Technological competitiveness of the EU member states in the era of the fourth industrial revolution

Open access


The aim of this paper is to investigate the implications of the fourth industrial revolution for technological competitiveness, its definition and measurement methods. An empirical part is aimed at identifying comparative advantages of the European Union in digital technologies. Recently new approaches have appeared to measure digital competitiveness, however they use a broad definition of competitiveness that encompasses not only technological factors but also the macroeconomic and institutional environment (IMD, 2017; WEF, 2018). There is still a limited number of studies focused on the technological dimension of competitiveness in digital technologies. This paper fills the gap by developing a conceptual framework based on patent indicators, i.e. Patent Share and Revealed Technological Advantage indices. It allows a consistent analysis of the comparative advantages of the EU member states in digital technologies to be conducted. The results confirm a huge diversity within the EU in terms of digital technologies, their global impact and comparative advantages.

If the inline PDF is not rendering correctly, you can download the PDF file here.

  • Abbas A. Zhang L. & Khan S. U. (2014). A literature review on the state-of-the-art in patent analysis. World Patent Information37 3-13.

  • Aiginger C. & Vogel J. (2015). Competitiveness: From a misleading concept to a strategy supporting Beyond GDP goals. Competitiveness Review25(5) 497-523.

  • Aiginger K. Bärenthaler-Sieber S. & Vogel J. (2013 October). Competitiveness under new perspectives. (WWW for Europe Working Paper No. 44). Vienna: WIFO.

  • Archambault É. (2002). Methods for using patents in cross-country comparisons. Scientometrics54(1) 15-30.

  • Archibugi D. & Pianta M. (1996). Measuring technological change through patents and innovation surveys. Technovation16(9) 451-468.

  • Aschhoff B. Crass D. Cremers K. Grimpe Ch. & Rammer Ch. (2010). European competitiveness in key enabling technologies. Centre for European Economic Research (ZEW). Retrieved from

  • BMBF. (2013). Zukunftsbild Industrie 4.0. Berlin: Bundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung.

  • Chiappini R. (2014). Persistence vs. mobility in industrial and technological specialisations: evidence from 11 Euro area countries. Journal of Evolutionary Economics 24(1) 159-187.

  • Choi D. & Song B. (2018). Exploring technological trends in logistics: Topic modeling-based patent analysis. Sustainability10(8) 1-26.

  • Cockburn I. Henderson R. & Stern S. (2018). The impact of artificial intelligence on innovation. (NBER Working Paper No. 24449). National Bureau of Economic Research. Retrieved from

  • Delgado M. Ketels Ch. Porter M. E. & Stern S. (2012). The determinants of national competitiveness. (NBER Working Paper No. 18249).

  • Dernis H. Guellec D. & van Pottelsberghe B. (2002). Using patent counts for cross-country comparisons of technology output. STI Review 27 129-146. Special Issue on New Science and Technology.

  • Dziallas M. & Blindt K. (2019). Innovation indicators throughout the innovation process: An extensive literature analysis. Technovation80-81 3-29.

  • EC. (2010). Europe’s digital competitiveness report 2010. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union.

  • EC. (2015). Monitoring the digital economy & society 2016-2021. Brussels: European Commission DG Communications Networks Content & Technology.

  • EC. (2018). Digital transformation scoreboard 2018. EU businesses go digital: Opportunities outcomes and uptake internal market. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union.

  • Ernst H. & Omland N. (2011). The Patent Asset Index: A new approach to benchmark patent portfolios. World Patent Information33 34-41

  • Fagerberg J. (1996 September). Technology and competitiveness. Oxford Review of Economic Policy12(3) 39-51. Retrieved from

  • Ferraro S. Dutt P. K. & Kerikmäe T. (2017). Using patent development education policy and research and development expenditure policy to increase technological competitiveness of small European Union member states. Croatian International Relations Review23(78) 97-126.

  • Grossman G. E. & Helpman E. (1989). Comparative advantage and long-run growth. (NBER Working Papers 2809). National Bureau of Economic Research Inc.

