Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The effects of technology transfers and institutional factors on economic growth: evidence from Europe and Oceania

  • Published:
The Journal of Technology Transfer Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Most of the literature on technology transfers (TTs) has tended to focus on a country or regional level without looking at the cross-continent flows of knowledge that are becoming ever more important due to regional trading blocs. This study fills the gap on the role of cross-continent TTs and institutional factors by focusing on the impact of environment related patents on economic growth. The continents selected for comparison are Europe and Oceania, which differ in terms of economic climate, geography and sustainability policies. In this way, we contribute to the literature on cross-continent TT policies by examining how environmental patents influence the economic growth rate of continents. This will help provide government policy with better means of enhancing TT. We conclude with the implications for managers, theory and policy in conjunction with the limitations and suggestions for future research.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Acemoglu, D., Aghion, P., Bursztyn, L., & Hemous, D. (2012). The environment and directed technical change. American Economic Review, 102(1), 131–166.

    Google Scholar 

  • Aghion, P., Dechezlepretre, A., Hemous, D., Martin, R., & Van Reenen, J. (2016). Carbon taxes, path dependency and directed technical change: Evidence from the auto industry. Journal of Political Economy, 124(1), 1–51.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ahmed, A., & Suardi, S. (2007). Sources of economic growth and technology transfer in sub-saharan Africa. South African Journal of Economics, 75(82), 159–178.

    Google Scholar 

  • Alam, A., Uddin, M., & Yazdifar, H. (2017). Financing behaviour of R&D investment in the emerging markets: The role of alliance and financial system. R&D in Management. https://doi.org/10.1111/radm.12303.

    Google Scholar 

  • Alam, A., Uddin, M., & Yazdifar, H. (2018). Institutional determinants of R&D investment: Evidence from emerging markets. Technological Forecasting and Social Change. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2018.08.007.

    Google Scholar 

  • Alvarez, C., & Urbano, D. (2011). Environmental factors and entrepreneurial activity in Latin America. Academia Revista Latinoamericana de Adminstración, 48, 31–45.

    Google Scholar 

  • Aminullah, A., Fizzanty, T., Kusnandar, K., & Wijayanti, R. (2013). Technology transfer through OFDI: The case of Indonesian natural resource-based MNEs. Asian Journal of Technology Innovation, 21, 104–118.

    Google Scholar 

  • Aparicio, S., Urbano, D., & Audretsch, D. (2016). Institutional factors, opportunity entrepreneurship and economic growth: Panel data evidence. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 102, 45–61.

    Google Scholar 

  • Appiah-Adu, K., Okpattah, B., & Djokoto, J. (2016). Technology transfer, outsourcing, capability and performance: A comparison of foreign and local firms in Ghana. Technology in Society, 47, 31–39.

    Google Scholar 

  • Archarya, R. C., & Keller, W. (2009). Technology transfer through imports. Canadian Journal of Economics, 42(4), 1411–1448.

    Google Scholar 

  • Arellano, M., & Bond, S. (1991). Some tests of specification for panel data: Monte carlo evidence and an application to employment equations. The Review of Economic Studies, 58(2), 277.

    Google Scholar 

  • Arimura, T., Hibiki, A., & Johnstone, N. (2007). An empirical study of environmental R&D: What encourages facilities to be environmentally-Innovative? In N. Johnstone (Ed.), Corporate behaviour and environmental policy (pp. 142–173). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.

    Google Scholar 

  • Audretsch, D., & Belitski, M. (2017). Entrepreneurial ecosystems in cities: Establishing the framework conditions. Journal of Technology Transfer, 42, 1030–1051.

    Google Scholar 

  • Audretsch, D., & Keilbach, M. (2004a). Entrepreneurship capital and economic performance. Regional Studies, 38(8), 949–959.

    Google Scholar 

  • Audretsch, D., & Keilbach, M. (2004b). Does entrepreneurship capital matter? Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 28(5), 419–429.

    Google Scholar 

  • Audretsch, D., & Keilbach, M. (2008). Resolving the knowledge paradox: Knowledge-spillover entrepreneurship and economic growth. Research Policy, 37(10), 1697–1705.

