THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN NATIONAL INNOVATIVE CAPABILITY AND PERFORMANCE IN EUROPE

Year 2017, Volume: 6 Issue: 1, 53 - 60, 30.03.2017

Ozcan Karahan

https://doi.org/10.17261/Pressacademia.2017.385

Abstract

Purpose: The aim of
this study is to empirically investigate the relationships between capacity and
performance indicators of National Innovation Systems in European countries
over the period from 2000 to 2014. 

Methodology: As an
analytical tool in order to examine the dynamics of innovation process at macro
level, we used National ınnovation System approach which has had a large scope
in innovation literature over the last decades. In this analytical framework,
we employed Canonical Correlation Method to empirically examine the
relationships between two variable set of capacity and performance components.
National innovation capacity is represented by the dimensions of Research and
Development activities, Human Capital and Information and Communication
Technology (ICT) infrastructure. Dimensions of invention and innovation are
chosen the proxies for performance components of NIS. Thus, this study applies
an empirical method to get different capability dimensions of system together
in order to determine their effectiveness on innovation performance. 

Findings: Results of
the empirical study reveal that the most significant contribution to innovation
performance comes from Human Capital while dimensions of ICT infrastructure and
Research and Development take second and third place, respectively. In
addition, it seems that educational attainment and ICT-using levels are better
indicators for determining the impacts of Human Capital and ICT infrastructure
on innovation performance rather than the levels of education spending and ICT
investment.

Conclusion: As
generally argued, increasing of R&D intensity at country level is not only
sufficient condition for improving innovation system in Europe. Accordingly,
innovation policies like European Union focusing on an R&D–to-GDP ratio 3%
is not enough without providing the requirements for an appropriate human
capital development in national innovation system.  

Keywords

National innovative capability and performance, Europe

References

• Archibugi D. and Coco A. 2004. “A New Indicator of Technological Capabilities for Developed and Developing Countries”, World Development, 32 (4), 629-654.
• Bashir, M. 2013. “Innovation Index Framework for Assessing Ranking of Islamic Countries and Innovation Input-Output Indicators for Measuring Innovation Efficiency of Pakistan, International Journal of Advanced Research, 1 (8), pp. 527-539.
• Carlsson, B., 2007. “Innovation systems: a survey of the literature from a Schumpeterian perspective”. In: Hanusch, H., Pyka, A. (Eds.), Elgar Companion to Neo-Schumpeterian Economics. Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, pp. 857–871.
• Castellacci F. and Natera J. M. 2013. “The dynamics of national innovation systems: A panel cointegration analysis of the coevolution between innovative capability and absorptive capacity”. Research Policy, 42, 579-594.
• European Union. 2015. Innovation Union Scoreboard, European Commission, Belgium.
• Fagerberg, J. and Sapprasert, K. 2011. “National innovation Systems: the emergence of a new approach”, Science and Public Policy, vol. 38, no. 9, 669–79
• Freeman, C. 1987. Technology Policy and Economic Performance: Lessons from Japan. London: Pinter.
• Griffith R., Redding, S. and Reenen J. V., 2004. Mapping the two Faces of R&D: Productivity Growth in a Panel of OECD Industries. The Review of Economics and Statistics, 86 (4), 883-895.
• Hotelling H. 1936. “Relationship between Two Sets of Variates”. Biometrika 28 (3-4), 321-377.
• Johnson R. A. and Wichern D. W. 2007. Applied Multivariate Statistical Analysis. Sixth Edition, Pearson Education Inc. NJ, United State.
• Karahan O. 2012. “Input-output Indicators of Knowledge-Based Economy and Turkey”, Journal of Business, Economics & Finance, 1 (2), 2136.
• Kravchenko N., A. 2011 “The Problem of Measuring and Assessing National Innovation Systems”, Problems of Economic Transition, 53, 9’ 61-73.
• Lundvall, B.-Å. (ed.) 1992. National Systems of Innovation: Towards a Theory of Innovation and Interactive Learning, London, Pinter Publishers
• Nelson, R. (ed.). 1993. National Innovation Systems: A Comparative Analysis, Oxford University Press.
• OECD. 2015, Science, Technology and Industry (STI) Scoreboard, OECD Publishing, Paris.
• Pan T-W., Hung S-W. and L. W-M. 2010. “DEA Performance Measurement of the National Innovation System in Asia and Europe”. AsiaPasific Journal of Operational Research, 27 (3), 369-392.
• Samara E., Georgiadis P. and Bakouros I. 2012. “The impact of innovation policies on the performance of national innovation systems: A system dynamics analysis”, Technovation, 32, 624-638.
• Sharma S., Thomas V.J. (2008). “Inter-Country R&D Efficiency Analysis: An Application of Data Envelopment Analysis”, Scientometrics, Vol. 76, 3, 483–501.
• Varblane U. and Tamm D., 2007. “Development of the Systemic Approach to Innovation”. In: Carayannis, E.G., Varblane, U. and Roolaht, T. (Eds.), Innovation Systems in Small Catching-Up Economies: Innovation, Technology and Knowledge Management 15, Springer Science & Business Media, pp.3-19.
• Teixeira A.C. 2013. “Evolution, roots and influence of the literature on National Systems of Innovation: a bibliometric account”, Cambridge Journal of Economics, 8, 1-34.