1 / 26

Manuel João de Albuquerque Rocha Pereira Bóia mjboia@dem.ist.utl.pt

Determinants of Innovation in Portugal. Designing, Implementing and Analyzing Evidence from the 3 rd Community Innovation Survey (1). Manuel João de Albuquerque Rocha Pereira Bóia mjboia@dem.ist.utl.pt Orientador: Doutor Pedro Filipe Teixeira da Conceição

cade
Télécharger la présentation

Manuel João de Albuquerque Rocha Pereira Bóia mjboia@dem.ist.utl.pt

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Determinants of Innovation in Portugal.Designing, Implementing and Analyzing Evidence from the 3rd Community Innovation Survey (1) Manuel João de Albuquerque Rocha Pereira Bóia mjboia@dem.ist.utl.pt Orientador: Doutor Pedro Filipe Teixeira da Conceição Instituto Superior Técnico – Universidade Técnica de Lisboa 3 September 2003 (1)the research reported in this thesis was partially supported by Observatorio da Ciencia e do Ensino Superior (OCES) [Obervatory of Science and Higher Education, Ministry for Science and Higher Education, Portugal]

  2. Outline • Objective • The Community Innovation Survey (1) • Results, • Innovative Enterprises by Sector and CIS Trajectories in the European Context • Input vs. Output of Innovation in Europe • A regression analysis of the CIS III data • Other Strategic and Organizational Important Changes • Innovation Sources • Innovation Barriers • Lessons Learned and Conclusions (1) Performed under contract with the Observatório das Ciências e Tecnologias (OCT – Sciences and Technologies Observatory, and since early 2003, Observatório das Ciências e do Ensino Superior, Sciences and Higher Education Observatory - OCES) within the Center for Innovation, Technology and Policy Research at Instituto Superior Técnico (IN+/IST) and primary sources of the analyzed data.

  3. 1. • Objective • To contribute to the characterization of the Determinants of Innovation in Portugal through the Design, Implementation and Evidence Analysis of the Third Community Innovation Survey (1998-2000) and the analysis of the EU countries Innovation Trajectories from CIS II to CIS III.

  4. CIS 3 2.1 Portugal • Survey Target Population • All Manufacturing and Service firms with more than 10 employees • Survey Sample • Initial Sample: 4727 firms stratified by firm size and sector (INE–1999 Data) • Corrected sample: 4127 firms • Sectors Surveyed • Mining and Quarrying, all Manufacturing, Utilities, Wholesale Trade and a selection of industries in the Service Sector

  5. CIS 3 2.2 Portugal • Innovation Definition Used: • Market introduction of a product (Good or Service) new or significantly improved, or the introduction of new or significantly improved processes, based on new technological developments, new combinations of existing technologies or on the use of other type of knowledge acquired. • The innovation should be new to the company and not necessarily to the market.

  6. Companies Characteristics Innovation Extension Companies Options Systemic Characteristics CIS 3 2.3 Portugal • Questionnaire • Harmonized questionnaire (the same for Services and Manufacturing and other industries) • Questions regarding: • General Information • Basic Economic Information • Product and Process Innovation • Patents and Other Protection Methods • Innovation Activities and Expenditure • Intramural R & D • Other Strategic and Organizational Important Changes • Effects of Innovation • Public Funding • Innovation Co-operation • Sources of Information for Innovation • Hampered Innovation Activity

  7. (2) (1) CIS III (Preliminary) • For comparison with the data of 1995-1997 some Sub sectors (NACE 63, 73, 74.3 e 64 except 64.2) and the manufacturing companies in between 10 and 20 employees which were part of the CIS 3 survey are not considered • (2) Includes the results not considered in (1). • Note: Final disaggregated and comparable results are not yet available for the other participants in the exercise. 3.1 • Results - Innovative Enterprises by Sector and CIS Trajectories in the European Context 100% 80% Proportion of Service Innovating Enterprises Ireland 60% Austria Luxemburg Germany CIS II UK 40% Netherlands France Sweden Portugal Italy Finland Norway 20% Belgium 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Proportion of Manufacturing Innovating Enterprises

