Industry R&D intensity distributions: regularities and underlying determinants

This paper aims to examine the nature of the distributions of firm R&D intensities within industries and explore the factors that underlie the industry R&D intensity distributions. In particular, following the seminal study by Cohen and Klepper (1992) and using some new and rich data on firm R&D intensities for seven industries across six countries, this study examines the regularities in the industry R&D intensity distributions and demonstrates, based on a simple model of firm R&D, that the industry R&D intensity distributions are governed by the distributions of technological competence, a measure of firm R&D productivity, which corresponds to the notion of the “unobserved R&D-related capabilities” suggested by Cohen and Klepper (1992). This study found that firm R&D intensities within industries are lognormally distributed, displaying a strikingly regular pattern across industries, that the industry distributions of the levels of technological competence are also lognormal, and that, based on the formal model of firm R&D and the notion of the unobserved R&D-related capabilities, the distribution of firm technological competence within an industry underlies the industry's firm R&D intensity distribution.     

Schumpeter and the revival of evolutionary economics: an appraisal of the literature

During the last two decades we have seen a revival of interest in the works of Joseph Schumpeter and “evolutionary” ideas in economics more generally. A professional society honouring Schumpeter's name has been founded, and linked to it we have had for more than fifteen years now a professional journal devoted to this stream of thought. However, it has been argued that, despite these developments, the link between Schumpeter's own work and the more recent contributions to evolutionary economics is in fact rather weak. This paper considers this claim. Based on an analysis of Schumpeter's contribution to economics the paper presents an overview and assessment of the more recent literature in this area. It is argued that although there are important differences between Schumpeter's work and some of the more recent contributions, there nevertheless remains a strong common core that clearly distinguishes the evolutionary stream from other approaches (such as, for instance, so-called “new growth theory”). RID="*" ID="*" Many people have contributed to this paper in various ways. Jon Hekland at the Norwegian Research Council started it all by asking me to make an overview of the contribution from “evolutionary economics” to our understanding of contemporary economies. Several people helped me on the way by supplying written material, comments and suggestions, and I am indebted to all of them. Brian Arthur, Stan Metcalfe, Keith Pavitt, Erik Reinert, Paolo Saviotti and Bart Verspagen may be particularly mentioned. A preliminary version was presented at the conference “Industrial R&D and Innovation Policy Learning – Evolutionary Perspectives and New Methods for Impact Assessment” organised by the Norwegian Research Council (“SAKI”) at Leangkollen, Asker, April 18–19.2002. I wish to thank the discussant, Tor Jakob Klette, and the participants at the conference for useful feedback. Moreover I have benefited from comments and suggestions from the editors and referees of this journal. The final responsibility is mine, however. Economic support from the Norwegian Research Council (“SAKI”) is gratefully acknowledged.     

Quantitative growth effects of subsidies in a search theoretic R&D model

Should government subsidize R&D and does it matter how these subsidies are allocated? We examine these questions in a dynamic model where R&D is described as sequential sampling from a distribution of new ideas. Successful discoveries affect future available resources and incentives for further R&D. Consequently, there may be under-investment in R&D. We study the effect of government interventions aimed at fostering growth through R&D. Calibrating the model with aggregate data from the Israeli business sector allows us to quantitatively compare two forms of support resembling those actually used to encourage R&D in the Israeli business sector: (i) an unrestricted subsidy that may be used at the recipients' discretion to finance R&D or other investments, (ii) a subsidy earmarked by the government for R&D activities only. While there is no theoretical way to determine which of the two subsidies will have a greater impact on search for new ideas and growth, we find that in the calibrated economy both subsidies have a significant but similar impact on the economy's output and TFP growth rates. Accordingly, in the case of the Israeli business sector, the incentives to conduct R&D were sufficiently strong, and no R&D-specific encouragement was needed. However, a sensitivity analysis reveals that for economies characterized by other parameter values this result may not be true. Correspondence to: B. Bental     

What is the systems perspective to Innovation and Technology Policy(ITP) and how can we apply it to developing and newly industrialized economies?

Despite recent advances in the Evolutionary and Systems Perspectives to Economic Change (SI), confusion still exists about how to apply it to the design and implementation of Innovation & Technology Policy (ITP) in concrete settings. Since the ‘Normative’ aspects of SI are framed in terms so general to make them insufficient or inadequate as guides and tools for actual policymaking, a presumption exists that additional theoretical and conceptual knowledge is required. Thus a major objective of this paper is to contribute to the development of a realistic and ‘grounded’ theoretical framework for Technology and Innovation Policy which is particularly relevant both for the promotion of Business Sector R&D and of hi tech (especially IT) industries in Top Tier and other Industrializing Economies. A second objective is to contribute directly to the capability of successfully applying this conceptual framework in concrete policy settings. Rather than justifying ITP the paper focuses on characterising and applying “Salient Normative Principles or Themes” of the SI perspective to ITP. Several concrete examples are given and the notions of Policy Process, (Country) Program Portfolio Profile and Policy Environment are introduced.     

