Firm heterogeneity in TFP,sectoral innovation and location. Evidence from Italy

Sectoral and territorial specificities affect a firm’s capabilities of being productive. While there is a wide consensus on this, a quantitative measure of these effects has been lacking. To this end, we combine a data-set of Italian firms with some meso regional and sectoral variables and apply a cross-classified model that allows for a clear distinction between firm, region-specific and sector-specific effects. After observing a marked TFP heterogeneity across firms, the paper addresses the issue of understanding how much differences in firms’ productivity depend on regional localisation and sector specificities. Results refer to 2004–2006 and have three aspects. First, they confirm that the main source of firm variety is mostly due to differences revealed at individual level. Secondly, we find that the sector is more important than location in explaining firms’ TFP. Lastly, the results show that firm TFP increases when it belongs to more innovative sectors. Similarly, companies get benefits from belonging to sectors where there is a high proportion of firms using R&D public support and a high propensity to collaborate in innovative projects.     

Firm growth and R&D: Evidence from the Portuguese manufacturing industry

This work studies the effects of R&D activities and investment, both physical and R&D, on the growth of firms by considering a dynamic firm growth model with serial correlation. The main hypotheses maintain that firms with a strong commitment to R&D have a higher growth rate, and investment has a positive effect on firm growth. We investigate such relations with reference to an unbalanced panel data set of Portuguese manufacturing firms over the period of 1990 to 2001. We find that a systematic tendency for smaller firms to grow more quickly is the main reason why firm growth is not entirely stochastic.     

High-growth versus declining firms: the differential impact of human capital and R&D

We provide evidence that both human capital and R&D increase the likelihood that a firm will be a high-growth firm in the industry. However, different from human capital, being an R&D active firm also increases the probability of substantial decline or failure, underscoring the risky nature of innovation. Quantile regression results show that, different from R&D, human capital is growth-enhancing for all firms, hence also those located in the lower quantiles of the distribution of growth rates across firms.     

R&D subsidies in a model of growth with dynamic market structure

This paper presents the effects of an R&D subsidy in a Schumpeterian general equilibrium model with rich industry dynamics. R&D subsidies raise the long-run growth rate, but they also raise the level of industry concentration. In the model firms compete for market share through process R&D endogenously determining the market structure within and across industries. Endogeneity of the market structure allows for analysis of changes in the moments of the firm size distribution in response to policy. R&D subsidies primarily benefit large incumbent firms who increase their innovation rates creating a greater technological barrier to entry. Concentration increases with fewer firms and a higher variance in the market shares. In general equilibrium, the greater distortions in the product market cause the wage rate to fall which leads to increased turnover rates. In addition, the analysis demonstrates that the model captures a large number of empirical regularities described in the industrial organization literature, but absent from most endogenous growth models. These features, such as entering firms are small relative to incumbents, the hazard rate of exit is negatively related to firm size, and large firms spend more on R&D than small firms play important roles in understanding the impact of R&D subsidies on the economy.     

Knowledge appropriability, firm size, and growth

Empirical evidence shows that the number of patents per R&D dollar declines with firm size. In this paper, we propose a Schumpeterian growth model that accounts for this evidence. We analyze an economy with firms that engage in cost-reducing innovation resulting from the accumulation of both codified and tacit knowledge: the former occurs through the purchase of patents, while the latter is the result of R&D conducted in-house by firms. We study the relation between knowledge appropriability and market structure, and we show that a shift from patents to in-house research occurs as firm size gets larger. Since innovation statistics concentrate mainly on patents, this process of research reallocation results into an under-estimation of innovative activity and is responsible for the declining ratio of patents to R&D expenditure. Survey data on UK-based firms provide support to our results.     

