The implications of wage structure rigidity on human capital accumulation, economic growth and unemployment: A Schumpeterian approach to endogenous growth theory

The approach put forward in this article is based on Schumpeter`s idea of creative destruction, the competitive process by which entrepreneurs are always looking for new ideas that will render their rivals` ideas obsolete. I present a model in which the rate of economic growth is sensitive to the interactions between relative wage and human capital accumulation. Human capital is an important source of sustained growth. By focusing explicity on innovation as an economic activity with different economic causes and effects, this article tries to open the door to a deeper understanding of how labor market rigidity in the form of wage structure rigidity affects human capital accumulation, and thereby the long-run growth through their effects on economic agent`s incentives to engage in knowledge-producing (education) activities. New technological vintages make it necessary that workers must become reeducated in order to qualify as skilled workers with the new generation of technology. Wage structure rigidity limits the incentives of agents to accumulate and adjust their human capital. This will be harmful to growth and employment. --economic growth,human capital accumulation,innovation,labor market rigidity,unemployment,wage (structure) rigidity

The implications of innovations and wage structure rigidity on economic growth and unemployment: A Schumpeterian approach to endogenous growth theory

The approach put forward in this article is based on Schumpeter`s idea of creative destruction, the competitive process by which entrepreneurs are always looking for new ideas that will render their rivals` ideas obsolete. By focusing explicity on innovation as an economic activity with different economic causes and effects, this article tries to open the door to a deeper understanding of how labor market rigidities in form of wage structure rigidities affect longrun growth through their effects on economic agent`s incentives to engage in innovative or more generally knowledge-producing activities. That is, to the extent that wage structure rigidities limits the ability of a successful innovator to capture monopoly rents from his or her innovations, it will be harmful to growth and employment. --innovation,labor market rigidity,wage (structure) rigidity,economic growth,unemployment

Medical technology innovations - challenges for research, economic an health policy. Summary

The medical technology sector is characterised by a pronounced innovative strength, high knowledge intensity and social relevance due to its contributions to the health care of the population. In Germany, the situation of this future-oriented sector can be characterised as good overall: The scientific-technical basis of medical technology research and development (R&D) is internationally outstanding in many areas. As an industry, German medical technology manufacturers are very well positioned and occupy a leading place on the world market alongside the USA and Japan. Despite this favourable starting position, the industry faces a number of challenges resulting from intensifying international competition, the internationalisation of production and distribution structures and the changing conditions in the health care sector. Subject and objective of the study The promotion of medical technology and the creation of the most favourable framework conditions possible also pose considerable challenges for the public sector: In addition to taking into account the complex requirements for the promotion of this markedly heterogeneous cross-sectional technology, it must be noted that medical technology falls within the sphere of responsibility of both research, economic and health policy. The innovation policy problem here is to coordinate the partly synergetic, but also partly divergent objectives, measures and instruments of the respective policy fields in such a way that favourable framework conditions are created for the development and clinical application of medical technology innovations. The aim of the policy benchmarking was to analyse, with regard to medical technology at the interfaces between research, economic and health policy, which demands on research policy for medical technology arise from health and economic policy objectives and strategies, through which mechanisms, procedures and instruments this situation could be taken into account in practice or is taken into account in order to create goal conflicts. To this end, to identify good practice examples of successful medical technology funding in two countries that are also successful in medical technology (Great Britain and Switzerland) and to examine the extent to which these examples can be transferred to the situation in Germany, and on this basis to develop options for action for a successful innovation policy from a research policy perspective in medical technology in Germany

Makroökonomische Effekte von nachwachsenden Rohstoffen

The results of a current study point out the macroeconomic effects associated with the use and production of renewable resources (NAWARO) in Germany. It focuses on the direct and indirect employment effects in the NAWARO market segments biofuels, energy/electricity, chemical commodities and materials. Supply quantities of renewable resources and agricultural area in Germany required by the industrial production in the different market segments and associated employment effects in the German agricultural sector are also analyzed. Above all, if Germany succeeds to be a lead market in certain NAWARO market segments while retaining agricultural and industrial value chains in Germany considerable employment potentials emerge.renewable resources, new technologies, employment potentials, lead markets, scenarios, Labor and Human Capital, Resource /Energy Economics and Policy,

