From Theory to Practice: Examining the True Impact of Institutional Quality on Innovation Commercialization
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.61506/01.00164Keywords:
Innovation Commercialization, Institutional Quality, Corruption Level, Regional Geographies, Income Disparities, ReligionsAbstract
Does better corruption controls as institutional quality measure affect commercialization of innovation? Institutional quality from corruption control perspective is very important to be considered for making strong strategic policies favorable for innovation commercialization. Using panel data consists of 15-year time span (2001-2015) covering 143 countries, initial regression estimates with robust check along with fixed effects presents that better corruption controls are positively effective in promoting innovation commercialization in the country which is further verified by using GMM estimates. Our preferred specifications imply that corruption effects on innovation commercialization is worse in Middle East and North American (MENA) regions which is around negative 65% especially in upper middle income and Catholic countries. Apart from the exports of high-tech products, other demand and supply side contributors of innovation commercialization are also important to account for. While improving the research and development aspects, the policy makers must also have to plan strategically for improving these channels which may help in improving the institutional quality in the country including investment in improving the grass root literacy levels, flexible facilities for entrepreneurial incubators, and optimal utilization of population growth with urbanization measures in the country.
References
Aarikka-Stenroos, L., Sandberg, B., & Lehtimäki, T. (2014). Networks for the commercialization of innovations: A review of how divergent network actors contribute. Industrial Marketing Management, 43(3), 365-381. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2013.12.005
Acemoglu, D., Naidu, S., Restrepo, P., & Robinson, J. A. (2014). Democracy Does Cause Growth. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3386/w20004
Acemoglu, D., Naidu, S., Restrepo, P., & Robinson, J. A. (2019). Democracy does cause growth. Journal of Political Economy, 127(1), 000-000. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1086/700936
Aiyar S. et al., (2018). Growth slowdowns and the middle-income trap. Japan & the World Economy, 48. 22–37. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.japwor.2018.07.001
Alvarez, Javier and Manuel Arellano (2003). The Time Series and Cross-Section Asymptotics of Dynamic Panel Data Estimators, Econometrica, 71 (4), 1121–1159. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-0262.00441
Andersson, R., Quigley, J.M., Wilhelmsson, M., (2009). Urbanization, productivity, and innovation: evidence from investment in higher education. J. Urban Econ. 66 (1), 2–15. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jue.2009.02.004
Angrist, J.; Krueger, A. (2001). Instrumental Variables and the Search for Identification: From Supply and Demand to Natural Experiments. Journal of Economic Perspectives. 15 (4), 69–85. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1257/jep.15.4.69
Anokhin, S., Schulze, W., (2009). Entrepreneurship, innovation, and corruption. J. Bus. Ventur. 24, 465–476. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusvent.2008.06.001
Arellano, M., & Bond, S. (1991). Some tests of specification for panel data: Monte Carlo evidence and an application to employment equations. The review of economic studies, 58(2), 277-297. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/2297968
Arora, A., Cohen, W.M., & Walsh, J.P. (2016). The acquisition and commercialization of invention in American manufacturing: Incidence and impact. Research Policy, 45(6), 1113-1128. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2016.02.005
Audi, M., Ali, A., & Al-Masri, R. (2022). Determinants of Advancement in Information Communication Technologies and its Prospect under the role of Aggregate and Disaggregate Globalization. Scientific Annals of Economics and Business. DOI: https://doi.org/10.47743/saeb-2022-0009
Audi, M., Ali, A., & Roussel, Y. (2021). The Advancement in Information and Communication Technologies (ICT) and Economic Development: A Panel Analysis. International Journal of Innovation, Creativity and Change, 15(4), 1013-1039.
Auriol, M., Platteau, J.P. (2017). Religious co-option in autocracy: A theory inspired by history. Journal of Development Economics, 127, 395-412. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdeveco.2016.12.007
Autor, D. H. (2014). Skills, education, and the rise of earnings inequality among the ‘‘other 99 percent”. Science, 344(6186), 843–851. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1251868
Berardo, R., Scholz, J.T., (2010). Self-organizing policy networks: risk, partner selection, and cooperation in estuaries. An. J. Polit. Sci. 54 (3), 632–649. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5907.2010.00451.x
Bettendorf L, Dijkgraaf E., (2010). Religion and income: heterogeneity between countries. J Econ Behav Org. 74(1–2), 12–29. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jebo.2010.02.003
Bruinshoofd A. (2016), Institutional quality and economic performance.
Carmignani, F., (2005). Efficiency of institutions, political stability and income dynamics. United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (UNECE).
Cavdar, S.C., & Aydin, A.D. (2015). An Empirical Analysis about Technological Development and Innovation Indicators. Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences, 195, 1486-1495. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.06.449
Cheung, K.Y., Ping, L., (2004). Spillover effects of FDI on innovation in China: evidence from the provincial data. China Econ. Rev. 15 (1), 25–44. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S1043-951X(03)00027-0
Coccia M., (2009). A new approach for measuring and analyzing patterns of regional economic growth: empirical analysis in Italy. Ital J Reg Sci. 8(2), 71–95. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3280/SCRE2009-002004
Corkindale, D. (2010). Towards a business model for commercializing innovative new technology. International Journal of Innovation and Technology Management, 7(1), 37-51. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1142/S0219877010001817
Diamond, J. (1997). Guns, germs, and steel: the fates of human societies. New York: W.W. Norton & Company.
