Effluent taxes,market structure,and the rate and direction of endogenous technological change

This paper studies the effects of effluent taxes on firms’ allocation of resources to cost-reducing and emission-reducing R&D, and on entrepreneurs’ decisions to develop new goods and enter the market. A tax set at an exogenous rate that does not depend on the state of technology reduces growth, the level of consumption of each good, and raises the number of firms. The induced increase in the variety of goods is a benefit not considered in previous analyses. In terms of environmental benefits, the tax induces a positive rate of pollution abatement that offsets the “dirty” side of economic growth. A tax set at an endogenous rate that holds constant the tax burden per unit of output, in contrast, has ambiguous effects on growth, the scale of activity of each firm and the number of firms. Besides being novel, the potential positive growth effect of this type of effluent tax is precisely what makes this instrument effective for welfare-maximizing purposes. The socially optimal policy, in fact, requires the tax burden per unit of output to equal the marginal rate of substitution between the growth rate of consumption and abatement. Moreover, a tax/subsidy on entry is needed, depending on whether the contribution of product variety to pollution dominates consumers’ love of variety.      

Coopetition for radical innovation: technology,market and business-model perspectives

Coopetition (collaboration between competing firms) is used in many contemporary industries to achieve various innovation-related benefits. However, there is still a lack of consensus in the existing literature as to whether it is beneficial in the case of radical innovations or whether it only supports incremental improvements due to the similarity of knowledge bases among competitors. We address this issue in an empirical study based on a cross-industrial survey in Finnish markets. The study focuses on three types of technological coopetition and on their effect on the technological, market and business-model radicalness of the firms’ innovations. The results show that coopetition is negatively related to technological radicalness and positively related to business-model radicalness. The implications are that coopetition is likely to benefit incremental technological development over time and to promote the emergence of radical business-model innovations as competitors seek to differentiate their offerings.     

R&D competition, absorptive capacity, and market shares

This paper deals with an oligopolistic industry where firms are engaged in cost-reducting R&D activity to maximize their market shares. The existence and uniqueness of a feedback-Nash-optimal R&D strategy for each firm are discussed. Our simulations highlight that variations in spillovers hardly influence the firms' R&D investment, if their absorptive capacities to exploit extramural knowledge depend on their R&D efforts. Moreover, extramural knowledge cannot completely replace in-house R&D. However, a high level of public R&D favors the firm with the most restrictive R&D expenditure constraint and/or with the lowest initial R&D stock, provided it invests in R&D.     

Globalization and knowledge spillover: international direct investment,exports and patents

In this study three possible determinants of the increase in the ratio between skilled and unskilled workers are tested together: R&D, organisational change, and foreign direct investment. After analysing the literature, these hypotheses are jointly tested using a SUR estimate. The results – regarding a panel of 488 Italian manufacturing firms over the period 1989–1997 – suggest the statistical significance of the impact of organisational change, while they tend to exclude a direct relation between R&D spending and skill upgrading. With reference to FDIs, the nature of the data and the results do not permit the exclusion of their possible influence.     

Lagging productivity growth: Measurement,technology, and shock effects

One of the most important problems about which economists have professional knowledge is lagging productivity growth. After illustrating some significant developments this paper addresses three questions: (1) To what extent does R&;D activity drive productivity growth, (2) how do alternative measures of productivity affect the conclusions and (3) how did the oil price shocks and the increased openness of the U.S. economy affect productivity growth? After removing the influence of the extremely dynamic computer industry, average manufacturing industry productivity in the U.S. throughout the 80s grew at a disappointing pace. And it didn't improve in the most dynamic industries. But there is good news as well. First, part of the 1970s productivity slump is clearly attributable to the 1973–74 oil price shock. Second and more important, technological innovation does not appear to have lost its power in driving productivity growth forward. Indeed there is evidence of stronger and more consistent productivity effects from R&;D investment during the 1980s, although the exact channels through which R&;D enhances manufacturing sector productivity are left in doubt. Estimates of the role inter-industry technology flows play are sensitive to aggregation and the conventions used to construct the industry price deflators underlying productivity measures.     

How chaebol restructuring after the 1997 crisis has affected corporate decision and performance in Korea: debt financing,ownership structure,and investment

ABSTRACT

Korean chaebol firms, characterized by excessive debt financing and overinvestment, experienced restructuring after the 1997 crisis. By reducing debt financing and thus overinvestment, they tried to reorganize financing structure and ownership structure. Chaebols’ debt reduction turns out to have improved performance. However, polarization between chaebol and non-chaebol firms has become more significant. Even after the crisis, firms that give higher cash flows to a controlling shareholder take more capital investment, indicating that agency problems still exist within chaebols. Chaebol-affiliated firms continue to be more active in R&D than non-chaebol firms. However, the pattern is limited to the group of top 10 chaebols after the crisis.