Multinationals,R&D and Endogenous Productivity Asymmetries

We analyze the influence of endogenous productivity asymmetries between firms, in terms of competitiveness and size, on multinational activity. In the model, productivity depends on cost-reducing R&D (research and development). We show that when firms differ on commitment power in R&D, the R&D leader, independently of being a multinational or a domestic firm, tends to invest more in R&D than the R&D follower. Because of these productivity advantages, the R&D leader can more easily become multinational. Therefore, in addition to the proximity-concentration trade-off, we identify another FDI (foreign direct investment) determinant: technological competition.     

What are good R&D investment strategies for leaders and followers?

Research and development (R&D) investment affects the growth of firms in the same industry differently according to their technological positions. This study empirically investigates differences in how R&D investment influences firm growth between technological leaders and followers. Additionally, this study investigates the moderating effects of complementary assets and market competition on the relationship between R&D investment and firm growth. Using a sample of 2322 observations from 492 firms in the U.S. chemical and allied products industry for the period 2000–2009, we show that an increase in R&D investment leads to greater firm growth for technological followers than for technological leaders. We also find that the moderating effects of complementary assets and market competition vary depending on whether a firm is a technological leader or follower.     

Does R&D spending boost tangible investment? An analysis on European firms

This article investigates the relationship between firm’s R&D intensity, expressed as R&D expenditure over sales, and investment intensity in tangible assets. It is commonly acknowledged that R&D requires additional physical investment to be implemented. R&D increases a firm’s productivity and return to tangible investments, thus, providing to the firm incentives to bear high tangible capital costs and to invest more. This represents a crucial issue for a firm’s growth, particularly considering the strong interaction between physical capital accumulation and technological progress. The analysis is based on a large sample of manufacturing firms across seven European countries in the period 2007–2009. Since the sub-sample of firms performing R&D might not be random, there may potentially be an endogeneity issue. The analysis also considers that firms may decide to spend on R&D and investment in physical capital simultaneously. The questions of both endogeneity and simultaneity are dealt with by employing an instrumental variable two-step procedure. We find a positive and significant impact of R&D intensity on firms’ tangible investment intensity. The econometric results highlight the importance of financial factors, particularly with respect to firms’ internal resources. Exposure to international trade has a negative impact on investment, possibly depending on the time-span of the sample used.

Abbreviations: Technological Innovation and R&D; Investment Capital; Industry Studies; Firm Behavior; Empirical Analysis     

Corporate governance and research and development: Evidence from Japan

This paper investigates the effects of the ownership structure on the R&D intensity. Using the Japanese machine-manufacturing firm data from 1987 till 1998, we first found that the effects of R&D on stock market valuation and TFP growth were significantly positive in the latter half of the 1990s. Next, analyzing the determinants of the R&D intensity in 1998, we found that the shareholding ratios of large shareholders and the leverage ratios were positively correlated with R&D intensity, while the proportion of bank loans to total debt was negatively correlated with it. These results are consistent with the hypotheses that stress the disciplinary roles of large shareholders and debt. It is also consistent with a bank's holdup hypothesis. Finally, comparing the results of 1998 with those of 1989, we found that the positive roles of keiretsu affiliation and cross-shareholdings disappeared during the last decade.     

ChinHow R&D Investments Influence TFP Growth: Evidence from China’s Large and Medium- Sized Industrial Enterprises

This paper investigates the potential channels through which R&D may influence TFP growth using industry-level panel data of China’s large and medium-sized industrial enterprises over the period of 2000–2007. Comparing with existing literature, we provide a closer look of the relationship between R&D and TFP growth by decomposing TFP growth into efficiency change and technical change components using Malmquist productivity index and distinguishing between upstream R&D spillovers and downstream R&D spillovers. We find TFP grow slightly during 2000–2007, and R&D investment indeed serves as an engine of productivity growth just as endogenous growth theories argued, which is largely because R&D accelerates technical progress even it also results in enlarging technical inefficiency. However, we find a robust negative effect of downstream R&D spillovers on TFP growth, the effects of upstream is positive but not statistically significant. In addition, we do not find the positive effects of human capital on TFP as endogenous growth theories indicated, but find human capital severs as “assimilation device” for R&D spillovers both in promoting TFP growth and increasing technical efficiency even the effects on technical progress is adverse.     

