Do barriers to innovation impact changes in innovation activities of firms during business cycle? The effect of the Polish green island

• Authors: Aleksander Jakimowicz , Daniel Rzeczkowski

Abstracts

EN

Research background: There is no doubt that innovation is an important source of economic growth. In the assessment of the innovative activity of Polish industrial processing enterprises, two opposing views can be found. The first indicates the exogenous shock resulting from the global financial crisis and the associated innovation crisis and the subsequent period of innovative pessimism. The second shows the Polish economy as the European Green Island due to strong and uninterrupted economic growth over the past 27 years, controlled inflation, and reduction of unemployment as well as increase of the citizens? well-being. In these conditions, an interesting research gap appeared, which is worth filling, at the centre of which there are factors determining the innovative activity of enterprises, and in particular the role and importance of innovation barriers in various phases of the business cycle. Purpose of the article: The aim of the research is to determine the impact of innovation barriers and degrees of their importance on the innovation activity of Polish industrial processing enterprises during the business cycle. The time frame of the analysis covers three phases of the cycle: the prosperity period of 2004?2006, the global financial crisis of 2008?2010 and the recovery from 2012?2014. Methods: Pearson?s ?2 independence test and correspondence analysis were used for data analysis. The research results are presented in a graphical form of biplots that describe the coexistence of three types of variables: (1) types of enterprises and ownership sectors, (2) effects or objectives of innovative activity, and (3) innovation barriers and reasons for the lack of innovation. The basis of calculations were three databases covering the mentioned periods. Findings & Value added: High resistance of innovative activity of Polish industrial processing enterprises to economic fluctuations has been demonstrated. Innovation barriers and degrees of their importance had little impact on the operations of enterprises in the first of the analysed periods, when prosperity was booming. The impact of the global financial crisis on innovation activities proved to be counterintuitive, as enterprises have continuously achieved their goals and the importance of innovation barriers has diminished even more. In the third period, innovation barriers no longer had any significance for the innovation activities of enterprises. The phenomenon of a gradual decline in the importance of innovation barriers, regardless of the phases of the business cycle, was called the Polish Green Island Effect. The relationship found is a peculiarity which is probably unprecedented in recent world economic history.

Keywords

EN

industrial processing enterprises; innovation strategy; barriers to innovation; eco-innovations; business fluctuations

• Publisher: Instytut Badań Gospodarczych
• Journal: Equilibrium. Quarterly Journal of Economics and Economic Policy
• Year: 2019
• Volume: 14
• Issue: 4
• Pages: 631-676

