Research background: Innovation is an important determinant of economic development, and its importance is growing with the advancement of digitization and the development of the Fourth Industrial Revolution. In turn, the assessment of the innovativeness of a country’s economy affects its investment attractiveness and international image.
Purpose of this study: Given the factors presented above, the main aim of this study is to explore and compare the innovativeness of European economies in the context of the modified European Innovation Scoreboard.
Methods: To achieve this goal, the authors propose two key modifications of the existing innovation assessment methodology contained in the European Innovation Scoreboard. The first concerns the principles of the normalization of assessment indicators and aims to eliminate extreme assessment values. The second proposes to remove the indicators which are difficult to measure, subjective, and not always useful: (1) those related to sustainable development (resource productivity; emissions of fine particulates; and environment-related technologies) and (2) those that take into account only small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs introducing product innovations; SMEs introducing business process innovations; and innovative SMEs collaborating with others).
Findings & value added: An alternative approach to assessing the innovativeness of the analyzed countries — as proposed by the authors — resulted in changes in the ranking of countries in relation to the European Innovation Scoreboard, but the changes were not significant. The major changes concerned Serbia (down four places), Belgium (down two places), Hungary (up three places), and Poland (up two places). In addition, five countries moved up one place in the ranking (the UK, the Netherlands, Luxembourg, Estonia, Slovenia, Spain, and Slovakia), and five lost one place in the ranking (Norway, Italy, Portugal, Greece, and Croatia). Thirteen countries had no changes. The obtained results allowed us to conclude that the countries with the best and the worst innovativeness maintained the assessment level regardless of changes in the methodology of its implementation. The objectification of rules had the strongest impact on the countries in the middle of the ranking. This study draws attention to the problem of the subjectivity of the innovation rankings. It has also been documented that modifying the selection of evaluation criteria may change the final position in the ranking, which, in the case of emerging and developing economies, may affect investor assessment and economic growth opportunities. Such considerations are important because they are outside the often uncritical mainstream approach to the assessment of the innovativeness of economies. The conclusions imply the need for a multisource analysis of innovation and a critical look at the proposed methodologies.
