(back to Innovation)

Key Readings

The *readings are considered foundational papers that develop the theory. The other key readings provide the background and empirical regularities for the topic.

  1. Acs, Z. and D. Audretsch, 1988, Innovation in Large and Small Firms: An Empirical Analysis, American Economic Review, 78, 4, p.678-690.
  2. *R. Gilbert, 2006, “Innovation and Competition,” Journal of Industrial Organization Education, V1, Article 8.
  3. Jaffe, A. 1986, Technological Opportunity and spillovers of R&D: evidence from firm’s patent, profits and market value, American Economic Review, 76, 984-1001.
  4. *d’Aspremont, C. and A. Jacquemin, 1988, Co-operative and noncooperative R&D in duopoly with spillovers, American Economic Review, 78, 1133-1137.
  5. Teece, David, J., 1986, “Profiting from technological innovation: Implications for integration, collaboration, licensing and public policy,” Research Policy, 15: 285-305.
  6. *Milgrom, P. and J. Roberts, 1995, Complementarities and fit: Strategy, Structure and Organizational Change in Manufacturing, Journal of Accounting and Economics, 19, p. 179-208.
  7. Cassiman, B. and Veugelers, R. 2006 “In Search of Complementarity in Innovation Strategy: Internal R&D and External Knowledge Acquisition. Management Science.
  8. Saxenian, A., 1994, “Inside Out: Blurring Firms’ Boundaries,” Chapter 6 of Regional Advantage.
  9. *Aghion, P. and J. Tirole, 1994, “On the Management of Innovation”, Quarterly Journal of Economics, 109, 1185-1207.
  10. Lerner, J., and R. Merges, 1997, The Control of Technology Alliances: An Empirical Analysis of the Biotechnology Industry, Journal of Industrial Economics.
  11. Cohen, W. and R. Levin, 1989, Empirical Studies of Innovation and Market Structure, Handbook of Industrial Organization.
  12. *Vives, X., 2008, “Innovation and Competitive Pressure, The Journal of Industrial Economics, 56(3), 419-469.

The Basics

  1. Arrow, 1962, "Economic Welfare and the Allocation of Resources for Invention,"in Richard R. Nelson, ed., The Rate and Direction of Inventive Activity, Princeton University Press: pp. 609-619.
  2. Gilbert, R. and D. Newbery, 1982. “Preemptive Patenting and the Persistence of Monopoly,” American Economic Review, 72(3), p.514-526.
  3. Reinganum, J. 1983. “Uncertain Innovation and the Persistence of Monopoly,” American Economic Review, 73, p. 741-748.
  4. Christensen, C. 1997. "How can great firms fail? Insights from the hard disk industry." Chapter 1 in The Innovator's Dilemma, Harvard Business School Press, p.3-28.
  5. Henderson, R.M. and K. Clark, 1990. “Architectural Innovation: The Reconfiguration of Existing Product Technologies and the Failure of Established Firms,” Administrative Science Quarterly, 35, p. 9-30.
  6. Cohen, W. “Empirical Studies of Innovative Activity and Performance,” in Stoneman, ed., Handbook of the Economics of Innovation and of Technological Change, p. 182-198.
  7. Griliches, Z., 1998, R&D and Productivity, Chicago University Press.
  8. Hall, B., A. Jaffe and M. Trajtenberg, 2005. “Market Value and Patent Citations,” Rand Journal of Economics, 36, p.16-38.
  9. Mowery and Rosenberg, 1982, “The influence of market demand upon innovation: a critical review of some recent empirical studies,” in Rosenberg, ed., Inside the Black Box: Technology and Economics, p. 193-195, 225-238.
  10. Nelson, 1959, “The Simple Economics of Basic Scientific Research,” Journal of Political Economy, 67: 297-306.
  11. Schmookler, 1962, “Economic Sources of Inventive Activity,” Journal of Economic History, 22: p.1-20.

