National Academies Press: OpenBook
« Previous: 8 Key Themes and Possible Next Steps
Suggested Citation:"References." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2017. Advancing Concepts and Models for Measuring Innovation: Proceedings of a Workshop. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/23640.
×

References

Aghion, P., and Howitt, P. (1998). Endogenous Growth Theory. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Amabile, T. (1996). Creativity in Context. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.

Angel Resource Institute. (2014). Angel group update: 2014, The Halo Report™. See https://www.angelcapitalassociation.org/data/Documents/Resources/ARIHaloReport2014FINAL.pdf [August 2016].

Arora, A., Cohen, W.M., and Walsh, J.P. (2016a). The acquisition and commercialization of invention in American manufacturing: Incidence and impact. Research Policy, 45(6), 1113-1128.

Arora, A., Cohen, W.M., and Walsh, J.P. (2016b). Innovation and the sources of invention in American manufacturing. Submitted to Research Policy.

Asheim, B., and Coenen, L. (2005). Knowledge bases and regional innovation systems: Comparing Nordic clusters. Research Policy, 34, 1173-1190. doi:10.1016/j.respol.2005.03.013.

Azoulay, P., Liu, C.C., and Stuart, T.E. (2011). Social Influence Given (partially) Deliberate Matching: Career Imprints in the Creation of Academic Entrepreneurs. Working Paper. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University.

Balsmeier, B., Fleming, L., and Manso, G. (Forthcoming). Independent boards and innovation. Journal of Financial Economics.

Bartling, B., Ernst, F., and Holger, H. (2014, June). The Intrinsic Value of Decision Rights. University of Zurich, Department of Economics Working Paper No. 120. Available: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2255992 [August 2016].

Bascavusoglu-Moreau, E., and Tether, B. (2011). Design Economics Chapter Two: Registered Designs & Business Performance—Exploring the Link. Report commissioned for the Intellectual Property Office, United Kingdom. Available: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/310638/ipresearch-designsreport2-201109.pdf [August 2016].

Bertrand, M., and Schoar, A. (2003). Managing with style: The effect of managers on firm policies. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 118(4), 1169-1208.

Bloch, C., and Bugge, M.M. (2013). Public sector innovation—From theory to measurement. Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, 27(C), 133-145.

Suggested Citation:"References." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2017. Advancing Concepts and Models for Measuring Innovation: Proceedings of a Workshop. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/23640.
×

Bloom, N., and Van Reenen, J. (2007). Measuring and explaining management practices across firms and countries. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 122(4), 1351-1408.

Bloom, N., Sadun, R., and Van Reenan, J. (2012, February). Americans do it better: U.S. multinationals and the productivity miracle. American Economic Review, 102(1), 167-201. doi: 10.1257/aer.102.1.167.

Byrne, D.M., Oliner, S.D., and Sichel, D.E. (2013). Is the information technology revolution over? International Productivity Monitor, 25, 20-36.

Byrne, D.M., Oliner, S.D., and Sichel, D.E. (2015). How Fast Are Semiconductor Prices Falling? AEI Working Paper. Washington, DC: American Enterprise Institute.

Chetty, R., Hendren, N., Kline, P., Saez, E, and Turner, N. (2014, January). Is the United States Still a Land Of Opportunity? Recent Trends in Intergenerational Mobility. NBER Working Paper No. 19844. Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research.

Corrado, C., Goodridge, P., and Haskel, J. (2011). Constructing a Price Deflator for R&D: Calculating the Price of Knowledge Investments as a Residual. Discussion Paper, No. 2011/07. London, UK: Imperial College.

Cutler, D.M., and McClellan, M. (2001). Is technological change in medicine worth it? Health Affairs, 20, 11-29.

Dasgupta, P., and David, P. (1994). Towards a new economics of science. Research Policy, 23(5), 487-521.

DeBruyn, J. (2015). GSK’s Triangle genealogy. Triangle Business Journal, 3(1), September 4.

Decker, R., Haltiwanger, J., Jarmin, R., and Miranda, J. (2015, March). Where Has All the Skewness Gone? The Decline in High Growth (Young) Firms in the U.S. Available: http://econweb.umd.edu/~decker/DHJM_3_30_2015.pdf [August 2016].

Ederer, F., and Manso, G. (2013). Is pay for performance detrimental to innovation? Management Science, 59, 1496-1513.

