Innovation in R&D service firms: evidence from the UK

Research and Development (R&D) service firms make significant contributions to innovation in other businesses. The extant literature considers these firms a homogenous sub-group of Knowledge Intensive Business Service firms (KIBS). The objective of this study is to investigate how R&D service firms innovate and the variety of innovation practices within these firms. Employing data from semi-structured interviews with senior managers from 32 UK-based R&D service firms, we suggest that there are two different modes of innovation: in the first mode, R&D service firms innovate similarly to KIBS whose innovation is ad-hoc in nature and driven by customers’ requests; another group of R&D service firms innovate like New Technology-based Firms (NTBFs) relying more on structured in-house R&D activities.     

Role of home and host country innovation systems in r&d internationalisation: a patent citation analysis

This paper has three novelties. First, we argue that any given R&D facility’s capacity to exploit and/or augment technological competences is a function not just of its own resources, but the efficiency with which it can utilise complementary resources associated with the relevant local innovation system. Just as asset-augmenting activities require proximity to the economic units (and thus the innovation system) from which they seek to learn, asset-exploiting activities draw from the parent’s technological resources as well as from the other assets of the home location’s innovation system. Furthermore, we argue that most firms tend to undertake both asset exploiting and augmenting activities simultaneously. Second, we use patent citation data from the European Patent Office to quantify the relative asset augmenting vs. exploiting character of foreign-located R&D. Third, we do so for European MNEs located in the US, as well as US MNEs located in Europe. Our results indicate that both EU (US) affiliates in the US (EU) rely extensively on home region knowledge sources, although they appear to exploit the host country knowledge base as well.     

Low-cost innovation and technology-driven innovation in China’s machinery industry

ABSTRACT

The political concept of indigenous innovation in China sets out a guiding principle for the country’s major transformation towards becoming an innovation nation. However, firms’ innovation strategies and capabilities in middle-income countries are usually heterogeneous, making a uniform response to this concept at the company level highly unlikely. The paper’s empirical contribution is based on analysing survey data on technologically advanced machinery firms in China. It uses a multinomial model approach to establish which drivers of innovation go hand-in-hand with the different innovation strategies. This paper identifies different innovation strategies and forms of innovation that co-emerge as part of this transformation, leading to four firm groups: low-cost producers, technology-oriented producers, user-oriented innovators and technology-oriented innovators. It thus contributes to a more differentiated view of the effects of China’s innovation-focused transformation. We find that R&D investments, governmental R&D support and scientific collaborations are key factors to distinguish between the above-mentioned groups.     

Innovation And Inter-Firm Co-Operation: The Case Of The West Midlands

Drawing upon the innovative milieux and industrial districts literature, the paper provides substantial empirical evidence that firms have a greater chance of being innovative if they co-operate with other firms over innovation, albeit undertaking no investment in RLD. This is an important result especially for small firms. In particular, the paper focuses on inter-firm cwperation along the supply chain, using a swey of firms in the West Midlands to investi-gate co-operation over innovation between suppliers and buyers. A probit model is used to test the link between innovation performance and four innovation inputs: R&D expenditure, R&D personnel, networking with suppliers and networking with client firms.     

The transatlantic productivity gap: Is R&D the main culprit?

The literature has pointed to different causes to explain the productivity gap between the EU and the US in the last decades. This paper tests the hypothesis that the lower European productivity performance in comparison with the US can be explained not only by a lower level of corporate R&D investment but also by a lower capacity to translate R&D investment into productivity gains. The proposed microeconometric estimates are based on a unique longitudinal database covering the period 1990–2008 and comprising 1,809 US and EU companies for a total of 16,079 observations. Consistent with previous literature, we find robust evidence of a significant impact of R&D on productivity; however, using different estimation techniques, the R&D coefficients for the US firms always turn out to be significantly higher. To see to what extent these transatlantic differences in the R&D/productivity relationship may be related to the different sectoral structures in the US and the EU, we differentiated the analysis by sectors. The result is that bothin manufacturing, services and high‐tech manufacturing sectors US firms are more able to translate their R&D investments into productivity increases.     

Innovation and productivity in family firms: evidence from a sample of European firms

ABSTRACT

Using firm-level data, we estimate the returns to R&D investments for a sample of European manufacturing firms over the period 2007–2009. Results confirm that R&D efforts are positively related to productivity regardless of firm type (family or nonfamily firms). Additionally, we find that family firms invested more in R&D than nonfamily firms, but the returns to their R&D investments are low, emphasizing that they have a lower capacity to translate R&D investments into economic gains.     

