The Journal of Technology Transfer

, Volume 42, Issue 6, pp 1377–1406 | Cite as

Estimating intersectoral technology spillovers for Brazil

  • Eduardo GonçalvesEmail author
  • Fernando Salgueiro Perobelli
  • Inácio Fernandes de AraújoJr.


This paper aims to evaluate the main intersectoral R&D flows in the Brazilian economy, determining their direction and magnitude. Unlike other studies that focus exclusively on rent spillovers flows of R&D, this paper also calculates spillovers with total spending on innovation in addition to R&D expenditure. In the case of developing countries, where R&D is of lower relative importance, we assume that technological effort is measured more accurately if it is considered as different types of innovative expenditure. We used data from the Technological Innovation Survey, conducted by the Brazilian Institute of Geography and Statistics with the support of Ministry of Science and Technology and data from an input–output matrix for the Brazilian economy, calibrated by Laboratório de Analises Territoriais e Setoriais—LATES of the Federal University of Juiz de Fora. The analysis is from the year 2011 and covers 32 sectors of economic activity resulting from the compatibility of the two databases. The main results show a mapping of the intersectoral flow of knowledge embodied both by the total expenditure on innovation and by in-house R&D to Brazil for the year 2011. It is important to highlight the wealth of detail of such a mapping, as it characterizes not only by sectoral interdependence of these aspects, but it also shows the direction of flows, the sectoral hierarchy in terms of “donation” of technical knowledge and the intersectoral flows in terms of technological intensity.


Rent spillovers Input–output Sectoral linkages Brazil 

JEL Classification

O33 C67 D57 O54 



The authors gratefully acknowledge the support of research funding agencies such as the National Council for Scientific and Technological Development (CNPq), the Brazilian Federal Agency for Support and Evaluation of Graduate Education (CAPES) and the Minas Gerais State Research Foundation (FAPEMIG).


