Innovative activity and business cycle: Austria in the 19th and 20th century

DSpace Repository

Show simple item record Minárik, Pavol Vokoun, Marek Stellner, František
dc.contributor.other Ekonomická fakulta cs 2018-06-28 2018-06-28 2018-06-28
dc.identifier.issn 1212-3609
dc.description.abstract This paper focuses on the analysis of the relationship between business cycles and innovative activity in a small open economy. Small economies benefit from imports of foreign technologies through international trade and foreign investments and are subjects to significant exogenous shocks that impact their business cycle. The economic analysis is based on the demand and supply theories of innovation and economic fluctuations. Hypotheses about long term and short term (Granger) effects are tested on Austrian historical data (1852-1979) about the economic output (gross domestic product and industry production) and innovation output (granted patents). The econometric analysis utilizes vector error correction procedure to estimate time-series models of the economy. The results are interpreted in Austrian historical context. The economic-historical analysis suggests that there is no long-term relationship between business cycles and innovative activity between 1852 and 1937. The long-term relationship manifested only between 1948 and 1979. This relationship is very complex and influenced by the historical context, and it is not easy to grasp by the econometric analysis. In the short run, there is no compelling evidence trough-out the analyzed time period (1852-1979). However, we cannot fully reject the hypothesis suggesting a relationship between economic cycles and innovative activities. In the most recent period (1948-1979), we can observe a negative impact (Granger causality) of granted patents on the real GDP. Future research taking into account more countries using parametric as well as non-parametric approach could shed some light on the demand hypothesis in the pre-war and post-war development of small open economies. This paper showed that there is a long-term equilibrium between economic output and innovation activity. This result suggests that long term factors such as political stability are behind the complex relationship. en
dc.format text
dc.format.extent 16 stran cs
dc.language.iso en
dc.publisher Technická Univerzita v Liberci cs
dc.publisher Technical university of Liberec, Czech Republic en
dc.relation.ispartof Alfaro, J., Lopez, V., & Nevado, D. (2011). The relationships between economic growth and intellectual capital: A study in the European Union. Acta Oeconomica, 61(3), 293-312. cs
dc.relation.ispartof Artis, M., Krolzig, H., & Toro, J. (2004). The European Business Cycle. Oxford Economic Papers, 56(1), 1-44. cs
dc.relation.ispartof Axarloglou, K. (2003). The Cyclicality of New Product Introductions. The Journal of Business, 76(1), 29-48. cs
dc.relation.ispartof Baten, J., Spadavecchia, A., Streb, J., & Yin, S. (2007). What made southwest German firms innovative around 1900? Assessing the importance of intra- and inter-industry externalities. Oxford Economic Papers, 59(Supplement 1), I105-I126. cs
dc.relation.ispartof Bolt, J., Zanden van L. J., & Zanden, J. (2013). The first update of the Maddison project. Re-estimating growth before 1820. Resource document. University of Groningen. Retrieved November 13, 2016, from cs
dc.relation.ispartof Brandner, P., & Neusser, K. (1992). Business cycles in open economies: Stylized facts for Austria and Germany. Review of World Economics, 128(1), 67-87. cs
dc.relation.ispartof Brouwer, E., & Kleinknecht, A. (1999). Note and comment. Keynes-plus? Effective demand and changes in firm-level R&D: an empirical note. Cambridge Journal of Economics, 23(3), 385-399. cs
dc.relation.ispartof Collins, A., & Yao, S. (1998). On innovative activity over the business cycle: a note. Applied Economics Letters, 5(12), 785-788. cs
