YENİLİK ÇIKTI VERİMLİLİĞİ VE ÜLKELERİN REKABET GÜCÜNE ETKİSİ

Year 2020, Volume: 19 Issue: 39, 828 - 842, 27.12.2020

Ahmet Oguz Demir

https://doi.org/10.46928/iticusbe.739246

Cited By: 2

Abstract

Son yıllarda ekonomik büyüme açısından yeniliğin önemine ilişkin çalışmalar artmaktadır. Bu çalışmalar sadece bilimsel araştırmalar seviyesinde kalmamakta aynı zamanda birçok ülkede hükümetler de işletme düzeyinde yenilik ve yeniliğe yönelik faaliyetlerin artmasına yönelik politikalar geliştirmekte, kaynak ayırmaktadırlar. Ancak yenilik faaliyetlerinin harcanan kaynaklara göre büyüme ya da uluslararası rekabet gücü açısından ne denli etkin sonuçlar verdiğine ilişkin çalışmalar, yenilik çıktılarının ölçümüne ilişkin güçlükler nedeniyle işletme ya da sektörel ölçekle sınırlı kalmaktadır. Bu yayında panel stokastik sınır analizi yöntemi kullanılarak ülkelerin yenilik çıktılarının, rekabet gücü yaratma becerisi üzerindeki etkinliği ölçülmeye çalışılmıştır. Kırk sekiz ülkenin 2003-2015 yılları arasındaki verileri kullanılarak yapılan çalışmada yıllar içerisinde yenilik çıktılarının, rekabet gücü göstergesi olarak ele alınan ihracat ve yüksek teknolojili ürün ihracatı etkinliğinin arttığı sonucuna ulaşılmıştır. Yapılan analiz sonucunda Singapur, Çin, Malezya, Meksika ve Almanya’nın yenilik çıktılarının ihracata katkısı açısından dünyada en etkin beş ülke olduğu görülmüştür.

