Visegrad Countries and Regions: Innovation Performance and Efficiency

Oto Hudec


Purpose: The aim of the article is to study the differences between efficiency of their research and innovation systems, innovation performance and efficiency of the Visegrad countries (Czech Republic, Hungary, Poland and Slovakia) as well as their regions. Methodology/Approach: Visegrad countries are to be compared according to national innovative capacity framework based on the composite index methodology The regional innovation efficiency is examined by considering R&D expenditures as inputs and patents as outputs. The efficiency of the regional research and innovation systems is based on the concept of knowledge production function (Cobb - Douglas type). Findings: Visegrad countries do not belong among the best performers in innovation and competitiveness in the European Union. The findings show a substantial difference if replacing commonly evaluated innovation performance by the efficiency. Except the capital regions, there are several Polish and Czech regions which belong to the most efficient in innovation in the Visegrad regional comparison: Lodzkie, Lesser Poland, Central Moravia and South-East Moravia. Research Limitation/implication: The research shows the limitation of the innovation performance as published by the European Commission in a form of Regional Innovation Monitor.  Originality/Value of paper: The approach of relative efficiency evaluation shows a rather different picture in comparison to previous static models and comparisons. 


Annoni, P. and Kozovska, K., 2010. EU Regional Competitiveness Index 2010. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union. Available at: [Accessed 17 June 2015].

Council for European Studies, 2013. Research and Innovation performance in the EU Member States and Associated Countries. Innovation Union Progress at Country Level. Report of European Commission. [online], Available at: [Accessed 17 June 2015]

Freeman, Ch., 1995. The “National System of Innovation” in historical perspective. Journal of Economics, 19, pp. 5-24.

Fritsch, M. and Slavtchev, V., 2011. Determinants of the Efficiency of Regional Innovation Systems. Regional Studies, 45(7), pp. 905-918.

Furman, J.L., Porter M.E. and Stern S., 2002. The determinants of national innovative capacity. Research Policy, 31, pp. 899-933.
Innovation Union Scoreboard, 2013. Report of European Commission. [online] Available at: [Accessed 17 June 2015]. DOI: 10.2769/72530.

JRC EC, 2012. Joint Research Centre of the European Commission. Composite indicators measuring structural change, monitoring the progress towards a more knowledge-intensive economy in Europe. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union, 56 pp.

JRC EC, 2014. Joint Research Centre of the European Commission. The 2014 EU Industrial R&D Investment Scoreboard. Available at:

Lundvall, B.A. and Johnson, B., 1994. The learning economy. Journal of Industry Studies, 1. pp. 23-42.

Liu, X. and Buck, T.W., 2007. Innovative Performance and Channels for International Technology Spillovers: Evidence from Chinese High-Tech Industries, Research Policy, 36(3), pp.355-366. DOI: 10.1016/j.respol.2006.12.003.

Porter, M.E., 1990. The Competitive Advantage of Nations. New York: Free Press, MacMillan. pp. 17-48.

Schiuma. G. and Lerro. A., 2008. Knowledge-based capital in building reional innovation capacity. Journal of Knowledge Management, 12 (5), pp. 121-136. DOI: 10.1108/13673270810902984.

Schwab. K. and Porter, M. E., 2007. The Global Competitiveness Report 2007-2008. World Economic Forum, Geneva, Switzerland.


Oto Hudec (Primary Contact)
Hudec, O. (2015). Visegrad Countries and Regions: Innovation Performance and Efficiency. Quality Innovation Prosperity, 19(2), 55–72.
Copyright and license info is not available

Article Details

Does Foreign Direct Investment Boost Innovation? The Case of the Visegrad and Baltic Countries

Aneta Bobenič Hintošová, Michaela Bruothová, Iveta Vasková
Abstract View : 285
Download :175

The Effectiveness of Innovative Infrastructure: The Case of Kazakhstan

Bakyt Bayadilova, Arsen Nassyrkhanov, Elvira Tlessova, Lyazzat Parimbekova, Maigul...
Abstract View : 668
Download :362