dc.relation.ispartof Eigner, P. (1997). Die wirtschaftliche Entwicklung der Habsburgermonarchie im 19. Jahrhundert: Ein Modellfall verzögerter Industrialisierung? Beiträge zur historischen Sozialkunde, 27(3), 112-122. cs
dc.relation.ispartof Federico, P. J. (1964). Historical Patent Statistics 1791-1961. Journal of the Patent Office Society, 76(2), 89-171. cs
dc.relation.ispartof Federico, P. J. (2011). Historical Patent Statistics of 44 Nations, 1791 to 1961. GESIS Data Archive, Cologne. cs
dc.relation.ispartof Filippetti, A., & Archibugi, D. (2011). Innovation in times of crisis: National Systems of Innovation, structure, and demand. Research Policy, 40(2), 179-192. cs
dc.relation.ispartof Gerschenkron, A. (1977). An economic spurt that failed: four lectures in Austrian history. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press. cs
dc.relation.ispartof Geroski, P. A., & Walters, C. F. (1995). Innovative activity over the business cycle. Economic Journal, 105(431), 916-928. cs
dc.relation.ispartof Giedeman, D. C., Isely, P. N., & Simons, G. (2006). Innovation and the Business Cycle: A Comparison of the U.S. Semiconductor and Automobile Industries. International Advances in Economic Research, 12(2), 277-286. cs
dc.relation.ispartof Gilbert, M. (1962). The Postwar Business Cycle in Western Europe. American Economic Review, 52(2), 93-109. cs
dc.relation.ispartof Gonzalo, J. (1994). Five alternative methods of estimating long-run equilibrium relationships. Journal of Econometrics, 60(1-2), 203-233. cs
dc.relation.ispartof Greenhalgh, C., & Rogers, M. (2009). Innovation, Intellectual Property, and Economic Growth. Princeton: Princeton University Press. cs
dc.relation.ispartof Griliches, Z. (1991). Patent Statistics as Economic Indicators: A Survey. National Bureau of Economic Research. Retrieved November 29, 2016, from cs
dc.relation.ispartof Gross, N. T. (1968). An Estimate of Industrial Product in Austria in 1841. Journal of Economic History, 28(1), 80-101. cs
dc.relation.ispartof Gross, N. T. (1971). Economic Growth and the Consumption of Coal in Austria and Hungary 1831-1913. Journal of Economic History, 31(4), 898-916. cs
dc.relation.ispartof Hall, B. H., & Rosenberg, N. (2010). Handbook of the economics of innovation. Amsterdam: ElsevierNorth-Holland. cs
dc.relation.ispartof Hamilton, J. D. (1994). Time Series Analysis. Princeton: Princeton University Press. cs
dc.relation.ispartof Hinrichs, E. (2014). Der „Koerber-Plan“: Wirtschaftspolitik als Integrationsfaktor für die Nationalitäten des Habsburgerreichs. Die Regierungszeit Ernest von Koerbers 1900-1904 aus wirtschaftlicher Perspektive. Frankfurt am Main, Wien: Lang. cs
dc.relation.ispartof Huertas, T. F., (1978). Economic Growth and Economic Policy in a Multinational Setting: The Habsburg Monarchy, 1841-1865. Journal of Economic History, 38(1), 281-282. cs
dc.relation.ispartof Jarque, C. M., & Bera, A. K. (1987). A test for normality of observations and regression residuals. International Statistical Review, 55(2), 163-172. cs
dc.relation.ispartof Johansen, S. (1995). Likelihood-Based Inference in Cointegrated Vector Autoregressive Models. Oxford: Oxford University Press. cs
dc.relation.ispartof Jovanovic, B., & Lach, S. (1997). Product Innovation and the Business Cycle. International Economic Review, 38(1), 3-22. cs
dc.relation.ispartof Kleinknecht, A., & Verspagen, B. (1990). Demand and innovation: Schmookler re-examined. Research Policy, 19(4), 387-394. cs
dc.relation.ispartof Komlos, J. (1983). The Habsburg Monarchy as a Customs Union: Economic Development in Austria-Hungary in the Nineteenth Century. Princeton: Princeton University Press. cs
dc.relation.ispartof Kose, M. A., Otrok, C,, & Whiteman, C. H. (2003). International Business Cycles: World, Region, and Country-Specific Factors. American Economic Review, 93(4), 1216-1239. cs
dc.relation.ispartof Kydland, F. E., & Prescott, E. C. (1982). Time to Build and Aggregate Fluctuations. Econometrica, 50(6), 1345-1370. cs