A simple theory and evidence on the determinants of firm R&D

This paper derives a simple, but informative, model of firm R&D to figure out key factors that determine firm R&D effort. The model suggests a demand-pull, technology-push theory of R&D by showing that a firm's profit-maximizing R&D expenditure is determined jointly by both demand-side factors and technology-side factors. The former includes demand size (firm sales) and consumer preference over quality and price and the latter includes R&D cost structure or the production-cost effect of product R&D and firm-specific technological competence. In addition, the model shows that other things being equal, the stock of exogenous technological knowledge, including the firm's previously accumulated technological knowledge, relevant to current R&D which is negatively related with current R&D effort. An empirical analysis of firm R&D intensities and technological capabilities of more than 1600 firms in nine industries across six countries provides supportive evidence for the theory. Further, the theory implies that R&D intensity or the R&D-to-sales ratio is independent of firm size unless firm size affects technological competence and that given consumer preference and R&D cost structure facing all firms in the same industry, the distribution of firm-specific technological competence among firms determines the distribution of firm R&D intensities within the industry.     

Empirical Patterns of Firm Growth and R&D Investment: a Quality Ladder Model Interpretation

We present a partial equilibrium model of endogenous firm growth with R&D investment and stochastic innovation as the engines of growth, drawing on the quality ladder models in the macro growth literature, and the literature on patent races and the discrete choice models of product differentiation. The model fits a number of empirical patterns well, including: (i) a skewed size distribution of firms with persistent differences in firm sizes, (ii) firm growth independent of firm size, as stated in the so-called Gibrat's law, and (iii) R&D investment proportional to sales.     

Be productive or face decline. On the sources and determinants of output growth in Italian manufacturing firms

This article investigates the sources and determinants of output growth of Italian manufacturing firms. Applying stochastic frontier techniques, we decompose output growth into factor accumulation and TFP growth for the period 1998–2003. TFP growth is further decomposed into technological change, efficiency change and scale effects. Two key results emerge from the analysis. After confirming that both input accumulation and TFP growth are important in explaining output growth, we show that efficiency change (technological catch-up) is the most significant component of TFP growth in explaining output growth distribution. Furthermore, using a specific model of the asymmetric error component, we find that R&D spillovers, banking efficiency and public infrastructures have statistically significant and economically relevant effects on technological catch-up.     

How do housing cycles influence listed firms’ R&D investment: evidence from the collateral channel

ABSTRACT

Firm innovation is essential to long-run economic growth. Financially constrained R&D firms may use firm-owned properties as collateral to finance their R&D projects. Therefore, the housing price cycle can affect firms’ R&D investment through influencing their real estate value. By examining listed R&D firms during the housing boom period 2002–2006 in the U.S., we find that a $1 increase in real estate value leads a firm to increase its R&D investment by $0.38. We also find that this collateral effect is more pronounced among financially constrained R&D firms than that among unconstrained ones. Additionally, we examine the housing bust period 2008–2012, and find that real estate depreciation retarded R&D investment, especially among constrained R&D firms.     

R&D and productivity growth: Evidence from the UK

Although the econometric evaluation of R&D has attracted wide interest in many countries, it has not attracted much in the UK. The main objective of this paper is to fill this void, i.e., to estimate the impact of R&D on productivity growth of the UK manufacturing sector. However, there are some additional objectives. Firstly, we estimate the impact of R&D on productivity growth of large and small firms and we discuss a number of theoretical arguments regarding the role of firm size. Secondly, given that the technological infrastructure influences the innovative capacity of a firm, we compare the impact of R&D on productivity growth of high-tech firms with the corresponding impact on productivity growth of low-tech firms. Thirdly, we investigate whether the contribution of R&D to productivity growth has changed over time.