  1. Araújo, B., & Cavalcante, L. (2011). Determinantes dos gastos empresariais em pesquisa e desenvolvimento no Brasil: uma proposta de sistematização. Radar: Tecnologia, Produção e Comércio Exterior, 16, 9–18.Google Scholar
  2. Arrow, K. (1971). Economic welfare and the allocation of resources for invention. In D. M. Lamberton (Org.), Economics of information and knowledge. Harmondsworth Middlesex: Penguim Books Ltd.Google Scholar
  3. Belegri-Roboli, A., & Michaelides, P. G. (2005). Measurement of R&D multipliers: The case of Greece. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 30(3), 327–332. doi: 10.1007/s10961-005-0934-8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bos, M., Goderis, B., & Vannoorenberghe, G. (2014). Inter-industry total factor productivity spillovers in India. DFID working paper. Tilburg.Google Scholar
  5. Branstetter, L. G. (2000). Looking for international knowledge spillovers a review of the literature with suggestions for new approaches. In The economics and econometrics of innovation (pp. 495–518). Boston, MA: Springer US. doi: 10.1007/978-1-4757-3194-1_20
  6. Brown, M., & Conrad, A. (1967). The influence of research and education on CES production relations. The theory and empirical analysis of production. In M. Brown, (Ed.), The theory and empirical analysis of production. Cambridge, MA: NBER.Google Scholar
  7. Cerulli, G., & Poti, B. (2009). Measuring intersectoral knowledge spillovers: An application of sensitivity analysis to Italy. Economic Systems Research, 21(4), 409–436. doi: 10.1080/09535310903569216.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. De La Potterie, B. V. P. (1997). Issues in assessing the effect of interindustry R&D spillovers. Economic Systems Research, 9(4), 331–356. doi: 10.1080/09535319700000030.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Dosi, G. (1988). Sources, procedures, and microeconomic effects of innovation. Journal of Economic Literature, 26(3), 1120–1171. doi: 10.2307/2726526.Google Scholar
  10. Ferreira, P. C., & Silva, L. F. (2015). Structural transformation and productivity in Latin America. The B.E. Journal of Macroeconomics, 15(2), 903–932. doi: 10.1515/bejm-2014-0020.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Foster, N., Pöschl, J., & Stehrer, R. (2012). Manufacturing productivity: Effects of service sector innovations and institutions. WIIW working papers 89.Google Scholar
  12. Griliches, Z. (1979). Issues in assessing the contribution of research and development to productivity growth. The Bell Journal of Economics, 10(1), 92–116. doi: 10.2307/3003321.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Grossman, G., & Helpman, E. (1991). R&D spillovers and the geography of innovation and production. Production, 86(3), 630–640.Google Scholar
  14. Hanel, P. (2000). Interindustry and international technology spillovers and the total factor productivity growth of manufacturing industries in Canada. Economic Systems Research, 12(3), 345–361. doi: 10.1080/09535310050120925.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Hauknes, J., & Knell, M. (2009). Embodied knowledge and sectoral linkages: An input–output approach to the interaction of high- and low-tech industries. Research Policy, 38(3), 459–469. doi: 10.1016/j.respol.2008.10.012.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Jacinto, P. A., & Ribeiro, E. P. (2015). Crescimento da Produtividade no setor de serviços e da indústria no Brasil: dinâmica e heterogeneidade. Economia Aplicada, 19(3), 401–427. doi: 10.1590/1413-8050/ea119450.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Malecki, E. J. (2010). Everywhere? The geography of knowledge. Journal of Regional Science, 50(1), 493–513. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9787.2009.00640.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Miller, R. E., & Blair, P. D. (2009). Input–output analysis: Foundations and extensions. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Nishimura, J., & Okamuro, H. (2016). Knowledge and rent spillovers through government-sponsored R&D consortia. Science and Public Policy, 43(2), 207–225. doi: 10.1093/scipol/scv028.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Nishioka, S., & Ripoll, M. (2012). Productivity, trade and the R&D content of intermediate inputs. European Economic Review, 56(8), 1573–1592. doi: 10.1016/j.euroecorev.2012.08.004.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Odagiri, H., & Kinukawa, S. (1997). Contributions and channels of interindustry R&D spillovers: An estimation for Japanese high-tech industries. Economic Systems Research, 9(1), 127–142. doi: 10.1080/09535319700000008.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. OECD. (2015). Frascati manual: Proposed standard practice for surveys on research and experimental development. The Measurement of Scientific and Technological Activities,. doi: 10.1787/9789264199040-en.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Pavitt, K. (1984). Sectoral patterns of technical change: Towards a taxonomy and a theory. Research Policy, 13(6), 343–373. doi: 10.1016/0048-7333(84)90018-0.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. PINTEC. (2011). Survey of technological innovation. Rio de Janeiro: Instituto Brasileiro de Geografia e Estatística.Google Scholar
  25. Putnam, J., & Evenson, R. (1994). Inter-sectoral technology flows: Estimates from a patent concordance with an application to Italy. New Haven, CT: Mimeograph, Yale University.Google Scholar
  26. Robson, M., Townsend, J., & Pavitt, K. (1988). Sectoral patterns of production and use of innovations in the UK: 1945–1983. Research Policy, 17(1), 1–14. doi: 10.1016/0048-7333(88)90017-0.
  27. Scherer, F. M. (1982a). Inter-industry technology flows in the United States. Research Policy, 11(4), 227–245. doi: 10.1016/0048-7333(82)90011-7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Scherer, F. M. (1982b). Inter-industry technology flows and productivity growth. The Review of Economics and Statistics, 64, 627–634.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Terleckyj, N. (1974). Effects of R&D on the productivity growth of industries: An exploratory study. Washington, DC: National Planning Association. Google Scholar
  30. van Meijl, H. (1997). Measuring the impact of direct and indirect R&D on the productivity growth of industries: Using the Yale technology concordance. Economic Systems Research, 9(2), 205–211. doi: 10.1080/09535319700000014.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Verspagen, B. (1997). Measuring intersectoral technology spillovers: Estimates from the European and US patent office databases. Economic Systems Research, 9(1), 47–65. doi: 10.1080/09535319700000004.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Verspagen, B., & de Loo, I. (1999). Technology spillovers between sectors. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 60(3), 215–235. doi: 10.1016/S0040-1625(98)00046-8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Wolff, E. N. (1997). Spillovers, linkages and technical change. Economic Systems Research, 9(1), 9–23. doi: 10.1080/09535319700000002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Wolff, E. N. (2012). Spillover, linkages, and productivity growth in the US economy, 1958 to 2007. In Innovation and growth: From R&D strategies of innovating firms to economy-wide technological change (pp. 233–265). Oxford University Press. doi: 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199646685.003.0011

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Eduardo Gonçalves
    • 1
    Email author
  • Fernando Salgueiro Perobelli
    • 1
  • Inácio Fernandes de AraújoJr.
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of EconomicsFederal University of Juiz de ForaJuiz de ForaBrazil

Personalised recommendations