Skip to main content

2006 | Buch

The Economics of Persistent Innovation: An Evolutionary View

insite
SUCHEN

Über dieses Buch

William Latham Christian Le Bas Persistence of firm innovative behavior became an important topic in applied industrial organization with the publication of the seminal empirical work of P. Geroski and his colleagues (1997). Evidence that firms innovate persistently has led previous studies to focus on the determinants of innovation persistence and on its heterogeneity across industries, technologies and countries. The aims of this book are: (1) to illumine the scale and scope of the phenomenon of persistence in innovation, and (2) to account for the principal factors that explain why some firms innovates persistently and others do not. Because this book deals intensively and extensively with the subject of firm innovation persistence, which is not, as yet, a well-known term, we need to provide a nontrivial definition of it that encompasses the full range topics we want to address and aids our understanding of how they are related to each other. We begin with a careful identification of "innovation. " Our first definition is drawn from K. Pavitt (2003), "innovation processes involve the exploration and exploitation of opportunities for a new or improved product, process or service, based either on an advance in technical practice or a change in market demand, or a combination of the two. " While this definition is clear, and conforms well to both our empirical and theoretical perspectives, some elaboration may help to clarify the concept.

Inhaltsverzeichnis

Frontmatter
Chapter 1. Persistence in Innovation: Definitions and Current Development of the Field
Abstract
The objectives of this chapter are to provide the reader with a more comprehensive understanding of the concept of persistence in innovation, to distinguish its roles in each of two distinct analytical frameworks, to describe its current status as a research area, and finally to identify its principal determinants. First we elaborate our definition of the subject. Then we discuss the significance of persistence in innovation both in the standard neoclassical approach of industrial organization and in a Schumpeterian model of industrial dynamics. Next we provide a survey of the principal empirical literature on the subject. The final section of the chapter provides an overview of what we believe are the main factors determining persistence in innovation.
Christian Le Bas, William Latham
Chapter 2. Determinants of Persistence in Innovation: A Study of French Patenting
Abstract
In this chapter we report the results of an empirical analysis using a methodology very similar to the one implemented by (1997). Our aims are simple: 1) to provide the reader with a preliminary understanding of some of the difficulties encountered in conducting empirical analysis of innovation persistence, and 2) to identify the variables likely to be the most important in explaining this phenomenon. Our empirical analysis uses a sample of 3 347 French industrial firms that made patent applications to the US Patent office from 1969 to 1985 and had a total of 22 000 patents granted. We estimate the coefficients of variables which explain the duration of innovation (the length of the innovation period) by using an econometric model of duration.1 In the following section we describe our data set after first reviewing the arguments in favor of patents as an indicator of innovative activity.
Alexandre Cabagnols, Claudine Gay, Christian Le Bas
Chapter 3. Factors of Entry and Persistence In Innovation: A Competence Based Approach
Abstract
Results about persistence reported in this book lead to two main conclusions: firstly most of the patenting firms only patent for one year, afterwards they never or very sporadically patent; secondly, a few firms succeed in continuing to patent for long periods of time. Unfortunately patent data are not sufficient to understand in detail why some firms persist in innovation while others are absolutely non-innovative or only sporadic innovators. The purpose of this paper is to explore this question with qualitative data collected in two French surveys devoted to study innovation and the competences for innovation. More precisely we will address three questions: 1- What are the competences that explain entry into innovation? 2- What are the competences that explain persistence in innovation? 3- What are the differences between competences that promote entry and those that promote persistence? This chapter is structured into three parts. Firstly we briefly discuss the relevance of this questioning and we describe the organization of our empirical analysis. Secondly we present the French surveys on which the analysis is based and we report basic descriptive results. Thirdly we comment on the results obtained from different binary logit estimations in which competences are entered as explanatory variables of the probability of entry and persistence in innovation. In conclusion we discuss the scope and implications of the results.
Alexandre Cabagnols
Chapter 4. Characteristics of Persistent Inventors as Revealed in Patent Data
Abstract
