The formation of Coasean institutions to provide university knowledge for innovation: a case study and econometric evidence for Switzerland

Author:

Foray Dominique,Woerter MartinORCID

Abstract

Abstract“Coasean” institutions are an alternative institutional form that provides a solution to some market and coordination failures. As such they can weaken considerably the case for public subsidies in a vast range of context. They are “market-based” and an inexpensive way to address the public good issues of R&D. They are, however, a largely overlooked institutional option. Early theoretical notions emphasize the advantages of such an institutional setting, however, broader empirical evidence about their effectiveness is lacking. We apply two different empirical approaches to assess the relationship between “Coasean” institutions and the innovation performance of SMEs. In a case study, we investigate Inspire AG, a successful bottom-up, institutional invention in the spirit of a “Coasean” institution. To assess the general validity of this model, we use representative firm-level data to econometrically investigate the relationship between “Coasean” institutions and the sales share of innovative products. “Coasean” institutions are positively related with innovative sales only if the company has a sufficiently large absorptive capacity for external knowledge. This positive moderating effect of “Coasean” institutions for the innovation performance is larger for SMEs. Our empirical findings provide a strong case for policies aimed at encouraging the operation of this type of institution.

Funder

Swiss Federal Institute of Technology Zurich

Publisher

Springer Science and Business Media LLC

Subject

General Engineering,Accounting,Business and International Management

Reference43 articles.

1. Aghion, P., David, P. A., & Foray, D. (2009). Science, technology and innovation for economic growth: linking policy research and practice in ‘STIG systems’. Research Policy, 38(4), 681.

2. Agrawal, A. (2001). University-to-industry knowledge transfer: Literature review and unanswered questions. International Journal of Management Reviews, 3(4), 285–302.

3. Antonelli, C., & Patrucco, P. (2016). Organizational innovations, ICTs and knowledge governance: the case of platforms. In Johannes M. Bauer & Michael Latzer (Eds.), Handbook on the Economics of the Internet, chapter 15 (pp. 323–343). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing.

4. Antonelli, C., & Foray, D. (1992). The economics of technological clubs. Economics of Innovation and New Technology, 2(1), 37–47.

5. Arvanitis S., F.Seliger, A.Spescha, T. Stucki, & Woerter, M. (2016). Die Entwicklung der Innovationsaktivitäten in der Schweizer Wirtschaft 1997–2014, Strukturberichterstattung Nr. 55, Staatssekretariat für Wirtschaft SECO, Bern, Schweiz.

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3