Keywords

inovasyon, rekabet gücü, stokastik sınır analizi

References

• Adams, F. G., Gangnes, B., and Shachmurove, Y. (2006). Why is China so Competitive? Measuring and Explaining China’s Competitiveness. The World Economy, 29(2), 95–122
• Aigner, D., Lovell, C.K., ve Schmidt, P., 1977. Formulation and estimation of stochastic frontier production function models. J. Econom. 6 (1), 21–37.
• Amiti, M. (1999). Specialization patterns in Europe. Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv, 135, 573–593.
• Autant-Bernard, C. (2001). Science and knowledge flows: Evidence from the French case. Research Policy, 30(7), 1069-1078. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0048-7333(00)00131-1
• Autant-Bernard, C., Fadairo, M. and Massard, N. (2013). Knowledge diffusion and innovation policies within the European regions: Challenges based on recent empirical evidence. Research Policy, 42 (1), 196-210. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2012.07.009
• Balassa, B. (1965). Trade liberalization and ‘revealed’ comparative advantage. The Manchester School of Economic and Social Studies, 32, 99–123.
• Cassiman, B, Golovko and E, Martínez-Ros, E (2010) Innovation, exports and productivity. International Journal of Industrial Organization 28: 372–376.
• Chen, C. P., Hu, J. L., and Yang, C. H. (2013). Produce patents or journal articles? A cross-country comparison of R&D productivity change. Scientometrics, 94(3), 833–849.
• Cleff, T., Licht, G., Spielkamp, A. and Urban, W. (2005). Innovation and Competitiveness. In O. Heneric, G. Licht and W. Sofka, Europe's automotive industry on the move: competitiveness in a changing world (Band 32, S. 103-155). Heidelberg: Physica.
• Cooper, W.W., Seiford, L.M., and Tone, K., 2000. Data Envelopment Analysis: A Com- prehensive Text with Models, Applications, References and DEA-Solver Soft- ware. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Boston.
• Fernandes, C.I., Ferreira, J.J. and Raposo, M.L. (2013) ‘Drivers to firm innovation and their effects on performance: an international comparison’, International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, Vol. 9, No. 4, pp.557–580.
• Ferreira, J., Marques, C. and Fernandes, C. (2010) ‘Decision-making for location of new knowledge intensive businesses on ICT sector: Portuguese evidences’, International Journal of E-Entrepreneurship and Innovation, Vol. 1, No. 1, pp.60–82.
• Global Competitiveness Report Methodology (2017), World Economic Forum, http://www3.weforum.org/docs/GCR2017-2018/04Backmatter/TheGlobalCompetitivenessReport2017–2018AppendixA.pdf, Erişim tarihi: 6 Şubat 2019
• Guan J. and Chen K . (2012). Modeling the relative efficiency of national innovation systems, Research Policy , vol. 41, 102–15
• Guan, J.C. and Zuo, K.R., 2014. A cross-country comparison of innovation efficiency. Scientometrics, http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11192-014-1288-5.
• Hana, U. (2013). Competitive advantage achievement through innovation and knowledge. Journal of Competitiveness, 5(1), 82–96.
• Hidalgo, C.A. and Hausmann, R., 2009. The building blocks of economic complexity. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 106, 10570–10575.
• Hong, J.; Feng, B.;Wu, Y.;Wang and L. Do government grants promote innovation efficiency in China’s high-tech industries? Technovation 2016, 57, 4–13
• IMD World Competitiveness Yearbook (2019) IMD World Competitiveness Center, https://www.imd.org/wcc/world-competitiveness-center-mission/methodology/ Erişim tarihi: 6 Şubat 2019
• Jacobs, R., 2001. Alternative methods to examine hospital efficiency: data envelopment analysis and stochastic frontier analysis. Health Care Manag. Sci. 4 (2), 103–115.
• Kao, C., Wu, W.-Y., Hsieh, W.-J., Wang, T.-Y., Lin, C., and Chen, L.-H. (2008). Measuring the national competitiveness of Southeast Asian countries. European Journal of Operational Research, 187(2), 613–628
• Kumbhakar, S.C., Lovell and C.K., 2003. Stochastic Frontier Analysis. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
• Lall, S. (2001). Competitiveness ndices and developing countries: an economic evaluation of the global competitiveness report. World Development, 29(9), 1501–1525.
• Laursen, K., and Drejer, I. (1999). Do intersectoral linkages matter for international export specialisation? The Economics of Innovation and New Technology, 8, 311–330.
• Malerba, F. and Montobbio, F. (2003). Exploring factors affecting international technological specialization: the role of knowledge flows and the structure of innovative activity. Journal of Evolutionary Economics, 13, 411–434.
• Manzur, M, Wong, W K and Chau, I C. 1999. Measuring international competitiveness: experience from East Asia. Appl. Economics, 31: 1383–91.
• Martín-de Castro, G., Delgado-Verde, M. Navas-López, J. E. and Cruz-González, J. (2013). The moderating role of innovation culture in the relationship between knowledge assets and product innovation. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 80(2), 351-363. http:// dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2012.08.012
• Meeusen, W. and Van den Broeck, J., 1977. Efficiency estimation from Cobb-Douglas production functions with composed error. Int. Econ. Rev., 435–444.
• Noruzy, A., Dalfard, V. M., Azhdari, B., Nazari-Shirkouhi, S. and Rezazadeh, A. (2013). Relations between transformational leadership, organizational leasing, knowledge management, organizational innovation and organizational performance: an empirical investigation of manufactruing firms. The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, 64(5-8), 1073-1085. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00170-012-4038-y
• OECD Science, Technology and R&D Statistics: Main Science and Technology Indicators Tacchella, A., Cristelli, M., Caldarelli, G., Gabrielli, A., and Pietronero, L. (2013). Economic complexity: Con- ceptual grounding of a new metrics for global competitiveness. Journal of Economic Dynamics & Control.
• Ünal, T. ve Seçilmiş, N. (2013), “Ar-Ge Göstergeleri Açısından Türkiye ve Gelişmiş Ülkelerle Kıyaslaması”, İşletme ve İktisat Çalışmaları Dergisi, ISSN: 2147-804X, 1(1), 12-25 http://www.isletmeiktisat.com (Erişim Tarihi: 06.02.2019)
• Seung-Hoo Yoo (2008) High-technology exports and economic output: an empirical investigation, Applied Economics Letters, 15:7, 523-525, DOI: 10.1080/13504850600721882
• Stern, S., Porter, M. and Furman, J. L. (2000) The determinants of national innovative capacity, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc, NBER Working Papers 7876.
• Zabala-Iturriagagoitia, J.M., Voigt, P., Gutiérrez-Gracia, A., and Jiménez-Sáez, F., 2007. Regional innovation systems: how to assess performance. Reg. Stud. 41 (5), 661–672.