Regulation of the evolution of the architecture of a network by tensors operating on coalitions of actors

Socio-economic networks, neural networks and genetic networks describe collective phenomena through constraints relating actions of several actors, coalitions of these actors and multilinear connectionist operators acting on the set of actions of each coalition. We provide a class of control systems governing the evolution of actions, coalitions and multilinear connectionist operators under which the architecture of the network remains viable. The controls are the “viability multipliers” of the “resource space” in which the constraints are defined. They are involved as “tensor products” of the actions of the coalitions and the viability multiplier, allowing us to encapsulate in this dynamical and multilinear framework the concept of Hebbian learning rules in neural networks in the form of “multi-Hebbian” dynamics in the evolution of connectionist operators. They are also involved in the evolution of coalitions through the “cost” of the constraints under the viability multiplier regarded as a price.     

On bubbling dynamics generated by a stochastic model of herd behavior

This paper suggests a class of stochastic collective learning processes exhibiting very irregular behavior. In particular, there are multimodal long run distributions. Some of these modes may vanish as the population size increases. This may be thought of as “bubbles” persistent for a finite range of population sizes but disappearing in the limit. The limit distribution proves to be a discontinuous function of parameters determining the learning process. This gives rise to another type of “bubbles”: limit outcomes corresponding to small perturbations of parameters are different. Since an agent's decision rule involves imitation of the majority choice in a random sample of other members of the population, the resulting collective dynamics exhibit “herding” or “epidemic” features. RID="*" ID="*" We are grateful to two anonymous referees for the comments and suggestions. Correspondence to: L. Gaio     

A resource-based view of Schumpeterian economic dynamics

This paper seeks to offer a theoretical platform where the modern “resource-based view” of the firm might meet with evolutionary economics and the study of entrepreneurship, and with the economics of industrial organization. It does so by proposing the concept of the “resource economy” within which productive resources are produced and exchanged between firms. This is presented as the dual of the mainstream goods and services economy – where the “resource economy” captures the dynamic capital structure of the economy. The paper is concerned to bring out the distinctive principles governing resource dynamics in the resource economy, capturing competitive dynamics in such categories as resource creation, replication, propagation, exchange and leverage; evolutionary dynamics in terms of resource variation, selection and retention; entrepreneurial dynamics in terms of resource recombination and resource imitation, transfer and substitution; and industrial organizational dynamics in terms of resource configuration, resource complementarities and resource trajectories.     

A Schumpeterian model of equilibrium unemployment and labor turnover

This paper constructs a general equilibrium model of equilibrium unemployment by combining an endogenous growth model with a variant of equilibrium search theory. The analysis offers two explanations for the causes of widening wage gap between skilled and less-skilled labor, and rising unemployment rate among the less skilled: technological change in the form of an increase in the size of innovations or skilled labor saving technological change in R&D activity. In addition, the model identifies two distinct effects of faster technological progress on the aggregate unemployment rate. First, it increases the rate of labor turnover and therefore increases the aggregate unemployment rate – the creative destruction effect. Second, it creates R&D jobs, which offer workers complete job security, and consequently reduces the aggregate unemployment rate – the resource reallocation effect.     

Intellectual Property Rights and Crop-Improving R&D under Adaptive Destruction

This paper studies how the strength of intellectual property rights (IPRs) affects investments in biological innovations when the value of an innovation is stochastically reduced to zero because of the evolution of pest resistance. We frame the problem as a research and development (R&D) investment game in a duopoly model of sequential innovation. We characterize the incentives to invest in R&D under two competing IPR regimes, which differ in their treatment of the follow-on innovations that become necessary because of pest adaptation. Depending on the magnitude of the R&D cost, ex ante firms might prefer an intellectual property regime with or without a “research exemption” provision. The study of the welfare function that also accounts for benefit spillovers to consumers—which is possible analytically under some parametric conditions, and numerically otherwise—shows that the ranking of the two IPR regimes depends critically on the extent of the R&D cost.      

R&;D spillovers and firms’ performance in Italy

Using a translog production function we estimate the impact of R&D spillovers on the output performance of Italian manufacturing firms over the period 1998-2003. Technological flows are measured through an asymmetric similarity index that takes also into account the geographical proximity of firms. Results show that R&D spillovers positively affect firms production and that geography matters in determining the role of the external technology. Moreover, we find that the effect of R&D spillovers is high in the Centre-South of Italy and that the stock of R&D spillovers is Morishima complement to the stock of R&D own-capital. The authors thank Giovanni Anania, Olof Ejermo, Vincenzo Scoppa, Alessandro Sterlacchini and Marco Vivarelli for useful comments on an earlier draft. We are also grateful to the participants at the Workshop on “Spatial Econometrics and Statistics” in Rome (University “Guido Carli, May 2006) and at the 2006 ADRES Conference, “Networks of Innovation and Spatial Analysis of Knowledge Diffusion” in St Etienne for helpful discussion and to an anonymous referee for many detailed and constructive comments on an earlier version. All remaining errors and omissions are our own. Financial support received by MIUR is gratefully acknowledged.     

