Search

A key concept in the economics of innovation is the 'public good' nature of knowledge. This generates a tension between incentivizing knowledge production by allowing knowledge creators appropriate the economic benefits and encouraging its diffusion to enhance the social return to knowledge creation. Where firms operate in localities that are characterized by greater entrepreneurship, there may be lower incentives to engage in research and development. This would result from a higher risk of knowledge spillovers to local start-ups and/or that employees may exploit new knowledge in spin-out firms. It has also been suggested in the literature that greater local entrepreneurial activity may lower profits for incumbent firms, through greater competition and/or the leakage of commercially valuable new knowledge. This paper presents a novel conceptual perspective on this tension and empirically tests it. Using Swedish firmlevel data and county-level data on new start-ups, this paper estimates the effect on R&D activity of local rates of business start-ups. It finds that greater numbers of new start-ups in a metropolitan area reduces firm-level R&D expenditure. However, this relationship is not linear, so that at higher levels of new firm formation in a region, firm-level R&D expenditure falls at a diminishing rate. This suggests that the effect of local entrepreneurship on a business' R&D decisions is conditioned by the extent of that entrepreneurship.

This paper analyses differences across sectors in firms’ propensity to innovate and the relative importance of inputs to innovation classifying firms into four broad sectors. The propensity and drivers of four types of innovation (new to firm, new to market, process and organisational) within these sectors are then analysed. The results indicate that, for new to firm and new to market innovation, there is a strong degree of heterogeneity in the drivers of innovation across sectors. The propensity to introduce process or organisational innovations varies slightly across sectors but that there is no evidence of differences across sectors in the drivers of innovation. These results have important implications for policy instruments to meet the needs of targeted firms.

This paper analyses the effects of geography on innovation by small and medium sized enterprises in the South-West and South-East regions of Ireland. Using an augmented innovation production function it estimates, both directly and indirectly, the effects of interaction with geographically proximate external agents and agglomeration economies on product and process innovation in these enterprises. The findings question the premise that geography matters for innovation in the Irish case. There is little evidence that local/regional interaction is more important for innovation and the close availability of a skilled labour pool and a range of urbanization indicators have no effect.

In the last decade Irish innovation policy has been focused on Higher Education Institutions (HEIs). This paper explores the effects of HEIs, in the context of interaction with other interaction agents, on the innovation output of Irish high-technology businesses. Based on a survey of 184 businesses in the Chemical and Pharmaceutical, Information and Communications Technology and Engineering and Electronic Devices sectors, the paper estimates the importance of in-house R&D activity and external interaction with HEIs, support agencies and other businesses for product and process innovation. A key finding is that the greater the frequency of direct interaction with HEIs the lower the probability of both product and process innovation in these businesses. There is some evidence of a positive indirect HEI effect, through complementarities of interactions with suppliers and support agencies. However, while external interaction is important for innovation output, there is little evidence that geographical proximity matters. These findings have important implications for Irish innovation policy. Last year’s Strategy for Science, Technology and Innovation: 2006 to 2013 committed an additional €1.88 billion for research and commercialisation programmes in HEIs. The econometric results presented suggest that this substantial public investment in HEIs may have a disappointing, and perhaps even a negative, effect on the innovation output of Irish business, thus undermining future Irish prosperity. In addition, the absence of evidence supporting the existence of Irish clusters and networks for innovation suggests that policymakers long-standing support for these have been misguided. The paper concludes by advocating that innovation is a business rather than a technological phenomenon and argues for a changed role for HEIs to one of responding to innovative businesses.

This paper presents new survey-based evidence on the increasingly topical question of what drives innovation in Irish high-technology businesses. The extraordinary performance of the Irish economy since the 1990s has been inextricably linked to highly successful foreign-owned businesses, in sectors such as pharmaceuticals, electronics and computers (Gallagher, Doyle and O’Leary, 2002). It might be expected that innovation in these multi-nationals is largely sourced in other group companies located abroad. It is therefore pertinent to ask, in the context of the recent policy recommendations of the Enterprise Strategy Group (ESG) (2004), the extent to which these Irish subsidiaries source innovation in Ireland. This may be through their own research and development efforts and/or through interaction for the purposes of promoting innovation with other locally or regionally based businesses, Third Level Colleges and innovation support agencies, such as IDA Ireland and Enterprise Ireland. Moreover, it may be equally important to ask, in the context of the long-standing emphasis on improved performance of indigenous industry, whether indigenous high-technology businesses interact locally or regionally in order to promote innovation. Beginning with Culliton (1992) and continuing to the present, through, for example, Forfás (2004a) and the ESG (2004), Irish industrial policy has consistently promoted and supported clusters and networks. In recent years substantial State funding has also been devoted to research and development. The National Development Plan 2000-2006 (2000) allocated €2.5 billion and the government established Science Foundation Ireland. The ESG (2004) has proposed further State investment in research and development as well as new initiatives including building enterprise capability, funding collaboration between industry and Irish Third Level Colleges, introducing tax credits for research and development. There is a consensus in the Irish, and indeed the European, policy community that developing innovation through clusters and networks will be important for future Irish and European competitiveness (Bergin et al., 2003; Forfás, 2003; National Competitiveness Council, 2003; European Commission, 2003). By presenting survey based evidence on the sources of innovation in Irish high-technology industry, this paper makes an important contribution to this debate. It begins by outlining the design of the survey instrument and then presents the results. The policy implications of the results are then discussed.