DEBATE METODOLÓGICO EN TORNO AL 'REGIONAL INNOVATION SCOREBOARD'
DEBATE METODOLÓGICO EN TORNO AL 'REGIONAL INNOVATION SCOREBOARD'
BI BLIO
Ács, Z. J., Autio, E., y Szerb, L. (2014). National systems of entrepreneurship: Measurement issues and policy implica- tions. Research Poli- cy, 43 (3), 476-494. Álvarez, I., Barbe - ro, J., y Zofío, J. L. (2016). A data en - velopment analysis toolbox for MATLAB, Journal of Statistical Software, 95 (3), 1-49. Arundel, A. (2007). Innovation Survey Indicators: What Impact on Innova - tion Policy? En OECD (Ed.), From Science, Technology and In - novation Indicators in a Changing World (pp. 49-64). OECD. Arundel, A., y Hollan - ders, H. (2008). Inno - vation scoreboards: indicators and policy use. En C. Nauwe- laers y R. Wintjes (Eds.), Innovation Policy in Europe. Measurement and Strategy (pp. 29-52). Edward Elgar. Barbero, J., Zaba - la-Iturriagagoitia, J. M., y Zofío, J. L. (2021). Is more always better? On the relevance of de- creasing returns to scale on innovation.
Technovation, (107), 102314.
(1978). Measuring the efficiency of decision making units. European Journal of Operatio - nal Research, 2 (6), 429-444. Cooper, W. W., Ruiz, J. L., y Sirvent, I. (2011). Choices and uses of DEA wei- ghts. En W.W. Coo - per, L. M. Seiford y J. Zhu (Eds.), Hand - book on data envelo - pment analysis (pp. 93-126). Springer. Davenport, S., y Bibby, D. (1999). Rethinking a national innovation system: The small country as «SME». Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 11 (3), 431-462. Dziallas, M., y Blind, K. (2019). Innovation indicators throu- ghout the innovation process: An extensi - ve literature analysis. Technovation, (80- 81), 3-29. Edler, J., y Fager - berg, J. (2017). Innovation policy: what, why, and how. Oxford Review of Economic Policy, 33(1), 2-23. Edquist, C. (2011). Design of innovation
policy through diag - nostic analysis: iden- tification of systemic problems (or failu - res). Industrial and Corporate Change, 20 (6), 1725-1753. Edquist, C. (2014). Striving towards a Holistic Innovation Policy in European countries – But linearity still prevails! STI Policy Review, 5 (2), 1-19. Edquist, C., y Laatsit, M. (2022). From the Systems of Innova - tion Approach to a General Theory of Innovation: Do Acti - vities and Functions Reflect what Ha - ppens in Innovation Systems? Papers in Innovation Studies, (2022/07). CIRCLE, Lund University, Suecia. Edquist, C., y Zaba - la-Iturriagagoitia, J. M. (2015). The Innovation Union Scoreboard is Flawed: The case of Sweden – not being the innovation leader of the EU. Papers in Innovation Studies, (2015/16). CIRCLE, Lund University, Suecia.
Barbosa, N., y Faria, A. P. (2011). Innova - tion across Europe: How important are institutional differen- ces. Research Policy, (40), 1157-1169. Becker, W., Saisana, M., Paruolo, P., y Vandecasteele., I. (2017). Weights and Importance in Com - posite Indicators: Closing the Gap. Ecological Indica - tors, (80), 12-22. Carayannis, E. G., Goletsis, Y., y Gri - goroudis, E. (2018). Composite innova- tion metrics: MCDA and the Quadruple Innovation Helix framework. Techno - logical Forecasting and Social Change, (131), 4-17. Castellacci, F., y Natera, J. M. (2013). The dynamics of national innovation systems: A panel co- integration analysis of the coevolution between innovati- ve capability and absorptive capacity. Research Policy, 42(3), 579-594.
GRA
FÍA
Charnes, A., Cooper, W. W., y Rhodes, E.
Edquist, C., Zaba - la-Iturriagagoitia,
82
83
Made with FlippingBook - Online Brochure Maker