Small Business Economics

, Volume 31, Issue 2, pp 181–194 | Cite as

Innovation, R&D cooperation and labor recruitment: evidence from Finland

  • Jaakko Simonen
  • Philip McCannEmail author


This article investigates the role played by one type of firm interaction, namely R&D cooperation, and also the acquisition of labor, in the promotion of industrial innovations. We employ a unique innovation dataset from Finland which combines firm specific information about the innovation performance of the firms along with their individual characteristics, as well as firm specific information regarding the origins of their recent labor acquisitions. Analyzing this data allows us to identify the different roles which the knowledge spillovers and labor markets play in the innovation process. Our results suggest that small firms are generally more innovative than large firms; R&D cooperation is an essential feature of innovation, but the variety of cooperation is of little importance; and labor acquisition appears to be only of limited importance for innovation.


Innovation Labor Cooperation R&D 

JEL Classifications

O31 J60 L26 


  1. Acs, Z. J., & Audrestch, D. B. (1990). Innovation and small firms. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  2. Acs, Z. J., & Audrestch, D. B. (1991). Innovation and technological change: An international comparison. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
  3. Alanen, A., Houtari, J., & Kangasharju, A. (2000). Constructing a new indicator for regional impact of innovativeness. Working Paper, Pellervo Economic Research Institute, Helsinki.Google Scholar
  4. Ali-Yrkkö, J. (2001). Nokia’s network: Gaining competitiveness from cooperation, ETLA – The Research Institute of the Finnish Economy B174 Series, Taloustieto Oy, Helsinki.Google Scholar
  5. Almeida, P., & Kogut, B. (1999). Localization of knowledge and the mobility of engineers. Management Science, 45(7), 905–917.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Angel, D. P. (1991). High technology agglomeration and the labor market: The case of silicon valley. Environment and Planning A, 23(10), 1501–1516.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Audretsch, D. B., & Stephan, P. E. (1996). Company-scientist locational links: The case of biotechnology. American Economic Review, 86(3), 641–652.Google Scholar
  8. Audretsch, D. B., & Vivarelli, M. (1996). Firms size and R&D spillovers: Evidence from Italy. Small Business Economics, 8(3), 249–258.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Breschi, S., & Lissoni, F. (2001a). Localised knowledge spillovers vs. innovative milieux: Knowledge ‘tacitness’ reconsidered. Papers in Regional Science, 80, 255–273.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Breschi, S., & Lissoni, F. (2001b). Knowledge spillovers and local innovation systems: A critical survey. Industrial and Corporate Change, 10, 975–1005.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Breschi, S., & Lissoni, F. (2003). Mobility and social networks: Localised knowledge spillovers revisited. CESPRI Working Paper 142, Department of Economics, Bocconi University, Milan.Google Scholar
  12. Brouwer, E., & Kleinknecht, A. (1999). Measuring spillovers from technical advance. American Economic Review, 76, 742–755.Google Scholar
  13. Caniels, M. (2000). Knowledge spillovers and economic growth. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
  14. Cantwell, J. A., & Iammarino, S. (2003). Multinational corporations and European systems of innovation. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  15. Carlino, G. A., Chatterjee, S., & Hunt, R. M. (2007). Urban density and the rate of invention. Journal of Urban Economics, 61, 389–419.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Ciccone, A., & Hall, R. E. (1996). Productivity and the density of economic activity. American Economic Review, 86, 54–70.Google Scholar
  17. De Meyer, A. (1993). Management of an international network of industrial R&D laboratories. R&D Management, 23, 109–120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Estrella, A. (1998). A new measure of fit for equations with dichotomous dependent variables. Journal of Business and Economic Statistics, 16(2), 198–205.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Fujita, M., Krugman, P., & Venables, A. J. (1999). The spatial economy: Cities, regions and international trade. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  20. Franco, A. M., & Filson, D. (2000). Knowledge diffusion through employee mobility. Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis: Research Department Report 272, Minneapolis.Google Scholar
  21. GIER. (2006). Finnish Economy Structural Indicators 2006. Helsinki: Government Institute for Economic Research.Google Scholar
  22. Kaiser, U. (2002). Measuring knowledge spillovers in manufacturing and services: An empirical assessment of alternative approaches. Research Policy, 31, 125–144.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Louviere, J. J., Hensher, D. A., & Swait J. D. (2000). Stated choice methods. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  24. Lucas, R. E. (1988). On the mechanics of economic development. Journal of Monetary Economics, 22, 3–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. McCann, P., & Simonen, J. (2005). Innovation, knowledge spillovers and local labour markets. Papers in Regional Science, 84(3), 465–485.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. McFadden, D. (1979). Quantitative methods for analysing travel behaviour of individuals. In D. A. Hensher & P. R. Storper (Eds.), Behavioural travel modelling. London: Croom Helm.Google Scholar
  27. Nishiguchi, T. (1994). Strategic industrial sourcing. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  28. OECD. (2005). Oslo Manual: Guidelines for collecting and interpreting innovation data (3rd ed.). Paris: OECD.Google Scholar
  29. Orlando, M. J. (2000). On the importance of geographic and technological proximity for R&D spillovers: An empirical investigation. Research Working Paper RWP00-02, Research Division, Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City.Google Scholar
  30. Persson, L. O. (2002). The impact of regional labour flows in the Swedish knowledge economy. In Y. Higano, P. Nijkamp, J. Poot, & K. van Wyk (Eds.), The region in the new economy: An international perspective on regional dynamics in the 21st century (pp. 221–237). Aldershot: Ashgate.Google Scholar
  31. Porter, M. E. (1990). The competitive advantage of nations. The Free Press.Google Scholar
  32. Power, D., & Lundmark, M. (2004). Working through knowledge pools: Labour market dynamics, the transference of knowledge and ideas, and industrial clusters. Urban Studies, 41(5–6), 1025–1044.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Romer, P. (1987). Crazy explanations of the productivity slowdown. National Bureau of Economic Research Macroeconomics Annual 1987. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  34. Schumpeter, J. A. (1934). The theory of economic development. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  35. Schonberger, R. (1996). World class manufacturing: The next decade. Free Press, New York external tacit knowledge spillovers.Google Scholar
  36. Scott, A. J. (1988). New industrial spaces. London: Pion.Google Scholar
  37. Tether, B. S., Smith, I. J., & Thwaites, A. T. (1997). Smaller enterprises and innovation in the UK: The SPRU innovations database revisited. Research Policy, 26, 19–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Van Dijk, B., Hertog, R. D., Menkveld, B., & Thurik, R. (1997). Some new evidence on the determinants of large- and small-firm innovation. Small Business Economics, 9(4), 335–343.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC. 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Economics, Waikato Management SchoolUniversity of WaikatoHamiltonNew Zealand

Personalised recommendations