Measuring Innovation Performance of Developing Regions: Learning and Catch-Up in Provinces of Iran

Abstract

Common innovation performance measures, which are based on research and development activities, are not relevant to dominant innovation behaviour of developing countries. The main functions of the innovation system of developing countries are capture, imitation, learning by doing and diffusion of knowledge, to reduce technology gaps with technology frontiers. Hence, the purpose of measuring innovation performance in a developing geographical area should be the evaluation on its success in technological learning and catching-up. Using the learning and technology gap concepts, in this paper we develop a novel model of measuring innovation performance of developing countries/regions, based on common regional statistics. In the virtual absence of mandatory firm level surveys, this model can provide a useful method to compare the innovation behaviour of regions for policymaker. Running the model with the data from the Iranian provinces, the paper concludes each province has its own specific innovation behaviour stemming from different historical development paths and geographical characteristics.

The Impact of Interplay between Formal and Informal Institutions on Innovation Performance: Evidence from CEECs

“…This study uses methods and variables connected with the aim of the research and with regard to the proposed concept of the relationship between formal and informal institutions and innovation performance. Moreover, Ghazinoory et al (2014) highlight the fact that the method and the selection of the proxy variables are influenced by the researcher's approach to the definition of the concept of innovation or innovation performance.…”

“…Researchers have until now focused on: i) the regional innovation process (Rodriguez, 2014); ii) the innovation capacity of small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) (Dukic et al, 2015) or industrial structure in innovation capacity (Zdrazil et al, 2016); iii) the innovation ecosystem (Jucevicius et al, 2016); iv) open innovation policies (Sekliuckiene et al, 2016); v) the innovation environment and innovation activities of strong, moderate or modest innovators among CEECs (Prokop & Stejskal, 2017); vi) innovative SMEs (Belas et al, 2017); vii) pro-innovation factors (Kraftova & Kraft, 2018); viii) the impact of human resources, research networks, the institutional environment, public or private expenditures on research and development (European Commission, 2019a); or ix) measuring the innovation performance of developed and developing regions (Ghazinoory et al, 2014). Others focused on confirming the impact of formal or informal institutions on innovation performance in various countries.…”

Building absorptive capacity through firm openness in the context of a less-open country

“…We selected this context for multiple reasons. First, operating in an emerging economy, Iranian firms have strong motivation to acquire knowledge from external sources, in order to develop their own performance, and gain the capabilities necessary to compete in the global market (Ghazinoory, Riahi, Azar, & Miremadi, 2014). While the funding allocated by the Iranian government has yielded an increase from 82 researchers per million residents to 1500 researchers per million during the past three decades (Soofi & Ghazinoory, 2011), this support has not been enough to change the traditional Iranian economy into a knowledge-based one (Scaringella & Burtschell, 2015).…”

Can Organisation Capital Improve Corporate Performance Through Direct Path or Mediating Effect Surveillance of Board Function: Evidence From Taiwan?

“…Our research results have broad implications for policy makers. First, the benefits expected to result from organisation innovation and process improvement may have integrated under board function monitor and consult of dynamic capacity (Ghazinoory et al 2014). Moveover, reducing barriers to enforce corporate governance and generating reputation, innovation react to dynamic capacity, which condition the behavior of organisational participants can lead to a significant increase in corporate performance, which is an important driver of a company's competitive advantage and effectiveness.…”

“…Innovation capital (IVCA) is defined as the intellectual property within an organization, which refers to a company's revolutionary capability, innovativeness, and potential build-up of new products and services, including patents, trademarks, know-how and copyrights on the output-side, and employees and organizational investments in new product development on the input-side (Ghazinoory et al 2014).…”