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

Simple item page
dc.contributor.authorMinárik, Pavol
dc.contributor.authorVokoun, Marek
dc.contributor.authorStellner, František
dc.contributor.otherEkonomická fakultacs
dc.date.accessioned2018-06-28
dc.date.available2018-06-28
dc.date.issued2018-06-28
dc.description.abstractThis 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.formattext
dc.format.extent16 strancs
dc.identifier.doi10.15240/tul/001/2018-2-004
dc.identifier.eissn2336-5604
dc.identifier.issn1212-3609
dc.identifier.urihttps://dspace.tul.cz/handle/15240/26414
dc.language.isoen
dc.publisherTechnická Univerzita v Libercics
dc.publisherTechnical university of Liberec, Czech Republicen
dc.publisher.abbreviationTUL
dc.relation.ispartofAlfaro, 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. https://dx.doi.org/10.1556/aoecon.61.2011.3.3.cs
dc.relation.ispartofArtis, M., Krolzig, H., & Toro, J. (2004). The European Business Cycle. Oxford Economic Papers, 56(1), 1-44.cs
dc.relation.ispartofAxarloglou, K. (2003). The Cyclicality of New Product Introductions. The Journal of Business, 76(1), 29-48. https://dx.doi.org/10.1086/344112.cs
dc.relation.ispartofBaten, 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. https://dx.doi.org/10.1093/oep/gpm032.cs
dc.relation.ispartofBolt, 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 http://www.ggdc.net/maddison/maddison-project/data.htm.cs
dc.relation.ispartofBrandner, P., & Neusser, K. (1992). Business cycles in open economies: Stylized facts for Austria and Germany. Review of World Economics, 128(1), 67-87. https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/bf02707246.cs
dc.relation.ispartofBrouwer, 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. https://dx.doi.org/10.1093/cje/23.3.385.cs
dc.relation.ispartofCollins, A., & Yao, S. (1998). On innovative activity over the business cycle: a note. Applied Economics Letters, 5(12), 785-788. https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/135048598354032.cs
dc.relation.ispartofEigner, 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.ispartofFederico, P. J. (1964). Historical Patent Statistics 1791-1961. Journal of the Patent Office Society, 76(2), 89-171.cs
dc.relation.ispartofFederico, P. J. (2011). Historical Patent Statistics of 44 Nations, 1791 to 1961. GESIS Data Archive, Cologne. https://dx.doi.org/10.4232/1.10297.cs
dc.relation.ispartofFilippetti, A., & Archibugi, D. (2011). Innovation in times of crisis: National Systems of Innovation, structure, and demand. Research Policy, 40(2), 179-192. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2010.09.001.cs
dc.relation.ispartofGerschenkron, A. (1977). An economic spurt that failed: four lectures in Austrian history. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press.cs
dc.relation.ispartofGeroski, P. A., & Walters, C. F. (1995). Innovative activity over the business cycle. Economic Journal, 105(431), 916-928.cs
dc.relation.ispartofGiedeman, 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. https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11294-006-9009-3.cs
dc.relation.ispartofGilbert, M. (1962). The Postwar Business Cycle in Western Europe. American Economic Review, 52(2), 93-109.cs
dc.relation.ispartofGonzalo, J. (1994). Five alternative methods of estimating long-run equilibrium relationships. Journal of Econometrics, 60(1-2), 203-233. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0304-4076(94)90044-2.cs
dc.relation.ispartofGreenhalgh, C., & Rogers, M. (2009). Innovation, Intellectual Property, and Economic Growth. Princeton: Princeton University Press.cs
dc.relation.ispartofGriliches, Z. (1991). Patent Statistics as Economic Indicators: A Survey. National Bureau of Economic Research. Retrieved November 29, 2016, from http://ideas.repec.org/p/nbr/nberwo/3301.html.cs
dc.relation.ispartofGross, N. T. (1968). An Estimate of Industrial Product in Austria in 1841. Journal of Economic History, 28(1), 80-101. https://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0022050700076063.cs
dc.relation.ispartofGross, N. T. (1971). Economic Growth and the Consumption of Coal in Austria and Hungary 1831-1913. Journal of Economic History, 31(4), 898-916. https://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0022050700074684.cs
dc.relation.ispartofHall, B. H., & Rosenberg, N. (2010). Handbook of the economics of innovation. Amsterdam: ElsevierNorth-Holland.cs
dc.relation.ispartofHamilton, J. D. (1994). Time Series Analysis. Princeton: Princeton University Press.cs
dc.relation.ispartofHinrichs, 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.ispartofHuertas, 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.ispartofJarque, C. M., & Bera, A. K. (1987). A test for normality of observations and regression residuals. International Statistical Review, 55(2), 163-172. https://dx.doi.org/10.2307/1403192.cs
dc.relation.ispartofJohansen, S. (1995). Likelihood-Based Inference in Cointegrated Vector Autoregressive Models. Oxford: Oxford University Press.cs