    Google Scholar 

  • Australian Government. (2015). Setting Australia’s post-2020 target for greenhouse gas emissions. Issue paper, March 2015. https://www.dpmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/publications/Issues_Paper_greenhouse_gas_1.pdf. Accessed 12 Nov 2018.

  • Barbosa, N., & Faria, A. P. (2011). Innovation across Europe: How important are institutional differences? Research Policy, 40, 1157–1169.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barge-Gil, A., & López, A. (2014). R&D determinants: Accounting for the differences between research and development. Research Policy, 43(9), 1634–1648.

    Google Scholar 

  • Björkman, I., Stahl, G., & Vaara, E. (2007). Cultural differences and capability transfer in cross-border acquisitions: The mediating roles of capability complementarity, absorptive capacity, and social integration. Journal of International Business Studies, 38, 658–672.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bleaney, M., & Nishiyama, A. (2002). Explaining growth: A contest between models. Journal of Economic Growth, 7(1), 43–56.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bond, S. R. (2002). Dynamic panel data models: A guide to micro data methods and practice. Portuguese Economic Journal, 1(2), 141–162.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bozeman, B. (2000). Technology transfer and public policy: A review of research and theory. Research Policy, 29(4), 627–655.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bozeman, B., Rimes, H., & Youtie, J. (2015). The evolving state-of-the-art in technology transfer research: Revisiting the contingent effectiveness model. Research Policy, 44, 34–49.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brey, P. (2018). The strategic role of technology in a good society. Technology in Society, 52, 39–45.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chen, C., Link, A., & Oliver, Z. (2018). U.S. Federal laboratories and their research partners: A quantitative case study. Scientometrics, 115(1), 501–517.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chen, J., & Quang, T. (2014). The impact of international financial integration on economic growth: New evidence on threshold effects. Economic Modelling, 42, 475–489.

    Google Scholar 

  • Choi, Y. R., Yoshikawa, T., Zahra, S. A., & Han, B. H. (2014). Market-oriented institutional change and R&D investments: Do business groups enhance advantage? Journal of World Business, 49, 466–475.

    Google Scholar 

  • Coe, D., & Helpman, E. (1995). International R&D Spillovers. European Economic Review, 39, 859–887.

    Google Scholar 

  • Coe, D. T., Helpman, E., & Hoffmaister, A. W. (1997). North–south R&D spillovers. Economic Journal, 107, 134–149.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, W. M., & Levinthal, D. A. (1990). Absorptive capacity: A new perspective on learning and innovation. Administrative Science Quarterly, 35, 128–152.

    Google Scholar 

  • Constantini, V., & Liberati, P. (2014). Technology transfer, institutions and development. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 88, 26–48.

    Google Scholar 

  • Danquah, M., Outtara, B., & Quartey, P. (2018). Technology transfer and national efficiency: Does absorptive capacity matter? African Development Review, 30(2), 162–174.

    Google Scholar 

  • Daude, C., & Stein, E. (2007). The quality of institutions and foreign direct investment. Economics and Politics, 19, 317–344.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dechezleprêtre, A., Martin, R., & Mohnen, M. (2017). Knowledge spillovers from clean and dirty technologies. Grantham Research Institute working series, paper no. 135.

  • DiMaggio, P., & Powell, W. (1983). The iron cage revisited: Institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields. American Sociological Review, 48, 147–160.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dowrick, S., & Nguyen, D. (1989). OECD comparative economic growth 1950–1985: Catch up and convergence. American Economic Review, 79, 1010–1030.

    Google Scholar 

  • Engelbrecht, H. J. (1997). International R&D spillovers, human capital and productivity in OECD economies: An empirical investigation. European Economic Review, 41, 1479–1488.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fabrizi, A., Guarini, G., & Meliciani, V. (2018). Green patents, regulatory policies and research network policies. Research Policy, 47, 1018–1031.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fagerberg, J. (1994). Technology and international differences in growth rates. Journal of Economic Literature, 32, 1147–1175.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fagerberg, J., Srholec, M., & Knell, M. (2007). The competitiveness of nations: Why some countries prosper while others fall behind. World Development, 35, 1595–1620.

