RICERCA ITALIANA     

FIRB simili:

• 1 - Modelli e strumenti per la valutazione dell'impatto a breve e medio termine degli investimenti in ricerca e innovazione nelle imprese sul sistema produttivo del paese
• 2 - Un approccio multideimensionale al trasferimento tecnologico
• 3 - La riorganizzazione del sistema della ricerca pubblica per il trasferimento tecnologico: governance, strumenti ed interventi attuativi.
• 4 - LA RAPPRESENTAZIONE DELLE CONOSCENZE ORGANIZZATIVE: MODELLI E APPLICAZIONI DIGITALI A SUPPORTO DEI SISTEMI DISTRIBUITI DI IMPRESE
• 5 - La valutazione degli investimenti in ricerca nelle imprese e nel sistema economico: approcci e metodologie
• 6 - Governo elettronico per i Paesi del Mediterraneo (eG4M) - Nuove metodologie nelle aree sociologica, economica, organizzativa e tecnologica per l'adattamento e il miglioramento del modello per il governo elettronico nei paesi del mediterraneo, concezione e produzione di linee guida per la pianificazione strategica, azioni per la sensibilizzazione e disseminazione del nuovo modello per il governo elettronico e dei servizi per l'accesso a dati pubblici.
• 7 - ---------SOCRATE: SOcietà artificiali per la Competizione e la collaborazione: Reti di conoscenza, reputazione orgAnizzativa e clusTEr di medie e piccole imprese. Costruzione di un simulatore user-enabling.
• 8 - La frammentazione internazionale della produzione delle imprese italiane. Nuovi modelli organizzativi e ruolo delle tecnologie dell'informazione
• 9 - Sviluppo di modelli e strumenti avanzati per acquisire, gestire e valorizzare le nuove conoscenze a sostegno della competitività delle piccole e medie imprese
• 10 - Le dinamiche evolutive dei cluster di imprese: nuove architetture organizzative e tecnologiche

Classificazione scientifico-disciplinare

• Area scientifico disciplinare: Scienze economiche e statistiche
  • ECONOMIA POLITICA

