Technology flows and innovation output in Italy: industry-level evidence from R&D and patent data

Author/s Andrea de Panizza, Mariagrazia Squicciarini
Publishing Year 2014 Issue 2014/3
Language Italian Pages 23 P. 109-131 File size 199 KB
DOI 10.3280/POLI2014-003005
DOI is like a bar code for intellectual property: to have more infomation click here

Below, you can see the article first page

If you want to buy this article in PDF format, you can do it, following the instructions to buy download credits

Article preview

FrancoAngeli is member of Publishers International Linking Association, Inc (PILA), a not-for-profit association which run the CrossRef service enabling links to and from online scholarly content.

This paper offers a broad characterisation of inter-industry R&D flows in Italy. It exploits a novel ‘R&D performer-beneficiary’ matrix built on survey-based information collected by Istat, the Italian National Institute of Statistics and relies on matched enterprise and patent data. The study identifies net R&D performers, including specialised R&D suppliers, maps the type and number of industries they serve and sheds some light on the industries that most benefit from the R&D carried out by other industries. It further depicts a number of inter-industry R&D linkages and technology clusters. Finally, relying on information about the technology class of patented inventions, it assesses the level of technological specialisation or diversification of the innovative output of R&D performers.

Keywords: Technology flows, inter-industry flows, R&D, patents, Istat

Jel codes: O14, O33, O34

  1. Barbosa N., Faria A.P. 2011. Innovation across Europe: how important are institutional differences?. Research Policy, 40 (9): 1157-1169, DOI: 10.1016/j.respol.2011.05.017
  2. Cohen W.M., Klepper S. 1992. The anatomy of industry R&D intensity distributions. American Economic Review, 82 (4): 773-799.
  3. Griffith R., Redding S., Van Reenen J. 2004. Mapping the two faces of R&D: productivity growth in a panel of OECD industries. Review of Economics and Statistics, 86 (4): 883-895, DOI: 10.1162/0034653043125194
  4. Griliches Z. 1979. Issues in assessing the contribution of research and development to productivity growth. Bell Journal of Econometrics, 10 (1): 92-116, DOI: 10.2307/3003321
  5. Guellec D., van Pottelsberghe de la Potterie B. 2001. R&D and productivity growth: panel data analysis of 16 OECD countries. OECD Economic Studies, 33 (2): 103-126, 10.1111/j.1468-0084.2004.00083.x.
  6. Harhoff D., Scherer F.M., Vopel K. 2003. Citations, family size, opposition and the value of patent rights. Research Policy, 32 (8): 1343-1363, DOI: 10.1016/S0048-7333(02)00124-5
  7. Istat. 2007. Rapporto annuale: la situazione del paese nel 2006. Istat: Roma.
  8. Istat. 2010. Rapporto annuale: la situazione del paese nel 2009. Istat: Roma.
  9. Istat. 2011. Rapporto annuale: la situazione del paese nel 2010. Istat: Roma.
  10. Lanjouw J.O., Pakes A., Putnam J. 1998. How to count patents and value intellectual property: the uses of patent renewal and application data. Journal of Industrial Economics, 46 (4): 405-432, DOI: 10.1111/1467-6451.00081
  11. Leoncini R., Montresor S. 2001. Struttura produttiva e processo innovativo: un’analisi intersettoriale del sistema tecnologico italiano. Rivista della Società Italiana degli Economisti, 6 (2): 169-206, DOI: 10.1427/3694
  12. Lerner J. 1994. The importance of patent scope: an empirical analysis. RAND Journal of Economics, 25 (2): 319-333.
  13. Lopez-Bassols V., Jankowski J. 2012. Improving the measurement of business R&D: preliminary findings from the NESTI task force review of BERD surveys. Paper
  14. presented at the OECD Working Party of National Experts on Science and Technology Indicators (NESTI). Paris, June 4-6.
  15. OECD. 2002. Frascati Manual. Proposed Standard Practice for Surveys on Research and Experimental Development. OECD: Paris, DOI: 10.1787/9789264199040-en
  16. OECD. 2013. OECD Economic Surveys: Italy 2013. OECD: Paris.
  17. Pavitt K. 1984. Sectoral patterns of technical change: towards a taxonomy and a theory. Research Policy, 13 (6): 343-373, DOI: 10.1016/0048-7333(84)90018-0
  18. Scherer F.M. 1982. Inter-industry technology flows and productivity growth. Review of Economics and Statistics, 64 (4): 627-634, DOI: 10.2307/1923947
  19. Squicciarini M., Dernis H. 2013. A cross-country characterisation of the patenting behaviour of firms based on matched firm and patent data. OECD Science, Technology and Industry Working Papers 2013/05, DOI: 10.1787/5k40gxd4vh41-en
  20. Squicciarini M., Dernis H., Criscuolo C. 2013. Measuring patent quality: indicators of technological and economic value. OECD Science, Technology and Industry Working Papers 2013/03, DOI: 10.1787/5k4522wkw1r8-en
  21. Tassey G. 2014. Competing in advanced manufacturing: the need for improved growth models and policies. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 28 (1): 27-48, DOI: 10.1257/jep.28.1.27
  22. Van Pottelsberghe de la Potterie B. 1997. Issues in assessing the effect of interindustry R&D spillovers. Economic Systems Research, 9 (4): 331-356, DOI: 10.1080/09535319700000030
  23. Wilson D.J. 2002. Is embodied technology the result of upstream R&D? Industry-level evidence. Review of Economic Dynamics, 5 (2): 285-317, 10.1006/redy.2002.0163.

  • Do KIBS make manufacturing more innovative? An empirical investigation of four European countries Daria Ciriaci, Sandro Montresor, Daniela Palma, in Technological Forecasting and Social Change /2015 pp.135
    DOI: 10.1016/j.techfore.2015.02.008

Andrea de Panizza, Mariagrazia Squicciarini, Technology flows and innovation output in Italy: industry-level evidence from R&D and patent data in "ECONOMIA E POLITICA INDUSTRIALE " 3/2014, pp 109-131, DOI: 10.3280/POLI2014-003005