Impact of the Economic Crisis on Innovation

Changes to the economy that occurred in 2008 caused many business opportunities to decline, even many investors were afraid to invest because of the risky conditions to invest. So instead, many companies are taking short-term macroeconomic paths to cut spending, including investment development and innovation.

But on the other hand, this global economic crisis also provides opportunities for companies, industries, and all aspects of the country to restructure productive facilities to look for innovations and the latest outputs in their business. In this case, savvy companies can see that the economic crisis will not last forever and a recovery will sooner or later arrive.

However, the new economic cycle is also likely to bring about structural changes in the composition of output and demand. To take advantage of opportunities in a changing economic environment, successful companies need to provide new and improved goods and services.

As had been predicted by Schumpeter and Schumpeter economists, while the economic crisis had a bad impact on most economic actors, in the long run it would not only cause losses.

On the one hand, some economic actors may emerge victorious and we assume that they will be found among firms that understand earlier than others the composition of prices and profits.

On the other hand, opponents may be found among companies that aim to save costs by cutting labor and reducing investment and spending on innovation. Now the question for this case is, which one is better for the company?

The 2008 economic crisis offers a unique opportunity to examine two models of innovation derived from Schumpeter's and Schumpeter's economics that can be labeled creative destruction and technological accumulation. In turn, these models can help us to identify what will be the typology of companies that will lead the recovery. This paper is an attempt to examine the interaction between creative destructive forces and accumulation in innovation before, during and after the financial crisis that began in Fall 2008.

In fact, there has been a substantial decline in innovative investment in Europe (Filippetti and Archibugi, 2011), and this leads to the question of what is the best strategy to adopt at the country level (see Sharif, 2012). This analysis was made possible based on data from the Innobarometer Survey wave recently designed and collected by the European Commission in 2009 (European Commission, 2009).

Innovations generated through the accumulation of technology and the creative destruction of the economy Young Schumpeter (1911) viewed these innovations as events that could revolutionize economic life by giving rise to new entrepreneurs, new companies, and new industries.

On the other hand, in his book, Schumpeter observes and describes the activities of large oligopolistic companies, which are able to carry out R&D and innovation as routines by building on their previous competencies.

The relative importance of these two processes has been further investigated in the Schumpeterian tradition. Creative destruction is described as the result of a regime characterized by low cumulative and high technology opportunities, leading to an environment with greater dynamism in terms of ease of entry and exit of technology, as well as the leading role played by entrepreneurs and intense competition.

creative game with the technological regime created by the background of more stable competition among large enterprises and the map gradually, leading to market competition and oligopoly competition.