Appropriation Of Returns From Technological Assets And The Values Of Patents And R&D In Japanese High-Tech Firms †

This paper investigates the extent that technological assets contribute to the value of the firm, using the sample of 90 Japanese firms in pharmaceutical, chemical, and electrical equipment industries. We use the firm's R&D expenditures and the number of patents (in stock) as the measures of its technological assets and show that the relative usefulness of these two measures varies across industries. Particularly, Tobin's q is positively related to the technological assets most strongly in the pharmaceutical industry. It is also most sensitive in this industry to the level of patent stock, coinciding with the view that drug patents are more effective than other patents as a means of appropriating returns from innovation. The communications equipment industry is also characterized by its q's dependence on patent stock. In addition, this industry's q is particularly sensitive to the level of net R&D investment in the most recent year, presumably because of the rapid technological progress in this industry.     

Promoting innovation and competition with patent policy

Recently the role of institutions on growth, and especially the influence of Intellectual Property Rights, has been integrated into the Schumpeterian Growth Framework. In this contribution, we highlight the possibility using one patent’s characteristic, the patent height, as an instrument for promoting innovation and growth. We introduce this possibility into the Segerstrom (Am Econ Rev 80:1290–1310, 1998)/Li (Am Econ Rev 93:1009–1018, 2003) quality ladders model of growth. The Li (Am Econ Rev 93: 1009–1018, 2003) generalized model overturns Segerstrom (Am Econ Rev 80:1290–1310, 1998) policy implication in terms of the size of innovations having to be taxed or subsidized by relaxing a crucial assumption on the value of the elasticity of substitution between goods. In this paper, we point out the fact that the innovation size requirement has to be considered as a policy instrument, so that it appears extremely important to consider the case when the innovation size has been made endogenous. A patent policy using the novelty requirement as an instrument for innovation policy enables implementation of the social optimum. The consequences of this policy for market structure and economic growth are then discussed. When the level of the patent novelty requirement is initially high, a patent policy that weakens the patent height can reinforce competition and promote innovation.     

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.     

Technological knowledge,spillover and productivity: evidence from Taiwanese firm level panel data

Using a panel data on Taiwanese manufacturing firms from 1990–1997, this study investigates the relationship among technological knowledge, spillover and productivity. In addition to R&D stock, we also employ patent counts to construct the output-side indicators of knowledge and spillover to explore the relationship between knowledge and productivity. We find a very significant contribution of R&D, patents and spillover stock to productivity. In addition, the magnitude of the patent stock coefficient is substantially larger than that estimated by R&D stock. Our results imply that innovative activity investment has been very productive in increasing output for Taiwanese manufacturing firms in the 1990s.     

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.     

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.     

An empirical analysis of firm process and product patenting

This paper presents an empriical study of the determinants of firm patenting. Since industrial research and development (R&D) encompasses a variety of activities, this study distinguishes between patents on process innovations and patents on product innovations. The property rights provided by a patent may differ between process and product patents, which suggests that the determinants of process innovations and product innovations may difer as well.

Several recent studies have distinguished between research directed toward process innovations and research directed toward product innovations. Scherer (1983a) included measures of process R&D spending and product R&D spending in regressions for inter-industry differences in productivity growth. Link and Lunn (1984) found that the returns to process-related R&D activity exceed the returns to product-related R&D activity. Link (1982) found inter-firm differences in the allocation of R&D spending for process innovations and product innovations. Lunn (1986) found differences in the determinants, as well as the effects, of process patenting and product patenting at the industry level. This paper examines whether the determinants of product and process patenting differ at the firm level.     

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.     

International trade and competitiveness

We analyze the role of international market size differences in determining the investment in process R&D (and thus firms?? competitiveness) in a trade model with oligopolistic market structure, non-homothetic production technology and costly trade. We show that the R&D effort is higher (or even disproportionately so) for firms in the larger market, which causes endogenous asymmetries across countries. As a result, firms in the larger market have higher competitiveness, which increases their market shares in international markets. Furthermore, and contrary to what is predicted by Krugman (Am Econ Rev 70:950?C959, 1980) ??home market effect??, in equilibrium the larger country does not need to host a disproportionately higher share of the world??s industry than of the world??s demand. Despite this, the larger country can still continue to run a trade surplus in the oligopolistic sector, since it hosts firms with higher competitiveness than firms in the smaller country.     

