The relationships between science, technologies and their industrial exploitation: An illustration through the myths and realities of the so-called ‘European Paradox’
By Giovanni Dosi, Patrick Llerena, Mauro Sylos Labini. 2006
479 citations recorded by the source corpus.
Subfields: Management of Technology and Innovation, Strategy and Management
View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/7d2de5467459d7ce30205916ec74d5d0e80525c8
How researchers see this paper
The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.
In Management of Technology and Innovation
- K. Hussinger
- Cédric Schneider
- Ross Brown
- Dirk Czarnitzki
- Thomas Scherngell
- Colin Mason
- Daniele Archibugi
- Andrea Filippetti
In Strategy and Management
- Koen Frenken
- Andrea Filippetti
- Bart Verspagen
- R. Crescenzi
- Jarno Hoekman
- Robert J. W. Tijssen
- Victor A. Gilsing
- Colin Mason
Citations in the corpus
- Is the Economic Crisis Impairing Convergence in Innovation Performance Across Europe (2011, background): “…by a homogeneous labour market, is a fundamental driver of the diffusion of knowledge generated in specific areas across the country (Barca, 2009; Zimmermann 1995, 2005).12 10 For a comparison of the EU and the United States, see Crescenzi et al. (2007); Dosi et al. (2006); Commission (2009c).”
- Knowledge Flows, Patent Citations and the Impact of Science on Technology (2008, background): “, 2006 , summarize this argument and discuss it critically).”
- The territorial dynamics of innovation: a Europe-United States Comparative Analysis (2007, methodology): “On the one hand, s Dosi et al. (2006) point out, “the usual claim concerning the higher share of publicly funded R&D in the EU as compared to the US is simply groundless”(p.1456): government financed R&D expenditure as a percentage of GDP was 0.66% in the EU-25 against 0.70% in the US (in 2003 and…”
- The territorial dynamics of innovation in China and India (2012, unknown): “In the ‘mature’ systems and as mentioned by earlier research (Dosi et al., 2006; Crescenzi et al., 2007), patenting is more territorially concentrated in the US than in the EU.3 In the ‘emerging’ systems, the six highestpatenting regions in China account for a bigger share of innovative activity…”
- In Defence of the Linear Model: An Essay (2010, background): “And in fact, on the same grounds, opposite conclusions can be and are reached (David and Hall 2006, Mazzoleni and Nelson 1998, Dosi et al. 2006).”
- Inside the high-tech black box: A critique of technology entrepreneurship policy (2014, background): “Despite a lack of concrete evidence, policy makers at various spatial levels view R&D support as a central mechanism for fuelling productivity growth within their respective jurisdictions (Dosi et al., 2006; Coad, 2009; Mazzucato, 2013).”
- Knowledge diffusion and innovation policies within the European regions: Challenges based on recent empirical evidence (2013, unknown): “Indeed, according to Dosi et al. (2006), the “European Paradox” would not be global, European paradoxes would appear at the two extremes, with weaknesses in both the scientific research systems and the corporate industries.”
- University Patenting in Germany before and after 2002: What Role Did the Professors' Privilege Play? (2012, background): “KEY WORDS: University patenting, technology transfer, professors’ privilege, Germany”
- Industry Funding of University Research and Scientific Productivity (2011, unknown): “…innovations is not yet fully exploited and thus believe that there is still room for improving the (social) returns from academic research (European Commission 2003a,b; OECD 2007; Dosi et al. 2006), others are concerned with the distraction of academics from their actual research mission.”
- Differences in technology transfer between science-based and development based industries: transfer mechanisms and barriers (2011, background): “In addition, such a more generic policy approach offers the requisite freedom for practitioners and lowers the potential risk of government failure that may be associated with specific, targeted policy instruments (Metcalfe, 1995; Dosi et al., 2006).”