International competitiveness of the european economy with regard to the EU state aid policy: the case of nanoelectronics. Summary

The domestic growth of high-tech industries is seen as central to future economic development in many countries. In this context, companies are often granted high levels of state support (e.g. through subsidies or tax breaks) to promote growth and employment in these promising sectors or fields of technology. In Europe, however, state support opportunities are regulated by EU state aid control. The aim is to reduce state aid from member states in order to promote European integration and free competition within Europe. State aid is only granted by EU member states under certain conditions Subject and objective of the project The impact of EU state aid control on national policy-making in the field of nanoelectronics is being discussed particularly intensively. Nanoelectronics is regarded as an important cross-sectional technology or industry whose components are in demand and used in numerous user industries. In particular, the construction of new production facilities is massively supported by some states, and at the same time production sites are increasingly being established outside Europe. The effects of EU state aid control on the competitiveness of Europe and its member states such as Germany are generally complex and above all indirect. They depend centrally on the development of other factors in the innovation system (e.g. demand, domestic establishment of user industries), the interaction of these factors, the use of complementary policy instruments and the extent of public support in non-European countries. The Innovation Report therefore examines the following research questions: Which factors influence the attractiveness of individual countries as locations for nanoelectronics? How should the current competitiveness in Germany and Europe be assessed? What consequences would a loss of production capacities have for the entire "nanoelectronics innovation system"? To what extent is there a situation in the field of nanoelectronics that justifies state aid? How can a sustainable funding policy be implemented, especially under the given conditions of limited state aid possibilities? To what extent can the example of nanoelectronics be transferred to other technologies and sectors

Forschungs- und wissensintensive Branchen: Optionen zur Stärkung ihrer internationalen Wettbewerbsfähigkeit. Innovationsreport