    Google Scholar 

  • Falk, M. (2006). What drives business Research and Development (R&D) intensity across Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) countries? Applied Economics, 38(5), 533–547.

    Google Scholar 

  • Franco, C., Montresor, S., & Vittucci Marzetti, G. (2012). On indirect trade-related R&D spillovers: The “average propagation length” of foreign R&D. Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, 22, 227–237.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gandenberger, C., Bodenheimer, M., Schleich, J., Orzanna, R., & Macht, L. (2016). Factors driving international technology transfer: Empirical insights from a CDM project survey. Climate Policy, 16, 1065–1084.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gerlagh, R., Kverndokk, S., & Rosendahl, K. E. (2009). Optimal timing of climate change policy: Interaction between carbon taxes and innovation externalities. Environmental and Resource Economics, 43(3), 369–390.

    Google Scholar 

  • GGDC. (2009). The conference board total economy database, Groningen growth and development centre. http://www.conference-board.org/economics. Accessed 12 Nov 2018.

  • Gholami, R., Lee, S. Y. T., & Heshmati, A. (2006). The causal relationship between information and communication technology and foreign direct investment. UNU-WIDER working paper, Helsinki.

  • Greiner, M. A., & Franza, R. M. (2003). Barriers and bridges for successful environmental technology transfer. Journal of Technology Transfer, 43, 522–544.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hall, B. H., Jaffe, A. B., & Trajtenberg, M. (2005). Market value and patent citations. The Rand Journal of Economics, 36(1), 16–38.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hart, R. (2008). The timing and balance of policies for CO2 abatement when technological change is endogenous. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 55, 194–212.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hemmert, M. (2004). The influence of institutional factors on the technology acquisition performance of high-tech firms: Survey results from Germany and Japan. Research Policy, 33, 1019–1039.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hensengerth, O. (2015). Where is the power? Transnational networks, authority and the dispute over the Xayaburi dam on the Lower Mekong Mainstream. Water International, 40, 911–928.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hoekman, B., Maskus, K., & Saggi, K. (2004). Transfer of technology to developing countries: Unilateral and multilateral policy options. University of Colorado, PEC2004-0003.

  • Howitt, P. (2000). Endogenous growth and cross-country income differences. American Economic Review, 90, 829–846.

    Google Scholar 

  • Inkpen, A. C., & Tsang, E. (2005). Social capital, networks and knowledge transfer. Academy of Management Review, 30, 146–166.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jaffe, A. B., Fogarty, M. S., & Banks, B. A. (1998). Evidence from patents and from patent citations on the impact of NASA and other federal labs on commercial innovation. Journal of Industrial Economics, 46(2), 183–205.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jaffe, A. B., & Lerner, J. (2001). Reinventing public R&D: Patent policy and the commercialization of national laboratory technologies. RAND Journal of Economics, 32(1), 167–198.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnstone, N., & Labonne, J. (2006). Environmental policy, management and R&D. OECD Economic Study, 42(1), 169–203.

    Google Scholar 

  • Karanikic´, P., Mladenovic´, I., Sokolov-Mladenovic´, S., & Alizamir, M. (2017). Prediction of economic growth by extreme learning approach based on science and technology transfer. Quality & Quantity, 51, 1395–1401.

    Google Scholar 

  • Keller, W. (2004). International technology diffusion. Journal of Economic Literature, 42(3), 752–782.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kirchherr, J., & Matthews, N. (2018). Technology transfer in the hydropower industry: An analysis of Chinese dam developers’ undertakings in Europe and Latin America. Energy Policy, 113, 546–558.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kirchherr, J., Matthews, N., Charles, J. J., & Walton, M. J. (2017). Learning it the hard way: Social safeguards norms in Chinese-led dam projects in Myanmar, Laos and Cambodia. Energy Policy, 102, 529–539.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kverndokk, S., & Rosendahl, K. E. (2007). Climate policies and learning by doing: Impacts and timing of technology subsidies. Resource and Energy Economics, 29(1), 58–82.

