The Impact of Innovation on Business Development. The Example of Moderate Innovators and the Visegrad Group Countries

Małgorzata Jabłońska

doi:10.18778/1508-2008.27.01

Authors

Małgorzata Jabłońska University of Lodz, Faculty of Economics and Sociology, Department of Finance and Accounting of SMEs https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1465-8818

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.18778/1508-2008.27.01

Keywords:

innovations, entrepreneurship, moderate innovators, the Visegrad Group, economic development, finance

Abstract

The paper analyzes the relationship between innovation dimensions, according to the European Innovation Scoreboard, and the entrepreneurship rate in a group of moderate innovator countries. Using the Pearson linear correlation, the author conducted a data analysis based on an empirical study using open data from the Summary Innovation Index – European Innovation Scoreboard (SII‑EIS) and Eurostat for 2013–2019. This period covers the moment when all the countries of the Visegrad Group (i.e., the Czech Republic, Hungary, Poland, and Slovakia – the V4) were classified into the same innovation group according to EIS. However, due to the volume limitations of the article, it was decided that Moderate Innovators from 2019 would be included in the comparative analysis, i.e., when the V4 were last collectively classified as Moderate Innovators. The results of the research positively verify the initial research hypothesis that the EIS indicators show a different strength of relationships with the entrepreneurship rate in the V4 and among other economies classified as Moderate Innovators (according to SII–2020).

The variables that describe the quantity and quality of entrepreneurs’ innovations strongly and positively impact the V4 countries’ entrepreneurship rate. In other countries, the variables derived from the investment attractiveness of economies show a significant and positive correlation with the entrepreneurship rate. Based on the analysis of the results, it can be concluded that there is a strong positive correlation between the entrepreneurship rate and the total innovation index, which is compiled each year based on a set of variables for the European Union countries. The study showed that the entrepreneurship rate in these countries is strongly impacted by indicators representing the following groups: Innovators (small and medium‑sized enterprises (SMEs) with product or process innovations; SMEs with marketing or organizational innovations and SMEs innovating in‑house), Attractive research systems (international scientific co‑publications), Finance and support (Venture capital expenditures), Firm investments (Enterprises that provide training to develop or upgrade their personnel’s ICT skills), and Linkages (Innovative SMEs that collaborate with others). The impact of these factors on the development of entrepreneurship in the V4 means that pro‑innovative activities undertaken in operating enterprises strongly correlate with deciding to start one’s own business. Therefore, it can be concluded that entrepreneurship in these countries has an entirely different development basis than in other countries that are Moderate Innovators, where the factors mentioned above were irrelevant.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Avram, G., Hysa, E. (2022), Education, Knowledge and Data in the Context of the Sharing Economy, [in:] V. Česnuitytė, A. Klimczuk, C. Miguel, G. Avram (eds.), The Sharing Economy in Europe. Developments, Practices, and Contradictions, Palgrave Macmillan, Cham, pp. 181–206, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-86897-0_9 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-86897-0_9

Będzik, B., Gołąb, S. (2020), Selected determinants of innovation potential in the agricultural sector in the Visegrad Countries, "Zagadnienia Ekonomiki Rolnej/Problems of Agricultural Economics", 364 (3), pp. 162–179, https://doi.org/10.30858/zer/126152 DOI: https://doi.org/10.30858/zer/126152

Będzik, B., Gołąb, S. (2021), Social Capital and Innovation in the Countries of the Visegrad Group, https://doi.org/10.36689/uhk/hed/2021-01-006 DOI: https://doi.org/10.36689/uhk/hed/2021-01-006

Copus, A., Skuras, D., Tsegenidi, K. (2015), Innovation and Peripherality: An Empirical Comparative Study of SMEs in Six European Union Member Countries, “Economic Geography”, 84 (1), pp. 51–82, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1944-8287.2008.tb00391.x DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1944-8287.2008.tb00391.x

Czupich, M. (2018), The innovative potential of the Visegrad Group regions, “University Economic Bulletin”, 38, pp. 14–22, https://doi.org/10.31470/2306-546X-2018-38-14-22 DOI: https://doi.org/10.31470/2306-546X-2018-38-14-22

Dobrota, C.E., Marcu, N., Siminica, M., Netoiu, L.M. (2019), Disparities, gaps and evolution trends of innovation, as a vector of economic development, in the countries of the European Union, “Romanian Journal of Economic Forecasting”, 22 (4), pp. 174–184.

