: Is there a common story across countries?’, Problems and Perspectives in Management, 2, 184–204.
21. Johansson, B. and H. Lööf (2010), ‘Innovation strategy and firm performance: what is the long-run impact of persistent R&D?’, CESIS Working Paper 240, Stockholm Royal Institute of Technology.
22. Kleinknecht, A., K. van Montfort and E. Brouwer (2002), ‘The non-trivial choice between innovation indicators’, Economics of Innovation and New Technology, 11, 109–21.
23. Lachenmaier, S. (2007), ‘Effects of innovation on firm performance’, Ifo Beiträge zur Wirtschaftsforschung 28, Munich: Ifo Institute for Economic Research and University of Munich.
24. Lachenmaier, S. and H. Rottmann (2011), ‘Effects of innovation on employment: A dynamic panel analysis’, International Journal of Industrial Organization, 29, 210–20.
25. Laursen, K. and A. Salter (2006), ‘Open for innovation: The role of openness in explaining innovation performance among UK manufacturing firms’, Strategic Management Journal, 27, 131–50.
26. Leiponen, A and C. Helfat (2010), ‘Innovation objectives, knowledge sources, and the ben- efits of breadth’, Strategic Management Journal, 31, 224–36.
27. Lööf, H. and A. Heshmati (2010), ‘Knowledge capital and heterogeneity in firm perform- ance. A sensitivity analysis’, Economics of Innovation and New Technology, 15, 317–44.
28. Malerba, F. and L. Orsenigo (1993), ‘Technological regimes and firm behaviour’, Industrial Corporate Change, 2, 45–71.
29. Mansfield, E. (1968), Industrial Research and Technological Innovation: An Econometric Analysis, New York: Norton.
30. Mansfield, E. (1998), ‘Academic research and industrial innovation: An update of empirical findings’, Research Policy, 26, 773–6.
31. Nelson, R. and S. Winter (1982), An Evolutionary Theory of Economic Change, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
32. OECD (1992), Proposed Guidelines for Collecting and Interpreting Technological Innovation Data – Oslo Manual, OCDE/GD(92)26, Paris: OECD.
33. OECD (2007), OECD Science, Technology and Industry Scoreboard 2007, Paris: OECD.
34. OECD/Eurostat (1997), Proposed Guidelines for Collecting and Interpreting Technological Innovation Data – Oslo Manual, 2nd edition, Paris: OECD.
35. OECD/Eurostat (2005), Oslo Manual: Guidelines for Collecting and Interpreting Innovation Data, Paris: OECD.
36. Parisi, M., F. Schiantarelli and A. Sembenelli (2006), ‘Productivity, innovation and R&D: Micro evidence for Italy’, European Economic Review, 50, 2037–61.
37. Peters, B. (2008), Innovation and Firm Performance. An Empirical Investigation for German Firms, ZEW Economic Studies 38, Heidelberg and New York: Physica.
38. Peters, B. (2009), ‘Persistence of innovation: Stylized facts and panel data evidence’, Journal of Technology Transfer, 34, 226–43.
39. Phillips, A. (1971), Technology and Market Structure: A Study of the Aircraft Industry, Lexington, MA: Heath Lexington Books.
40. Polder, M., G. van Leeuwen, P. Mohnen and W. Raymond (2009), ‘Productivity effects of innovation modes’, Statistics Netherlands Discussion Paper No. 09033, The Hague: Statistics Netherlands.
41. Rammer, C., D. Czarnitzki and A. Spielkamp (2009), ‘Innovation success of non-R&D- performers: Substituting technology by management in SMEs’, Small Business Economics, 33, 35–58.
42. Raymond, W., P. Mohnen, F. Palm and S. Schim van der Loeff (2010), ‘Persistence of inno- vation in Dutch manufacturing: Is it spurious?’, The Review of Economics and Statistics, 92, 495–504.
43. Romer, P. (1990), ‘Endogenous technological change’, Journal of Political Economy, 98, 71–102.
44. Schmidt, T. and K. Aerts (2008), ‘Two for the price of one? Additionality effects of R&D subsidies: A comparison between Flanders and Germany’, Research Policy, 37, 806–22.
45. Schwiebacher, F. (2012), ‘Complementary assets, patent thickets and hold-up threats – do transaction costs undermine investments in innovation?’, ZEW Discussion Paper No. 12- 015, Mannheim: ZEW.
46. Smith, K. (2005), ‘Measuring innovation’, in J. Fagerberg, D.C. Mowery and R.R. Nelson (eds), The Oxford Handbook of Innovation, New York: Oxford University Press, pp. 148–77.
47. Stoneman, P. (1983), The Economic Analysis of Technological Change, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
48. Sutton, J. (1991), Sunk Costs and Market Structure, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
49. Van Leeuwen, G. and L. Klomp (2006), ‘On the contribution of innovation to multi-factor productivity growth’, Economics of Innovation and New Technology, 15, 367–90.
50. Wooldridge, J.M. (2005), ‘Simple solutions to the initial conditions problem in dynamic non- linear panel data models with unobserved heterogeneity’, Journal of Applied Econometrics, 20, 39–54.