Abbreviations: KFTC: Korea Fair Trade Commission     

A comparative analysis of the change in R&D efficiency: a case of R&D leaders in the technology industry

This paper measures the cumulative change in research and development (R&D) efficiency of globally leading R&D companies in the technology industry. We use Data Envelopment Analysis /Malmquist index to analyse 49 such companies. The change in R&D efficiency is analysed by decomposing the Malmquist index into ‘catch-up’ and ‘frontier shift’ indices, and by comparing cumulative indices to those at the starting period. Those cumulative indices are obtained at both a firm and an industry level. Results indicate that the overall R&D efficiency of these globally leading R&D companies declined slightly during the period 2007–2013. At a firm level, this study determines in detail how the trend of each firm in R&D activities differs from other companies.     

Managerial compensation and R&D investments: the role of the external managerial labour market

This paper investigates the importance of the external managerial labour market in the determination of managerial compensation and in the influence of the compensation incentives on a firm’s R&D investments. I design an empirical model including the compensation adjustment regression, of which the focus is the role of the external labour market, and the R&D regression that examines how the compensation incentives derived from the external labour market affect a firm’s R&D intensity. Empirical results suggest that the R&D intensity is positively related to the premium of the actual pay adjustments over the expected pay adjustments based on the external labour market comparisons. The effect of the compensation incentives on the R&D investments is strongest when managers expect pay to decrease but actually experience an increase in pay.     

Competition for foreign direct investment: The role of technology and market structure

We analyze the location choice of a multinational corporation (MNC) between two host countries. We consider both passive and active governments and examine the role of production efficiencies, and of market structure, in the MNC's choice. Our findings include: (i) when the domestic firms export, the country with fewer firms always gets the MNC, but the MNC is indifferent between hosts with firms that have different efficiency levels, (ii) when the domestic firms do not export, the country with more firms gets the MNC if they are sufficiently inefficient, and the MNC locates in the country with less efficient firms.     

What are good R&D investment strategies for leaders and followers?

Research and development (R&D) investment affects the growth of firms in the same industry differently according to their technological positions. This study empirically investigates differences in how R&D investment influences firm growth between technological leaders and followers. Additionally, this study investigates the moderating effects of complementary assets and market competition on the relationship between R&D investment and firm growth. Using a sample of 2322 observations from 492 firms in the U.S. chemical and allied products industry for the period 2000–2009, we show that an increase in R&D investment leads to greater firm growth for technological followers than for technological leaders. We also find that the moderating effects of complementary assets and market competition vary depending on whether a firm is a technological leader or follower.     

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.     

R&D investment and internal finance: the cash flow effect

This paper investigates the cash flow effect on R&D investments for firms in Denmark. Evidence is found that internal funds are important in explaining R&D investments, indicating that R&D investment decisions are affected by credit market imperfections. Cash flow sensitivities are larger both for smaller firms and for firms with low debt relative to assets. Furthermore, this effect is also present after controlling for cash flow’s potential role as a predictor of future profitability.     

R&D,export and investment decision: evidence from European firms

This article provides an empirical investigation of the mechanism through which R&D influences export and tangible investment decisions. The analysis is based on a large representative and cross-country comparative sample of manufacturing firms across seven European countries. The novelty of this work lies in the three aspects. First, we expand the results on the R&D–export and R&D–investment relationships to a wide sample of cross-European firms. This differentiates from previous works based on single-country samples. Second, to the best of our knowledge, this study is the first in years which assess empirically the relationship between R&D and tangible investment at the micro level. Third, we control for endogeneity of R&D and simultaneity in firms’ decision whether to export and carry out tangible investment. The results of the analysis suggest that R&D positively affects export propensity and tangible investment. The results also reveal that neglecting endogeneity and simultaneity issues leads to underestimate the effect of R&D to both export and investment propensities.     

Firm ownership,industrial structure,and regional innovation performance in China's provinces

This paper uses panel data between 2000 and 2010 to explore how firm ownership and regional industrial structures contribute to regional innovation performance in Chinese provinces. Specifically, we explore how the extent of specialisation and diversification in regional industrial structures at the province level fosters both Marshall–Arrow–Romer and Jacobs spillovers, as well as how foreign and state ownership influence regional innovation. We find: (i) China's regional innovation systems benefit from Jacobs but not MAR externalities, with the former spurring higher quality innovation in the form of increased invention patenting; (ii) state-owned enterprises and foreign-invested enterprises advance local innovation, with the latter again fostering higher quality innovation; and (iii) a convergence towards a combination of low specialisation and high diversity in provincial industrial structure is taking place between China's more developed inland coastal provinces and less developed inland provinces. Implications and suggestions for policy-making and future research are discussed.     

