Innovation and Employment: a Reinvestigation using Revised Pavitt classes

By Francesco Bogliacino, Mario Pianta. 2010

298 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Economics and Econometrics, Management of Technology and Innovation

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/eb7cf07a9829ffec2b0e38997a445b9c61bdde0f

Citations in the corpus

• Innovation Strategies and Employment in Latin American Firms (2012, unknown): “The hypotheses have been empirically corroborated at the microlevel for firms in both developed and developing countries (Harrison et al., 2008; Bogliacino and Pianta, 2010; Crespi and Tacsir, 2011; Vivarelli, 2011).”
• Innovation, employment growth, and foreign ownership of firms (2014, unknown): “First, innovation and technology are major drivers for employment growth of firms (Bogliacino and Pianta, 2010; Harrison et al., 2008; Pianta, 2005).”
• The Job Creation Effect of R&D Expenditures (2012, unknown): “…of previous evidence using manufacturing and services together (using CIS cross-sectional sectoral data on relevant innovations for different European countries), Bogliacino and Pianta (2010) find a positive employment impact of product innovation (against a negative one of process innovation)5.”
• Innovation, Employment and Skills in Advanced and Developing Countries: A Survey of the Literature (2011, unknown): “Taking manufacturing and services jointly into account (using CIS cross-sectional sectoral data on relevant innovations for different European countries), Bogliacino and Pianta (2010) find a positive employment impact of product innovation (against a negative one of process innovation).”
• Innovation, Employment and Skills in Advanced and Developing Countries: A Survey of Economic Literature (2014, unknown): “Taking manufacturing and services jointly into account (using CIS cross-sectional sectoral data on relevant innovations for different European countries), Bogliacino and Pianta (2010) find a positive employment impact of product innovation (against a negative one of process innovation).”
• Environmental innovation and employment dynamics in different technology fields – an analysis based on the German Community Innovation Survey 2009 (2013, unknown): “In a recent analysis, Bogliacino and Pianta (2010) use a sectoral database including CIS data from 1994 to 2004 for eight European countries.”
• Technological change and employment: is Europe ready for the challenge? (2018, unknown): “In the current debate, various studies (Freeman et al. 1982; Freeman and Soete 1994, 1987; Vivarelli and Pianta 2000; Edquist et al. 2001; Bogliacino and Pianta 2010) agree that product innovations have a positive impact on employment since they open the way to the production of either entire new…”
• Embodied and disembodied technological change: The sectoral patterns of job-creation and job-destruction (2019, unknown): “With this purpose in mind, we follow a refined Pavitt (1984) taxonomy, as in Bogliacino and Pianta (2010).”
• Inverted-U relationship between R&D intensity and survival : evidence on scale and complementarity effects in UK data. (2016, unknown): “a Pavitt technology classes are from Pavitt (1984), as revised slightly by Bogliacino and Pianta (2010).”
• Profits, R&D and Innovation: a Model and a Test - IPTS WORKING PAPER on CORPORATE R&D AND INNOVATION - No. 5/2010 (2010, unknown): “In our model we will include these two dimensions of innovative activities (Pianta, 2001; Bogliacino and Pianta, 2009b,2010).3 Second, we avoid being confined to supply side mechanisms alone by also considering the dynamics of demand, proxied by value added growth.”
• THE INNOVATION†EMPLOYMENT NEXUS: A CRITICAL SURVEY OF THEORY AND EMPIRICS (2016, unknown): “Bogliacino and Pianta (2010) further investigate the relationship between innovation and employment at industry-level in eight European countries, between 1994 and 2004 using CIS 2, 3 and 4 data.”
• The impact of the economic crisis on innovation: Evidence from Europe (2013, unknown): “Our proxies for types of innovations reveal that throughout the three periods, firms that increase investment in innovation are less likely to compete on cost, than they are to compete on innovations (confirming similar results previously reported by Bogliacino and Pianta, 2010).”