Forschungs- und wissensintensive Branchen (z.B. Pharmabranche, Medizintechnik, Fahrzeugbau, EDV-Dienstleistungen) verfügen durch ihre hohen Aufwendungen für Forschung und Entwicklung (FuE) und die in diesen Branchen verwendeten neuen Technologien (z.B. Bio-, Nano-, Informationstechnologien) über große Potenziale zur Entwicklung neuer oder verbesserter Prozesse, Produkte und Dienstleistungen. Hierdurch können sie über Innovationen neue Märkte erschließen und andere Branchen wettbewerbsfähig umgestalten. Innovationen sind meist der Schlüssel zur Stärkung der internationalen Wettbewerbsfähigkeit forschungs- und wissensintensiver Branchen. Diese entstehen in Innovationssystemen, in denen diverse Akteure in einem interaktiven, interdisziplinären und kollektiven Prozess mit vielen Rückkoppelungseffekten beteiligt sind. Hierzu müssen nicht nur alle Teilsysteme (u.a. Wissenschaft/Ausbildung, industrielle Akteure, Nachfrage) innerhalb eines Innovationssystems leistungsstark sein, sondern sie müssen auch untereinander gut vernetzt sein. Dies impliziert, dass zur Stärkung der internationalen Wettbewerbsfähigkeit kontinuierliche Verbesserungen angebots- und nachfrageseitiger Standortfaktoren sowie deren Vernetzung entlang der gesamten Wertschöpfungskette erforderlich sind. Gegenstand und Ziel der Untersuchung Ziel dieses TAB-Innovationsreports war es, ausgehend von einer systemischen Perspektive Handlungsoptionen zur Stärkung der internationalen Wettbewerbsfähigkeit forschungs- und wissensintensiver Branchen zu entwickeln, mit denen bestehende Potenziale am Standort Deutschland erhalten und ausgebaut sowie Innovationshemmnisse abgebaut werden können. Folgende Fragen standen im Fokus der Untersuchungen: Welche wirtschaftspolitische Bedeutung haben forschungs- und wissensintensive Branchen in Deutschland? Welche angebots- und nachfrageseitigen Faktoren sind entscheidend zur Erzielung von Wettbewerbsvorteilen in diesen Branchen? Wie attraktiv ist der Standort Deutschland für forschungs- und wissensintensive Branchen hinsichtlich dieser angebots- und nachfrageseitigen Faktoren? Welche Handlungsoptionen stehen den Akteuren aus Politik, Wissenschaft und Wirtschaft zur Verfügung, um die forschungs- und wissensintensiven Branchen am Standort Deutschland und dessen Forschungsinstitutionen und Unternehmen international wettbewerbsfähiger zu machen? Zur Beantwortung dieser Fragen wurden gesamtwirtschaftliche und branchen- bzw. sektorspezifische Standortfaktoren sowie betriebliche Leistungsfaktoren integriert analysiert. Einige ausgewählte Ergebnisse zu den Stärken und Schwächen Deutschlands als Standort für forschungs- und wissensintensive Branchen werden im Folgenden dargestellt sowie einige Schlussfolgerungen in verallgemeinernder Form präsentiert. INHALT ZUSAMMENFASSUNG 5 I. EINLEITUNG: AUSGANGSSITUATION, ZIELSETZUNGEN, METHODIK DER STUDIE 33 II. GESAMTWIRTSCHAFTLICHE BEDEUTUNG FORSCHUNGS- UND WISSENSINTENSIVER BRANCHEN 41 1. Inländische Wertschöpfung 41 2. Außenhandel 44 3. Inländische Beschäftigung 50 4. Gesundheitssektoren als Innovations- und Beschäftigungsmotor 53 III. ERFOLGSKRITISCHE STANDORTFAKTOREN UND DAUERHAFTE UNTERNEHMERISCHE WETTBEWERBSVORTEILE 59 1. Ausgangssituation für forschungs- und wissensintensive Branchen 59 2. Erfolgskritische Standortfaktoren 61 2.1 Empirische Ergebnisse zu Standortverlagerungen 62 2.2 Standortfaktorensystematik für forschungs- und wissensintensive Branchen 66 2.3 Hemmende Standortfaktoren in der pharmazeutischen Industrie 70 3. »3-Säulen-Konzept« zur Bewertung der internationalen Wettbewerbsfähigkeit 74 4. Wirkungszusammenhänge zwischen Standortfaktoren und dauerhaften internationalen Wettbewerbsvorteilen 78 5. Zwischenfazit 89 IV. HANDLUNGSFELDER ZUR STÄRKUNG DER INTERNATIONALEN WETTBEWERBSFÄHIGKEIT FORSCHUNGS- UND WISSENSINTENSIVER BRANCHEN IN DEUTSCHLAND 91 1. Einleitende Bemerkungen 91 2. Handlungsfeld 1: Koordinierte Innovationspolitik 93 3. Handlungsfeld 2: Technologische Wissensbasis und Wissens- und Technologietransfer 96 3.1 Technologische Wissensbasis umfassend stärken 96 3.2 Wissens- und Technologietransfer beschleunigen 126 4. Handlungsfeld 3: Bildung und Qualifikation 145 4.1 Bildungsaktivitäten optimieren und Qualifikationen bedarfsgerechter ausrichten 145 4.2 Vorhandene Arbeitsangebotspotenziale besser ausschöpfen 153 4.3 Handlungsoptionen 159 5. Handlungsfeld 4: Nachfrage und Regulierung 171 5.1 Nachfrageseitige Erfolgsfaktoren für Vorreitermärkte aktivieren 171 5.2 Innovationsfreundliche Regulierungsdesigns entwickeln und Serviceorientierung von Verwaltungsprozessen durch Bürokratieabbau erhöhen 202 6. Handlungsfeld 5: Cluster und Netzwerke 208 6.1 Technologisch leistungsfähige Netzwerke stärken und an nationalen und globalen Kundenbedarfsstrukturen ausrichten 208 6.2 Intensiven Wettbewerb in hart umkämpften Märkten sicherstellen 229 6.3 Starke Industrieakteure in Netzwerken durch Optimierung betrieblicher Leistungsprozesse 231 6.4 Verflechtungspotenziale zwischen forschungsintensiven Industriebranchen und wissensintensiven Dienstleistungsbranchen nutzen 236 V. PHARMASTANDORTANALYSE: STANDORTATTRAKTIVITÄT UND WETTBEWERBSFÄHIGKEIT DER DEUTSCHEN UNTERNEHMEN 243 1. Zusammenfassung inputorientierter Pharmaergebnisse und outputorientierter Forschungsfragen 243 2. Pharmaspezifische FuE-Pipelineanalyse 247 2.1 Standortattraktivität: Deutschland als Pharmastandort im internationalen Vergleich 248 2.2 Wettbewerbsfähigkeit 253 2.3 Standortattraktivität und Wettbewerbsfähigkeit, differenziert nach einzelnen Krankheitsklassen 255 2.4 Fazit FuE-Pipelineanalyse 279 VI. GESAMTFAZIT 283 LITERATUR 285 ANHANG 303 1. Tabellenverzeichnis 303 2. Abbildungsverzeichnis 305 Anhang A.1: Sektorgliederung nach Forschungs- und Wissensintensität 310 Anhang A.2: Datenbank Pharmaprojects 313 Anhang A.3: Abbildungen und Tabellen 319 Anhang A.4: Akteursliste schriftliche Befragung 34