The elasticity of demand for wagering in an unregulated market

The literature estimating the take-out rate (price) elasticity of horse race wagering has consistently found values far above one. The persistence of these apparently inefficiently high prices can be attributed to institutional factors of the US market where federal taxes are imposed on the total amount wagered, and not on the bookmakers’ revenue. By investigating all horse races in New Zealand from August 1993 to April 2009, our article is the first one to consider price setting for wagering in an unregulated market where taxes for a monopolistic betting agency are based on revenues. In such a setting, one would expect elasticities close to one, but in all econometric specifications, we find values well below one. We identify two reasons why higher prices could nevertheless reduce profits: cross price elasticities are negative and, due to the specific features of parimutuel betting, international competitors may only be attracted when take-out rates are above a critical threshold.     

Innovative growth: the role of market power and negative selection

ABSTRACT

This paper relies on register-based statistical data from Finland to measure broad research and development (R&D), organizational capital (OC) and information and communication technology (ICT) investments as innovation inputs in addition to formal survey-based R&D and CIS survey data on innovations. The linked panel data are appropriate for a comparison of low-market-share (small) and large-market-share (large) firms. We analyze the productivity growth and profitability of Finnish firms with varying market power. In contrast to high-market-share firms, low-market-share firms are characterized by low profit derived from new innovations. This study suggests that in addition to imitative growth, a ‘negative selection mechanism’ explains the high productivity growth relative to the low profits.     

Disentangling the effects of process and product innovation on cost and demand

ABSTRACT

We explore in this note different structural models of the impact of process and product innovation on firms' demand and production cost functions. We find that the introduction of process and product innovations affects them differently as could be expected. Both product and process innovation shift forward the demand for the products of the firm. Process innovation reduces production marginal cost, but not always. A possibility, that we cannot prove or reject with the current specification of our models and available data, is that process innovation associated with product innovation raise marginal cost. Interestingly, we also find that advertising significantly augments demand but does not affect production marginal cost. To obtain broader conclusions, richer data will be needed allowing an enlargement of the model, in which process and product innovations could be specified distinctively and well identified.     

Vertical R&D Spillovers,Cooperation, Market Structure,and Innovation

This paper studies vertical R&D spillovers between upstream and downstream firms. The model incorporates two vertically related industries, with horizontal spillovers within each industry and vertical spillovers between the two industries. Four types of R&D cooperation are studied: no cooperation, horizontal cooperation, vertical cooperation, and simultaneous horizontal and vertical cooperation. Vertical spillovers always increase R&D and welfare, while horizontal spillovers may increase or decrease them. The comparison of cooperative settings in terms of R&D shows that no setting uniformly dominates the others. Which type of cooperation yields more R&D depends on horizontal and vertical spillovers, and market structure. The ranking of cooperative structures hinges on the signs and magnitudes of three "competitive externalities" (vertical, horizontal, and diagonal) which capture the effect of the R&D of a firm on the profits of other firms. One of the basic results of the strategic investment literature is that cooperation between competitors decreases R&D when horizontal spillovers are low; the model shows that this result does not necessarily hold when vertical spillovers are sufficiently high, and/or when horizontal cooperation is combined with vertical cooperation.     

Technological Change, Market Rivalry, and the Evolution of the Capitalist Engine of Growth

In the early stages of Western industrialization, innovation was the domain of individuals who devoted their entrepreneurial talents to the development of a new product or process, typically setting up a new firm in order to take the innovation to the market. Today, commercial R&;D is almost exclusively carried out by corporate laboratories affiliated with manufacturing firms. The corporate R&;D lab, however, did not exist in its modern form until the late nineteenth century. The history of Western industrialization, thus, suggests that a fundamental change in the structure of incentives, and consequently in the nature and the organization of the R&;D process, occurred around the turn of the century. Three questions arise. What is the nature of this change? What economic forces caused it? What are its implications? To answer these questions, I construct a model where this change is endogenous to the evolution of the economy toward industrial maturity. The change in the locus of innovation—from R&;D undertaken by intventor-entrepreneurs, to R&;D undertaken within established firms in close proximity to the production line—results from the interaction of market structure and technological change. This interaction captures the essence of the evolution of the capitalist engine of growth and provides an economic explanation of a “stylized fact” that has received no attention in the theoretical literature. The endogenous market structure generates dynamic feedbacks that shape the growth path of the economy and determine the structural change it undergoes, including the endogenous formation of corporate R&;D labs. The evolution of market rivalry explains when and how established firms become the major locus of R&;D activity.