Edquist, C., and Zabala-Iturriagagoitia, J.M. (2015). The Innovation Union Scoreboard Is Flawed: The Case of Sweden—Not the Innovation Leader of the EU—Updated Version. CIRCLE Working Paper 2015/27. Lund, Sweden: Center for Innovation, Research, and Competence in the Learning Economy, Lund University.

Fazio, C., Guzman, J., Murray, F., and Stern, S. (2016). A New View of the Skew: A Quantitative Assessment of the Quality of American Entrepreneurship. Cambridge, MA: MIT Innovation Initiative, Laboratory for Innovation Science and Policy. Available: http://innovation.mit.edu/assets/A-New-View_Final-Report_5.4.16.pdf [August 2016].

Feldman, M., Hadjimichael, T., and Lanahan, L. (2016). The logic of economic development: A definition and model for investment. Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy, 34(1), 5-21. doi: 10.1177/0263774X15614653.

Fernald, J.G. (2012). A Quarterly, Utilization-Adjusted Series on Total Factor Productivity. FRBSF Working Paper, No. 2012-19. San Francisco, CA: Federal Reserve Board.

Fernald, J., and Jones, C. (2014). The Future of U.S. Economic Growth. AEA Papers and Proceedings. Washington, DC: American Economic Association.

Frey, C.B., and Osbourne, M.A. (2013, September). The Future of Employment: How Susceptible Are Jobs to Computerisation? Working Paper, Oxford Martin Programme on Technology and Employment, University of Oxford. Available: http://www.oxfordmartin.ox.ac.uk/downloads/academic/future-of-employment.pdf [August 2016].

Furman, J.L., and Stern, S. (2011). Climbing atop the shoulders of giants: The impact of institutions on cumulative research. American Economic Review, 101, 1933-1963. doi:10.1257/aer.101.5.1933.

Gagné, M., and Deci, E.L. (2005). Self-determination theory and work motivation. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 26, 331-362. doi:10.1002/job.322.

Galindo-Rueda, F., and Millot, V. (2015). Measuring Design and Its Role in Innovation. OECD Science, Technology, and Industry Working Paper No. 2015/01. Paris, France: OECD.

Suggested Citation:"References." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2017. Advancing Concepts and Models for Measuring Innovation: Proceedings of a Workshop. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/23640.
×

Gambardella, A., Khashabi, P., and Panico, C., (2013, November). Working Autonomy in Innovative Activities: Managing Knowledge Workers. Academy of Management Annual Meeting Proceedings. Washington, DC. Available: http://proceedings.aom.org/content/2013/1/14788.short [November 2016].

Gambardella, A., Raasch, C., and von Hippel, E. (2015). The User Innovation Paradigm: Impacts on Markets and Welfare. Social Science Research Network. Available: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2079763 [August 2016].

Gault, F. (2016). Measuring Innovation in All Sectors of the Economy. United Nations University, Working Paper Series, No. 2015-038. Maastricht, The Netherlands. Available: http://www.merit.unu.edu/publications/working-papers/abstract/?id=5832 [August 2016].

Gordon, R.J. (2016). The Rise and Fall of American Growth. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

Graetz, G., and Michaels, G. (2015). Estimating the impact of robots on productivity and employment. VOX, CEPR’s Policy Portal, Washington, DC. Available: http://voxeu.org/article/robots-productivity-and-jobs [August 2016].

Graham, S., Grim, C., Island, T., Marco, A., and Miranda, J. (2015). Business Dynamics of Innovating Firms: Linking U.S. Patents with Administrative Data on Workers and Firms. Center for Economic Studies Research Paper CES 15-19. Washington, DC: U.S. Census Bureau. Available: https://www2.census.gov/ces/wp/2015/CES-WP-15-19.pdf [August 2016].

Guzman, J., and Stern, S. (2015). Where is Silicon Valley? Science, 347(6222), 606-609. doi: 10.1126/science.aaa0201.

Guzman, J., and Stern, S. (2016). The State of American Entrepreneurship: New Estimates of the Quantity and Quality of Entrepreneurship for 15 U.S. States, 1988-2014. Working Paper No. 22095. Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research. Available: http://www.nber.org/papers/w22095.pdf [August 2016].

Hall, B.H., and Jaffe, A.B. (2012). Measuring Science, Technology, and Innovation: A Review. Commissioned paper prepared for the Panel on Developing Science, Technology, and Innovation Indicators for the Future. Committee on National Statistics, Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education, Washington, DC.

