Corporate Governance and Its Impact on R&D Investment in Emerging Markets

Corporate R&D activities are inherently risky but also difficult to monitor. Against this background, we examine the impact of ownership concentration and legal shareholder rights protection on corporate R&D investments in emerging markets. Based on a comprehensive sample of publicly listed firms from 24 countries, we find that R&D intensity is lower in firms with (strategic) block ownership, and this effect is more pronounced in countries with stronger shareholder rights protection. This suggests that, similar to the situation in developed economies, dispersed ownership, which allows shareholders to diversify their investment risks, is beneficial for corporate R&D and that this effect is intensified by more developed institutions.     

Shareholder governance, bondholder governance, and managerial risk-taking

We examine the relation between the overall corporate governance structure and managerial risk-taking behavior. We find that the overall governance structure has a significant impact on how managers make decisions on investment policy: strong bondholder governance motivates more low-risk investments such as capital expenditure and lower high-risk investments such as R&D expenditures, whereas weak shareholder governance (entrenched managers) leads to more R&D expenditures. Moreover, we find that the effects of governance on investment policy differ significantly between speculative and investment-grade firms. For speculative firms, strong bondholder or shareholder governance leads to more capital expenditures and low R&D investments. For investment-grade firms, strong bondholder or shareholder governance leads to low capital expenditures and an insignificant impact on R&D investments. Furthermore, financing and investment covenants exhibit strong binding power to deter risky investments. Finally, a more dependent (or a less independent) board is associated with low capital expenditures and high R&D investments.     

Employment protection legislation and R&D investment

This paper examines how employment protection legislation influences corporate R&D investment. With a sample of 113,228 observations across 23 OECD countries from 2001 to 2018, I document that firms in strong employment protection legislation have lower R&D expenditure and investment efficiency. In addition, I find that the effect of employment protection on R&D expenditure is stronger in financially constrained firms but the effect of employment protection on R&D investment efficiency is stronger in financially unconstrained firms.     

The Stock Market and Corporate Investment: A Test of Catering Theory

We test a catering theory describing how stock market mispricingmight influence individual firms' investment decisions. We usediscretionary accruals as our proxy for mispricing. We finda positive relation between abnormal investment and discretionaryaccruals; that abnormal investment is more sensitive to discretionaryaccruals for firms with higher R&D intensity (opaque firms)or share turnover (firms with shorter shareholder horizons);that firms with high abnormal investment subsequently have lowstock returns; and that the larger the relative price premium,the stronger the abnormal return predictability. We show thatpatterns in abnormal returns are stronger for firms with higherR&D intensity or share turnover.     

The effect of R&D on future returns and earnings forecasts

Prior studies attribute the future excess returns of research and development activity (R&D) firms to either compensation for increased risk or to mispricing. We suggest a third explanation and show that neither the level of R&D investment nor the change in R&D investment explains future returns. Rather, the positive future returns that prior studies attribute to R&D investment are actually due to the component of the R&D firm??s realized return that is unrelated to R&D investment but present in R&D firms. Our results suggest that the excess returns of R&D firms are part of the larger value/growth anomaly. In addition, we show that while future earnings are positively associated with current R&D, errors in earnings expectations by investors and analysts are not related to R&D investment.     

Uncertainty and R&D investment: Does product market competition matter?

In recent years, the question of how uncertainty influences corporate decisions has received greater interest among academics, researchers, and corporations. This study is an attempt to investigate how uncertainties (firm-specific uncertainty (fsu), market-based uncertainty (mu), and economic policy uncertainty (epu)) influence research and development (R&D) investment and to further examine whether this relation is moderated by product market competition across firms of different sizes. Using a sample of Chinese listed firms covering 2000–2017, this study applies a two-step system GMM model to perform estimations and control for endogeneity issues. The findings show that uncertainties (fsu, mu, and epu) negatively influence R&D investment and that this negative relationship is more prominent for firms operating in competitive industries. In concentrated industries, however, the negative impact of uncertainty is mitigated for large firms, which have more internal resources and better access to external financing. This study contributes to real options theory by illustrating how different forms of uncertainty embedded in a firm’s internal and external environment reduce R&D investment, and by indicating how this relationship is moderated by product market competition.     

