Catching up to the technology frontier: the dichotomy between innovation and imitation

Abstract

Using data for 55 developing and developed countries, this research examines the roles of technology transfer, research intensity, educational attainment, and the ability to absorb foreign technology in explaining cross-country differences in productivity growth. The results show that innovation is an important factor for growth in OECD countries, whereas growth in developing countries is driven by imitation. Furthermore, the interaction between educational attainment and the distance to the frontier is a significant determinant of growth in the overall sample. JEL classification: O30, O40 Se rapprocher de la frontière technologique: la dichotomie entre innovation et imitation.. A l'aide de données pour 55 pays développés et en développement, on examine les rôles du transfert de technologie, de l'intensité de recherche, du niveau d'éducation, et de l'habiletéà absorber la technologieétrangère dans l'explication desécarts entre pays dans la croissance de la productivité. Les résultats montrent que l'innovation est un facteur important dans la croissance des pays de l'OCDE alors que la croissance des pays en développement est animée par l'imitation. De plus, l'interaction entre le niveau d'éducation et la distance de la frontière est un facteur déterminant et significatif de la croissance dans tout l'échantillon.

Intellectual Property Rights, Migration and Diaspora

“…In line with the predictions of our theoretical model (see condition (29)), this confirms that emigration fosters innovation through diaspora, as long as the IPRs regime is strong. It is important to point out that, even if we could interpret this result as the interaction between IPRs and diaspora, there could be other explanations of why IPRs foster innovation.…”

“…29 As the results show, the coefficients of our three main variables of interest remain significant and of the same sign as in the baseline specification: migration is negative and significant, IPRs protection is negative and significant and the interaction term between migration and IPRs protection is positive and significant. 30 …”

“…At the same time, there is a negative and significant effect of IPRs on patents, suggesting that IPRs protection by itself does not increase domestic innovation in developing countries (Qin, 2007). This effect could also be due to the fact that a high degree of IPRs protection reduces the propensity to innovate by blocking essential technological spillovers that in developing countries are only possible through imitation (Madsen et al, 2010). Nevertheless, key to our analysis is the interaction term between migration and IPRs protection, which reveals to be highly significant and positive.…”

R&D Policy and Schumpeterian Growth: Theory and Evidence

“…Consistent results are obtained by Madsen (2010) in a growth-regression analysis conducted on a sample of OECD countries since the Second Industrial Revolution onwards. Similarly, Madsen et al (2010b) consider the role of distance to frontier to quantify the impact of imitation and innovation in productivity growth of OECD and non-OECD member states. Furthermore, Madsen et al (2010c) extend this kind of analyses to development issues, looking at the uptake of Indian economy.…”

Does Skill-Biased Technical Change Diffuse Internationally?

“…On the other hand, ample evidence is provided that the ability to absorb external knowledge depends very much on characteristics of the recipient entity, so called absorptive capacities. For example, the rate of technology diffusion seems the higher, the more intense an entity's own research efforts are (Griffith, Redding, andVan Reenen 2004, Madsen, Islam, andAng 2010). 3 Since the ability to absorb external knowledge is usually higher in more developed countries, this effect might offset the higher theoretical diffusion potential.…”