There is empirical evidence regarding the role of certain key individuals in the creation of technological knowledge. In particular, studies of knowledge-based industries have identified the significant roles of key scientists and key engineers in the process of technological innovation (Zucker and Darby, 1996, 1998, and Almeida and Kogut, 1997). With respect to the process of technological invention, (2003) using patent data provided by the US Patent Office found a high positive correlation between the presence of consistent inventors or strong inventors (who patented from 10 to 50 times during the period under observation) and the technological value of patented inventions as measured by the number of citations to the patent by subsequent patents. The Patent Value survey provides the opportunity to make value comparisons. (1992) pointed out that, among the factors which could explain the success of a firm’s innovative strategy, was the presence of certain key individuals: effective “product champions” or “technological gatekeepers”. He considered product champions and project leaders as playing an important role in achieving both more successful and faster new product development. Many other scholars in the field of management and organization have emphasized the importance of individuals in the generation and promotion of ideas in the innovation process as well. Individuals emerge to actively promote innovations through the various organizational stages.
William Latham, Christian Le Bas, Karim Touach
Chapter 5. Comparing Innovative Persistence Across Countries: A Cox-Model of Patenting in the UK and France
Abstract
The evolutionary framework defined by Nelson and (1982) and (1984) has initiated two related types of analysis concerning the determinants of the persistence in innovation: a first one at the industry level and a second one at the firm level. At the industry level firms’ aggregate propensity to persist in innovation is supposed to be determined by the market structure and, more broadly, by the technological regime of the industry ((1989); (1993), (1995); (2000); (2000)). At the firm level, persistence in innovation would be determined by two different feedbacks: a first feedback stemming from the economic success of the innovative activity in term of sales, profit and finally in term of market power; a second one stemming from the learning process associated to the technological activity. The first feedback results from the decision made to maintain the innovative effort and eventually to reinvestment a fraction of the profits generated by the innovation for the enlargement of production and research capacities. The second feedback stems from the accumulation of related technological knowledge and from the development of specific competencies of “learning to learn”. Our paper focuses exclusively on that second technological feedback and studies its impact on the ability of French and UK firms1 to persist in innovation.
Alexandre Cabagnols
Chapter 6. Persistent Adoption of Time-Saving Process Innovations
Abstract
The previous chapters were concerned with persistent innovation by innovating firms. In this chapter we consider the related topic of persistent adoption of innovations by firms that are not directly involved in the innovation process. In addition to a survey of the literature, we offer empirical evidence of persistent adoption for a specific time-saving process innovation: the high-speed detachable chairlifts now used at many, but not all, ski resorts.
Nilotpal Das, James G. Mulligan
Chapter 7. Towards an Evolutionary Theory of Persistence in Innovation
Abstract
In this chapter we present a first coherent attempt to elaborate an evolutionary theory of persistence in innovation. We constrain our analytical framework in two ways. First, we do not make any attempt to explain why firms do not innovate. We recognize that a more comprehensive theory would explain a firm’s decision to innovate on any basis (persistently, sporadically, or occasionally) or not to innovate at all. However, our objective is more limited in scope: we focus our attention on only innovating firms, seeking to understand why firms that innovate choose to do so persistently, sporadically or occasionally. These behaviors jointly constitute the phenomenon of persistence. Explaining persistence, not innovation per se, is our goal.
Christian Le Bas, William Latham
Chapter 8. Principal Findings, Policy Implications and Research Agenda
Abstract
The Economics of Innovation emerged as an independent field of investigation at the beginning of the last century as has been described by Antonelli 2003, Dosi 1988, Dosi 2000, Rosenberg 1982, Stonemen 1995, and von Tunzelmann 1995. Then, very quickly, two specializations within, or approaches to, the subject emerged creating distinct subfields, each with its own theoretical road map. The first approach emphasizes the innovation itself, i.e., the technology, and the second focuses on the innovator, usually a firm. Consequently, in the first approach, the innovation is the unit of analysis while, in the second, the firm is the central unit of investigation. In the first of these two approaches the analysis concerns how a new technology emerges, is adopted, developed, diffused, and incrementally improved over time. Technological trajectories, paradigm shifts (Dosi, 1982), technological systems (Carlson, 1997), and related concepts provide the basis for the models and schemes of analysis in this approach. The accent is placed on the accumulation of technological change along a trajectory or on the systemic interactions between technologies. Most innovation diffusion models, in particular those based on epidemic schemes, fall into this first category.
Christian Le Bas, William Latham
Backmatter
Metadaten
Titel
The Economics of Persistent Innovation: An Evolutionary View
herausgegeben von
William R. Latham
Christian Le Bas
Copyright-Jahr
2006
Verlag
Springer US
Electronic ISBN
978-0-387-29245-8
Print ISBN
978-0-387-28872-7
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-29245-8

    Marktübersichten

    Die im Laufe eines Jahres in der „adhäsion“ veröffentlichten Marktübersichten helfen Anwendern verschiedenster Branchen, sich einen gezielten Überblick über Lieferantenangebote zu verschaffen.