Venture capital investment and the performance of entrepreneurial firms: Evidence from China

We examine the contributions of venture capital investment to entrepreneurial firms in China. Based on a panel dataset of Chinese manufacturing firms, we investigate the performance and R&D activities of venture capital-backed (VC-backed) and non-VC-backed firms during the period 1998 to 2007. We explore whether VC-backed firms in China generally outperform their non-VC-backed counterparts, and if so, whether this outperformance is mainly attributed to the ex-ante screening or ex-post monitoring efforts of venture capitalists (VCs). We then determine whether the different types of VCs and investment approaches affect the ex-post monitoring efforts of VCs, and consequently, the performance and R&D activities of the VC-backed firms. Our analysis shows that VC-backed firms outperform non-VC-backed firms in terms of profitability, labor productivity, sales growth, and R&D investment. First, VCs select firms with higher profitability, labor productivity, and sales growth, as well as firms that invest more in R&D activities. Moreover, the differences in profitability and labor productivity are significantly magnified after VC entry. After receiving investment from VCs, firms on average achieve magnified higher ROS, ROE, and labor productivity compared to non-VC-backed firms. However, no evidence demonstrates the magnified improvement in sales growth or R&D investment of the VC-backed firms after the venture investment is made. We distinguish the screening and value added effects by using propensity score matching. We also use instrumental variables to determine whether the post-investment performance improvements of the firms are driven by the venture capital investment. Finally, we find different types of VCs and investment approaches affect the performance of the firms after the investment is made. Foreign VCs add more value to the firms they invest in compared to domestic VCs. Firms backed by syndicated investment perform better and invest more in R&D after the investment is made compared to those backed by non-syndicated investment and non-VC-backed firms.     

The Effects of Private Investments in Public Equity on R&D Investment in Small and Medium-Size Enterprises

This paper provides evidence that small and medium-size enterprises (SMEs) use a portion of private investments in public equity (PIPEs) for current research and development (R&D) investment, hold the rest in liquidity reserves such as cash assets and working capital, and ultimately use these reserves to smooth R&D investment. That is, PIPEs may have a direct effect on R&D investment and an indirect or smoothing effect using liquidity reserves. This paper also shows that innovative SMEs such as venture businesses, inno-biz firms, and management innovative firms are more likely to use PIPEs for R&D investment than are noninnovative SMEs. The implications of this paper are that PIPEs can be used as an important source of external financing to fund R&D investment and can be particularly valuable for R&D investment in innovative SMEs.     

Excess Returns to R&D-Intensive Firms

Recent studies indicate that both current R&D investment levels and current or recent changes in R&D investment are positively associated with subsequent excess (risk-adjusted) stock returns. The tentative explanation offered for these results is that shares of R&D-intensive firms are mispriced because investors fail to see through earnings distortions caused by conservative accounting for R&D costs. However, an alternative explanation is that conventional controls for risk do not completely capture the riskiness of R&D-intensive firms, causing measured excess returns for these firms to be biased upward. This study provides evidence useful for distinguishing between the mispricing and risk explanations for R&D-related excess returns. Overall, our empirical results suggest that the positive association between R&D investment levels and excess returns is more likely to result from failure to control adequately for risk than from mispricing. On the other hand, our results do not rule out the possibility of a second source of excess returns that are due to mispricing and that are associated with changes in the level of R&D investment.     