Dziuba, R. (2014), Rola innowacyjności i konkurencyjności w rozwoju regionu Bałkanów Zachodnich na przykładzie Czarnogóry, Wydawnictwo Naukowe Uniwersytetu Szczecińskiego, Szczecin.

Elert, N., Stenkula, M., (2022), Intrapreneurship: Productive and Non Productive, “Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice”, 46 (5), https://doi.org/10.1177/1042258720964181 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1042258720964181

European Commission, Directorate General for Enterprise and Industry (2013), Innovation Union Scoreboard 2013, Publications Office, Luxemburg, https://data.europa.eu/doi/10.2769/72530 (accessed: 19.11.2022).

European Commission, Directorate General for Enterprise and Industry (2014), Innovation Union Scoreboard 2014, Publications Office, Luxemburg, https://data.europa.eu/doi/10.2769/88936 (accessed: 19.11.2022).

European Commission, Directorate General for Internal Market, Industry, Entrepreneurship and SMEs (2015), Innovation Union Scoreboard 2015, Publications Office, Luxemburg, https://data.europa.eu/doi/10.2769/247779 (accessed: 19.11.2022).

European Commission, Directorate General for Internal Market, Industry, Entrepreneurship and SMEs (2016), European Innovation Scoreboard 2016, Publications Office, Luxemburg, https://data.europa.eu/doi/10.2873/84537 (accessed: 19.11.2022).

European Commission, Directorate General for Internal Market, Industry, Entrepreneurship and SMEs (2017), European innovation scoreboard 2017, Publications Office, Luxemburg, https://ec.europa.eu/docsroom/documents/24829 (accessed: 19.11.2022).

European Commission, Directorate General for Internal Market, Industry, Entrepreneurship and SMEs (2018), European innovation scoreboard 2018, Publications Office, Luxemburg, https://data.europa.eu/doi/10.2873/66501 (accessed: 19.11.2022).

European Commission, Directorate General for Internal Market, Industry, Entrepreneurship and SMEs (2019), European innovation scoreboard 2019, Publications Office, Luxemburg, https://data.europa.eu/doi/10.2873/877069 (accessed: 19.11.2022).

European Commission, Directorate General for Internal Market, Industry, Entrepreneurship and SMEs (2020), European innovation scoreboard 2020, Publications Office, Luxemburg, https://data.europa.eu/doi/10.2873/6063 (accessed: 19.11.2022).

European Commission, Directorate General for Internal Market, Industry, Entrepreneurship and SMEs (2021), European innovation scoreboard 2021, Publications Office, Luxemburg, https://data.europa.eu/doi/10.2873/725879 (accessed: 19.11.2022).

European Commission (2022), Innovation Union Scoreboard Report 2022, Luxemburg, https://data.europa.eu/doi/10.2777/572275 (accessed: 20.09.2023).

European Commission (2023), EIS 2023 – RIS 2023, https://ec.europa.eu/research-andinnovation/en/statistics/performance-indicators/european-innovation-scoreboard/eis (accessed: 21.08.2023).

Eurostat (n.d.), Population and Demography. Database, https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/web/population-demography/demography-population-stock-balance/database (accessed: 21.08.2023).

Golejewska, A. (2012), Innowacyjność a konkurencyjność regionalna krajów Grupy Wyszehradzkiej w latach 1999–2008, “Prace Komisji Geografii Przemysłu Polskiego Towarzystwa Geograficznego”, 19, pp. 93–115, https://doi.org/10.24917/20801653.19.7 DOI: https://doi.org/10.24917/20801653.19.7

Gossling, T., Rutten, R. (2007), Innovation in Regions, “European Planning Studies”, 2 (15), pp. 253–270, https://doi.org/10.1080/09654310601078788 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/09654310601078788

Holienka, M., Gál, P., Kovačičová, Z. (2017), Drivers of Student Entrepreneurship in Visegrad Four Countries: Guesss Evidence, “Central European Business Review”, 6 (2), pp. 54–63, https://doi.org/10.18267/j.cebr.180 DOI: https://doi.org/10.18267/j.cebr.180

Holienka, M., Pilková, A., Ostapenko N. (2016), Entrepreneurial Environment and Economic Growth: What Affects the Productiveness of Business Activity at Macro Level?, [in:] T. Dudycz, G. Osbert-Pociecha, B. Brycz (eds.), The Essence and Measurement of Organizational Efficiency, Springer International Publishing, Switzerland, pp. 79–95, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-21139-8 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-21139-8_6

