Persistence of innovation patterns according to innovation types

• Autor(a) principal: Braga, Diana Cura
• Data de Publicação: 2017
• Tipo de documento: Dissertação
• Idioma: eng
• Título da fonte: Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)
• Texto Completo: http://hdl.handle.net/10773/25250
• topic: Innovation persistence; Innovation types; Random effects dynamic probit

The role of innovation in economic growth is widely explored, thus, in the last decades it has been understood that along with innovation per se, one must address the continuity of these behaviours over time. Analysing the details of innovation persistence helps in the understanding of firm dynamics, effectiveness of policy actions, raising productivity and prosperity generation. Persistence of innovation is empirically explored using technological innovation, and continuity of innovative behaviours in the same innovation type; non-technological innovation types are somehow neglected and, the existing literature may not apply to the innovation types in a generalised manner and iterative persistence of innovation has not been detailed so far. Understanding the specific characteristics of each innovation type will grant the design of fine tuning policy actions accommodating the array of particularities. Moreover, the effect of the absorptive capacity and the open innovation strategy has not been connected to the innovation types by the existing literature. The present thesis analyses persistence of innovation using a dynamic panel comprising 2147 firms operating in all economic sectors in Portugal, observed from 2008 to 2014, covering three editions of the Portuguese Community Innovation Survey (CIS). Using the random effects probit model, conventional hypothesis of persistence hypothesis is supported for interactive process innovation, reinforcing the specific characteristics of each innovation type. That fact that only a small number of firms are persistent in the technological types of innovation seems to prove that policy programs financing the same innovation type will fail to boost future innovation. The results point to intermittence in innovative behaviors in the different innovation types, however, process innovation presents a different pattern from all others. The open innovation strategy seems to reinforce intermittence and public funds are helpful only for technological innovations; there is a scale effect reinforcing persistence. Therefore, is seems rational to encourage differentiated public policies targeting the different innovation types avoiding the one size fits all approaches in use at present.