Aggregate accounting research and development expenditures and the prediction of real gross domestic product

The role of accounting information for public policy making has received increased attention in recent years. Konchitchki and Patatoukas, 2014a, Konchitchki and Patatoukas, 2014b demonstrate that growth in aggregate accounting earnings can predict future growth in nominal and real Gross Domestic Product (GDP). We extend the micro to macro literature by decomposing earnings into the R&D and pre-R&D components. Using the Almon (1965) finite distributed lag model, we find that both components can predict future real GDP growth with different lead-lag structures. Importantly, this decomposition significantly increases the explanatory power of the predictive model using accounting information. Aggregate accounting R&D can predict real GDP through the personal consumption, business investment, and net export channels of GDP. Our study extends prior research on the forecasting usefulness of accounting information at the aggregate level and has practical implications for macro forecasting and for public policy making regarding innovative activities of publicly listed firms.     

Why Are U.S. Stocks More Volatile?

U.S. stocks are more volatile than stocks of similar foreign firms. A firm's stock return volatility can be higher for reasons that contribute positively (good volatility) or negatively (bad volatility) to shareholder wealth and economic growth. We find that the volatility of U.S. firms is higher mostly because of good volatility. Specifically, stock volatility is higher in the United States because it increases with investor protection, stock market development, new patents, and firm‐level investment in R&D. Each of these factors is related to better growth opportunities for firms and better ability to take advantage of these opportunities.     

Law,Stock Markets,and Innovation

We study a broad sample of firms across 32 countries and find that strong shareholder protections and better access to stock market financing lead to substantially higher long‐run rates of R&D investment, particularly in small firms, but are unimportant for fixed capital investment. Credit market development has a modest impact on fixed investment but no impact on R&D. These findings connect law and stock markets with innovative activities key to economic growth, and show that legal rules and financial developments affecting the availability of external equity financing are particularly important for risky, intangible investments not easily financed with debt.     

Investment policy in family controlled firms

We explore the relation between family ownership and corporate investment policy. Our analysis centers on two incentives, risk aversion and extended investment horizons, which potentially influence the level and type of investments that family firms undertake. We find that family firms devote less capital to long-term investments than firms with diffuse ownership structures. When dividing long-term investment into its two components of R&D and capital expenditures, we note that family firms, relative to nonfamily firms, prefer investing in physical assets relative to riskier R&D projects. Additional tests indicate that family firms receive fewer patent citations per dollar of R&D investment relative to nonfamily firms. Overall, all empirical results indicate that family preferences for lower firm risk, across all family sub-types, affects corporate R&D spending and capital expenditures.     

Cash holdings and R&D smoothing

The sharp increase in R&D investment in recent decades has important but unexplored implications for corporate liquidity management. Because R&D has high adjustment costs and is financed with volatile sources, it is very expensive for firms to adjust the flow of R&D in response to transitory finance shocks. The main contribution of this paper is to directly examine whether firms use cash reserves to smooth their R&D expenditures. We estimate dynamic R&D models and find that firms most likely to face financing frictions rely extensively on cash holdings to smooth R&D. In particular, our estimates suggest that young firms used cash holdings to dampen the volatility in R&D by approximately 75% during the 1998–2002 boom and bust in equity issues. Firms less likely to face financing frictions appear to smooth R&D without the use of costly cash holdings. Our findings provide new insights into the value of liquidity and the financing of intangible investment, and suggest that R&D smoothing with cash reserves is now important for understanding cash management for a substantial fraction of publicly traded firms.     

The information content of R&D reductions

An extensive literature shows that R&D intensities and increases are positively related to firm performance, but little research examines the valuation of R&D reductions. This paper fills the void by studying long-term performance following R&D reductions. We find that, contrary to conventional wisdom, large R&D cuts are associated with positive future stock returns. This return drift cannot be explained by asset pricing factors, including R&D intensities and R&D increases. We explore two potential economic motives behind R&D reductions: R&D spillover and firm life cycle. We show that operating performance deteriorates immediately before R&D reductions but exhibits no abnormal pattern afterward. While firm growth falls substantially and variability in profitability reduces, firms with low or declining investment opportunities and mature firms outperform. These findings are inconsistent with the spillover hypothesis, but support the life cycle story that firms attempt to resolve overinvestment in R&D that arises over the course of firm life cycle.     

Did financing constraints cause investment stagnation in Japan after the 1990s?