    Google Scholar 

  • Laeven, L. (2003). Does financial liberalization reduce financing constraints? Financial Management, 32, 5–34.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lai, Y.-L., Lin, F.-J., & Lin, Y.-H. (2015). Factors affecting firms R&D investment decisions. Journal of Business Research, 68, 840–844.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lanoie, P., Laurent Lucchetti, J., Johnstone, N., & Ambec, S. (2011). Environmental policy, innovation and performance: New insights on the porter hypothesis. Journal of Economy and Management Strategy, 20(3), 803–842.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lee, C., Park, G., & Kang, J. (2018). The impact of convergence between science and technology on innovation. Journal of Technology Transfer, 43, 522–544.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lee, H., & Tan, H. (2006). Technology transfer, FDI and economic growth in the ASEAN region. Journal of the Asia Pacific Economy, 11(4), 394–410.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lemola, T. (2002). Convergence of national science and technology policies: The case of Finland. Research Policy, 31(8–9), 1481–1490.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lerner, J. (1994). The importance of patent scope: An empirical analysis. The Rand Journal of Economics, 25(2), 319–333.

    Google Scholar 

  • Link, A. N., Siegel, D. S., & Van Fleet, D. (2011). Public science and public innovation: Assessing the relationship between patenting at U.S. National Laboratories and the Bayh–Dole Act. Research Policy, 40(8), 1094–1099.

    Google Scholar 

  • Loko, B., & Diouf, M. A. (2009). Revisiting the determinants of productivity growth: What’s new?. Geneva: International Monetary Fund.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lundvall, B. A. (1992). National system of innovation: Towards a theory of innovation and interactive learning. London: Pinter.

    Google Scholar 

  • Madsen, J. (2007). Technology spillovers through trade and TFP convergence: 135 years of evidence for OECD countries. Journal of International Economics, 72, 464–480.

    Google Scholar 

  • Malerba, F. (2006). Innovation and the evolution of industries. Journal of Evolutionary Economy, 16, 3–23.

    Google Scholar 

  • Markusen, J. R., & Venables, A. (1999). Foreign direct investment as a catalyst for industrial development. European Economic Review, 43, 335–356.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mayer, J. (2001). Technology diffusion, human capital and economic growth in developing countries. UNCTAD discussion papers no. 154, United Nations Conference on Trade and Development, Geneva, Switzerland.

  • Meyer, J. W., & Rowan, B. (1977). Institutionalized organizations: Formal structure as myth and ceremony. American Journal of Sociology, 83, 340–363.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mohr, R. D. (2002). Technical change, external economies, and the porter hypothesis. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 43(1), 158–168.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nelson, R. R. (1993). National innovation systems: A comparative analysis. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nelson, R., & Phelps, E. (1966). Investment in humans, technological diffusion, and economic growth. American Economic Review, 56, 65–75.

    Google Scholar 

  • Niosi, J. (1999). Limited by design: R&D laboratories in the U.S. national innovation system. Journal of Policy Analysis of Management, 18(4), 717–719.

    Google Scholar 

  • North, D. C. (1990). Institutions, institutional change and economic performance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • North, D. C. (1991). Institutions. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 5(1), 97–112.

    Google Scholar 

  • OECD. (1963). Science and policies of the governments. Paris: OECD.

    Google Scholar 

  • OECD. (1971). Science, growth and society, a new perspective. Paris: OECD.

    Google Scholar 

  • OECD. (2009). OECD patent statistics manual. Paris: OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264056442-en.

    Google Scholar 

  • OECD. (2018). The measurement of scientific, technological and innovation activities Oslo manual 2018 guidelines for collecting, reporting and using data on innovation. Paris: OECD Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ouardighi, J. (2011). Pro-development economic growth and international income mobility: Evidence worldwide. International Economics, 128, 77–96.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pattit, J. M., Raj, S. P., & Wilemon, D. (2012). An institutional theory investigation of US technology development trends since the mid-19th century. Research Policy, 41(2), 306–318.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pinkse, J., & Groot, K. (2015). Sustainable entrepreneurship and corporate political activity: Overcoming market barriers in the clean Energy sector. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 39(3), 633–654.

