Snapshots of a state of flux: how Brazilian industrial firms differ in the adoption of digital technologies and policy implications

References

• Abramovitz, M. 1986. “Catching Up, Forging Ahead, and Falling Behind.” The Journal of Economic History 46 (2): 385–406. doi:10.1017/S0022050700046209.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Abreu, M. N., A. L. Siqueira, and W. T. Caiaffa. 2009. “Ordinal Logistic Regression in Epidemiological Studies.” Revista de Saúde Pública 43 (1): 183–194.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Acemoglu, D., D. Dorn, G. H. Hanson, and B. Price. 2014. “Return of the Solow Paradox? IT, Productivity, and Employment in US Manufacturing.” National Bureau of Economic Research, No. w19837.
   Google Scholar
• Aghion, P., B. E. Jones, and C. I. Jones. 2017. “Artificial Intelligence and Economic Growth.” NBER, Working Paper 23928, Cambridge, http://www.nber.org/papers/w23928
   Google Scholar
• Agresti, A. 1996. An Introduction to Categorical Data Analysis. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
   Google Scholar
• Agresti, A. 2002. Categorical Data Analysis. 2nd ed. Hoboken, New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons.
   Google Scholar
• BCG. 2015. Industry 4.0: The Future of Productivity and Growth in Manufacturing Industries. Boston: Boston Consulting Group.
   Google Scholar
• Bell, M., and K. Pavitt. 1993. “Technological Accumulation and Industrial Growth: Contrasts between Developed and Developing Countries.” Industrial and Corporate Change 2 (2): 157–210. doi:10.1093/icc/2.2.157.
   Google Scholar
• Brynjolfsson, E., and D. Syverson. 2017. “Artificial Intelligence and the Modern Productivity Paradox: A Clash of Expectations and Statistics.” NBER working paper 24001, Cambridge: NBER http://www.nber.org/papers/w24001.
   Google Scholar
• Corrado, C. A., and C. R. Hulten. 2010. “How Do You Measure a “Technological Revolution?” American Economic Review 100 (2): 99–104. doi:10.1257/aer.100.2.99.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• ECLAC. 2018. Data, Algorithms and Policies: Redefining the Digital World. ECLAC, Santiago: United Nations Publication LC/CMSI.6/4.
   Google Scholar
• Freeman, C. 1987. Technology Policy and Economic Performance: Lessons from Japan. London: Pinter Publishers.
   Google Scholar
• Frey, C., and M. Osborne. 2013 The Future of Employment: How susceptible and jobs to computerisation. University of Oxford, Mimeo
   Google Scholar
• Gordon, R. J. 2016. The Rise and Fall of American Growth: The U.S. Standard of Living since the Civil War. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
   Google Scholar
• IEL. 2018. Indústria 2027: Riscos e oportunidades para o Brasil diante de inovações disruptivas. Brasilia: IEL. www.portaldaindustria.com.br/cni/canais/industria-2027.
   Google Scholar
• Industrie 4.0 Working Group. 2013. Securing the future of German Manufacturing Industry: Recommendations for the implementing the Strategic Initiative INDUSTRIE 4.0. Frankfurt/Main: Office of the Industry-Science Research Alliance.
   Google Scholar
• ITU. 2018. Measuring the Information Society Report 2017. Geneva: ITU.
   Google Scholar
• Lee, K. 2013. Schumpeterian Analysis of Economic Catch-Up, Knowledge, Path-Creation, and the Middle-Income Trap. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Lee, K., and F. Malerba. 2018. “Economic Catch-Up by Latecomers as an Evolutionary Process.” In Modern Evolutionary Economics: An Overview , edited by R. Nelson, G. Dosi, C. Helfat, A. Pyka, P. Saviotti, K. Lee, et al., 172–207.. Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press. doi:10.1017/9781108661928.006.
   Google Scholar
• Long, J. S., and J. Freese. 2006. Regression Models for Categorical and Limited Dependent Variables Using Stata. 2nd ed. College Station, Texas: Stata Press.
   Google Scholar
• Long, J. S., and J. Freese. 2014. Regression Models for Categorical Dependent Variables Using Stata. 3rd ed. College Station, TX: Stata Press.
   Google Scholar
• McKinsey. 2017. A Future that Works: Automation, Employment and Productivity. New York: McKinsey Global Institute.
   Google Scholar
• Nelson, R., and S. Winter. 1982. An Evolutionary Theory of Technical Change. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Nelson, R. R. 1991. “Why Do Firms Differ, and How Does It Matter?” Strategic Management Journal 12: 61–74. Special issue: Fundamental Research Issues in Strategy and Economics (Winter, 1991). doi:10.1002/(ISSN)1097-0266.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• OECD. 2017. The Next Production Revolution: Implications for Government and Business. Paris: OECD.
   Google Scholar
• Oks, S. J., A. Fritzsche, and C. Lehmann. 2016. “The Digitalisation of Industry from a Strategic Perspective.” In Paper Submitted to R&D Management Conference 2016 “From Science to Society: Innovation and Value Creation”. Cambridge, UK. July.
   Google Scholar
• Pavitt, K. 1984. “Sectoral Patterns of Technical Change: Towards a Taxonomy and a Theory.” Research Policy 13 (6): 343–373. doi:10.1016/0048-7333(84)90018-0.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Porter, M., and J. Heppelmann. 2014. “How Smart, Connected Products are Transforming Competition.” Harvard Business Review, November.
   Google Scholar
• Porter, M., and J. Heppelmann. 2015. “How Smart, Connected Products are Transforming Companies.” Harvard Business Review, October.
   Google Scholar
• Teece, D., and G. Pisano. 1994. “The Dynamic Capabilities of Firms: An Introduction.” Industrial and Corporate Change 3 (3): 537–556. doi:10.1093/icc/3.3.537-a.
   Google Scholar
• UNIDO. 2017. Emerging Trends in Global Advanced Manufacturing. Vienna: UNIDO.
   Google Scholar
• WEF. 2018. Readiness for the Future of Production Report 2018, Geneva: WEF.
   Google Scholar
• Williams, R. 2006. “Generalized Ordered Logit/Partial Proportional Odds Models for Ordinal Dependent Variables.” Stata Journal 6: 58–82. doi:10.1177/1536867X0600600104.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Williams, R. 2016. “Understanding and Interpreting Generalized Ordered Logit Models.” The Journal of Mathematical Sociology 40 (1): 7–20. doi:10.1080/0022250X.2015.1112384.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar