Effect Of Liquidity On Firms' R&D Spending

The effect of firms financial condition on their R&D investment is explored using a relatively long panel data set for five high-technology industries. We find that financial condition, whether measured as cash flow, the stock of liquid assets or the ratio of liquid assets to current liabilities, does affect the R&D spending of small firms. The effect persists after controlling for unobserved permanent firm effects, and the pattern of significance of lagged effects supports the interpretation of causality running from liquidity to R&D. For larger firms, there is no evidence of such an effect. Using these data, we cannot say whether the absence of an effect in larger firms results from better access to capital markets or from higher adjustment costs in R&D.     

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.     

ASYMMETRIC EFFECTS OF THE BUSINESS CYCLE ON FIRM-FINANCED R&D

Abstract

Business cycles might affect the ability of firms to finance R&D, since firms rely on cash flow to finance most R&D activities. However, business cycles also influence the incentive to perform R&D. The opportunity cost of funds devoted to R&D falls during recessions, since the return on production will likely be lower than during an expansion. During recessions, this provides firms with an incentive to redistribute an existing pool of funds away from production and towards R&D projects. The changes in the size and distribution of the pool may also be asymmetric across the business cycle. For example, cash-flow constraints are more likely to bind during recessions than expansions. This paper finds strong evidence for the cash-flow effect, but not the opportunity-cost effect. This means that R&D is pro-cyclical, but smoothing out the business cycle will actually lead to reduced R&D, since the duration of expansions exceeds the duration of recessions.     

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.     

R&D investments and corporate cash holdings

This paper presents evidence about how research and development (R&D) expenditures affect corporate cash holdings in European country groups that differ in their innovation capacity. In theory, one can expect intangible investments such as R&D to result in higher cash stocks than fixed investments, particularly because intangible capital is less suitable as collateral for obtaining external funds. The relationship can be expected to be particularly strong in innovative countries. These countries carry out a relatively high proportion of cutting-edge R&D, which tends to be particularly risky and may be associated with substantial gestation lags before becoming productive. These features tend to increase firms' precautionary cash holdings. To investigate this issue in a European context, we examine different groups of countries that are clustered based on differences in their innovative capacity. Our estimation results confirm a positive relation between changes in R&D investment and changes in cash holdings, whereas changes in fixed investment do not appear to be related to changes in cash positions. The impact of changes in R&D on cash tends to be higher for country groups characterized by a high level of innovative capacity than for countries with moderate levels of innovative capacity. However, the differences across country groups are less pronounced than expected.     

Subsidizing cooperative and noncooperative R&D in duopoly with spillovers

Comparing the effect on private R&D investments of allowing firms to cooperate in R&D with that of providing R&D subsidies reveals that in general the latter policy is more effective than the former in promoting R&D activity. Analyzing the implementation of both policies simultaneously reveals that subsidizing cooperative and noncooperative R&D leads to the same market outcome. The preferred R&D-stimulating policy is to subsidize optimally an agreement according to which firms only share the outcomes of their independent research.     

Cooperation or competition in R&D when innovation and absorption are costly

This article analyzes cost-reducing R&D investments by firms that behave non-cooperatively or cooperatively. Firms face a trade-off between allocating their R&D investments to innovate or to imitate (absorb). We find that the non-cooperative behavior not only induces more imitation (absorption) but also, for the most part, more innovation investments. Only the cooperative behavior, however, ensures that R&D investments are allocated efficiently to innovation and to imitation (absorption) in the sense that any given amount of industry-wide cost reduction is obtained for the minimum overall R&D costs.     

Process R&;D and Product Line Deletion by a Multiproduct Monopolist

Relative to single-product firms, a multiproduct monopolist can internalize the negative externalities of its R&D investments (the ``cannibalization effect') in two ways: (1) To lower R&D investment for each product; and (2) To delete some of its product lines so as to enlarge the market size for the remaining lines. It is shown that line deletion is profitable if products are close substitutes. If products are not close substitutes, the multiproduct monopolist keeps all product lines and invests less in cost-reducing R&D than single-product firms engaging in Cournot competition with product differentiation. However, it invests more in R&D than single-product firms if there are significant economies of scope in R&D, or if the oligopolistic firms can cooperate in their R&D decisions.      

Product differentiation, process R&D, and the nature of market competition

We investigate the relationship between process and product R&D and compare the incentives for both types of R&D under different modes of market competition (Bertrand versus Cournot). It is shown that: (i) process R&D investments increase with the degree of product differentiation and firms invest more in product R&D when they can do process R&D than when they cannot; (ii) Bertrand firms have a stronger incentive for product R&D whereas Cournot firms invest more in process R&D; and (iii) cooperation in product R&D promotes both types of R&D relative to competition whereas cooperation in both types of R&D discourages R&D relative to cooperation in just product R&D.     

Value maximizing hurdle rates for R&D investment

We show that the value maximizing hurdle rate for research and development (R&D) investments among private firms operating in a market setting is less than for conventional investments despite the fact that R&D has development risk. Because development risk arises only during R&D, entrepreneurs control this risk by deferring or pursuing R&D depending upon profitability. This risk management moderates downside loss and encourages upside gain which increases the value attraction of R&D and decreases the value maximizing hurdle rate below that of conventional investment.     

R&D policy in a vertically related industry

In this paper, we analyze the effectiveness of public policy aimed to stimulate business-performed R&D in a vertically related market. We examine the role of an R&D active upstream supplier in a four-stage R&D model, where we incorporate public funding. The considered policy instrument is direct funding of firms’ R&D efforts. We calculate the optimal policies and show that they have a positive impact on firms’ R&D investments. From a welfare point of view, it is optimal to differentiate the subsidy rates between the upstream and the downstream markets. Competition in the product market leads to a higher subsidy rate to the upstream supplier than to the downstream firms. When concentration is high in the downstream market, the optimal solution is an R&D subsidy for these firms, otherwise the optimal solution is an R&D tax for the downstream firms.     