R&D productivity: A global multi-industry comparison

This study considers the productivity of R&D expenditures on an international and multi-industry basis. Using 1992 data reported by Business Week on 117 companies in the United States, Europe, and Japan, we examined two measures of innovative output, patents and impact-adjusted patents, in relationship to R&D spending. Our results clearly show a decreasing returns to scale of R&D expenditure. Although this pattern holds true regardless of industry or global region, the level of return and rate of decreasing returns vary by both industry and international region.     

Inferior factor in Cournot oligopoly revisited

We reconsider the recent work by Okuguchi (J Econ 101:125–131, 2010) on (possibly asymmetric) Cournotian firms with two production factors, one being inferior for each firm. It is shown there that an increase in the price of the inferior factor does raise the equilibrium industry output. In addition of providing a simpler and more rigorous proof of that result, we generalize it to the case of technologies with $s\ge 2$ factors and also allow some firms not to use the inferior one.     

Dynamical analysis of the R&D-based growth model with a regime switch

Several empirical studies suggest that advanced economies experience a growth regime switch from factor accumulation to knowledge accumulation. To investigate the mechanism of such a regime switch, this study develops a concise and flexible dynamic model based on Romer (J Polit Econ 98:S71–S102, 1990) by introducing two types of endogenously supplied R&D input capital. The model replicates the growth patterns of developed and underdeveloped nations, clarifies the important role that capital plays in the difference between them, and presents several implications for interest-rate subsidies and official development assistance. Further, it shows that if a country enjoying long-run growth has little initial capital, its initial economic development will be based on capital accumulation. When the capital stock becomes sufficient for supporting R&D, the economy will achieve long-run growth through R&D.     

Reverse causality in the R&D–patents relationship: an interpretation of the innovation persistence

Starting from the failure of the R&D–patents traditional relationship, when time-series and/or within-industry dimensions are included in the empirical analysis, the present work tries to contribute to the empirical literature from two directions. First, it performs a Granger causality test based on the theoretical presumption of a reverse patents→R&D link as an explanation for the failure of the traditional relationship. Second, assuming the reverse patents–R&D causality, we test and interpret the lag structure of such a relationship which shows the effective patent life that firms can expect within the two Schumpeterian patterns of innovations they belong to. In the light of the effective patent life, we offer a further explanation of innovation persistence which overturns the findings of the existing literature on persistence.     

Niche products, generic products, and consumer search

We endogenize product design in a model of sequential search with random firm-consumer match value à la Wolinsky (Quart J Econ 96:493–511, 1986) and Anderson and Renault (RAND J Econ 30:719–735, 1999). We focus on a product design choice by which a firm can control the dispersion of consumer valuations for its product; we interpret low-dispersion products as “generic” and high-dispersion products as “nichy.” Equilibrium product design depends on a feedback loop: when reservation utility is high (low), the marginal customer’s match improves (worsens) with more nichy products, encouraging high (low) differentiation by firms. In turn, when firms offer more nichy products, this induces more intense search; depending on search costs, this could raise or lower consumers’ reservation utility. Remarkably, when the match distribution satisfies a hazard rate condition, firm and consumer interests align: equilibrium product design always adjusts to the level that maximizes utility. When this condition is not met, either multiple equilibria (one nichy, the other generic) or one asymmetric equilibrium (generic and nichy firms coexist) can arise; we argue that the former is more likely for common specifications of consumer preferences.     

Asymmetric Conditional Volatility and Firm Size: Evidence from Australian Equity Portfolios

This paper examines the relationship between firm size and equity volatility for two portfolios of Australian equities. Univariate and Multivariate GARCH models are used to demonstrate that conditional variance is related to firm size. There is strong evidence to suggest that the variance-covariance matrix of returns is time varying and asymmetric. A negative innovation to the return of the large firm portfolio results in higher levels of conditional volatility in the small firm portfolio than would be the case for a positive innovation of equal magnitude. News about own returns appears to determine the conditional variance of the portfolio of large firms. The conditional covariance between the two portfolios also displays evidence of asymmetry.     

Profit persistence and stock returns

This article attempts to assemble further empirical evidence on the relationship between the product and the financial market. Drawing back on work in industrial organization, we analyse the relationship between profit persistence and factor-adjusted stock returns looking at about 2000 listed US firms over the last 34 years. While the relationship between (current, lagged and unexpected) profits/earnings and returns has been extensively analysed before, to our knowledge this is the first study to look at the relationship between stock returns and profit persistence. We interpret profit persistence as a result of market competition and innovation of the firm. It is shown that firm-specific long-run profit persistence after correction for other additional economic fundamentals of the firm has a positive impact on four-factor adjusted returns and a negative impact on their volatility.     

