Knowledge spillovers

Overall, Cockburn and Henderson (1999) emphasize the presence of knowledge spillovers both within and across firms. The success of a given project is enhanced, they argue, by the success of a related program within the firm as well as in other firms. Even more important, they write ... 

Large, vertically-oriented pharmaceutical firms have in the past been able to deal with the classic "market-based" problems of managing risk in imperfect markets, capturing knowledge spillovers, and working with distortions in symmetrical flows of information... 

Gupta, S., Coordination Incentives In Competing Supply Chains With Knowledge Spillovers, Working Paper, University of Michigan, 2001. 

Richter R, Streb J (2009) Catching-up and falling behind knowledge spillover fixrm American to German machine tool makers. Discussion Paper 09-2009, University of Hohenheim. https // fzid.uni-hohenheim.de/71978.html. Accessed 15 March 2014... 

Caniels M., 1999, Regional Growth Differentials. The Impact of Locally Bounded Knowledge Spillovers, Ph.D Thesis, University of Maastricht... 

Zucker L., Darby M. and Armstrong J., 1998, Geographically localized knowledge Spillovers or markets . Economic Inquiry 36, 65-86... 

Breschi S. and F. Lissoni. 2001. Knowledge spillovers and local iimovation systems a critical survey. Industrial and Corporate Change. 10 975-1005. 

Regional knowledge spillovers from scientific activities are unambiguously empirically confirmed. The most referred studies about regional scientific spillover are Jaffe (1989) Acs, Audretsch, Feldman (1992) and Jaffe et al. (1993). On the other hand, the empirical evidence for a firm s better perception of local demand preferences is weak as well, see Cornish (1997). 

Jaffe, Adam, Manuel Trajtenberg, Rebecca Henderson et al., 1993, Geographic Locali2 a-tion of Knowledge Spillovers as Evidenced by Patent Citations, Quarterly Journal of Economics 198, 577-598. 

Cockburn and Henderson also note there are some grounds for believing that the entry of additional firms into the pharmaceutical research race is not unambiguously welfare-destroying. Competing projects are better described as complements rather than substitutes, and there are significant spillovers of knowledge across firms (p. 508). They conclude that rivalrous research activity is not the dominant factor behind the decision to invest in pharmaceutical research. 

Each chapter is a comprehensive overview, but the emphasis is on the current horizon of knowledge. Each should serve not only the researcher, teacher, or practitioner of catalytic science alone, but those in chemistry and materials science with spillovers to solid-state physics and other disciplinary practices that deal with the transformation of solids or the fate of molecules that contact solids. 

Moreover, the described phenomena will bear relevance for the metal-promoter interaction in promoted supported transition or noble metal catalysts. Unless spillover effects play a decisive role, promotion can occur only if the active metal and promoter oxide are in contact. Obviously, in such complex systems the surface- and interface-free energies and the mobilities of individual components under preparation conditions critically will determine their morphology and distribution. For a deeper understanding of the detailed mechanisms of wetting and spreading in such complex systems as supported catalysts, additional fundamental studies are required, in which our basic knowledge in surface chemistry, surface spectroscopy, colloid and solid-state chemistry, and powder technology must be combined. 

Concluding this section, it seems that research on oxidation catalysts and oxidation reactions provides some push to innovation, through (i) the high level of activity in the synthesis of new structures and development of new approaches to catalyst fabrication, (ii) a better knowledge of the state of catalysts during their use, (iii) the role of surface mobility, spillover and remote control, (iv) the use of additives in the feed and (v) a better understanding of the contribution of homogeneous gas phase reactions. 

In the biking industry firms profit from spillover effects, which occur when embedded lead users use the firms products. User employees of firms take part in races or other bicycle related events in their leisure time. Here, they are in close contact to external users. During these events they tend to use new products (e.g. frames, helmets, pedals] of their employees firms, which are provided to them as test specimen. Other users get aware of these innovations and express their interest by contacting the embedded lead users with questions or solicitations. The embedded lead users share their knowledge about the new products or present the benefits of the products. The fact alone that these products are new and unavailable to the majority of the market seems to spark the interest of external (lead] users. They place preorders with embedded lead users or want to be informed as soon as the product is introduced into the market. 

These results echo the literature acknowledging both common benefits and private benefits (Hamel 1991 Khanna et al. 1998 Lavie 2006). For small firms, SCC helps them jointly create value with their partners but their interfirm learning and joint knowledge are difficult to internalize or transfer to other business areas due to their small scale and scope of operations. Thus, SCC can cause little spillover effect that generates private benefits. In other words, SCC can achieve almost no benefits that are not related to the collaborative advantage, and thus it has no direct impact on firm performance. So the impact of SCC on firm performance is completely mediated by collaborative advantages for small firms. 

Lichtenberg, Frank, Bruno van Pottelsberghe de la Potterie, 1996, The Channels of International R D Spillovers, Paper prepared for the OECD-Conference on the NEW Indicators for the Knowledge based Economy, 19 -21 June, Paris. 

---