Effects of coordinated strategies on product and process R&;D

Using a game theoretical model on firms’ simultaneous investments in product and process R&D, we advance and empirically test hypotheses on the role of externalities on the optimal R&D portfolio of cooperating firms and independently competing firms. We use Community Innovation Survey data on 3,696 Italian manufacturing firms. In line with our model we find that members of a group of firms invest significantly more into product, process, and aggregate R&D than independent firms. Further, their R&D portfolios tend to show a higher product versus process ratio. However, with regard to R&D performance and efficiency we find that independent firms are superior.      

Strategic timing in R&D agreements

We study the endogenous formation of R&D agreements in a R&D/Cournot duopoly model with spillovers where also the timing of R&D investments is endogenous. This allows us to consider the incentives for firms to sign R&D agreements over time. It is shown that, when both R&D spillovers and investment costs are sufficiently low, firms may find difficult to maintain a stable agreement due to the strong incentive to invest noncooperatively as leaders. In this case, the stability of an agreement requires that the joint investment occurs at the initial stage, thus avoiding any delay. When spillovers are sufficiently high, the coordination of R&D efforts becomes a profitable option, although firms may also have an incentive to sequence noncooperatively their investment over time. Finally, when spillovers are asymmetric and knowledge mainly leaks from the leader to the follower, investing as follower may become extremely profitable, making R&D agreements hard to sustain unless firms strategically delay their joint investment in R&D.     

Financing R&D in Chinese private firms: Business associations or political connection?

Using a new and unique dataset of Chinese private firms, this paper explores how private firms access bank loans to finance innovative activities. The results reveal that political connection, rather than membership in a government-controlled business association, largely determines private firms' innovations by providing access to bank loans. Furthermore, the “grease-the-wheels” mechanism of political connection is stronger if the firms are more constrained financially, located in regions with low levels of financial development, or located in regions with relatively under-developed institutional environments. Finally, cash flow, used to measure internal financing, and trade credit, used to measure informal financing, are important alternative financing channels and support firms' R&D investments. Our paper implies that China's government needs to continue fostering a good financing environment and supporting innovation activities.     

Strategic Rivalry With Spillovers Within Segmented Versus Integrated Markets

We consider a two-stage game with firms investing in R&D in the first stage while competing [a] la Cournot in the second stage. The firms are located in two countries, which are either segmented or integrated. R&D spillovers occur between firms located in the same country as well as between firms located in different countries.

We first examine the consequences of market integration on the impact of national and international R&D spillovers on innovative efforts, effective R&D, profits and total welfare. Comparing the resulting equilibrium levels, we subsequently conclude that market integration always leads to higher R&D investments and output if international R&D spillovers are limited, while the welfare consequences are ambiguous. Finally, we also analyze the welfare maximization problem of a ‘constrained social planner who can only decide on the level of R&D spillovers.     

Foreign capital,credit constraints and continuity of firms’ R&D

In this article, we investigate the role of foreign capital participation as a means for firms to overcome the obstacle posed by credit constraints to sustain R&D investments. Using data for Spanish manufacturing firms in the period 1990–2006, we show that firms with foreign capital are significantly less likely to stop already initiated R&D projects and also more likely to sustain R&D investment when facing credit constraints. Our results are robust to positive selection into foreign capital participation, which we control through a set of variables chosen from a propensity score estimation, and to firms’ fixed-effects.     

The effectiveness of R&D subsidies

In this paper, the effectiveness of R&D subsidies is analyzed in an oligopolistic model that we apply to the cases of international R&D competition and cooperation. We find that the existence of asymmetric information among firms on whether a rival (or partner) is being subsidized or not may play a key role in explaining whether subsidies are effective or not in increasing R&D investments. In particular, it is shown that if the existence of the subsidy is made public (e.g. because strict information release regulation about R&D subsidies is enforced) and depending on the strategic relationship between the firms’ R&D efforts, an R&D subsidy could even hurt the subsidized firm.     

The struggle to survive in the R&D sector: Implications for innovation and growth

By allowing for investment activities by research and development (R&D) firms to prevent product obsolescence, we show that if legal patent protection is too strong, a higher R&D subsidy rate delivers insufficient investments for survival in the R&D sector, depressing innovation and growth in the long run.     

Foreign and domestic R&D investment

A considerable share of R&D investment is due to multinational firms that simultaneously operate R&D bases at home and abroad. We develop a simple model of foreign and domestic R&D investment and test the model's predictions on a sample of 146 Japanese multinational firms’ R&D investments in Japan and the United States in 1996. The empirical results confirm that the foreign to domestic R&D ratio depends on relative technological opportunities and relative demand conditions, with foreign research expenditures responding to technological opportunity and foreign development expenditures responding to demand.     

Monetary Policy,Financial Frictions,and Heterogeneous R&D Firms in an Endogenous Growth Model*

Motivated by empirical facts, I construct an endogenous growth model in which heterogeneous research and development (R&D) firms are financially constrained and use cash to finance R&D investments. I also examine the optimal monetary policy. The effects of financial constraint crucially depend on whether R&D firms are homogeneous or heterogeneous regarding R&D productivity. If R&D firms are homogeneous, then the zero nominal interest rate (i.e., the Friedman rule) is always optimal under severe financial constraint. Heterogeneity in R&D productivity leads to the opposite result. With heterogeneity, severe financial constraint makes the strictly positive nominal interest rate welfare-improving under a plausible condition.