Based on firm-level data (78 firms, 1989–2002), we find that the contribution of R&D is approximately 0.04. Although the R&D-elasticity of large firms (0.044) is higher than the corresponding elasticity of small firms (0.035), the difference is small. In contrast, the R&D-elasticity is considerably high for high-tech sectors (0.11), but statistically insignificant for low-tech sectors. Finally, the investigation of the elasticity of R&D over time revealed an interesting discontinuity showing that although until 1995 the R&D-elasticity was approximately zero, after 1995 it increased dramatically to 0.09. We investigate the potential causes of such non-linearity and we suggest a number of possible explanations.     

How R&;D investments influence TFP growth: Evidence from China’s large and medium-sized industrial enterprises

This paper investigates the potential channels through which R&D may influence TFP growth using industry-level panel data of China’s large and medium-sized industrial enterprises over the period of 2000–2007. Comparing with existing literature, we provide a closer look of the relationship between R&D and TFP growth by decomposing TFP growth into efficiency change and technical change components using Malmquist productivity index and distinguishing between upstream R&D spillovers and downstream R&D spillovers. We find TFP grow slightly during 2000–2007, and R&D investment indeed serves as an engine of productivity growth just as endogenous growth theories argued, which is largely because R&D accelerates technical progress even it also results in enlarging technical inefficiency. However, we find a robust negative effect of downstream R&D spillovers on TFP growth, the effects of upstream is positive but not statistically significant. In addition, we do not find the positive effects of human capital on TFP as endogenous growth theories indicated, but find human capital severs as “assimilation device” for R&D spillovers both in promoting TFP growth and increasing technical efficiency even the effects on technical progress is adverse.     

Noncooperative versus cooperative R&D with endogenous spillover rates

This paper deals with a general version of a two-stage model of R&D and product market competition. We provide a thorough generalization of previous results on the comparative performance of noncooperative and cooperative R&D, dispensing in particular with ex-post firm symmetry and linear demand assumptions. We also characterize the structure of profit-maximizing R&D cartels where firms competing in a product market jointly decide R&D expenditure, as well as internal spillover, levels. We establish the firms would essentially always prefer extremal spillovers, and within the context of a standard specification, derive conditions for the optimality of minimal spillover.     

Firm size and types of innovation

We propose a general theory of innovation that illustrates the relative benefits of performing process versus product R&D when firm size is endogenous. A firm's size, scope, and R&D portfolio are shown to reflect the same underlying characteristic of the firm, namely manufacturing efficiency. We demonstrate that efficient firms become larger, have greater scope, and perform more of both process and product R&D. In light of decreasing returns to R&D, this implies small firms obtain more product innovations per dollar of R&D than large firms, which is consistent with evidence we present that small firms are more innovative than large firms as they obtain more patent counts and citations per dollar of R&D.     

The impact of the Great Recession on TFP convergence among EU countries

This article provides evidence on the effect of the Great Recession on productivity convergence among European Union (EU) economies. We use firm data, aggregated at the country-year level, to analyse the evolution of beta-convergence on total factor productivity (TFP) for 2003–2014. We obtain a positive impact of the recession on TFP (unconditional and conditional) beta-convergence across EU economies. These results support the existence of a catching-up process within the EU during the recent financial crisis. Other macroeconomic and institutional characteristics are important in fostering TFP growth, namely R&D intensity and quality of governance.     

Property rights protection and corporate R&D: Evidence from China

Following the recent literature on institutions and economic growth, we examine the effects of property rights protection on corporate R&D. Using a unique 2003 World Bank survey of over 2400 firms in 18 Chinese cities, we obtain the following findings: (1) property rights protection is positively and significantly related to corporate R&D activity (for both process and product R&D); (2) government services and helping hand are conducive to corporate R&D, while informal payments to government officials are not; and (3) government ownership of firms and direct appointment of CEOs are negatively associated with corporate R&D activities. We also find that corporate R&D is positively related to firm size, and access to finance, but negatively related to product market competition and firm age.