Appropriability and Spillovers

  1. De Bondt, R., 1997. “Spillovers and innovative activities.” International Journal of Industrial Organisation, 15(1), p.1-28.
  2. Griliches, Z. 1992. “The Search for R&D Spillovers,” Scandinavian Journal of Economics, 94, p. S29-47.
  3. Geroski, P., 1996, “Do Spillovers undermine the incentives to innovate?,” in S. Dowrick, Economic Approaches to Innovation, Edward Elgar, Aldershot., p.76-97.
  4. Levin, R., Klevorich, A., Nelson, R. and Winter, S. 1987. “Appropriating returns from industrial research and development” Brookings Papers on Economic Activity 3: p.783-820.
  5. Cohen, W., R. Nelson and J. Walsh. 2002. “Links and Impacts: The Influence of Public Research on Industrial R&D.” Management Science, 48(1), p.1-23.

Complementarity of (Innovation) Activities and Assets

  1. Cohen, W.M. and Levinthal, D.A., 1989, “Innovation and learning: The two faces of R&D--implications for the analysis of R&D investment”, Economic Journal, 99. p.569-596.
  2. Arora, A. and A. Gambardella, 1990. ”Complementarity and external linkages: the strategies of the large firms in biotechnology,” Journal of Industrial Economics, 38, p.361-379.
  3. Arora, A. and A. Gambardella, 1994, “Evaluating technological information and utilizing it: Scientific knowledge, technological capability and external linkages in biotechnology,” Journal of Economic Behavior and Organisation, p.91-114.
  4. Cockburn, I. and R. Henderson, 1998. “Absorptive capacity, coauthoring behavior and the organization of research in drug discovery,” Journal of Industrial Economics, 46, p. 157-182
  5. Athey, S. and S. Stern, 1998. “An Empirical Framework for Testing Theories about Complementarity in Organizational Design,” NBER working paper #6600.
  6. Ichniowski, C., Shaw, K. and G. Prennushi, 1997. “The Effects of Human Resource Management Practices on Productivity: A Study of Steel Finishing Lines,” American Economic Review, 87, p.291-213.
  7. Milgrom, P. and J. Roberts, 1990. “The Economics of Modern Manufacturing: Technology, Strategy, and Organization,” American Economic Review, 80, p.511-528.
  8. Ghemawat, P and G. Pisano, 1999. “Building and Sustaining Success,” in Strategy and the Business Landscape, Chapter 5, Addison-Wesley: Massachusetts.

Organization and Innovation

  1. Anton, J. and D. Yao, 1995. “Start-ups, Spin-offs and Internal Projects,” Journal of Law, Economics and Organization, 11, p.362-378.
  2. Cassiman B. and M. Ueda, 2006. “Optimal Project Rejection and New Firm Start-ups,” Management Science, 52 (2), p. 262 -275.
  3. Gans J.S. and S. Stern, 2000. “Incumbency and R&D Incentives: Licensing the Gale of Creative Destruction,” Journal of Economics and Management Strategy, 9(4), p.485-511.
  4. Gans J.S. and S. Stern, 2003. “The Product Market and the “Market for Ideas”: Commercialization Strategies for Technology Entrepreneurs,” Research Policy, 32 (2), p.333-350.

Market Structure and Competition

  1. Aghion, P., R. Blundell, R. Griffith, P. Howitt and S. Prantl, 2009. “The Effects of Entry on Incumbent Innovation and Productivity.” The Review of Economics and Statistics, 91(1): 20–32.
  2. Cassiman, B., Colombo, M., Gerrone, P. and R. Veugelers, 2005. “The Impact of M&A on the R&D Process. An Empirical Analysis of the Role of Technological and Market Relatedness,” Research Policy, 34(2), p. 195-220.
  3. Dasgupta & Stiglitz, 1980. “Industrial Structure and the Nature of Innovative Activity,” Economic Journal, 90, p.266-293.
  4. Kamien, M. and N. Schwartz, 1982. Market Structure and Innovation.