dc.relation.ispartof Machlup, F., & Penrose, E. (1950). The Patent Controversy in the Nineteenth Century. Journal of Economic History, 10(1), 1-29. cs
dc.relation.ispartof Moser, P. (2005). How Do Patent Laws Influence Innovation? Evidence from Nineteenth-Century World's Fairs. American Economic Review, 95(4), 1214-1236. cs
dc.relation.ispartof OECD. (2018). Triadic patent families (indicator). cs
dc.relation.ispartof Pakes, A., Simpson, M., Judd, K., & Mansfield, E. (1989). Patent Renewal Data. Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, 1989(1989), 331-410. cs
dc.relation.ispartof Penrose, E. (2009). The Theory of the Growth of the Firm. Oxford: Oxford University Press. cs
dc.relation.ispartof Piva, M., & Vivarelli, M. (2007). Is demand-pulled innovation equally important in different groups of firms? Cambridge Journal of Economics, 31(5), 691-710. 10.1093/cje/bem010. cs
dc.relation.ispartof Plosser, C. I. (1989). Understanding Real Business Cycles. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 3(3), 51-77. cs
dc.relation.ispartof Rafferty, M. C. (2003). Do business cycles influence long-run growth? The effect of aggregate demand on firm-financed R&D expenditures. Eastern Economic Journal, 29(4), 607-618. cs
dc.relation.ispartof Shleifer, A. (1986). Implementation Cycles. Journal of Political Economy, 94(6), 1163-1190. cs
dc.relation.ispartof Scherer, F. (1982). Demand-pull and technological invention: Schmookler revisited. Journal of Industrial Economics, 30(3), 225-237. cs
dc.relation.ispartof Schmidt, C. T. (1931). The Austrian Institute for Business Cycle Research. Journal of Political Economy, 39(1), 101-103. cs
dc.relation.ispartof Schmookler, J. (1966). Invention and Economic Growth. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. cs
dc.relation.ispartof Schulze, M. S. (1993). Economic development of Austria-Hungary's machine-building industry, 1870-1913. London: London School of Economics and Political Science. cs
dc.relation.ispartof Schulze, M. S. (1997). The Machine-Building Industry and Austria's Great Depression after 1873. Economic History Review, 50(2), 282-304. cs
dc.relation.ispartof Schumpeter, J. A. (1927). The Explanation of the Business Cycle. Economica, 21(1927), 286-311. cs
dc.relation.ispartof Spree, R. (1977). Die Wachstumszyklen der deutschen Wirtschaft von 1840 bis 1880. Berlin: Duncker & Humblot. cs
dc.relation.ispartof Tkáčová, A., & Siničáková, M. (2015). New composite leading indicator of the Hungarian business cycle. Acta Oeconomica, 65(3), 479-501. cs
dc.relation.ispartof United Nations Statistics Division. (2007). Handbook of the international comparison programme. New York: United Nations Statistics Division. cs
dc.relation.ispartof Wandruszka, A., & Urbanitsch, P. (1978). Die Habsburgermonarchie, 1848-1918, 1: Die wirtschaftliche Entwicklung. Vienna: Osterreichische Akademie der Wissenschaften. cs
dc.relation.ispartof WIPO. (2012). Statistics on Patents - IP statistics prior to 1980. Data file. Retrieved December 14, 2016, from . cs
dc.relation.ispartof Economics and Management en
dc.rights CC BY-NC
dc.subject business cycle en
dc.subject innovation en
dc.subject innovative activity en
dc.subject Austria en
dc.subject.classification E32
dc.subject.classification O40
dc.subject.classification N13
dc.subject.classification N14
dc.subject.classification P52
dc.title Innovative activity and business cycle: Austria in the 19th and 20th century en
dc.type Article en
dc.publisher.abbreviation TUL
dc.relation.isrefereed true
dc.identifier.doi 10.15240/tul/001/2018-2-004
dc.identifier.eissn 2336-5604
local.relation.volume 21
local.relation.issue 2
local.relation.abbreviation E+M cs
local.relation.abbreviation E&M en
local.faculty Faculty of Economics
local.citation.spage 53
local.citation.epage 68
local.access open
local.fulltext yes
local.filename EM_2_2018_04

Files in this item

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

Search DSpace

Advanced Search


My Account