Dixit A., (2009). Governance institutions and economic activity. An Econ Rev. 99(1), 5–24. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.99.1.5
Do, T. H., Mazzarol, T., Volery, T., & Reboud, S. (2012). Innovation commercialisation and anticipated return: a typology of innovative SMEs. In Leading from the Edge. (pp. 10-13).
Fan, P. (2011). Innovation Capacity and Economic Development: China and India. Economic Change and Restructuring, 44 (1-2): 49-73. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10644-010-9088-2
Gao Y. et al., (2017). Does democracy cause innovation? An empirical test of the popper hypothesis. Research Policy 46 (2017) 1272–1283. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2017.05.014
Guiso L, Sapienza P, Zingales L., (2003). People’s opium? Religion and economic attitudes. J Monetary Econ. 50(1), 225–82. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0304-3932(02)00202-7
Hausman, A. and Johnston, W. J. (2014). The Role of Innovation in Driving the Economy: Lessons from the Global Financial Crisis. Journal of Business Research, 67 (1): 2720-2726. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2013.03.021
Hooghe, M., Vanhoutte, B., Hardyns, W., & Bircan, T. (2010). “Unemployment, Inequality, Poverty and Crime: Spatial Distribution Patterns of Criminal Acts in Belgium, 2001-2006”, the British Journal of Criminology, (2011) 51, 1–20. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/bjc/azq067
Kaufmann, D., Kraay, A., & Mastruzzi, M. (2010). The worldwide governance indicators: Methodolgy and analytical issues.
Kaufmann, D., Kraay, A., (2003). Governance and growth: which causes which? The World Bank Working papers. World Bank, Washington, DC.
Khademi, T., Ismail, K., Lee, C.T., & Garmsari, M. (2015). The Role of Potential Licensee Availability in Facilitating Commercialization of Academic Research Results. Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences, 172, 331-335. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.01.372
Lambsdorff, G.J., (2003). How corruption affects productivity. Kyklos (56), 457–474. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1046/j.0023-5962.2003.00233.x
Levchenko, A. A. (2013). International trade and institutional change. Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, 29(5), 1145–1181. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/jleo/ews008
Lin, L., Mihov, A., Sanz, L., Stoyanova, D., (2016). Property Rights Institutions, Foreign Investment, and the Valuation of U.S. MNCs. University of Pittsburgh. Working Paper. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2662259
Lipkova, L., & Braga, D. (2016). Measuring commercialization success of innovations in the EU.
Luo, Y., (2005). An organizational perspective of corruption. Manage. Organ. Rev. 1 (1), 119–154. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1740-8784.2004.00006.x
Maridal J.H., (2013). Cultural impact on national economic growth. J Socio-Econ. 136–46. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socec.2012.08.002
Marozau, R., Guerrero, M., (2016). Conditioning factors of knowledge transfer and commercialization in the context of post-socialist economies: the case of Belarusian higher education institutions. Int. J. Entrepreneurship Small Bus. 27 (4), 441–462. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1504/IJESB.2016.075014
McCleary R., (2008). Religion and economic development: a two-way causation. Policy Rev April–May (148).
Meyer, K. E., & Peng, M. W. (2016). Theoretical foundations of emerging economy business research. Journal of International Business Studies, 47(1), 3–22. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/jibs.2015.34
Nickell, Stephen (1981) “Biases in Dynamic Models with Fixed Effects,” Econometrica, 49(6), 1417–1426. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/1911408
Nogami, V. K. D. C., Vieira, F. G. D., & Veloso, A. R. (2018). Concept of innovation in low-income market. Revista Brasileira de Gestão de Negócios, 20(1), 127-149. DOI: https://doi.org/10.7819/rbgn.v20i1.3044
Peng, M. W., & Lebedev, S. (2017). Intra-national business (IB). Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 34(2), 241–245. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10490-017-9507-2
Prud’hommeab, D. (2018). China’s intellectual property policies for transmission and exploitation of technological knowledge. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3192820
Santacreu, A. M. (2015). Innovation, Diffusion, and Trade: Theory and Measurement. Journal of Monetary Economics, 75: 1-20. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmoneco.2015.06.008
Scott, W.R., (1995). Institutions and Organizations. vol. 2 Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA.
Sheather, Simon (2009). A modern approach to regression with R. New York, NY: Springer. ISBN: 978-0-387-09607-0. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-09608-7
Spolaore E, Wacziarg R., (2013). How deep are the roots of economic development? J Econ Lit. 51(2), 1–45. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1257/jel.51.2.325
Stoian, C., & Mohr, A. (2016). Outward foreign direct investment from emerging economies: Escaping home country regulative voids. International Business Review, 25(5), 1124–1135. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ibusrev.2016.02.004
Uhlenbruck, K., Rodriguez, P., Doh, J., Eden, L., (2006). The impact of corruption on entry strategy: evidence from telecommunication projects in emerging economies. Organization Science 17 (3), 402–414. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1060.0186
Wagner, S., & Wakeman, S. (2016). What do patent-based measures tell us about product commercialization? Evidence from the pharmaceutical industry. Research Policy, 45(5), 1091-1102. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2016.02.006
Walsh, P.R. (2012). Innovation Nirvana or Innovation Wasteland? Identifying commercialization strategies for small and medium renewable energy enterprises. Technovation, 32(1), 32-42. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.technovation.2011.09.002
Wu, Y., Welch, E.W., & Huang, W.-L. (2015). Commercialization of university inventions: Individual and institutional factors affecting licensing of university patents. Technovation, 36-37, 12-25. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.technovation.2014.09.004
