Technological paradigms, regimes and trajectories: Manufacturing and service industries in a new taxonomy of sectoral patterns of innovation

Abstract

The paper presents a new sectoral taxonomy that combines manufacturing and service industries within the same general framework. This exercise is relevant because it seeks to achieve a greater integration between the study of sectoral patterns of innovation in manufacturing and services, and to point out the increasing importance of vertical linkages and inter-sectoral knowledge exchanges between these interrelated branches of the economy. The empirical relevance of the new taxonomy is illustrated with reference to the innovative activities and economic performance of manufacturing and service industries in Europe. This empirical evidence, which presents fresh results from the Fourth Community Innovation Survey, supports the relevance of the taxonomy by showing the great variety of sectoral patterns of innovation in European industries.

Do the effects of R&D tax credits vary across industries? A meta-regression analysis

“…Its estimated coefficient (positive in table 4 and negative in table 5) indicates that those studies that have run regressions on a subsample of manufacturing companies (i.e. excluding service firms) have on average obtained a greater estimated effect of fiscal incentives to R&D. This result is not surprising, since the innovation literature has often pointed out that the bulk of R&D activities is concentrated in manufacturing industries, whereas enterprises in the service sectors innovate through a variety of different strategies among which R&D is certainly not the dominant mode (Castellacci, 2008). It is therefore reasonable to infer that service firms are less responsive to R&D policy schemes than manufacturing companies.…”

“…This is in other words a measure of the so-called pervasiveness of the new technologies produced in sector j, indicating whether they have widespread impacts throughout the whole economic system or rather weak effects on a limited set of related industries. Besides the degree of novelty of the new technologies, sectoral pervasiveness also depends on the position of each industry in the economic system, and the function it plays: upstream industries producing advanced knowledge are likely to lead to stronger spillover effects in the whole economy than downstream (supplier-dominated) industries (Pavitt, 1984;Castellacci, 2008).…”

“…One important result in this literature is that some sectors have a high degree of pervasiveness, and hence a strong knowledge spillover potential (the parameter δ j in equation 7), thus playing a central role as key drivers of the whole economic system. In particular, upstream industries that produce advanced technological knowledge are likely to lead to stronger spillover effects throughout the whole economy than downstream (supplier-dominated) industries (Pavitt, 1984;Castellacci, 2008). In terms of the effectiveness of R&D policy, this would imply that the spillover effects that R&D tax credits in sector j have on all other industries k of the economy should be expected to be substantially stronger for upstream knowledge intensive industries (e.g.…”

Determinants of Innovation and Productivity in the Service Sector in Mexico

“…This paper contributes to the literature by looking explicitly at services firms, while results for manufacturing firms provide some benchmark to our discussion. For the sake of comparability with other country cases in the larger study, we adopted a conventional taxonomy of firms, namely hightechnology (high-tech) and low-technology (low-tech) manufacturing industries on the one hand, and Knowledge Intensive Business Services (KIBS) and traditional services on the other (Hipp and Grupp 2005, Tether and Takhar 2008, Castellacci 2008.…”

Twenty Challenges for Innovation Studies

“…18 And there have been a few high-impact studies focussing on innovation in services (e.g. Evangelista, 2000;Tether, 2005;Castellacci, 2008). 19 In the 1950s, it took around two hours to prepare each meal whereas the average figure now is a matter of minutes (The Economist, 2003;Pelupessy & Van Kempen, 2005, p.360).…”