Haltiwanger, J., Hathaway, I., and Miranda, J. (2014). Declining Business Dynamism in the U.S. High-Technology Sector. Kansas City, MO: Ewing Marion Kauffman Foundation.

Hathaway, I., and Litan, R. (2014). The Other Aging of America: The Increasing Dominance of Older Firms. Economic Studies at Brookings. Washington, DC: The Brookings Institution. Available: https://www.brookings.edu/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/other_aging_america_dominance_older_firms_hathaway_litan.pdf [August 2016].

Hecker, D. (2005). High-technology employment: a NAICS-based update. Monthly Labor Review (U.S. Dept. of Labor and U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics), 128(7), 58.

Hienerth, C., von Hippel, E., and Jensen, M. (2012). User Community vs. Producer Innovation Development Efficiency: A First Empirical Study. MIT Sloan Working Paper No. 4926-11, SSRN eLibrary, Social Science Research Network. Available: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1916319 [August 2016].

Holland, J.H. (2006). Studying complex adaptive systems. Journal of Systems Science and Complexity, 19, 1-8. Available: http://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/41486 [August 2016].

Kuhn, T. (1962). The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.

Lacetera, N. (2009). Academic entrepreneurship. Managerial and Decision Economics, 30(7), 443-464. doi: 10.1002/mde.1461.

Lamoreaux, N., and Sokoloff, K. (1999). Inventors, firms, and the market for technology in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. In N. Lamoreaux, D. Raff, and P. Temin (Eds.), Learning by Doing in Markets, Firms, and Countries (pp. 19-57). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.

Suggested Citation:"References." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2017. Advancing Concepts and Models for Measuring Innovation: Proceedings of a Workshop. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/23640.
×

Lane, J., Owen-Smith, J., Rosen, R., and Weinberg, B. (2014). New Linked Data on Research Investments: Scientific Workforce, Productivity, and Public Value. NBER Working Paper No. 20683. Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research. Available: http://www.nber.org/papers/w20683 [August 2016].

Ledford, H. (2016). CRISPR: Gene editing is just the beginning. Nature, 531, 156-159. doi:10.1038/531156a.

Lerner, J., and Kovner, A. (2015). Doing well by doing good? Community development venture capital. Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, 24(3), 643-663.

Litan, R.E. (2010). Inventive Billion Dollar Firms: A Faster Way to Grow. SSRN Working Paper No. 1721608. Available: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1721608 [November 2016].

Loeb, S. (2014). How successful are the top accelerators? Financial Trends and News, Vatornews, April 26. Available: http://vator.tv/n/363c [November 2016].

Lowe, N. (2009). Challenging tradition: Unlocking new paths to regional industrial upgrading. Environment and Planning A, 41(1), 128-145. doi:10.1068/a40111.

Lundvall, B. (1992). National Innovation Systems: Towards a Theory of Innovation and Interactive Learning. London, England: Pinter.

Manso, G. (2011). Motivating innovation. Journal of Finance, 66, 1823-1860.

Mason, C., and Brown, R. (2014). Entrepreneurial Ecosystems and Growth Oriented Entrepreneurship. Background paper prepared for the workshop organized by the OECD LEED Programme and the Dutch Ministry of Economic Affairs on Entrepreneurial Ecosystems and Growth Oriented Entrepreneurship, The Hague, Netherlands, November 2013. Final Version, January 2014. Available: https://www.oecd.org/cfe/leed/Entrepreneurial-ecosystems.pdf [August 2016].

Mokyr, J. (2004). The Gifts of Athena: Historical Origins of the Knowledge Economy. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

Montresor, S., and Vezzani, A. (2015). The production function of top R&D investors: Accounting for size and sector heterogeneity with quantile estimations. Research Policy, 44(2), 381-393.

Nagaraj, A. (2015). The Private Impact of Public Maps—Landsat Satellite Imagery and Gold Exploration. Job Market Paper, MIT Sloan School of Management, Cambridge, MA. Available: http://web.mit.edu/nagaraj/files/nagaraj_jmp_nov6.pdf.

National Research Council. (2014). Capturing Change in Science, Technology, and Innovation: Improving Indicators to Inform Policy. Panel on Developing Science, Technology, and Innovation Indicators for the Future, R.E. Litan, A.W. Wyckoff, and K.H. Husbands Fealing, Editors. Committee on National Statistics, Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education. Board on Science, Technology, and Economic Policy, Division of Policy and Global Affairs. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.