  8. CIS III (Preliminary) 3.2 • Results – Input vs. Output of Innovation in Europe Manufacturing Sector 80% Ireland Germany Austria Netherlands 60% UK Sweden Norway France Porportion of Innovative Enterprises CIS II 40% Finland Belgium Portugal 20% 0% 0.0% 2.0% 4.0% 6.0% 8.0% Expenditure in Innovating Activities as Share of Turnover

  9. Logistic Regression (Manufacturing) Source: (Conceição and Heitor, 2002; Conceição et al., 2003) Logistic Regression (Manufacturing) 3.3 • Results - A regression analysis of the CIS III data Model on the Characteristics of Innovative Manufacturing Enterprises by Conceição and Heitor • Dependent variable: Innovation, dichotomous (1 if a firm innovates, 0 otherwise) • Explanatory variables: • integration into a Group • firm dimension (Log of number of employees) • technology intensity (divided in two dummy variables High/Medium-High and Medium Low)

  10. 3.4 • Results - Other Strategic and Organizational Changes

  11. 3.5 • Results - Innovation Sources of Highly Importance for Manufacturing

  12. 3.6 • Results - Innovation Barriers of Highly Importance

  13. 4.1 • Lessons Learned from the CIS III Implementation: • Unreliable Initial Sample (1999 Data) • Non-Enforcement of the Policy regarding Mandatory Surveys • Biased General perception of Innovation Definition (“Radical” Innovation) • Services misperception of Innovation Definition (Product and/or Goods) • Non-Disclosure Policy of Financial Data • Lack of Qualifications of the Questionnaire Filling Contact Person (“Cultural” bias towards Non Response or Non Innovation) • Lack of correspondence between the surveyed data/indicators and Companies data/indicators gathering. • Mergers and Acquisitions (Availability of Contact Person and Data) • Huge paperwork! • In Data Processing, • High values of “Item Non-response” in some strata (CAE 2 Digits*Dimension) of the realized sample for some variables,”Exports Sales”, “Innovation Expenditure”, “Level of importance in Cooperation”, “Innovation Hampering Factors (partially)” and Patents • Unreliable missing values imputation methodology and routines provided by Eurostat, surpassed in cooperation with other member states.

  14. 4.2 • Lessons Learned and Conclusions: • The CIS is a good evolving instrument for benchmarking and follow up of the best practices, although incomplete in what concerns the systemic characteristics of innovation. • A significant increase in the innovation extension and in the firms innovation expenditure was achieved for Portugal in CIS III compared to CIS II. • In the innovation process, both sources and barriers to innovation profiles remain consistent with the CIS II data, where the most relevant are respectively “Within the Enterprise” and financial constraints. • Innovation expenditure has reached a milestone above which innovation effectiveness appears to be more correlated with factors of systemic nature. • Technological innovation appears to be strongly correlated with Organizational Innovation and Change.

  15. Determinants of Innovation in Portugal.Designing, implementing and Analyzing Evidence from the 3rd Community Innovation Survey Manuel João de Albuquerque Rocha Pereira Bóia mjboia@dem.ist.utl.pt Orientador: Doutor Pedro Filipe Teixeira da Conceição Instituto Superior Técnico – Universidade Técnica de Lisboa 3 September 2003

  16. Additional Slides

  17. CIS 3 Portugal • Survey • Start date: October 2001 • Sample verification and validation (Name and Address) and identification of a contact person • Mailing of Questionnaire with innovations examples and a postage free envelope for replying (fax reply also accepted) • Systematic phone reminders plus two fax reminders and an additional questionnaire re-mailing • Support is provided on working days by phone, fax or e-mail by a multidisciplinary team of 6 trained staff people • End date --> 15th April 2002

  18. CIS 3 Portugal • Response Rates • Small – 10 to 49 Employees • Medium – 50 to 249 Employees • Large - over 250 Employees

  19. Results - Innovation Extension

  20. Results – Product and Process Innovation Product and Process Innovation Product Innovation Process Innovation

  21. Results - Innovation by Firm Size

  22. CIS 3 Portugal

  23. Results – Innovation by Technological Intensity (Manufacturing)

  24. Results - Innovation Sources of Highly Importance for Services

  25. Results - Patenting Clear characteristic: the Portuguese companies ignore or do not choose to use patenting as a protection tool

  26. Results – Other Protection Methods Used

More Related