R&;D: A Small Contribution to Productivity Growth

In this article I evaluate the contribution of R&D investments to productivity growth. The basis for the analysis are the free entry condition and the fact that most R&D innovations are embodied. Free entry yields a relationship between the resources devoted to R&D and the growth rate of technology. Since innovators are small, this relationship is not directly affected by the size of R&D externalities, or the presence of aggregate diminishing returns in R&D after controlling for the growth rate of output and the interest rate. The embodiment of R&D-driven innovations bounds the size of the production externalities. The resulting contribution of R&D to productivity growth in the US is smaller than 3–5 tenths of 1% point. This constitutes an upper bound for the case where innovators internalize the consequences of their R&D investments on the cost of conducting future innovations. From a normative perspective, this analysis implies that, if the innovation technology takes the form assumed in the literature, the actual US R&D intensity may be the socially optimal.     

R&D strategy and innovation performance: the role of standardization

Firms now increasingly recognise the important role of R&D strategy in building technological advantage. However, few attempts have linked standardisation with specific R&D strategies in explaining innovation performance. To bridge this gap, this study empirically examines the relationships between R&D strategies, standardisation, and firms’ innovation performance. Based on a sample of 371 firms in China, we use structural equation modelling (SEM) and find that novelty-oriented R&D strategy generates greater accumulation of standardisation knowledge and standards diversity, while R&D openness only positively relates to this standardisation knowledge accumulation. Moreover, standardisation knowledge accumulation is positively related to both administrative and technical innovation performance, while a greater variety of standards only leads to higher administrative innovativeness. More importantly, our results reveal that accumulation of standardisation knowledge mediates the relationships between R&D novelty and administrative and technical innovation performances. Both the theoretical and practical implications that arise from these findings are discussed.     

Financing constraints for R&D in China: the role of state ownership

We investigate financing constraints for R&D in China. We find that Chinese private firms are financially constrained for R&D, while state-owned enterprises are not. Mature private firms encounter more severe financing constraints for R&D than young private firms. Moreover, the expansion of external financing supply does not relax the financing constraints for R&D faced by private firms.     

Innovation strategy and the patenting behavior of firms

This paper investigates whether firms’ innovation strategies affect their patenting behavior, as measured by both the probability of having a patent portfolio and the number of active patents held. Three main dimensions of an innovation strategy are taken into account: the relative importance of basic research, applied research and development work in total R&D activities, the product or process orientation of innovation efforts, and the extent to which firms enter into collaborative R&D with other institutions. The major findings can be summarized as follows: (1) taking into account the various dimensions of an innovation strategy turns out to approximate the patenting behavior of firms better than the traditional Schumpeterian hypotheses related to firm size and market power; (2) there is a positive relationship between the patent portfolio of firms and an outward-oriented innovation strategy characterized by R&D partnerships with external organizations - scientific institutions and competitors in particular; (3) process-oriented innovators patent less than product-oriented innovators; (4) a stronger focus on basic and applied research is associated with a more active patenting behavior; (5) firms that perceive high barriers to innovation (internal, risk-related or external barriers) have smaller patent portfolios; (6) the perceived limitations of the patent system do not significantly influence the patenting behavior, suggesting that firms patent for other strategic reasons than merely protecting innovation rents.     

Effectiveness of R&D subsidies during the crisis: firm-level evidence across EU countries

This paper is one of the first attempts in the literature to evaluate the effectiveness of R&D policies in Europe during the great crisis of the late 2000s. Using homogenous firm-level data for the largest EU Member States over the period 2007–2009, we test whether manufacturing firms receiving public subsidies spent more on R&D. The analysis is performed using both non-parametric techniques and parametric estimation methods accounting for the possible endogenous selectivity of R&D subsidies. The hypothesis of full crowding-out is rejected in all countries under exam as firms did not replace their own resources with public grants. However, these firms did not allocate additional funds to research and hence, differently from earlier works, we do not find evidence for additionality effects of R&D subsidies. Our estimates indicate that, albeit not expansive, public subsidies to R&D thwarted the reduction of firm R&D efforts in the aftermath of economic crisis.     

Export,R&D and new products. a model and a test on European industries

In this article we extend the model developed by Bogliacino and Pianta (Industrial and Corporate Change 22 649, 2013, b) on the link between R&D, innovation and economic performance, considering the impact of innovation on export success. We develop a simultaneous three equation model in order to investigate the existence of a ‘virtuous circle’ between industries’ R&D, share of product innovators and export market shares. We investigate empirically – at the industry level – three key relationships affecting the dynamics of innovation and export performance: first, the capacity of firms to translate their R&D efforts in new products; second, the role of innovation as a determinant of export market shares; third, the export success as a driver of new R&D efforts. The model is tested for 38 manufacturing and service sectors of six European countries over three time periods, from 1995 to 2010. The model effectively accounts for the dynamics of R&D efforts, innovation and international performance of European industries. Moreover, important differences across countries emerge when we split our sample into a Northern group – Germany, the Netherlands and the United Kingdom – and a Southern group – France, Italy and Spain. We find that the ‘virtuous circle’ between innovation and competitiveness holds for Northern economies only, while Southern industries fail to translate innovation efforts into export success.     

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.     