Nelson, R. (1977). The Moon and the Ghetto. New York: W.W. Norton.

OECD. (2007). Science, Technology, and Innovation Indicators in a Changing World: Responding to Policy Needs. Paris, France. Available: http://www.oecd.org/sti/inno/sciencetechnologyandinnovationindicatorsinachangingworldrespondingtopolicyneeds.htm [August 2016].

OECD. (2010). Towards a Measurement Agenda for Innovation. Paris, France. Available: http://www.oecd.org/site/innovationstrategy/45392693.pdf [August 2016].

OECD-Eurostat. (2005). Oslo Manual—Guidelines for Collecting and Interpreting Innovation Data, 3rd Edition. Paris, France. Available: http://www.oecd.org/sti/inno/oslomanualguidelinesforcollectingandinterpretinginnovationdata3rdedition.htm [August 2016].

Oppenheimer, J. (1948). The eternal optimist. Time Magazine, 52, 81.

Porter, M.E. (1990). The Competitive Advantage of Nations. Worchester, UK: Billing.

Renski, H.C., Koo, J., and Feser, E.J. (2007). Differences in labor versus value-chain industry clusters: An empirical investigation. Growth and Change, 38(3), 364-395.

Suggested Citation:"References." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2017. Advancing Concepts and Models for Measuring Innovation: Proceedings of a Workshop. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/23640.
×

Robb, A., and Farhat, J. (2013). An Overview of the Kauffman Firm Survey—Results from 2011 Business Activities. Kansas City, MO: Ewing Marion Kauffman Foundation. Available: http://www.kauffman.org/~/media/kauffman_org/research%20reports%20and%20covers/2013/06/kauffmanfirmsurvey2013.pdf [August 2016].

Robbins, C. (2016). Concepts and Models for Focusing on People and Places in the Development of Innovation Data. Unpublished manuscript, National Science Foundation.

Romer, P.M. (1994). The origins of endogenous growth. The Journal of Economic Perspectives, 8(1), 3-22. doi:10.1257/jep.8.1.3. JSTOR 2138148.

Rosenberg, N. (1982). Inside the Black Box—Technology and Economics. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Rosoff, M., D’Onfro, J., and Carson, B. (2015). Silicon Valley’s denial is over: Everybody thinks we’re in a bubble. Business Insider, October 10. Available: http://www.businessinsider.com/silicon-valleys-denial-is-over-everybody-thinks-were-in-a-bubble-2015-10 [August 2016].

Sander, A., and Wolfgang, M. (2014). The Rise of Robotics. BCG Perspectives, Center for Sensing & Mining the Future, Boston Consulting Group, Boston, MA. Available: https://www.bcgperspectives.com/content/articles/business_unit_strategy_innovation_rise_of_robotics/ [August 2016].

Sauermann, H., and Cohen, W. (2010). What makes them tick? Employee motives and firm innovation. Management Science, 56(12), 2134-2153.

Sauermann, H., and Roach, M. (2014). Not all scientists pay to be scientists: PhDs’ preferences for publishing in industrial employment. Research Policy, 43(1), 32-47.

Sauermann, H., and Stephan, P. (2013). Conflicting logics? A multidimensional view of industrial and academic science. Organization Science, 24(3), 889-909.

Schumpeter, J.A. (1934). The Theory of Economic Development: An Inquiry into Profits, Capital, Credit, Interest, and the Business Cycle. Harvard University Press. Harvard Economic Studies 46. Available: http://www.hup.harvard.edu/catalog.php?isbn=9780674879904 [November 2016].

Stern, S. (2004). Do scientists pay to be scientists? Management Science, 50(6), 835-853.

Torrisi, S., Gambardella, A., Giuri, P., Harhoff, D., Hoisl, K., and Mariani, M. (2016). Using, blocking, and sleeping patents: Empirical evidence from a large inventor survey. Research Policy, 45(7), 1374-1385. Available: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2016.03.021 [August 2016].

Uzzi, B., Mukherjee, S., Stringer, M., and Jones, B. (2013). Atypical combinations and scientific impact. Science, 342(6157), 468-472.

Van Noorden, R. (2012). Global mobility: Science on the move. Nature, 490(7420), News Feature, October 17. Available: http://www.nature.com/news/global-mobility-scienceon-the-move-1.11602 [November 2016].

