INNOVATION PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS FOR EUROPEAN UNION COUNTRIES FOCUSED ON MODEST INNOVATORS: ROMANIA AND BULGARIA

Daniela Alexandra Crisan (), Ana-Maria Preda (), Justina Lavinia Stanica () and Adam Nelu Altar Samuel ()
Additional contact information
Daniela Alexandra Crisan: Romanian-American University, Bucharest, Romania
Ana-Maria Preda: Romanian-American University, Bucharest, Romania
Justina Lavinia Stanica: Romanian-American University, Bucharest, Romania
Adam Nelu Altar Samuel: Romanian-American University, Bucharest, Romania

Journal of Information Systems & Operations Management, 2018, vol. 12, issue 1, 30-44

Abstract: The aim of this paper is to analyze the innovation performance of Romania, compared to other EU Member States, in order to detect the most significant strengths and weaknesses. There have been used the data provided annually by the European Innovation Scoreboard, namely the Summary Innovation Index (SII), which is a composite index, an aggregation of indicators grouped by dimensions and blocks, to measure the innovation performance at country level. A synthesis of the evolution of the SII since 2001 and analysis of the data in the period 2010-2016 have been performed. The focus was on the Modest innovators cluster – the least performing in innovation group of countries – which includes Bulgaria and Romania. Using a comparative, structural analysis of the SII and its components in both countries, and a time series analysis, the trends, similarities and differences have been identified. A 6-years evolution of the overall innovation performance in Romania has been modelled through linear regression, and the estimation for SII in 2017 was not promising. We’ve deepened the analysis of the innovation performance in Romania for the period 2010-2016, by studying the evolution of the 10 dimensions of the SII. Data show that 5 dimensions had an increasing evolution, 5 registered a decreasing trend, and 8 of them follow a linear regression model. The conclusions are similar to those obtained in other reports, such as those for competitiveness or doing business rankings. The analysis should be continued at indicator level to obtain a more insightful understanding of the phenomenon.

Date: 2018
References: View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
http://www.rebe.rau.ro/RePEc/rau/jisomg/SU18/JISOM-SU18-A04.pdf (application/pdf)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:rau:jisomg:v:12:y:2018:i:1:p:30-44

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in Journal of Information Systems & Operations Management from Romanian-American University Contact information at EDIRC.
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Alex Tabusca ().