  • Guellec D. & Paunov C. (2018). Innovation policy in the digital age. OECD Science Technology and Innovation Policy Papers 59.

  • Haskel J. & Westlake S. (2017). Capitalism without capital: The rise of the intangible economy. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

  • Hemais C. A. Barros H. M. & Rosa E. O. R. (2005 July). Technology competitiveness in emerging markets: The case of the Brazilian polymer industry. Journal of Technology Transfer30(3) 303-314.

  • Howells J. & Michie J. (1998). Technological competitiveness in an international arena. International Journal of the Economics of Business 5(3) 279-293.

  • Huang M.-H. Chen D.-Z. Shen D. Wang M. S. & Ye F. Y. (2015). Measuring technological performance of assignees using trace metrics in three fields. Scientometrics 104 61-86.

  • IMD. (2017). IMD World Digital Competitiveness Ranking 2017. Lausanne: The IMD World Competitiveness Center. Retrieved from

  • IMD (2018). IMD World Digital Competitiveness Ranking 2018. Lausanne: The IMD World Competitiveness Center. Retrieved from

  • Kagermann H. Helbig J. Hellinger A. & Wahlster W. (2013). Recommendations for implementing the strategic initiative INDUSTRIE 4.0: Securing the future of German manufacturing industry. Final report of the Industrie 4.0 working group Forschungsunion.

  • Kim J. & Lee S. (2015). Patent databases for innovation studies: A comparative analysis of USPTO EPO JPO and KIPO. Technological Forecasting and Social Change92(C) 332-345

  • Kowalski A. M. Michorowska B. (2014). Methods for measuring innovation. In M. A. Weresa (Ed.) Innovation human capital and trade competitiveness. how are they connected and why do they matter? (pp. 74-78). Heidelberg New York London: Springer.

  • Lee Y.-G. (2009). What affects a patent’s value? An analysis of variables that affect technological direct economic and indirect economic value: An exploratory conceptual approach. Scientometrics79(3) 623-633.

  • Makhoba X. & Pouris A. (2019). A patentometric assessment of selected R&D priority areas in South Africa: A comparison with other BRICS countries. World Patent Information56 20-28.

  • Marinova D. & McAleer M. (2003). Nanotechnology strength indicators: International rankings based on US Patents. Nanotechnology14(1) R1-R7(7).

  • Mehrotra D. Sabitha S. Nagpal R. & Mattas N. (2016). Landscape analysis of patent dataset. Journal of Intellectual Property Rights21 211-225.

  • Ménière Y. Rudyk I. & Valdes J. (2017). Patents and the fourth industrial revolution. The inventions behind digital transformation. Munich: European Patent Office.

  • Monaco L. Bell J. & Nyamwena J. (2019 February 28). Understanding technological competitiveness and supply chain deepening in plastic auto components in Thailand: Possible lessons for South Africa. (CCRED Working Paper No. 1/2019). Retrieved from or

  • Montresor S. & Quatraro F. (2017). Regional branching and key enabling technologies: Evidence from European patent data. Economic Geography93(4) 367-396. doi: 10.1080/00130095.2017.1326810

  • Morrar R. Arman H. & Mousa S. (2017). The fourth industrial revolution (Industry 4.0): A social innovation perspective. Technology Innovation Management Review. Retrieved from file:///C:/Documents%20and%20Settings/bkam/Pulpit/Morrar_et_ al_TIMReview_November2017.pdf17.02.2019.

  • Narula R. & Wakelin K. (1998 September). Technological competitiveness trade and foreign direct investment. Structural Change and Economic Dynamics9(3) 373-387.

  • OECD. (2009). Patent Statistics Manual. Paris: OECD Publishing.

  • OECD. (2017). OECD Science Technology and Industry Scoreboard 2017: The digital transformation. Paris: OECD Publishing. Retrieved from

  • OECD. (2019). Digital innovation: Seizing policy opportunities. Paris: OECD Publishing. Retrieved from

  • Pantano E. Priporas K.-V. & Stylos N. (2018). Knowledge Push Curve (KPC) in retailing: Evidence from patented innovations analysis affecting retailers’ competitiveness. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services44 150-160.