    Google Scholar 

  • Priem, R. L., & Butler, J. E. (2001). Is the resource-based theory a useful perspective for strategic management research? Academy of Management Review, 26(1), 22–40.

    Google Scholar 

  • Puig, D., Haselip, J., & Bakhtiari, F. (2018). The mismatch between the in-country determinants of technology transfer, and the scope of technology transfer initiatives under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. International Environment Agreements, 18, 659–669.

    Google Scholar 

  • Quinn, D. (1997). The correlates of change in international financial regulation. American Political Science Review, 91, 531–551.

    Google Scholar 

  • Romer, P. M. (1986). Increasing returns and long-run growth. Journal of Political Economy, 94(5), 1002–1037.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosenzweig, S. (2017). The effects of diversified technology and country knowledge on the impact of technological innovation. Journal of Technology Transfer, 42(3), 564–584.

    Google Scholar 

  • Saggi, K. (2002). Trade foreign direct investment, and international technology transfer: A survey. The World Bank Research Observer, 17(2), 191–235.

    Google Scholar 

  • Salomon, J.-J. (1977). Science policy studies and the development of science policy. In I. Spiegel-Rösing & D. de Solla Price (Eds.), Science, technology and society. a cross-disciplinary perspective (pp. 43–70). London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Salter, A. J., & Martin, B. R. (2001). The economic benefits of publicly funded basic research: A critical review. Research Policy, 30(3), 509–532.

    Google Scholar 

  • Samet, K. (2014). Brain gain, technology transfer and economic growth: Case of Tunisia. International Journal of Economic and Finance, 6(9), 57–72.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schmid, G. (2012). Technology transfer in the CDM: The role of host-country characteristics. Climate Policy, 12(6), 722–740.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shih, H.-Y., & Chang, T.-L. S. (2009). International diffusion of embodied and disembodied technology: A network analysis approach. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 76, 821–834.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sigmund, S., Semrau, T., & Wegner, D. (2015). Networking ability and the financial performance of new ventures: Moderating effects of venture size, institutional environment, and their interaction. Journal of Small Business Management, 53(1), 266–283.

    Google Scholar 

  • Solow, R. M. (1956). A contribution to the theory of economic growth. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 70(1), 65–94.

    Google Scholar 

  • Solow, R. M. (2007). The last 50 years in growth theory and the next 10. Oxford Review Economic Policy, 23(1), 3–14.

    Google Scholar 

  • Soto, H. D. (1989). The other path: The invisible revolution in the Third World. New York: Harper & Row.

    Google Scholar 

  • Soto-Acosta, P., Popa, S., & Palacios-Marques, D. (2018). Social web knowledge sharing and innovation performance in knowledge-intensive manufacturing SMEs. Journal of Technology Transfer, 42, 425–440.

    Google Scholar 

  • Srholec, M. (2011). A multilevel analysis of innovation in developing countries. Industrial and Corporate Change, 20(6), 1539–1569.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stevens, A. J., Jensen, J. J., Wyller, K., Kilgore, P. C., Chatterjee, S., & Rohrbaugh, M. (2011). The role of public sector research in the discovery of drugs and vaccines. The New England Journal of Medicine, 364(6), 535–541.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sucker, L. G. (1987). Institutional theories of organization. Annual Reviews in Sociology, 13, 443–464.

    Google Scholar 

  • Swan, T. W. (1956). Economic growth and capital accumulation. Economic Record, 32(2), 334–361.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tang, L., & Coveos, P. E. (2008). Embodied and disembodied R&D spillovers to developed and developing countries. International Business Review, 17, 546–558.

    Google Scholar 

  • Teece, D. J. (2010). Business models, business strategy and innovation. Long Range Planning, 43(2), 172–194.

    Google Scholar 

  • Teo, H. H., Wei, K. K., & Benbasat, I. (2003). Predicting intention to adopt interorganizational linkages: An institutional perspective. MIS Quarterly, 27, 19–49.

    Google Scholar 

  • Trajtenberg, M. (1990). A penny for your quotes: Patent citations and the value of innovations. The Rand Journal of Economics, 22(1), 172–187.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tran, T., Daim, T., & Kocaoglu, D. (2011). Comparison of technology transfer from government labs in the US and Vietnam. Technology in Society, 33, 84–93.

