Modelling the innovation value chain

By S. Roper, Jun Du, J. Love. 2008

756 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Economics and Econometrics, Political Science and International Relations

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/089854b87b407cd2a7e84252507f8bbf4af1b836

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Economics and Econometrics

1. J. Love
2. S. Roper
3. P. Ganotakis
4. Nola Hewitt-Dundas
5. J. Bourke
6. Helen McGuirk
7. Helena Lenihan
8. J. Doran

In Political Science and International Relations

1. J. Love
2. S. Roper
3. P. Ganotakis
4. Pierre Mohnen
5. W. Raymond
6. J. Foreman-Peck
7. G. van Leeuwen
8. M. Polder

Citations in the corpus

• Productivity Growth and Pecuniary Knowledge Externalities: An Empirical Analysis of Agglomeration Economies in European Regions (2011, background): “…and empirical contributions on the complementarity between internal and external knowledge inputs, see, for instance, Zahra and George, 2002; Roper, Du, and Love, 2008; and Love and Roper, 2009, who elaborated, further developed, and tested the original intuition by Cohen and Levinthal…”
• Differentiating the effects of the institutional environment on corporate entrepreneurship (2011, background): “The cognitive dimension can exert pressure on an organisation to become more innovative, but it is also necessary for creative ideas to be generated and shared within an organisation (Roper et al., 2008).”
• High-growth firms and productivity: evidence from the United Kingdom (2015, background): “2010), R&D and innovation (Roper et al. 2008).”
• Export propensity, export intensity and firm performance: The role of the entrepreneurial founding team (2012, methodology): “Models of this type are typically estimated either by tobit (e.g. Love and Mansury 2007; Roper et al 2008) or by the quasi-likelihood estimation method for fractional dependent variables suggested by Papke and Wooldridge (1996) (Wagner, 2001)9.”
• Innovation, quality management and learning: Short-term and longer-term effects (2017, background): “Numerous scholars have attempted to explain why some firms are more likely to innovate, with firm characteristics, such as size, sector, ownership, and location being identified as influential drivers of innovation output (Audretsch and Feldman, 1996; Boschma, 2005; Gordon and McCann, 2005; Jordan a”
• Costs and Benefits of Inter-Departmental Innovation Collaboration (2011, background): “In order to measure the benefits of inter-departmental innovation collaboration the survey offers a variety of different innovation indicators tapping product as well as process innovation, a distinction often deemed critical (Pittaway et al., 2004; Roper et al., 2008).”
• Research and Development, Cash Flow, Agency and Governance: UK large companies (2012, background): “Some estimates suggest that in the UK, R&D accounts for only about half of all innovation inputs (Bulli 2008; Roper et al 2008).”
• The role of state ownership and institutions in the innovation performance of emerging market enterprises: Evidence from China (2017, background): “their R&D resource base, generate synergies and complementarities between public R&D and the firm’s internal R&D (Roper et al., 2008), and thus help them develop valuable and rare technological combinations.”
• Openness and Innovation Performance: Are Small Firms Different? (2014, background): “…gained from alternative sources tends to be complementary, and also complementary with firms’ internal knowledge in shaping innovation performance (Roper, Du, and Love 2008; Cassiman and Veugelers 2006).2 Having more or more different types of external linkages may therefore both increase the…”
• R&D, product innovation, and exporting: evidence from UK new technology based firms (2011, background): “…R&D and economic output and growth (Guellec and van Pottelsberghe, 2004), previous studies for Ireland and Switzerland have found no evidence of university links having a positive effect on innovation at the firm level (Jordan and O’Leary, 2007; Roper et al, 2008; Roper and Arvanitis, 2009).”
• Learning from openness: The dynamics of breadth in external innovation linkages (2014, background): “In addition, empirical evidence suggests that knowledge gained from different types of linkages generates complementarities both between external linkages and with firms’ internal R&D (Roper, Du, and Love, 2008).”
• Entrepreneurial leadership, capabilities and firm growth (2015, background): “Human capital, intellectual property and organizational knowledge represent different forms of intellectual asset stocks that promote the capacity to learn and profit from alliances and acquisitions (e.g. Hayton and Zahra, 2005; Roper et al., 2008; Zahra and Hayton, 2008) and are supportive of innov”
• Learning by exporting: Lessons from high-technology SMEs (2013, methodology): “Recent work on the ‘innovation value chain’ has shown that knowledge inputs from direct collaborative relationships with a variety of sources can have a positive impact on innovation (Roper et al 2008, Ganotakis and Love 2009).”
• Openness, knowledge, innovation and growth in UK business services (2011, methodology): “…of customers’ preferences in shaping the commercial success of firms’ innovation and Edvardsson et al (2010) have highlighted the importance of integrating customers in to the service innovation process, while Roper et al. (2008) emphasise the greater value of supplier linkages for process change.”
• Output Additionality of Public Support for Innovation: Evidence for Irish Manufacturing Plants (2010, background): “…to promote skill development are therefore likely to be doubly effective in increasing wealth creation both by promoting innovation directly (Freel, 2005) and by increasing the effectiveness with which innovation activity is commercially exploited and knowledge absorbed (Roper et al., 2008).”