World economy and international economic relations

Changes in research and development after crisis in selected countries

Economic Annals-XXI

Economic Annals-ХХI: Volume 160, Issue 7-8, Pages: 31-34

Citation information:
Hvizdova, E., Mokrisova, V., & Polacko, J. (2016). Changes in research and development after crisis in selected countries. Economic Annals-XXI, 160(7-8), 31-34. doi: https://doi.org/10.21003/ea.V160-06

View Full-TextDownload PDF

Eva Hvizdova
PhD (Economics),
Assistant Professor,
College of International Business ISM
Presov, Slovakia 1 Duchnovitch Square, Presov, 080 01, Slovak Republic
hvizdova@ismpo.sk

Viera Mokrisova
PhD (Economics),
Senior Lecturer,
College of International Business ISM
Presov, Slovakia 1 Duchnovitch Square, Presov, 080 01, Slovak Republic
mokrisova@ismpo.sk

Jozef Polacko
Senior Lecturer,
College of International Business ISM
Presov, Slovakia 1 Duchnovitch Square, Presov, 080 01, Slovak Republic
kancelar@ismpo.sk

Changes in research and development after crisis in selected countries

Abstract. This article deals with the value of research and development (R&D) indicators before, during and after the economic crisis of 2008-2009. Higher R&D intensity and higher R&D manpower are found to be predictors of improved firm performance. On the example of four countries with various level of R&D, we try to show if crisis influences this area of economy in the selected countries, namely, Germany, Finland, Slovakia and the Czech Republic. We analysed the period of 2006-2014, as the indicators of the year 2015 are still not available, paying particular attention to Slovakia. For the analysis, such indicators were chosen: expenditures on research and development per inhabitant and as a per cent of GDP; number of university graduates; number of companies in high-technology sector and total high-tech trade (export and import) as a per cent of total trade. According to analysed indicators, the leading countries in research and development were Finland and Germany. Slovakia reached the worst results in expenditures to R&D. Another conclusion of our research was that the crisis does not cause significant changes in research and development area. Despite the fact that in the years 2008 and 2009 there were lower values of some R&D indicators compared to the other years, the crisis did not make a serious impact on analysed sphere.

Keywords: Research and Development; High-tech Sector; Tertiary Education

JEL Classification: O30

DOI: https://doi.org/10.21003/ea.V160-06

References

  1. Beckman, T. (1997). A methodology for knowledge management. In M. H. Hamza (Ed.). Proceedings on the IASTED International Conference on AI and Soft, 29-32.
  2. Brinkley, I. (2006). Defining the knowledge economy. London: The Work Foundation.
  3. Dosi, G., & Soete, L. (1988). Technical change and international trade. In Dosi, G. et al. (Eds.). Technical Change and Economic Theory (pp. 631-646). London: Pinter.
  4. Drucker, P. (2004). Age of Discontinuity. The image of a changing society. Praha: Management Press (in Czech).
  5. Fagerberg, J. (1996). Competitiveness, scale and R&D. Norwegian Institute of International Affairs – Norsk utenrikspolitisk institutt (NUPI).
    Retrieved from http://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:tik:wparch:1996545
  6. Hindls, R. (2007). Statistics for economist. Praha: Professional publishing. (in Czech).
  7. Houghton, J., & Sheehan, P. (2000). A Primer on the Knowledge Economy Melbourne: Victoria University of Technology.
  8. Husek, R. (2007). Econometric analysis. Praha: Oeconomica (in Czech).
  9. Hvizdova, E., Jr. (2014). Academic promotion system and academic success indicators in Slovakia. In M. Mitrega (Ed.). Leveraging success of young scholars in business discipline (pp. 53-75). Warsaw: CeDeWu Sp. z o.o.
  10. Kelemen, J. et al. (2007). Invitation to the knowledge society. Bratislava: Iura Edition (in Slovak).
  11. Kravcakova-Vozarova, I., Kotulic, R., & Sira, E. (2015). V4 countries agricultural sector evaluation in terms of coptetitive advantage. Economic annals-XXI, 5-6, 60-63.
    Retrieved from https://ea21journal.world/index.php/ea-v151-15/
  12. Langot, F., & Lemoine, M. (2016). Strategic fiscal policies in Europe: why does the labour wedge matter? European Economic Review.
    doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.euroecorev.2016.09.005
  13. Leu, G., & Abbass, H. (2016). A multi-disciplinary review of knowledge acquisition methods: From human to autonomous eliciting agents. Knowledge-Based Systems, 105, 1-22.
    doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.knosys.2016.02.012
  14. Matsumura, T., Matsushima, N., & Cato, S. (2013). Competitiveness and R&D competition revisited. Economic modelling, 31, 541-547.
    doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.econmod.2012.12.016
  15. Mazzucato, M. (2015). Debunking public vs. private sector myths. London: Anthem Press.
  16. Morozumi, A., & Veiga, F. J. (2016). Public spending and growth: The role of government accountability. European Economic Review, 89, 148-171.
    doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.euroecorev.2016.07.001
  17. Prodan, I. (2005). Influence of Research and Development Expenditures on Number of Patent Applications: Selected Case Studies in OECD countries and Central Europe, 1981-2001. Applied Econometrics and International Development, 5, 1-22.
    Retrieved from http://www.usc.es/economet/reviews/aeid541.pdf
  18. Rimarcik, M. (2007). Statistics for practice. Kosice: M. Rimarcik (in Slovak).
  19. Sasaki, T. (2016). Financial cash flows and research and development investment. Pacific-Basin Finance Journal, 39, 1-15.
    doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.pacfin.2016.05.002
  20. Sher, P. J., & Yang, P. Z. (2005). The effects of innovative capabilities and R&D clustering on firm performance: the evidence of Taiwans semiconductor industry. Technovation, 25(1), 33-43.
    doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0166-4972(03)00068-3

Received 20.06.2016

View Full-TextDownload PDF
In, , , , , , , ,

More Papers