R&D: Czech Republic and Slovakia reach EU targets?

Authors

  • Nina Bočková Brno University of Technology, Faculty of Business and Management, Department of Economics http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8507-5874
  • Tomáš Meluzín Brno University of Technology, Faculty of Business and Management, Department of Economics

Keywords:

Economic growth, Europe 2020 Strategy, GDP per inhabitant, R&D Intensity, Multiple regression

Abstract

Purpose of the article The contribution analyses the relationship between Research and Development Intensity and economic growth. The studied geographical area is two EU members Czech Republic and Slovakia. The indicators considered in this contribution are R & D Intensity, total intramural expenditure on research and development performed on the national territory during a given period and GDP per inhabitant

 Methodology/methods The contribution studied statistical dataset is two countries – both EU members – Czech Republic and Slovakia; one is member of European Area (EA) in 2008 - 2015. Based on theoretical background discussed in contribution, the hypothesis and assumption formed for testing here is the following: Funding of the R&D activities as GERD leads to increase the long-term economic growth. For multiple regressions has been used software STATISTICA 12.

Scientific aim The scientific aim is to find the relevant relationship basis of multiple regression in between R&D funding and economic growth in Czech Republic and Slovakia.

Findings The econometric analysis show that R & D Intensity is an important driver of economic growth (R = 0.64) that is measured by GDP per inhabitant in PPS. The first phase research produced a regression analyze with dependent variable GDP per inhabitant and independent variable R&D Intensity. In the second phase of the research were formulated econometric models. The Czech Republic in period 2008 – 2015 is shown correlation with R2adj. = 0.534, DW = 1.55. The Slovakia in period 2008 – 2015 is shown correlation with R2adj. = 0.885, DW = 2.01.

Conclusions (limits, implications etc) The empirical findings suggest that Slovakia has a closer relationship than rival country. The global 3% R & D investment target will not reach even one without dramatic changes in innovation policy.

Author Biographies

Nina Bočková, Brno University of Technology, Faculty of Business and Management, Department of Economics

Department of Economics

Tomáš Meluzín, Brno University of Technology, Faculty of Business and Management, Department of Economics

Department of Economics

References

Brécard, D. et al., 2006. Macro-economic consequences of European research policy: Prospects of the Nemesis model in the year 2030. Research Policy, 35(7), pp.910-924.

Cai, B. & Chen, G., 2009. The Contribution of R&D Investment to Economic Growth-A Panel Data Analysis Based on the 31 Countries and Regions. In International Conference on Management of Technology. Taiyuan: AUSSINO ACAD PUBL HOUSE, PO BOX 893, MARRICKVILLE, NSW 2204 00000, AUSTRALIA, pp. 208-212.

Girone, G., Massari, A. and Mazzitelli, D. 2015. More on the Mean Difference of Continuous Distribution Models. In: Statistics and Demography: The Legacy of Corrado Gini: proceedings of the SIS Conference. Treviso, 9-11 September 2015, 1-8.

Griliches, Z., 1958. Research Costs and Social Returns: Hybrid Corn and Related Innovations. Journal of Political Economy, 66(5), pp.419-431.

Griliches, Z., 1973. Research Expenditures and Growth Accounting. In Science and technology in economic growth: proceedings of a conference held by the International Economic Association at St Anton, Austria. New York: Wiley, pp. 59-95. Available at: http://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007%2F978-1-349-01731-7_3 [Accessed January 23, 2017].

Halaskova, M., Slovak, S. & Halaskova, R., 2016. Impact of Selected R&D Indicators on Competitiveness of the European Union Countries. In PROCEEDINGS OF THE 3RD INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON EUROPEAN INTEGRATION 2016. Ostrava: VSB-TECH UNIV OSTRAVA, FEECS, DEPT ELECTR POWER ENG, 17. LISTOPADU 15, OSTRAVA, 70833, CZECH REPUBLIC, pp. 309-318.

Ho, Y.P., Wong, P.K. & Toh, M.H., 2009. THE IMPACT OF R&D ON THE SINGAPORE ECONOMY: AN EMPIRICAL EVALUATION. SINGAPORE ECONOMIC REVIEW, 54(1), pp.1-20.

Horowitz, I., 1967. The relationship between interstate variations in the growth of R. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, EM-14(3), pp.135-141. Available at: http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/6448339/.

Minniti, M. & Lévesque, M., 2010. Entrepreneurial types and economic growth. Journal of Business Venturing, 25(3), pp.305-314.

Necadova, M., 2014. IMPACT OF ECONOMIC CRISIS ON THE R&D INTENSITY AND ON POSITION OF THE CZECH REPUBLIC AND SLOVAKIA IN THE EVALUATION OF INNOVATION PERFORMANCE (IUS). In 8TH INTERNATIONAL DAYS OF STATISTICS AND ECONOMICS. Prague: MELANDRIUM, pp. 1043-1053.

OECD, 2011. OECD Science, Technology and Industry Scoreboard 2011 online., OECD.

OECD, 2015. Frascati Manual 2015: Guidelines for Collecting and Reporting Data on Research and Experimental Development 1st ed., Paris: OECD Publishing. Available at: http://www.oecdbookshop.org/en/browse/title-detail/Frascati-Manual-2015/?k=5JRXTJLV6BXX [Accessed December 19, 2016].

Stoneman, P., 1979. Kaldor's law and British economic growth: 1800–1970. Applied Economics, 11(3), pp.309-319.

Downloads

Published

2017-10-02

Issue

2017: COLLECTED ABSTRACTS

Section

Section 1: Perspectives of Business and Entrepreneurship Development

License

One of our top priorities and responsibilities is to prevent any illegal or unethical practice. Plagiarism is not tolerated in any form. Through the submission of a manuscript, the author confirms that it is their own original research. The ethical rules are binding for all parties who participate in the conference and are published in the Conference Proceedings. All parties to the editorial process respect the Ethical Rules of Conference.