The EU 2020 innovation indicator: A step forward in measuring innovation outputs and outcomes?

被引：110

作者：

Janger, Jurgen ^{[3
]}

Schubert, Torben ^{[5
,6
]}

Andries, Petra ^{[1
]}

Rammer, Christian ^{[4
]}

Hoskens, Machteld ^{[2
]}

机构：

[1] Univ Ghent, Dept Innovat Entrepreneurship & Serv Management, Ghent, Belgium

[2] Katholieke Univ Leuven, Ctr R&D Monitoring, Leuven, Belgium

[3] Austrian Inst Econ Res WIFO, Vienna, Austria

[4] Ctr European Econ Res ZEW, Mannheim, Germany

[5] Lund Univ, CIRCLE, Lund, Sweden

[6] Fraunhofer Inst Syst & Innovat Res ISI, Karlsruhe, Germany

来源：

RESEARCH POLICY | 2017年 / 46卷 / 01期

关键词：

Innovation output; Innovation outcome; Innovation measurement; Structural change; Structural upgrading; EU; 2020; strategy; Innovation policy; TECHNOLOGY INDICATORS; PERFORMANCE; STATISTICS; COUNTRIES; FIRMS; CONSTRUCTION; MANAGEMENT; FRAMEWORK; INDUSTRY; EXPORTS;

D O I：

10.1016/j.respol.2016.10.001

中图分类号：

C93 [管理学];

学科分类号：

12 ; 1201 ; 1202 ; 120202 ;

摘要：

In October 2013, the European Commission presented a new indicator intended to capture innovation outputs and outcomes and thereby "support policy-makers in establishing new or reinforced actions to remove bottlenecks that prevent innovators from translating ideas into products and services that can be successful on the market". This article aims to evaluate the usefulness of the new indicator against the background of the difficulties in measuring innovation outputs and outcomes. We develop a unique conceptual framework for measuring innovation outcomes that distinguishes structural change and structural upgrading as two key dimensions in both manufacturing and services. We conclude that the new indicator is biased towards a somewhat narrowly defined "high-tech" understanding of innovation outcomes. We illustrate our framework proposing a broader set of outcome indicators capturing also structural upgrading. We find that the results for the modified indicator differ substantially for a number of countries, with potentially wide-ranging consequences for innovation and industrial policies. (C) 2016 Published by Elsevier B.V.

引用

页码：30 / 42

页数：13

共 60 条

[11] Developing science, technology and innovation indicators: What we can learn from the past [J].

Freeman, Christopher ;

Soete, Luc .

RESEARCH POLICY, 2009, 38 (04) :583-589

[12]

Geroski PA., 1994, Market Structure, corporate performance and innovative activity

[13] Investments in modernization, innovation and gains in productivity: Evidence from firms in the global paper industry [J].

Ghosal, Vivek ;

Nair-Reichert, Usha .

RESEARCH POLICY, 2009, 38 (03) :536-547

[14] The obsession for competitiveness and its impact on statistics: the construction of high-technology indicators [J].

Godin, B .

RESEARCH POLICY, 2004, 33 (08) :1217-1229

[15] The emergence of S&T indicators: why did governments supplement statistics with indicators? [J].

Godin, B .

RESEARCH POLICY, 2003, 32 (04) :679-691

[16] Science, accounting and statistics: The input-output framework [J].

Godin, Benoit .

RESEARCH POLICY, 2007, 36 (09) :1388-1403

[17] QUALITY LADDERS IN THE THEORY OF GROWTH [J].

GROSSMAN, GM ;

HELPMAN, E .

REVIEW OF ECONOMIC STUDIES, 1991, 58 (01) :43-61

[18] THE MEASUREMENT OF TECHNICAL PERFORMANCE OF INNOVATIONS BY TECHNOMETRICS AND ITS IMPACT ON ESTABLISHED TECHNOLOGY INDICATORS [J].

GRUPP, H .

RESEARCH POLICY, 1994, 23 (02) :175-193

[19] Review and new evidence on composite innovation indicators for evaluating national performance [J].

Grupp, Hariolf ;

Schubert, Torben .

RESEARCH POLICY, 2010, 39 (01) :67-78

[20]

HALL B, 2001, RAND J EC, V32

← 1 2 3 4 5 6 →