Classificazione geografica

• Regione: Lombardia

Bibliografia

Acs, Z, Audretsch D., and M. Feldman 1994, R&D Spillovers and Recipient Firm Size. Review of Economics and Statistics 76, 336-340
Airaghi A., Busch N., Georghoiu L., Kuhlmann S., Ledoux M.J., van Raan A. and Viana Baptista J. 1999, Options and Limits for Assessing the Socio-Economic Impact of European RTD Programmes, ETAN, European Commission
Amendola G., and Perrucci A. 1995, L’Italia nella competizione tecnologica internazionale, Milano: Franco Angeli
Bianchi C. 2004, The Growth Performance and Prospects in Europe: a Kaldorian Approach, Quaderni di Ricerca del Dipartimento di Economia Politica e Metodi Quantitativi, Università di Pavia
Bond S., D. Harhoff , and J. Van Reenen 2003, Investment, R&D and financial constraints in Britain and Germany, CEP DP n. 595
Bottazzi G., Dosi G., and Rocchetti G. 2001, Modes of Knowledge Accumulation, Entry Regimes and Patterns of Industrial Evolution, Industrial and Corporate Change, 10, 609-638
Branstetter, L. 2001, Are Knowledge Spillovers International or Intranational in Scope? Microeconometric Evidence from Japan and the United States, Journal of International Economics, 53, 53-79
Breschi, S. Malerba, F., Orsenigo, L. 2000, Technological Regimes and Schumpeterian Patterns of Innovation, Economic Journal, 110, 388-410
Cameron G. 1996. Innovation and Economic Growth, CEP DP n. 277, LSE
Cantwell, J. 1995. The globalisation of technology: what remains of the product cycle model, Cambridge Journal of Economics 19, 155-174
Carlsson B. 1995, Technological Systems and Economic Performance: The Case of Factory Automation. Dordrecht: Kluwer
Cohen, W., and D. Levinthal 1990, Absorptive Capacity: A New Perspective of Learning and Innovation, Administrative Science Quarterly, 35, 128-152
Cowan R., David P, and D. Foray 2000, The explicit economics of knowledge codification and tacitness, Industrial and Corporate Change, 9: 211-253
Dasgupta P. and P. David 1994, Towards a New Economics of Science, Research Policy, 23 (5): 487-532
Davies S. and. Lyons B. 1991, Characterizing Relative Performance: The Productivity Advantages of Foreign Owned Firms in the U.K, Oxford Economic Papers, 43: 584-595
Doms M., Jensen B. 1998, Comparing wages, skills, and productivity between domestically and foreign-owned manufacturing establishments in the United States, in Baldwin R., Lipsey R. and Richardson J.D. eds Geography and Ownership as Basis for Economic Accounting, University of Chicago Press
Dunning, J.and Cantwell, J. 1988, The changing role of multinational enterprises in the creation and diffusion of technology, in Dunning, J.H. ed. Multinationals, Technology and Competitiveness, Unwin Hyman, London
European Commission-IPTS – Joanheum Research 2002, The RTD evaluation Toolbox, EPUB, Seville
Fagerberg, J. 2002, Technology, growth and competitiveness: Selected essays, Edward Elgar, Cheltenham
Ferrari S., Guerrieri P. Malerba F., Mariotti S., Palma D. 1999, L’Italia nella competizione tecnologica internazionale – Secondo rapporto. Milano: Franco Angeli
Ferrari S., Guerrieri P. Malerba F., Mariotti S., Palma D. 2001, L’Italia nella competizione tecnologica internazionale. La meccanica strumentale. Milano: Franco Angeli
Ferrari S., Guerrieri P. Malerba F., Mariotti S., Palma D. 2002, L’Italia nella competizione tecnologica internazionale – Terzo rapporto. Milano: Franco Angeli
Foss N.J., Pedersen T 2002, Transferring knowledge in MNCs: the role of sources of subsidiary knowledge in organisational context, Journal of International Management, 8119, 49-67
Freeman C. 1987. Technology Policy and Economic Performance: Lessons from Japan. London: Pinter
Griliches Z. 1981. Market Value, R&D and Patents, Economic Letters, 7,183-187
Griliches Z. 1998. R&D and Productivity. Chicago: University of Chicago Press
HallB. H. 1996. The private and social returns to R&D. In Smith B., Barfield C. eds., Technology, R&D and the Economy. AEI- Brookings Institution: Washington
Hamel G., Prahalad C.K. 1994, Competing for the Future, Boston: Harvard Business School Press
Hansen M., Nohria N., Tierney T. 1999, What’s your strategy for managing knowledge?, Harvard Business Review, March-April. 106-116
Jaffe A.1986. Technological opportunities and spillovers of R&D: Evidence from firms’ patents, profits and market values, American Economic Review, 76, 94-1001
Kaldor, N. 1957 A model of economic growth, Economic Journal, 67, 591-624
Krueger D., Kumar K.B. 2004. US-Europe differences in technology-driven growth: quantifying the role of education, Journal of Monetary Economics, 51: 161-190
Lundvall B.-Å. 1992. National Systems of Innovation. London: Pinter
Malerba F., Nelson R., Orsenigo L., Winter S. 1999, History-friendly Models of Industry Evolution: The Computer Industry. Industrial and Corporate Change, 8 (1), 3-40
Malerba F., Nelson R., Orsenigo L., Winter S. 2001, Competition and Industrial Policies in a History-friendly Model of the Evolution of The Computer Industry. International Journal of Industrial Organization, 19, 635-664
Malerba F., Orsenigo L. 2002, Innovation and Market Structure in the Dynamics of the Pharmaceutical Industry and Biotechnology: Towards a History-friendly Model, Industrial and Corporate Change, 11 (4), 667-703
Malerba, F. 2002 Sectoral systems of innovation and production, Research Policy , 31 (2), 247-264
Metcalfe S. 1997, Evolutionary Economics and Creative Destruction, Routledge, London
Nelson R., Winter S. 1982, An Evolutionary Theory of Economic Change, Harvard University Press: Cambridge, MA
Pack H. 1994, Endogenous Growth Theory: Intellectual Appeal and Empirical Shortcoming, Journal of Economic Perspectives, 8, 55-72
Pavitt K. 1996, Some Foundations for a Theory of the Large Innovating Firm, in Dosi G., Giannetti R., Toninelli P. eds, Technology and Enterprise in a Historical Perspective, Brookfield: Elgar
Penrose, E. 1959, The Theory of the Growth of the Firm, M.E. Sharpe: White Plains, NY
Pianta, M. 2001, ‘Innovation, demand and employment’, in P. Petit and L. Soete , Technology and the future of European employment, Elgar, Aldershot, 142-165
Polanyi, M 1962, Personal Knowledge: Towards a post-Critical Philosophy. New York: Harper Torchbooks
Powell W., Koput K., and Smith-Doerr L. 1996, Interorganizational Collaboration and the Locus of Innovation: Networks of Learning in Biotechnology, Administrative Science Quarterly, 41, 116-145
Rivera-Batiz L., and Romer P. 1991. Economic Integration and Endogenous Growth, Quarterly Journal of Economics, 106,531-555
Romer P. 1990. Endogenous Technological Change, Journal of Political Economy, 98, 71-102.
Shane S. and Venkataraman S. 2000, The promise of entrepreneurship as a field of Research Academy of management review, 251, 217-226
Shapira P., Kuhlmann S. eds 2003 Learning from Science and Technology Policy Evaluation: Experiences from the United States and Europe. Edward Elgar UK
Silvani A., Sirilli G. 2001, A review of the Italian S&T policy and system of innovation in P.Laredo and P. Mustar eds. Research and Innovation Policies in the Global Economy , Eward Elgar UK
Stephan P. 1996, The Economics of Science, Journal of Economic Literature, 34 (3), 1199-1235
Toivanen O., Stoneman P., Bosworth D 2002, Innovation and market value of UK firms: 1989-1995, Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, 64, 39-61
Verspagen B. 1991, A New Empirical Approach to Catching Up or Falling Behind, Structural Change and Economic Dynamics 2, 359-380
Vivarelli M. and Pianta, M eds 2000, The employment impact of innovation. Evidence and policy,Routledge, London
Vonortas N. 2000, Technology policy in the US and European Union: Shifting orientation towards technology users, Science and Public Policy 27, 97-108
Zanfei, A. 2000, Transnational firms and the changing organization of innovative activities, Cambridge Journal of Economics, 24 (5), 515-542
Zucker, L., Darby M. and Brewer, M. 1998, Intellectual Capital and the birth of U.S biotechnology enterprises, American Economic Review 88, 290-306

Parole Chiave

Ricerca; Capitale Umano; Società della Conoscenza; Valutazione dell'Impatto; Politica Pubblica; Imprenditorialità