Hudáková, J., Maroš, M., (2019), Innovation and competitiveness in regions of the Slovak Republic, Sborník příspěvků, Velké Bílovice 12–14.06.2019, https://doi.org/10.5817/CZ.MUNI.P210-9268-2019-18 DOI: https://doi.org/10.5817/CZ.MUNI.P210-9268-2019-18

Hudec, O., Prochádzková, M. (2015), Visegrad Countries and Regions: Innovation Performance and Efficiency, “Quality Innovation Prosperity/Kvalitainovacia Prosperita”, 19 (2), https://doi.org/10.12776/qip.v19i2.593 DOI: https://doi.org/10.12776/qip.v19i2.593

Jabłońska, M., Fila, J. (2021), Conditions for development of entrepreneurship in regions of Visegrad Group countries, “Prague Economic Papers”, 30 (4), pp. 470–488, https://doi.org/10.18267/j.pep.777 DOI: https://doi.org/10.18267/j.pep.777

Jabłońska, M., Dziuba, R., Hurak, I. (2018), Czynniki rozwoju przedsiębiorczości w Polsce Wschodniej, “Wiadomości Statystyczne”, 10 (689), GUS, Warszawa.

Kahn, K.B., (2022), Innovation is not entrepreneurship, nor vice versa, “Journal of Product Innovation Management”, 39 (4), pp. 467–473, https://doi.org/10.1111/jpim.12628 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/jpim.12628

Klomp, L., Roelandt, T. (2004), Innovation Performance and Innovation Policy: The Case of the Netherlands, “De Economist”, 152 (3), pp. 365–374, https://doi.org/10.1023/B:ECOT.0000036576.40882.13 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/B:ECOT.0000036576.40882.13

Levie, J., Autio, E., Acs, Z., Hart M. (2014), Global entrepreneurship and institutions: an introduction, “Small Business Economics”, 42, pp. 437–444, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-013-9516-6 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-013-9516-6

Mikołajczyk, B. (2016), Obraz innowacyjności gospodarek w krajach UE mierzony wskaźnikiem SII, “Studia Ekonomiczne. Zeszyty Naukowe Uniwersytetu Ekonomicznego w Katowicach”, No. 282.

Pangsy Kania, S., Stobiecka, J. (2018), The impact of the selected determinants of creating entrepreneurship and innovation in EU countries on economic growth, “European Union.pl/Unia Europejska.pl”, 249 (2), pp. 30–43.

Pater, R., Lewandowska, A. (2015), Human capital and innovativeness of the European Union regions, “The European Journal of Social Science Research”, 28 (1), pp. 31–51, https://doi.org/10.1080/13511610.2014.962487 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/13511610.2014.962487

Polska Agencja Rozwoju Przedsiębiorczości (2017), Visegrad Group countries as a European centre of innovationan ecosystem and financing, Warszawa.

Polverari, L. (2018), Innovation as a regional development driver: Necessary shift or policy misdirection?, “European Policy Research Paper”, 102.

Ressin, M. (2022), Product Innovation Paradigm of Modern Entrepreneurship, “Quality Innovation Prosperity/Kvalita Inovácia Prosperita”, 26 (3), https://doi.org/10.12776/qip.v26i3.1752 DOI: https://doi.org/10.12776/qip.v26i3.1752

Skrabek, W.W. (2013), Wybrane zagadnienia metodologii nauk społecznych, Naukowe Wydawnictwo Piotrkowskie, Piotrków Trybunalski.

Teece, D.J. (2000), Strategies for Managing Knowledge Assets: The Role of Firm Structure and Industrial Context, “Long Range Planning”, 33 (1), pp. 35–54, https://doi.org/10.1016/S0024-6301(99)00117 X DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0024-6301(99)00117-X

Turro, A., Urbano, D., Peris Ortiz, M. (2014), Culture and innovation: The moderating effect of cultural values on corporate entrepreneurship, “Technological Forecasting and Social Change”, 88, pp. 360–369, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2013.10.004 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2013.10.004

Wach, K., Maciejewski, M., Głodowska, A., (2022), U Shaped Relationship in International Entrepreneurship: Entrepreneurial Orientation and Innovation as Drivers of Internationalisation of Firms, “Technological and Economic Development of Economy”, 28 (4), pp. 1044–1067, https://doi.org/10.3846/tede.2022.16690 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3846/tede.2022.16690