Does issuing equity help R&D activity? Evidence from unlisted Italian high-tech manufacturing firms

This paper evaluates the causal effect of issuing equities on the probability that a firm engages in R&D activity. Equity is a better source of external finance than debt for innovation. It does not require collateral, does not exacerbate moral hazard problems connected with the substitution of high-risk for low-risk projects, quite common when using debt, and, unlike debt, does not increase the probability of bankruptcy; equity also allows investors to reap the entire benefit of the returns of successful innovative projects. This paper focuses on high-tech firms for which asymmetric information problems are more pervasive. Implementing an instrumental variable estimation, we find that issuing equity increases the probability that the firm has R&D expenditures by 30–40%. We detect considerable heterogeneity in this effect: the impact of issuing equity is significant only for small, young and more highly leveraged high-tech firms. We also find interesting evidence that issuing equity increases R&D expenditures in relation to sales.     

Is demand-pulled innovation equally important in different groups of firms?

Previous empirical literature has tested the demand-pull hypothesisand found that innovation may be driven by output. Using a balancedpanel of 216 Italian manufacturing firms (1995–2000) andchecking for the path-dependent nature of R&D we find arole of sales in inducing R&D. However, the demand-pulleffect plays a varying role for different sub-samples of firms.Exporting firms, liquidity-constrained firms, unsubsidised firmsand those not heading a group seem to be sensitive to salesin deciding R&D. These results have been obtained usinga Least Squares Dummy Variable Corrected Estimator, a recentpanel-data technique suitable for small samples.     

A matching analysis of why some firms in peripheral regions undertake R&D whereas others do not

Many studies have established the importance of investment in R&D to facilitate innovation and consequently improve firm productivity. Firms decide whether or not to undertake R&D depending on a range of factors such as market orientation, business objectives, competitive advantages and absorptive capacity. This paper studies the factors that influence this decision in peripheral locations; and for firms that do not undertake R&D, we analyse the reasons for not doing so. The research is based on data from a survey of some 250 matched firms operating in Northern Ireland, about half undertaking R&D and half not. Northern Ireland is an interesting case study because it exhibits a low level of investment in R&D despite the public subsidies and policy initiatives that have existed over the last 30 years. For firms that undertake R&D, our results mostly confirm the findings of others while for firms that do not undertake R&D the results point to a capabilities-gap rather than a resource-gap as the fundamental problem. Policy conclusions are drawn as to what might be done to boost both the amount of R&D undertaken and the number of firms engaged in R&D in peripheral regions.     

Embedding environmental innovation in local production systems: SME strategies,networking and industrial relations: evidence on innovation drivers in industrial districts

Technological innovation is a key factor for achieving better environmental performances. Its role is even more relevant in local productions system, where innovation density, knowledge spillovers and externalities are concentrated in a circumscribed territory. The paper exploits new data for a sample of manufacturing firms in Northern Italy. New evidence is provided by testing a set of hypotheses, concerning primarily the role of environmental‐devoted R&D, networking activities, quality/nature of industrial relations. The role played by environmental policy pressure, structural firm features and past firm performances is also investigated to account for more exogenous forces. We show that structural characteristics of the firm appear to matter less than R&D, induced policy costs and innovative‐oriented industrial relations. Environmental auditing schemes also show some relevant correlation to innovation adoptions. R&D efforts appear to be associated to networking activities, which substitute for size‐related economies of scale. Overall, endogenous factors driven by firm strategy or local idiosyncratic features matter more than exogenous and structural firm factors.     

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 spillovers and employment: evidence from European patent data

In this paper we investigate the role of patents in the relationship between R&D activity, spillovers and employment at the firm level. A reduced-form labour demand equation is estimated. Our analysis is based upon a dataset consisting of 879 R&D-intensive manufacturing firms worldwide for which information was collected for the period 2002–2010. We use data from all EU R&D investment scoreboard editions issued every year until 2011 by the JRC-IPTS (scoreboards). Since the innovation output of the industrial strategy of every firm is the number of patents, the main contribution to the existing literature is to investigate also the impact of patents/R&D ratio and patents/spillovers ratio on employment level. The empirical results suggest a significant impact of R&D spillover effects on company employment although the results differ substantially according to the spillover stock, which may considerably affect policy implications.     

Canada–US productivity gap: The role of competition intensity differential

The relative lack of competitive pressure in product markets and lower investment in both fundamental and applied innovation are among the potential factors that have been put forward to explain Canada’s weak productivity performance with respect to the US. Since competition is generally seen as the single leading catalyst for fundamental and applied innovation, this paper analyzes the role of product market competition in the Canada–US productivity level gap. We develop an empirical framework in which competition exerts both direct and indirect effects on productivity, with the indirect impact coming through fundamental and applied innovation. We find statistically significant evidence that the competition intensity differential (between Canada and the US) has contributed to the Canada–US productivity level gap directly, as well as indirectly through lower investment in both R&D activities and M&E (including ICT) investment. We also find statistically significant evidence that Canada’s relatively poor performance in both productivity and M&E (including ICT) investment have acted as a self-reinforcing mechanism, which further causes detriment to the country’s productivity.