dc.relation.ispartofJovanovic, B., & Lach, S. (1997). Product Innovation and the Business Cycle. International Economic Review, 38(1), 3-22. https://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2527405.cs
dc.relation.ispartofKleinknecht, A., & Verspagen, B. (1990). Demand and innovation: Schmookler re-examined. Research Policy, 19(4), 387-394. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0048-7333(90)90022-X.cs
dc.relation.ispartofKomlos, 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.ispartofKose, M. A., Otrok, C,, & Whiteman, C. H. (2003). International Business Cycles: World, Region, and Country-Specific Factors. American Economic Review, 93(4), 1216-1239. https://dx.doi.org/10.1257/000282803769206278.cs
dc.relation.ispartofKydland, F. E., & Prescott, E. C. (1982). Time to Build and Aggregate Fluctuations. Econometrica, 50(6), 1345-1370. https://dx.doi.org/10.2307/1913386.cs
dc.relation.ispartofMachlup, F., & Penrose, E. (1950). The Patent Controversy in the Nineteenth Century. Journal of Economic History, 10(1), 1-29. https://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0022050700055893.cs
dc.relation.ispartofMoser, P. (2005). How Do Patent Laws Influence Innovation? Evidence from Nineteenth-Century World's Fairs. American Economic Review, 95(4), 1214-1236. https://dx.doi.org/10.1257/0002828054825501.cs
dc.relation.ispartofOECD. (2018). Triadic patent families (indicator). https://dx.doi.org/10.1787/6a8d10f4-en.cs
dc.relation.ispartofPakes, A., Simpson, M., Judd, K., & Mansfield, E. (1989). Patent Renewal Data. Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, 1989(1989), 331-410. https://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2534724.cs
dc.relation.ispartofPenrose, E. (2009). The Theory of the Growth of the Firm. Oxford: Oxford University Press.cs
dc.relation.ispartofPiva, M., & Vivarelli, M. (2007). Is demand-pulled innovation equally important in different groups of firms? Cambridge Journal of Economics, 31(5), 691-710. https://dx.doi.org/ 10.1093/cje/bem010.cs
dc.relation.ispartofPlosser, C. I. (1989). Understanding Real Business Cycles. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 3(3), 51-77. https://dx.doi.org/10.1257/jep.3.3.51.cs
dc.relation.ispartofRafferty, 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.ispartofShleifer, A. (1986). Implementation Cycles. Journal of Political Economy, 94(6), 1163-1190. https://dx.doi.org/10.1086/261428.cs
dc.relation.ispartofScherer, F. (1982). Demand-pull and technological invention: Schmookler revisited. Journal of Industrial Economics, 30(3), 225-237. https://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2098216.cs
dc.relation.ispartofSchmidt, C. T. (1931). The Austrian Institute for Business Cycle Research. Journal of Political Economy, 39(1), 101-103. https://dx.doi.org/10.1086/254174.cs
dc.relation.ispartofSchmookler, J. (1966). Invention and Economic Growth. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.cs
dc.relation.ispartofSchulze, 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.ispartofSchulze, M. S. (1997). The Machine-Building Industry and Austria's Great Depression after 1873. Economic History Review, 50(2), 282-304. https://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1468-0289.00055.cs
dc.relation.ispartofSchumpeter, J. A. (1927). The Explanation of the Business Cycle. Economica, 21(1927), 286-311.cs
dc.relation.ispartofSpree, R. (1977). Die Wachstumszyklen der deutschen Wirtschaft von 1840 bis 1880. Berlin: Duncker & Humblot.cs
dc.relation.ispartofTkáčová, A., & Siničáková, M. (2015). New composite leading indicator of the Hungarian business cycle. Acta Oeconomica, 65(3), 479-501. https://dx.doi.org/10.1556/032.65.2015.3.7.cs
dc.relation.ispartofUnited Nations Statistics Division. (2007). Handbook of the international comparison programme. New York: United Nations Statistics Division.cs
dc.relation.ispartofWandruszka, A., & Urbanitsch, P. (1978). Die Habsburgermonarchie, 1848-1918, 1: Die wirtschaftliche Entwicklung. Vienna: Osterreichische Akademie der Wissenschaften.cs
dc.relation.ispartofWIPO. (2012). Statistics on Patents - IP statistics prior to 1980. Data file. Retrieved December 14, 2016, from .cs
dc.relation.ispartofEconomics and Managementen
dc.relation.isrefereedtrue
dc.rightsCC BY-NC
dc.subjectbusiness cycleen
dc.subjectinnovationen
dc.subjectinnovative activityen
dc.subjectAustriaen
dc.subject.classificationE32
dc.subject.classificationO40
dc.subject.classificationN13
dc.subject.classificationN14
dc.subject.classificationP52
dc.titleInnovative activity and business cycle: Austria in the 19th and 20th centuryen
dc.typeArticleen
local.accessopen
local.citation.epage68
local.citation.spage53
local.facultyFaculty of Economics
local.filenameEM_2_2018_04
local.fulltextyes
local.relation.abbreviationE+Mcs
local.relation.abbreviationE&Men
local.relation.issue2
local.relation.volume21
Files
Original bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Thumbnail Image
Name:
EM_2_2018_04.pdf
Size:
1.33 MB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Description:
Článek
Download
Collections
Číslo 2