Una evaluación de los sistemas regionales y urbanos de innovación en Colombia
Palabras clave:
Resumen
Este estudio calcula los puntajes de eficiencia para los Sistemas Regionales de Innovación y los Sistemas Urbanos de Innovación de Colombia utilizando el análisis envolvente de datos (DEA) e identifica los determinantes clave basados en el modelo de la Triple Hélice de la innovación. Los resultados revelan una heterogeneidad significativa en la eficiencia, con puntajes concentrados en ambos extremos. Los modelos de datos de panel indican que las regiones con una mayor oferta de universidades de alta calidad y una actividad empresarial más densa tienen mejor desempeño. La satisfacción laboral mejora la innovación urbana, mientras que un proceso legal más ágil mejora los resultados regionales, fomentando un entorno más dinámico para la innovación.
Descargas
Altmetrics
Citas
Aghion, Philippe & Jaravel, Xavier (2015). Knowledge Spillovers, Innovation and Growth. The Economic Journal, 125, http://doi.org/10.1111/ecoj.12199.
Anderlini, Luca; Felli, Leonardo; Immordino, Giovanni & Riboni, Alessandro (2013). Legal Institutions, Innovation, and Growth. International Economic Review, 54(3), 937-956.
Antoncic, Jasna & Antoncic, Bostjan (2011). Employee Satisfaction, Intrapreneurship and Firm Growth: A Model. Industrial Management and Data Systems, 111, pp.589-607.
Anwar, Muhammad & Sha, Syed (2018). Managerial Networking and Business Model Innovation: Empirical Study of New Ventures in an Emerging Economy. Journal of Small Business & Entrepreneurship, 0(0), pp.1–22, http://doi.org/10.1080/08276331.2018.1490509.
Arrow, Kenneth (1962). Economic Welfare and the Allocation of Resources for Invention, in (R. R. Nelson, ed.) The Rate and Direction of Inventive Activity. Princeton University Press.
Ayala, Yarid; Peiró Silla, José; Tordera, Núria; Llorente, Laura & Yeves, Jesús (2017). Job Satisfaction and Innovative Performance in Young Spanish Employees: Testing New Patterns in the Happy-Productive Worker Thesis: A Discriminant Study. Journal of Happiness Studies, 18, 1377–1401. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10902-016-9778-1.
Bailetti, Tony (2012). Technology Entrepreneurship: Overview, Definition, and Distinctive Aspects. Technology Innovation Management Review, 2(2), pp. 5–12.
Breusch, Trevor & Pagan, Adrian (1980). The LM Test and its Applications to Model Specification in Econometrics. Review of Economic Studies, 47, pp. 239–254.
Bresciani, Stefano; Puertas, Rosa; Ferraris, Alberto & Santoro, Gabriele (2021). Innovation, Environmental Sustainability and Economic Development: DEA- Bootstrap and Multilevel Analysis to Compare Two Regions. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 172. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2021.121040.
Cai, Yuzhuo & Etzkowitz, Henry (2020). Theorizing the Triple Helix Model: Past, Present, and Future. Triple Helix, 7(2-3), 189-226.
Carayannis, Elias; Grigoroudis, Evangelos; Campbell, David; Meissner, Dirk & Stamati, Dimitra (2018). The Ecosystem as Helix: An Exploratory Theory ‐ Building Study of Regional Co opetitive Entrepreneurial Ecosystems as ‐ Quadruple/Quintuple Helix Innovation Models. R&D Management, 48(1), 148-162.
De Clercq, Dirk; Castañer, Xavier & Belausteguigoitia, Imanol (2010). Entrepreneurial Initiative Selling within Organizations: Towards a More Comprehensive Motivational Framework. Journal of Management Studies, 48(6), pp. 1269-1290.
Departamento Nacional de Planeación (2018). Plan Nacional de Desarrollo 2018-2022. Pacto por Colombia, pacto por la equidad. Departamento Nacional de Planeación de Colombia.
