Persistence of innovation: stylised facts and panel data evidence

By Bettina Peters. 2009

379 citations recorded by the source corpus.

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/af26381e3166542898a6b8f0ef2dbd1b26dd184e

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

Citations in the corpus

Innovation and Firm Growth: Is R&D Worth It? (2012, background): “Persistence in innovative activities, in particular patenting, has been widely discussed in the literature with the main emphasis centred on the existence and nature of innovative persistence and the reasons behind it (Cefis, 2003; Geroski et al. 1997; Peters, 2009).”
Open, Semi-Open and Closed Innovators: Towards an Explanation of Degree of Openness (2010, background): “This heterogeneity has been shown empirically to have a profound effect on the firm's decision to invest in innovation (Peters, 2009 ; Griffiths and Webster, 2010 ) and, arguably, might also influence decisions related to the degree of openness.”
The effects of R&D tax credits on patenting and innovations (2012, background): “Some recent examples include Wallsten (2000), who examined the U.”
‘Better late than never’: the interplay between green technology and age for firm growth (2017, background): “This also helps reduce, at least partially, the possible confounding effect of the persistency in technological leadership (Denicolò, 2001) on firm growth, which cannot be addressed by controlling for unobserved heterogeneity (Peters 2009).”
Using Innovation Surveys for Econometric Analysis (2010, neutral): “Peters (2009) finds persistence in innovation activities, that is, on the input side.”
Contradictory yet Coherent? Inconsistency in Performance Feedback and R&D Investment Change (2018, background): “First, studies using structural models report that levels of R&D intensity (R&D spending relative to sales) are rather stable over time and that most of the variance can be attributed to differences across industries (Máñez-Castillejo, RochinaBarrachina, Sanchis, & Sanchis, 2009; Peters, 2009).”
The dynamics of trade and innovation: a joint approach (2009, background): “Peters (2007) also emphasizes a kind of “success breads success” effect as an important factor to explain why state dependence is expected for innovation, suggesting that successful innovations stimulate subsequent innovations due to increasing market power or broader technological opportunities.”
Economic crisis and innovation: Is destruction prevailing over accumulation? (2013, positive): “, 1997; Cefis and Orsenigo, 2001), and innovation survey data (Peters, 2007; Roper and HewittDundas, 2008; Antonelli et al., 2010), confirmed that there are several industries where the innovators of today were also innovators in the past.”
R&D Partnerships and Innovation Performance: Can There Be Too Much of a Good Thing? (2016, methodology): “Control variables We follow the literature and control for a series of firm characteristics that have been shown to impact innovation performance (see e.g., Peters 2009; Un at al.”
Inside Innovation Persistence: New Evidence From Italian Micro-Data (2012, positive): “Finally, Peters (2009) provides strong evidence in favour of persistence of innovation activities both in terms of innovations inputs, in terms of R&D activities, and innovation outputs as measured by the number of innovation introduced by German manufacturing and service firms in the years…”
Innovation as a driver of eco‐innovation in the firm: An approach from the dynamic capabilities theory (2020, positive): “This is consistent with recent studies on the persistence of technological innovations (Peters, 2009; Sapprasert and Clausen, 2012; Tavassoli and Karlsson, 2015), which consider the innovation process as a process of “creative accumulation”, whereby knowledge obtained from past innovation fosters…”
Innovation and exporting: evidence from Spanish manufacturing firms (2010, positive): “The literature analyzing the innovation activities of firms has shown that firms’ innovation activity tends to be highly persistent and that firms that innovate one period tend to innovate once again the next period (e.g. Peters, 2009).”