Von Hippel, E., de Jong, J., and Flowers, S. (2010, September 27). Comparing Business and Household Sector Innovation in Consumer Products: Findings from a Representative Study in the UK. SSRN eLibrary, Social Science Research Network. Available: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1683503 [August 2016].

Williams, H. (2013). Intellectual property rights and innovation: Evidence from the human genome. Journal of Political Economy, 121(1), 1-27.

Winston Smith, S., Hannigan, T.J., Gasiorowski, L. (2015). Peering Inside: How Do Peer Effects Impact Entrepreneurial Outcomes in Accelerators? Academy of Management Annual Meeting Proceedings. Washington, DC. Available: http://proceedings.aom.org/content/2015/1/17072 [November 2016].

Zhao, B., and Ziedonis, R. (2012, July). State Governments as Financiers of Technology Startups: Implications for Firm Performance. Social Science Research Network. Available: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2060739 [August 2016].

Suggested Citation:"References." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2017. Advancing Concepts and Models for Measuring Innovation: Proceedings of a Workshop. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/23640.
×

Zolas, N., Goldschlag, N., Jarmin, R., Stephan, P., Owen- Smith, J., Rosen, R.F., McFadden Allen, B., Weinberg, B.A., and Lane, J. (2015). Examining employment and earnings outcomes for Ph.D. recipients. Science, 350(6266), 1367-1371. Available: http://www.sciencemag.org/content/350/6266/1367.full [August 2016].

Suggested Citation:"References." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2017. Advancing Concepts and Models for Measuring Innovation: Proceedings of a Workshop. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/23640.
×
Page 107
Suggested Citation:"References." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2017. Advancing Concepts and Models for Measuring Innovation: Proceedings of a Workshop. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/23640.
×
Page 108
Suggested Citation:"References." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2017. Advancing Concepts and Models for Measuring Innovation: Proceedings of a Workshop. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/23640.
×
Page 109
Suggested Citation:"References." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2017. Advancing Concepts and Models for Measuring Innovation: Proceedings of a Workshop. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/23640.
×
Page 110
Suggested Citation:"References." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2017. Advancing Concepts and Models for Measuring Innovation: Proceedings of a Workshop. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/23640.
×
Page 111
Suggested Citation:"References." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2017. Advancing Concepts and Models for Measuring Innovation: Proceedings of a Workshop. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/23640.
×
Page 112
Next: Appendix A: Workshop Agenda »
Advancing Concepts and Models for Measuring Innovation: Proceedings of a Workshop Get This Book
×
Buy Paperback | $64.00 Buy Ebook | $49.99
MyNAP members save 10% online.
Login or Register to save!
Download Free PDF

Because of the role of innovation as a driver of economic productivity and growth and as a mechanism for improving people's well-being in other ways, understanding the nature,determinants, and impacts of innovation has become increasingly important to policy makers.

To be effective, investment in innovation requires this understanding, which, in turn, requires measurement of the underlying inputs and subsequent outcomes of innovation processes. In May 2016, at the request of the National Center for Science and Engineering Statistics of the National Science Foundation, the Committee on National Statistics of the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine convened a workshop - bringing together academic researchers, private and public sector experts, and representatives from public policy agencies - to develop strategies for broadening and modernizing innovation information systems.This publication summarizes the presentation and discussion of the event.

  1. ×

    Welcome to OpenBook!

    You're looking at OpenBook, NAP.edu's online reading room since 1999. Based on feedback from you, our users, we've made some improvements that make it easier than ever to read thousands of publications on our website.

    Do you want to take a quick tour of the OpenBook's features?

    No Thanks Take a Tour »
  2. ×

    Show this book's table of contents, where you can jump to any chapter by name.

    « Back Next »
  3. ×

    ...or use these buttons to go back to the previous chapter or skip to the next one.

    « Back Next »
  4. ×

    Jump up to the previous page or down to the next one. Also, you can type in a page number and press Enter to go directly to that page in the book.

    « Back Next »
  5. ×

    Switch between the Original Pages, where you can read the report as it appeared in print, and Text Pages for the web version, where you can highlight and search the text.

    « Back Next »
  6. ×

    To search the entire text of this book, type in your search term here and press Enter.

    « Back Next »
  7. ×

    Share a link to this book page on your preferred social network or via email.

    « Back Next »
  8. ×

    View our suggested citation for this chapter.

    « Back Next »
  9. ×

    Ready to take your reading offline? Click here to buy this book in print or download it as a free PDF, if available.

    « Back Next »
Stay Connected!