Etzkowitz, Henry (2008). The Triple Helix Model: University-Industry–Government Innovation In Action. London: Routledge.
Etzkowitz, Henry & Leydesdorff, Loet (1995). The Triple Helix: University- Industry-Government Relations: A Laboratory for Knowledge Based Economic Development. EASST Review, 14(1), pp. 14–19.
Feng, Yongqi (2021). Technological Progress, Intellectual Property Protection and Economic Growth. PhD dissertation, Nankai University, Economics College, China.
Feng, Yongqi; Zhang, Haolin; Chiu, Yung-ho & Chang, Tzu-Han (2021). Innovation Efficiency and the Impact of the Institutional Quality: A Cross-Country Analysis Using the Two-Stage Meta-Frontier Dynamic Network Dea Model. Scientometrics, 126, 3091–3129. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-020-03829-3.
Forsman, Helena (2011). Innovation Capacity and Innovation Development in Small Enterprises: A Comparison between the Manufacturing and Service Sectors. Research Policy, 40(5), pp. 739–750.
Giannikis, Stefanos & Nikandrou, Irene (2013). The Impact of Corporate Entrepreneurship and High-Performance Work Systems on Employees’ Job Attitudes: Empirical Evidence from Greece During the Economic Downturn. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 24:19, 3644-3666, https://doi.org/10.1080/09585192.2013.778316.
Hausman, Jerry (1978). Specification Tests in Econometrics. Econometrica, 46, pp. 1251–1271.
Hausman, Naomi (2022). University Innovation and Local Economic Growth. Review of Economics and Statistics, 104(4), 718-735.
Hu, Xiaojun; Li, Xian & Rousseau, Ronald (2021). Mathematical Reflections on Triple Helix Calculations. Scientometrics, 126, pp. 8581–8587. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-021-04114-7.
Jovanovi , Milica; Savi , Gordana; Cai, Yuzhuo & Levi-Jaksic, Maja (2022). Towards A Triple Helix Based Efficiency Index of Innovation Systems. Scientometrics, 127, pp. 2577–2609. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-022-04304-x.
Kaiser, Ulrich; Kongsted, Hans; Laursen, Keld & Ejsing, Ann-Kathrine (2018). Experience Matters: The Role of Academic Scientist Mobility for Industrial Innovation. Strategic Management Journal, 39(7), 1935-1958. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.2907.
Kang, Weimin; Zhao, Shuliang; Song, Wei & Zhuang, Tao (2019). Triple Helix in the Science and Technology Innovation Centers of China from the Perspective of Mutual Information: A Comparative Study Between Beijing and Shanghai. Scientometrics, 118, pp. 921–940. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-019-03017-y.
Kaufmann, Daniel; Kraay, Aart & Mastruzzi, Massimo (2010). The Worldwide Governance Indicators: Methodology and Analytical Issues. World Bank Policy Research Working Paper, no. WPS 5430.
Klein, Peter; Mahoney, Joseph; McGahan, Anita & Pitelis, Christos (2010). Toward a Theory of Public Entrepreneurship. European Management Review, 7(1), pp. 1–15.
Landström, Hans; Harirchi, Gouya & Åström, Fredrik (2012). Entrepreneurship: Exploring the Knowledge Base. Research Policy, 41(7), pp.1154–1181.
Lithoxoidou, Evdoxia; Doumpoulakis, Stefanos; Tsakiris, Athanasios; Krinidis, Stelios; Ioannidis, Dimosthenis; Votis, Konstantinos & Tzovaras, Dimitrios (2017). Improvement of the Workers’ Satisfaction and Collaborative Spirit Through Gamification. In International Conference on Internet Science (pp. 184-191). Springer, Cham.
Malaver Rodríguez, Florentino & Vargas Pérez, Marisela (2013). Formas de Innovar y sus Implicaciones de Política: Lecciones de una Experiencia. Cuadernos de Economía, 32(60), 499-532.