Dates

published

2019

Contributors

author

Aleksander Jakimowicz

• Polish Academy of Sciences

• https://orcid.org/000000032522082X

author

Daniel Rzeczkowski

• University of Warmia and Mazury in Olsztyn

• https://orcid.org/0000000284585987

References

• Afonasova, M. A., Panfilova, E. E., Galichkina, M. A., & Ślusarczyk, B. (2019). Digitalization in economy and innovation: the effect on social and economic processes. Polish Journal of Management Studies, 19(2). doi: 10.17512/pjms.2019.19.2.02.
• Arza, V., & López, E. (2018). Obstacles to innovation and firm size: a quantitative study for Argentina. Inter-American Development Bank. doi:10.18235/0001177.
• Audretsch, D. B. (2019). Entrepreneurship and culture. Eurasian Economic Review Advance online publication. doi:10.1007/s40822-019-00132-2.
• Balcerzak, A.P. (2000). Quality of institutions in the European Union countries. Application of TOPSIS based on entropy measure for objective weighting. Acta Polytechnica Hungarica, 17(1).
• Balcerzak, A. P., & Pietrzak, M.B. (2016). Quality of institutions for knowledge-based economy within new institutional economics framework. Multiple criteria decision analysis for European countries in the Years 2000–2013. Economics & Sociology, 9(4). doi: 10.14254/2071-789X.2016/9-4/4.
• Borg, I., Groenen, P. J. F. (2010). Modern multidimensional scaling: theory and applications. New York: Springer Science + Business Media.
• Bourdieu, P. (1996). Distinction: a social critique of the judgement of taste. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
• Chen, H.-S., Tsai, B.-K., & Hsieh, C.-M. (2018). The effects of perceived barriers on innovation resistance of hydrogen-electric motorcycles. Sustainability, 10(1933). doi:10.3390/su10061933.
• Cienski, J. (2012). Poland growth defies eurozone crisis. Financial Times, May 31, 2012. Retrieved form https://www.ft.com/content/c4e09e84-ab35-11e1-a2ed-00144feabdc0 (7.05.2019).
• Coad, A., Pellegrino, G., & Savona M. (2016). Barriers to innovation and firm productivity. Economics of Innovation and New Technology, 25(3). doi: 10.1080/10438599.2015.1076193.
• Cobb, C. W., & Douglas, P. H. (1928). A theory of production. American Economic Review, 18(1).
• Commission Regulation (EU) No. 651/2014 of 17 June 2014 declaring certain categories of aid compatible with the internal market in application of Articles 107 and 108 of the Treaty. Official Journal of the European Union, L 187/1, 26.6.2014.
• Gorączkowska, J. (2015). Technological parks and the innovation activity of enterprises in the industrial networks – developed vs. intermediate regions. Equilibrium. Quarterly Journal of Economics and Economic Policy, 10(2). doi: 10.12775/EQUIL.2015.017.
• Greenacre, M. J. (1984). Theory and applications of correspondence analysis. London: Academic Press.
• Greenacre, M. J. (2007). Correspondence analysis in practice. Boca Raton, FL: Chapman & Hall/CRC – Taylor & Francis Group.
• Greenacre, M. J. (2010). Biplots in practice. Bilbao: Fundación BBVA.
• Iammarino, S., Sanna-Randaccio, F., & Savona M. (2009). The perception of obstacles to innovation. Foreign multinationals and domestic firms in Italy. Revue d’économie industrielle, 125(1). doi: 10.4000/rei.3953.
• Jakimowicz, A., & Rzeczkowski, D. (2016). Prosumption in the public administration sector. Acta Physica Polonica A, 129(5). doi: 10.12693/APhysPolA. 129.1011.
• Jakimowicz, A., & Rzeczkowski, D. (2019). Diversification of innovation strategies of Polish industrial processing enterprises depending on their size after the global financial crisis. Journal of Entrepreneurship, Management and Innovation, 15(4). doi: 10.7341/20191542.
• Kaczyński, P. M. (2012). Poland in the EU: the Green Island. Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Poland. Retrieved form https://www.msz.gov.pl/en/c/ MOBILE/foreign_policy/europe/european_union/poland_ineu/poland_in_eu/ (3.05.2019).
• Kijek, T. (2012). Innovation capital and its measurement. Journal of Entrepreneurship, Management and Innovation, 8(4).
• Lewandowska, M. S. (2014). Innovation barriers and international competitiveness of enterprises from Polish food processing industry. Research results. Acta Scientiarum Polonorum. Oeconomia, 13(4).
• Lorentzen, T., & Jakobsen, S-E. (2016). Explaining innovation. An empirical analysis of industry data from Norway. Journal of Entrepreneurship, Management and Innovation, 12(2). doi: 10.7341/20161221.
• Madeira, M. J., Carvalho, J., Miguel Moreira, J. R., Duarte, F. A. P., & de São Pedro Filho, F. (2017). Barriers to innovation and the innovative performance of Portuguese firms. Journal of Business, 9(1). doi: 10.21678/jb.2017.822.
• Nenadić, O., & Greenacre, M. J. (2007). Correspondence analysis in R, with two- and three-dimensional graphics: the ca package. Journal of Statistical Software, 20(3). doi: 10.18637/jss.v020.i03.
• Pachouri, A., & Sharma, S. (2016). Barriers to innovation in Indian small and medium-sized enterprises. ADBI Working Paper 588. Tokyo: Asian Development Bank Institute. Retrieved form http://www.adb.org/publications/barriers-innovation-indian-small-and-medium-sized-enterprises/ (11.05.2019).
• Pietrzak, M. B., Balcerzak, A. P., Gajdos, A., & Arendt, Ł (2017). Entrepreneurial environment at regional level: the case of Polish path towards sustainable socio-economic development. Entrepreneurship and Sustainability Issues, 5(2). 190-203, doi: 10.9770/jesi.2017.5.2(2).
• Pinget, A., Bocquet, R., & Mothe, C. (2015). Barriers to environmental innovation in SMEs: empirical evidence from French firms. M@n@gement, 18(2). doi: 10.3917/mana.182.0132.
• Rogalska, E. (2018). Multiple-criteria analysis of regional entrepreneurship conditions in Poland. Equilibrium. Quarterly Journal of Economics and Economic Policy, 13(4). doi: 10.24136/eq.2018.034.
• Segarra-Blasco, A., García-Quevedo, J., & Teruel-Carrizosa, M. (2008). Barriers to innovation and public policy in Catalonia. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 4(4). doi: 10.1007/s11365-008-0086-z.
• Succurro, M. & Costanzo, G.D. (2019). Ownership structure and firm patenting activity in Italy. Eurasian Economic Review, 9(2). doi:10.1007/s40822-018-0109-1.
• Świadek, A. (2015). The economic cycle and the innovation activity of the Polish industry system. Equilibrium. Quarterly Journal of Economics and Economic Policy, 10(2). doi: 10.12775/EQUIL.2015.014.
• Świadek, A., Dzikowski, P., Tomaszewski, M., & Gorączkowska, J. (2019). Sectoral patterns of innovation cooperation in Polish industry. Equilibrium. Quarterly Journal of Economics and Economic Policy, 14(1). doi: 10.24136/eq. 2019.009.
• Talegeta, S. (2014). Innovation and barriers to innovation: small and medium enterprises in Addis Ababa. Journal of Small Business and Entrepreneurship Development, 2(1).
• Toffler, A., & Toffler, H. (2006). Revolutionary wealth: how it will be created and how it will change our lives. New York: Currency Doubleday.
• Tomescu-Dubrow, I., Dubrow, J. K., Kiersztyn, A., Andrejuk, K., Kołczyńska, M., & Slomczynski K. M. (2019). The subjective experience of joblessness in Poland. Cham: Springer Nature Switzerland. doi: 10.1007/978-3-030-13647-5.
• Tomescu-Dubrow, I., Słomczyński, K. M., Domański, H., Dubrow, J. K., Sawiński, Z., & Przybysz, D. (2018). Dynamics of class and stratification in Poland. Budapest–New Jork: Central European University Press.
• Wziątek-Kubiak, A., Balcerowicz, E., & Pęczkowski, M. (2013). Differentiation of innovation strategies of manufacturing firms in the New Member States: cluster analysis on firm level data. Argumenta Oeconomica, 2(31).
• Wziątek-Kubiak, A., & Pęczkowski, M. (2019). Czynniki ciągłości komercjalizacji innowacji w okresie negatywnego szoku zewnętrznego. Przykład Polski. Bank I Kredyt, 50(1).

Identifiers

DOI

10.24136/eq.2019.030

Biblioteka Nauki

22446394