Research,Innovation And Productivi[Ty: An Econometric Analysis At The Firm Level

This paper studies the links between productivity, innovation and research at the firm level. We introduce three new features: (i) A structural model that explains productivity by innovation output, and innovation output by research investment: (ii) New data on French manufacturing firms, including the number of European patents and the percentage share of innovative sales, as well as firm-level demand pull and technology push indicators; (iii) Econometric methods which correct for selectivity and simultaneity biases and take into account the statistical features of the available data: only a small proportion of firms engage in research activities and/or apply for patents; productivity, innovation and research are endogenously determined; research investment and capital are truncated variables, patents are count data and innovative sales are interval data.

We find that using the more widespread methods, and the more usual data and model specification, may lead to sensibly different estimates. We find in particular that simultaneity tends to interact with selectivity, and that both sources of biases must be taken into account together. However our main results are consistent with many of the stylized facts of the empirical literature. The probability of engaging in research (R&D) for a firm increases with its size (number of employees), its market share and diversification, and with the demand pull and technology push indicators. The research effort (R&D capital intensity) of a firm engaged in research increases with the same variables, except for size (its research capital being strictly proportional to size). The firm innovation output, as measured by patent numbers or innovative sales, rises with its research effort and with the demand pull and technology indicators, either directly or indirectly through their effects on research. Finally, firm productivity correlates positively with a higher innovation output, even when controlling for the skill composition of labor as well as for physical capital intensity.     

企业专利与外部融资

除保护技术输出的传统职能外,专利在企业和利益相关者沟通中也发挥着重要的信号传递职能。其中,专利在资本市场上的信号价值近年来备受关注,已有研究指出专利作为质量信号有助于企业获得投资者认可,并且专利信号效果依赖于投资者获得企业信息的多少。在此基础上,进一步讨论了投资者获得企业信息的内容对信号价值的影响。具体地,在负面信号情境下（企业过去的财务绩效差、收益波动性大、未来不确定性高）,专利的信号价值更强,而在正面信号情境专利信号效果减弱。利用来自深沪两市1 787家上市公司2000-2011年面板数据验证了以上假设,专利数量和外部融资之间存在正向关系,并且在负面信号情境下二者正向关系更强。稳健性检验进一步表明,发明专利的信号效应比非发明专利更强,而私企的专利信号效应比国企更强。     

Business type,industry value chain,and R&D performance: Evidence from high-tech firms in an emerging market

This study focuses on how the business type and technological learning mode, which a high-tech firm chooses based on its core competence, influence the firm's R&D strategies, which in turn affect firm performance. This study also explores how the interaction between a firm's business type and industry value chain stage affects the relationship between R&D investments and operating performance. We suggest that the linkage of R&D investments and operating performance will increase gradually, when firms move from contract manufacturing to own brand business. R&D investments can contribute more to performance when firms adopt the hybrid business type. Furthermore, R&D investments generate more significant benefits for the own brand companies than the contract manufacturers at the same stage of the industry value chain. R&D investments of the downstream contract manufacturers have a negative impact on firm performance. Regardless of business type, firms in the upstream (midstream) stage of the industry value chain outperform downstream stage firms in deriving benefits from R&D activities. Finally, the lagged effects of R&D investments on operating performance are affected by the interaction between business type and industry value chain.     

Evidence on the impact of R&D and ICT investments on innovation and productivity in Italian firms

Both research and development (R&D) and information and communication technology (ICT) investment have been identified as sources of relative innovation underperformance in Europe vis-à-vis the USA. In this article, we investigate the R&D and ICT investment at the firm level in an effort to assess their relative importance and to what extent they are complements or substitutes. We use data on a large unbalanced panel data sample of Italian manufacturing firms constructed from four consecutive waves of a survey of manufacturing firms, to estimate a version of the CDM model of R&D, innovation, and productivity [Crépon–Duguet–Mairesse 1998. Research, innovation and productivity: An econometric analysis at the firm level. Economics of Innovation and New Technology 7, no. 2: 115–58] that has been modified to include ICT investment and R&D as the two main inputs into innovation and productivity. We find that R&D and ICT are both strongly associated with innovation and productivity, with R&D being more important for innovation, and ICT investment being more important for productivity. For the median firm, rates of return to both investments are so high that they suggest considerably underinvestment in both these activities. We explore the possible complementarity between R&D and ICT in innovation and production, but find none, although we do find complementarity between R&D and worker skill in innovation.