Barriers to the establishment of new key technologies. Summary

Germany is considered innovative and, in a global comparison, excellent in basic research and technology development. Germany is strong in its traditional markets, such as mechanical and vehicle engineering or electrical engineering. However, Germany also has problems when it comes to the rapid and broad implementation of the innovative ideas and results of research and development in concrete applications, especially for the establishment of new, future-oriented key technologies. The diffusion of applications resulting from new key technologies on the market also often confronts companies and entrepreneurs with blockades that are difficult or almost impossible to overcome. Subject and objective of the study The objective of the project "Blockades in the Establishment of New Key Technologies" was to investigate the existing innovation barriers in Germany that block or impede the establishment of new key technologies and the creation of German lead markets or the replacement of traditional export technologies by new key technologies. However, factors that have a particularly beneficial effect should also be identified. On this basis, specific technologies or markets were identified where Germany has not yet exhausted its diffusion and market potential or has been particularly successful in doing so. Finally, by analysing the factors to which these deficits or successes could be attributed, possibilities for political influence were elicited that could contribute to the removal of existing blockades and the promotion of positive factors. The project used a combined approach of a cross-technology innovation system analysis and three technology-specific, in-depth case studies to investigate specific key technologies. The innovation system approach was based on a comprehensive literature and data analysis and provided a research grid for the three case studies. In doing so, the innovation system analysis primarily aimed at capturing and structuring the central inhibiting and facilitating factors, which were specifically investigated and evaluated in the case studies. The case studies selected were Nanoelectronics as a cross-sectional technology, wind energy as an application technology, MP3 players and mini beamers as applications and product innovations respectively. Within the framework of these case studies, several expert interviews were conducted with relevant stakeholders in each case, as well as a workshop in the German Bundestag in Berlin with representatives from science, business and politics. The results of the three case studies were harmonised via the research grid in order to finally compare the identified blockages and derived measures or options for action on a generalised basis. In doing so, blockades were related to suitable measures and possible contributions for involved actors were identified, by means of which the dismantling of existing blockades and the establishment of new key technologies could be supported