MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4412464501 · doi:10.1016/j.ijis.2025.07.002

The interplay between innovation adoption and pricing competitiveness in Sub-Saharan Africa

2025· article· en· W4412464501 on OpenAlexfundno aff
André Dumas Tsambou, Yannick Fosso Djoumessi, Benjamin Fomba Kamga, Simplice Asongu

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Innovation Studies · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicEconomic Growth and Productivity
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of JohannesburgInternational Development Research CentreUnited Nations Development ProgrammeAfrican Development Bank GroupUniversitatea Alexandru Ioan Cuza din Iași
KeywordsBusinessIndustrial organizationEconomic geographyEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The objective of this work is to evaluate the effects of adopting technological innovation, non-technological innovation, and their complementarity on price competitiveness. This work employs a recursive bivariate probit model applied to microdata from 1897 firms in three Sub-Saharan countries: Cameroon, Côte d'Ivoire, and Senegal. This model allows us to solve the endogeneity problem by assessing the complementarity relationship between technological and non-technological innovation practices and their effects on firm competitiveness. The results confirm that technological and non-technological innovations are complementary and have significant effects on firms' competitive advantage in terms of price. This complementarity constitutes evidence that their simultaneous adoption contributes more to firms' competitiveness than the individual adoption of each type of innovation. Non-technological innovations facilitate the effectiveness of technological innovations, which leads to a competitive advantage of about 26% when both types of innovations are adopted together. However, firms can also suffer significant losses in market share as a result of the non-adoption of innovations. Indeed, firms that do not adopt any innovations deteriorate their competitive advantage in terms of price by 4% on average.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.303
Threshold uncertainty score0.295

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.054
GPT teacher head0.315
Teacher spread0.261 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Innovation StudiesSame topicEconomic Growth and ProductivityFrench-language works237,207