Mansfield, Edwin (1995). Research Underlying Industrial Innovations: Sources, Characteristics, and Financing. The Review of Economics and Statistics, 77(1), pp. 55-65.
Meliciani, Valentina & Savona, Maria (2015). The Determinants of Regional Specialisation in Business Services: Agglomeration Economies, Vertical Linkages and Innovation. Journal of Economic Geography, 15(2), 387-416.
Morais, Greiciele; Santos, Valdeci; Tolentino, Renata & Martins, Henrique (2021). Intrapreneurship, Innovation, and Competitiveness in Organization. International Journal of Business Administration, 12(2), 1-14.
Mustafa, M., Martin, L., & Hughes, M. (2016). Psychological ownership, job satisfaction, and middle manager entrepreneurial behavior. Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies, 23(3), 272-287. doi.org/10.1177/1548051815627
Neessen, Petra; Caniëls, Marjolein; Vos, Bart & de Jong, Jeroen (2019). The Intrapreneurial Employee: Toward an Integrated Model of Intrapreneurship and Research Agenda. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 15, pp. 545–571. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11365-018-0552-1.
OECD (2014). OECD Reviews of Innovation Policy: Colombia 2014. OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264204638-en.
OECD (2019). OECD Economic Surveys: Colombia 2019. OECD Publishing, Paris. https://doi.org/10.1787/e4c64889-en.
Ostrom, Elinor (2005). Unlocking Public Entrepreneurship and Public Economies. Wider Discussion Paper, no. 2005/01.
Patra, Swapan & Muchie, Mammo (2018). Research and Innovation in South African Universities: From the Triple Helix’s Perspective. Scientometrics, 116, pp. 51–76. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-018-2764-0.
Perkmann, Markus; Tartari, Valentina; McKelvey, Maureen; Autio, Erkko; Broström, Anders; D’Este, Pablo; Fini, Riccardo; Geuna, Aldo; Grimaldi, Rosa; Hughes, Alan; Krabel, Stefan; Kitson, Michael; Llerena, Patrick; Lissoni, Francesco; Salter, Ammon & Sobrero, Maurizio (2013). Academic Engagement and Commercialisation: A Review of the Literature on University– Industry Relations. Research Policy, 42(2), pp. 423–442. doi:10.1016/j.respol.2012.09.007.
Pham, Hien; Hoang, Viet-Ngu; Yu, Ming-Miin & McLennan, Char-lee (2024). Dynamic efficiency of Australia’s innovation systems: A regional and state analysis. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 205, 123470.
Phuc, Nguyen; Schinckus, Christophe & Dinh, Su (2018). Do Economic Openness and Institutional Quality Influence Patents? Evidence from GMM Systems Estimates. International Economics, 157, pp. 134-169.
Pierce, Jon; Kostova, Tatiana & Dirks, Kurt (2003). The State of Psychological Ownership: Integrating and Extending a Century of Research. Review of General Psychology, 7, 84-107. https://doi.org/10.5465/AMR.2001.4378028.
Pinchot, Gifford (1987). Innovation Through Intrapreneuring. Research Management, 30(2), pp. 14–17.
Ranga, Marina & Etzkowitz, Henry (2013). Triple Helix Systems: An Analytical Framework for Innovation Policy and Practice in the Knowledge Society. Industry and Higher Education, 27(4), 237-262.
Romer, P. M. (1990). Endogenous technological change. Journal of political Economy, 98(5, Part 2), 71-102. https://doi.org/10.1086/261725
Roper, Stephen & Jibril, Halima (2024). Understanding the Geographical Distribution of Innovation in England: Density, Accessibility and Spillover Effects. Regional Studies, 58(6), 1320-1338.
Sahibzada, Umar; Jianfeng, Cai; Fawad, Khawaja & Sahibzada, Hassam (2020). Fueling Knowledge Management Processes in Chinese Higher Education Institutes (HEIs): The Neglected Mediating Role of Knowledge Worker Satisfaction. Journal of Enterprise Information Management. https://doi.org/10.1108/jeim-07-2019-0197.