Has investment by Japanese firms been affected by financing constraints since the collapse of the asset price bubble? This study answers the question while improving on the weaknesses of the models used in previous studies. It employs panel data for Japanese listed firms in four R&D-intensive industries. We divide our sample by firm size and examine three periods with different economic environments: the first half of the “two lost decades” from 1991 to 2000, the second half of the ‘two lost decades’ from 2001 to 2009, and the period following the ‘two lost decades’ from 2010 to 2016. We construct new investment functions based on the Euler equation by considering both physical and R&D investment factors to remove estimator bias, thus enabling us to determine whether firms face financing constraints accurately. The estimation results indicate that there were financing constraints on both R&D and physical investments by large listed firms from 1991 to 2000 and from 2010 to 2016. Conversely, the weak growth of both R&D and physical investments by small listed firms from 2010 to 2016 was not attributed to financing constraints but the lack of productive investment opportunities. Different policy measures are needed depending on whether the investment is stagnant due to financing constraints or the lack of investment opportunities.     

R&D investment and distress risk

This paper proposes that besides volatility, R&D can increase firms' distress risk through another channel. Unlike capital investment, R&D is more inflexible and subject to high adjustment costs. Moreover, R&D intensive firms face severe financial constraints and are more likely to suspend/discontinue R&D projects. Therefore, firms' distress risk increases with their R&D intensity. Using a large panel of US companies over the 1980 to 2011 period, I find a robust empirical relation between R&D and distress risk, primarily among financially constrained firms. Moreover, the effect of R&D on distress risk is magnified during economic downturns. I also find that firms that have been previously successful in R&D or firms with high analyst coverage can mitigate the relationship between R&D and distress risk.     

Access to private equity and real firm activity: Evidence from PIPEs

We study how access to private equity financing affects real firm activities using a broad panel of publicly traded U.S. firms that raise external equity through private placements (PIPEs) between 1995 and 2008. The public firms relying on PIPEs are generally small, high-tech firms that cannot finance investment internally and likely face severe external financing constraints; PIPEs are by far the most important source of finance for these firms. We show that firms use PIPE inflows to maintain extremely high R&D investment ratios and to build substantial cash reserves. We also use GMM techniques that control for firm-specific effects and the endogeneity of the decision to raise private equity and find that PIPE funding has a substantial impact on corporate investment in cash reserves and R&D, and a smaller but significant impact on investment in non-cash working capital, but little impact on fixed investment or acquisitions. Our estimates indicate that R&D investment initially increases by $0.20–$0.25 for each dollar of private equity flowing into the firm, and that PIPE funds initially invested in cash ultimately go to R&D. These findings offer direct evidence that access to private equity finance has an important effect on the key input that drives innovation at the firm- and economy-wide levels.     

R&D investments,capital expenditures,and earnings thresholds

Prior studies find that firms cut research and development (R&D) expense in response to earnings considerations. We extend this stream of research by documenting that firms narrowly achieving an earnings threshold also report unusually high capital expenditures. In addition, these firms’ total investments (R&D expense plus capital expenditures) do not vary in response to earnings thresholds, which suggests that, on average, reductions in R&D expense are offset by concurrent increases in capital expenditures. Lastly, our research design allows us to infer that the increased capital expenditures are largely R&D investments that are capitalized instead of non-R&D capital expenditures, suggesting that overall investments in R&D are relatively unchanged.     

The relation between R&;D intensity and future market returns: does expensing versus capitalization matter?

The Australian accounting environment provides an ideal setting for examining the impact of different accounting treatments of firms’ R&D activities on their subsequent returns. Unlike US firms, which can only expense R&D, Australian GAAP permits firms to either expense or capitalize their R&D expenditure. We examine separately the market impact of the R&D intensity of all R&D active firms, ‘capitalizers’ and ‘expensers’. Our results suggest that firms with higher R&D intensity perform better, regardless of the accounting method used, consistent with the resource-based view of the firm. We also find some evidence that firms which expense R&D outperform those which capitalize R&D after controlling for R&D intensity.