Environmental regulations,induced R&D,and productivity: Evidence from Taiwan's manufacturing industries

This paper examines whether stringent environmental regulations induce more R&D and promote further productivity in Taiwan. Using an industry-level panel dataset for the 1997–2003 period, empirical results show that pollution abatement fees, a proxy for environmental regulations, is positively related to R&D expenditure, implying that stronger environment protection induces more R&D. On the other hand, pollution abatement capital expenditures do not have a statistically significant influence on R&D. Further evaluation of the influence of induced R&D by environment regulations on industrial productivity shows a significant positive association between them. This finding supports the Porter hypothesis that more stringent environmental regulations may enhance rather than lower industrial competitiveness.     

Optimal growth when environmental quality is a research asset

We advance an original assumption whereby a good state of the environment positively affects labor productivity in R&D such that deteriorating environmental quality negatively impacts R&D. We study the implications of this assumption for the optimal solution in an R&D-based model of growth, where the use of a non-renewable resource generates pollution. We show that in such a case, it is socially optimal to postpone extraction, as opposed to the situation in which the environment has no effect on productivity in R&D. Furthermore, insofar as environmental quality declines and subsequently recovers, we find that it is optimal to re-allocate employment to R&D in line with productivity changes. If environmental quality recovers only partially from pollution, R&D effort optimally begins above its long-run level, then progressively declines to a minimum and eventually increases to its steady-state level.     

Environmental Research Joint Ventures under Emission Taxes

The effect of environmentalpolicy depends crucially on the strategicbehavior of firms. Firms can undertakepollution abatement innovation cooperativelythrough environmental R&D joint ventures(RJVs). Environmental RJVs have not onlyenvironmental but also economic impacts. Threetypes of environmental RJV are discussed inthis paper: R&D cartelization in which firmschoose R&D efforts to maximize the jointprofit, RJV competition in which firms sharethe R&D fruits to maximize their own profits,and RJV cartelization in which firms share R&Dfruits and maximize the joint profit. An R&Dcartelization minimizes output quantities,maximizes the total emission, and minimizes thesocial surplus. An RJV cartelization with asufficiently high spillover coefficientmaximizes R&D efforts, minimizes the totalemission, and maximizes the social surplus.     

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.     

To what extent do earnings affect the R&D decision of Chinese manufacturing firms?

ABSTRACT

As R&D activities are involved in inherent uncertainty of large investment, high risk and long return periods, earnings, as the main source of internal financing, have been a significant factor of R&D decision in the firms. In contrast to the previous research, this study investigates the impacts of firm’s earnings on R&D decision, in which earnings are measured by the indicators of earnings level, earnings quality and earnings persistence, while separating firm R&D activity into two stages of (i) the decision to undertake R&D activity and (ii) the amount to be invested on innovation activities. We document that earnings level can increase the probability of undertaking R&D activity, but has no effect on R&D investment intensity. Earnings quality and earnings persistence have a promotional effect on both stages of R&D decision. The empirical evidence of the subsamples shows that the impacts of earnings are heterogeneous across different ownership and technology-intensity firms.     

R&D investment,cash holdings and the financial crisis: evidence from Korean corporate data

This article examines the real effects of the financial crisis in 2008 on corporate R&D investment by analyzing firm-level panel data from 2005 to 2011 obtained from KIS-VALUE, a Korean corporate finance database. I estimate a dynamic panel model of R&D investment that includes an after-crisis dummy to reflect the effects of the external finance supply shock after the financial crisis, an interaction term of the dummy and cash holdings to measure the marginal effect of cash holdings after the crisis, investment opportunities (sales and the q ratio) and financial positions as the debt-equity ratio. The estimation implies a negative yet relatively small impact of the credit supply shock from the financial crisis on R&D investment and the mitigation of the negative impacts by cash holdings after the onset of the financial crisis, whereas the data show decreasing R&D investment and sales for the whole period. Based on the data and the estimation, I find that firms were able to lessen the pressure from diminishing market demand before the crisis using external finance, but they had to use internal financial sources after the crisis smooth R&D investment.     

Should environmental R&D be prioritized?

An innovator may not be able to capture the full social benefit of her innovation and, therefore, governments support private R&D through various measures. We compare a market good innovation—to develop a more efficient technology to produce a standard market good—with an environmental innovation—to develop a more efficient abatement technology—that has the same potential to increase the social surplus. In the first-best outcome, which can be achieved by offering an R&D subsidy and a diffusion subsidy, the R&D subsidy should be greatest for an environmental innovation, whereas the diffusion subsidy should be greatest for a market good innovation. The ranking of the two types of subsidies reflects that the appropriability problem is greater for an environmental innovation than for a market good innovation.     

Testing a model of UK growth: A role for R&D subsidies

R&D is a main driver of growth, whether by generating new ideas for production or increasing technological transfer. However, R&D itself is risky and faces numerous barriers which may reduce its marginal return. Direct R&D subsides are intended to counteract such barriers, but whether they lead empirically to increased economic growth is unclear. In our structural model of the UK, subsidies offset the frictional costs associated with R&D, incentivising innovation and so stimulating productivity growth. We estimate and test this structural model by indirect inference, a method not previously used in work on R&D. We find that even temporary cuts to R&D funding have long-lasting impacts on UK economic growth. The power of the test allows us to calculate tight accuracy bounds for our results and for policy reform impacts calculated using the model. These findings are of high relevance to the ongoing debate around the future UK innovation environment.     

Capacity investment and green R&D in a dynamic oligopoly under the potential shift in environmental damage

We develop a differential oligopoly game to investigate firms’ capacity investment and green R&D efforts in the presence of the potential shift in environmental damage and under the spillover effect of R&D activities among firms. We find that when both the probability of potential shift in environmental damage and the efficacy of R&D activities are high, the spillover effect will discourage the R&D effort but encourage the capacity investment. Otherwise, the spillover effect will encourage the R&D effort but discourage the capacity investment. Moreover, the potential shift in environmental damage can significantly impact the capacity and green R&D decisions as well as the Pigouvian tax, especially in the case of a large number of firms, a high profitability of the product, a high level of interest rate, and a high level of R&D spillover among firms.     

Detecting which firm-specific characteristics impact market-oriented R&D

This paper investigates which firm-specific characteristics lead multinational enterprises (MNEs) to increase their R&D expenditure in host countries as a way of expanding their business into local markets (market-oriented R&D). The literature that addresses this topic is quite limited because of the difficulty of separating market-oriented R&D expenditure from knowledge-sourcing R&D expenditure in the data. We argue that determining the relationship between local sales and R&D expenditure is a better way to identify whether MNEs are investing market-oriented R&D than is separating the two types of R&D. For connecting firm-specific characteristics, local-market sales, and R&D expenditure together, we adapt two-stage regressions. By employing data from Taiwanese multinationals from 2003 to 2006, we found that if an MNE moves its technology toward capital-intensive products, it increases its R&D expenditure to promote its sales in the local markets in the host country.