Shikdar, Ashraf & Das, Biman (2003). A Strategy for Improving Worker Satisfaction and Job Attitudes in a Repetitive Industrial Task: Application of Production Standards and Performance Feedback. Ergonomics, 46(5), 466–481. https://doi.org/10.1080/00140130210000570066.
Tebaldi, Edinaldo & Elmslie, Bruce (2013). Does Institutional Quality Impact Innovation? Evidence from Cross-country Patent Grant Data. Applied Economics, 45(7), pp. 887–900.
Werker, Claudia; Ubacht, Jolien & Ligtvoet, Andreas (2017). Networks of Entrepreneurs Driving the Triple Helix: Two Cases of the Dutch Energy System. Triple Helix, 4(4), pp. 3-25. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40604-017-0047-z.
Wooldridge, Jeffrey (2001). Econometric Analysis of Cross Section and Panel Data. MIT Press Books.
World Bank (2021). World Bank Country and Lending Groups. Available online at: https://datahelpdesk.worldbank.org/knowledgebase/articles/906519 (accessed on 21 December 2022).
World Bank (2022). Patent Applications, Residents – Colombia. Available online at: https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/IP.PAT.RESD?locations=CO&most_ recent_value_desc=true (accessed on 21 December 2022).
Wright, Thomas; Cropanzano, Russell & Bonett, Douglas (2007). The Moderating Role of Employee Positive Well Being on the Relation Between Job Satisfaction and Job Performance. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1037/1076-8998.12.2.93.
Xu, Zongling; Lin, Jiali & Lin, Danming (2008). Networking and Innovation in SMES: Evidence from Guangdong Province, China. Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development, 15(4), pp. 788-801.
Zahoor, Nadia & Al-Tabbaab, Omar (2020). Inter-Organizational Collaboration and SMES’ Innovation: A Systematic Review and Future Research Directions. Scandinavian Journal of Management, 36(2).
Zemtzov, Stepan & Kotsemir, Maxim (2019). An Assessment of Regional Innovation System Efficiency In Russia: The Application of the DEA Approach. Scientometrics, 120, pp. 375-404. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-019-03130-y.
Derechos de autor 2026 Creative Commons (CC-BY)
Esta obra está bajo licencia internacional Creative Commons Reconocimiento 4.0.
Los artículos enviados para su evaluación en REM habrán de ser originales, no haber sido publicados con anterioridad, totalmente o en parte, tanto en otras revistas como en cualquier medio de difusión (incluyendo cualquier página web de acceso público), ni aceptados para su publicación, ni encontrarse en proceso de evaluación en otros medios de difusión. En caso de que un artículo sometido a evaluación no sea original, REM se reserva el derecho a no aceptar para su evaluación más artículos de sus autores. Una vez que los artículos comienzan el proceso de revisión, el derecho a imprimirlos y difundirlos corresponde a REM (tanto del artículo completo como partes del mismo, si REM considera que son partes sustanciales). El reconocimiento de este derecho se entiende implícito en la decisión del autor de someter el artículo a evaluación por REM. Estos derechos vuelven al autor en caso de que el artículo sea rechazado.
REM permite el acceso abierto completo a todos los contenidos publicados, lo que supone que todos los artículos estarán disponibles a los usuarios inmediatamente después de su publicación. El uso y distribución no comercial de los mismos está permitido siempre que se cite la autoría y fuente.
Los contenidos de REM se rigen bajo licencia Creative Commons (CC-BY).
Todas las personas que han trabajado en el artículo deben aparecer como autores del mismo; y todos los autores deben haber realizado una contribución sustancial al mismo. Además, todos los autores deben estar de acuerdo con el orden en que aparecen sus nombres. En caso de disconformidad de algún autor con cualquiera de estos requisitos, REM se reserva el derecho a no publicar el artículo incluso estando aceptado para su publicación.