    Google Scholar 

  • UNCTAD. (1999). Trade and development trade and development. In United Nations conference on trade development.

  • UNCTAD. (2014). Transfer of technology and knowledge sharing for development science, technology and innovation issues for developing countries. In United Nations conference on trade development (Vol. 71).

  • Urban, F., Nordensvard, J., Siciliano, G., & Li, B. (2015). Chinese overseas hydropower dams and social sustainability: The Bui dam in Ghana and the Kamchay dam in Cambodia. Asia Pacific Policy Studies, 2, 573–589.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Horne, C., & Dutot, V. (2017). Challenges in technology transfer: An actor perspective in a quadruple helix environment. Journal of Technology Transfer, 42, 285–301.

    Google Scholar 

  • Varsakelis, N. C. (2001). The impact of patent protection, economic openness and national culture on R&D investment: A cross-country empirical investigation. Research Policy, 30(7), 1059–1068.

    Google Scholar 

  • Varsakelis, N. C. (2006). Education, political institutions and innovation activity: A crosscountry empirical investigation. Research Policy, 35, 1083–1090.

    Google Scholar 

  • Villani, E., Rasmussen, E., & Grimaldi, K. (2017). How intermediary organizations facilitate university-industry technology transfer: A proximity approach. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 114, 86–102.

    Google Scholar 

  • von Hippel, E. (1988). The sources of innovation. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vonortas, N. S. (2018). International perspectives on innovation: Introduction. Journal of Technology Transfer, 43, 259–262.

    Google Scholar 

  • Waarden, F. V. (2001). Institutions and innovation: The legal environment of innovating firm. Organization Studies, 22(5), 765–795.

    Google Scholar 

  • Walz, R., & Marscheider-Weidemann, F. (2011). Technology-specific absorptive capacities for green technologies in Newly Industrialising Countries. International Journal of Technology and Globalisation, 5(3/4), 212–229.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wang, E. C. (2010). Determinants of R&D investment: The extreme-bounds analysis approach applied to 26 OECD countries. Research Policy, 39, 103–116.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wang, C., Yi, J., Kafouros, M., & Yan, Y. (2015). Under what institutional conditions do business groups enhance innovation performance? Journal of Business Research, 68, 694–702.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wooster, R. B., & Diebel, D. S. (2010). Productivity spillovers from foreign direct investment in developing countries: A meta-regression analysis. Review of Development Economics, 14(3), 640–655.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wu, J., Wang, C., Hong, J., Piperopoulos, P., & Zhuo, S. (2016). Internationalization and innovation performance of emerging market enterprises: The role of host-country institutional development. Journal of World Business, 51(2), 251–263.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yi, J., Wang, C., & Kafouros, M. (2013). The effects of innovative capabilities on exporting: Do institutional forces matter? International Business Review, 22, 392–406.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yousafzai, S., Saeed, S., & Muffatto, M. (2015). Institutional theory and contextual embeddedness of women’s entrepreneurial leadership: Evidence from 92 countries. Journal of Small Business Management, 53(3), 587–604.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank to NECE-Research Unit in Business Sciences funded by the Multiannual Funding Programme of R&D Centres of FCT-Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia, under the Project UID/GES/04630/2019.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Faculdade de Ciências Sociais e Humanas, Dep. Gestão e Economia, NECE-UBI Research Center in Business Sciences, Universidade da Beira Interior (UBI), Covilhã, Portugal

    Joao J. M. Ferreira & Cristina Fernandes

  2. La Trobe University, Melbourne, Australia

    Vanessa Ratten

Authors
  1. Joao J. M. Ferreira
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Cristina Fernandes
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Vanessa Ratten
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Joao J. M. Ferreira.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Ferreira, J.J.M., Fernandes, C. & Ratten, V. The effects of technology transfers and institutional factors on economic growth: evidence from Europe and Oceania. J Technol Transf 44, 1505–1528 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10961-019-09730-3

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10961-019-09730-3

Keywords

JEL Classification

Search

Navigation