  • Patel P. & Pavitt K. (1991). Europe’s technological performance. In C. Freeman M. Sharp & W. Walker (Eds.) Technology and the future of Europe (pp. 35-58). London: Pinter.

  • Planes-Satorra S. & Paunov C. (2019 May). The digital innovation policy landscape in 2019. OECD Science and Innovation Policy Papers71.

  • Popp D. (2005). Lessons from patents: Using patents to measure technological change in environmental models. Ecological Economics54(2-3) 209-226.

  • Porter M. E. (2008). On Competition. Boston: Harvard Business School Publishing.

  • Porter M. E. & Heppelmann J. E. (2014 November). How smart connected products are transforming competition. Harvard Business Review92(11) 64-88.

  • Prud’homme D. (2016). Dynamics of China’s provincial-level specialization in strategic emerging industries. Research Policy45(8) 1586-1603

  • Radman G. & Belin A. (2017). Competitiveness in technology and innovation: How to keep on?. International Journal of Digital Technology & Economy2(1) 45-56.

  • Rassenfosse G. de Dernis H. Guellec D. Picci L. & van Pottelsberghe de la Potterie B. (2013). The worldwide count of priority patents: A new indicator of inventive activity. Research Policy42(3) 720-737.

  • Santos C. Mehrsai A. Barros A. C. Araújo M. & Ares E. (2017). Towards Industry 4.0.: An overview of European strategic roadmaps. Procedia Manufacturing13 972-979.

  • Schwab K. (2016). The fourth industrial revolution. Geneva: World Economic Forum.

  • Scotchmer S. (2005). Innovation and incentives. Cambridge: MIT Press.

  • Tijssen R. & Winnink J. (2018). Capturing ‘R&D excellence’: Indicators international statistics and innovative universities. Scientometrics114(2) 687-699.

  • Uchida Y. & Cook P. (2005). The effects of competition on technological and trade competitiveness. Quarterly Review of Economics and Finance45(2-3) 258-283.

  • Ungerman O. Dedkova J. & Gurinova K. (2018). The impact of marketing innovation on the competitiveness of enterprises in the context of Industry 4.0. Journal of Competitiveness10(2) 132-148.

  • van Ark B. Hao J. X. Corrado C. & Hulten Ch. (2009). Measuring intangible capital and its contribution to economic growth in Europe. European Investment Bank14(1) 62-93.

  • van Raan A. F. J. (2017). Patent citations analysis and its value in research evaluation: A review and a new approach to map technology-relevant research. Journal of Data and Information Science2(1) 13-50.

  • Wallusch J. (2015). (Un)finished transition. Stock of knowledge in Poland 1924-2012. Economics and Business Review15(1) 89-102. doi: 10.18559/ebr.2015.1.7

  • WEF. (2018). The Global Competitiveness Report 2018. Geneva: World Economic Forum.

  • Weresa M. A. (2010). Intellectual property rights and competitiveness: evidence from Poland. International Journal of Foresight and Innovation Policy6(4) 233-247.

  • Weresa M. A. (2019). Stan i bariery rozwoju Przemysłu 4.0 w Polsce. In A. M. Kowalski M. A. Weresa (Eds.) Konkurencyjność międzynarodowa Polski w kontekście czwartej rewolucji przemysłowej i Przemysłu 4.0. Warszawa: Oficyna Wydawnicza SGH (forthcoming).

  • Wisla R. & Sierotowicz T. (2016). Medical technological specializations of central and eastern European regions. Economics and Sociology9(3) 195-209. doi: 10.14254/2071-789X.2016/9-3/17

  • Zamora-Torres A. (2014). Countries competitiveness on innovation and technology. Global Journal of Business Research8(5) 73-83.

Journal information
All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 0 0 0
Full Text Views 63 63 13
PDF Downloads 67 67 8