Commitment,first-mover-, and second-mover advantage

We identify circumstances under which a firm with a first-mover advantage may get leapfrogged by a follower. At the market stage we assume a Stackelberg structure, i.e. the leader commits to a quantity and the follower reacts to it. We allow the owners of both firms to select the internal organization and the production technology before quantities are set. That is, leader and follower can additionally use two commitment strategies alternatively or in combination: investing in R&D and delegating quantity decisions to managers. Despite the symmetry of options for the two firms, we find that there is a unique equilibrium in which both firms invest in process R&D, only the follower delegates, and the follower can overcome the first-mover advantage of the quantity leader and obtain a higher profit than the leader. Our analysis reveals that there are some important differences between the two commitment devices “cost-reducing R&Dt” and “delegation to managers”.      

Economic policy making in evolutionary perspective

Economic policy making is discussed from three different angles: the political economy of actual policy making (“what policy does do”), the analysis of policy instruments for given ends (“what policy could do”), and the debate on policy goals and their legitimization (“what policy ought to do”). Center stage in the evolutionary perspective is new, positive and normative knowledge which is unfolding during the policy making process and in its aftermath. It is argued that this implies regularities and constraints which extend and modify the comparative-static interpretations of public choice theory, economic policy making theory, and social philosophy. RID="*" ID="*" The author should like to thank three anonymous referees of this journal and the editor for helpful comments on an earlier version of the paper.     

Routines and incentives in group tasks*

The artificial context “Target the Two” has been used in experiments to explore some of the features of routinization and learning. Two agents must learn to coordinate their actions to achieve a common goal, without being allowed to use verbal communication. This article reports an experiment, in which we compare the degree of routinization and the performance of players in two treatments. Each treatment submits players to the same sequence of starting configurations, but differs in terms of the payoff function. In the first treatment (A), the payoff is based on the number of moves required to achieve the goal, whereas in the second treatment (B) the payoff depends on the time required for completion. We observe that (1) in treatment B subjects tend to play in a more “routinized” way and (2) treatment B reduces the time spent on play, but does not decrease the resources (the number of moves) used, relative to treatment A.     

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.     

Union structure and firms' incentives for cooperative R&D investments

Abstract .  We investigate the impact of alternative unionization structures on firms' incentives to invest on cost-reducing R&D and to form Research Joint Ventures (RJVs), in the presence of R&D spillovers. We show that if firms invest non-cooperatively and spillovers are low, R&D investments are higher under centralized rather than under decentralized wage-setting. In contrast, investments are always higher under decentralized wage-setting in the case of RJVs. Firms' incentives to form an RJV are stronger under centralized wage-setting if and only if spillovers are low enough. Finally, centralized wage-setting may hinder the formation of costly RJVs and their potential welfare benefits.     

Capitalism and democracy at a crossroads: the civilizational dimension

This paper evaluates Schumpeter's grand vision as reflected in his Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy, and elaborates it in conjunction with the so-called “globalization” trends characteristic of the wake of the twenty-first century. In addition to the evolutionary nature of his methodology, the institutionalist dimension of Schumpeter's definitions are brought to light. A case is made for a fundamental process of “uncreative destruction” as far as the institutional setup of the economy is concerned. The contention of this paper is that there is ample support in Schumpeterian analysis for a counterpoint to the liberal thesis that envisages the worldwide spread of individualism, market economies, and democratic forms of government.     

How R&;D investments influence TFP growth: Evidence from China’s large and medium-sized industrial enterprises

This paper investigates the potential channels through which R&D may influence TFP growth using industry-level panel data of China’s large and medium-sized industrial enterprises over the period of 2000–2007. Comparing with existing literature, we provide a closer look of the relationship between R&D and TFP growth by decomposing TFP growth into efficiency change and technical change components using Malmquist productivity index and distinguishing between upstream R&D spillovers and downstream R&D spillovers. We find TFP grow slightly during 2000–2007, and R&D investment indeed serves as an engine of productivity growth just as endogenous growth theories argued, which is largely because R&D accelerates technical progress even it also results in enlarging technical inefficiency. However, we find a robust negative effect of downstream R&D spillovers on TFP growth, the effects of upstream is positive but not statistically significant. In addition, we do not find the positive effects of human capital on TFP as endogenous growth theories indicated, but find human capital severs as “assimilation device” for R&D spillovers both in promoting TFP growth and increasing technical efficiency even the effects on technical progress is adverse.     

The determinants of pharmaceutical research and development expenditures

Since the late 1970s, pharmaceutical R&D has grown at a rapid rate relative to sales and other variables. In this paper, we examine the determinants of pharmaceutical R&D using a pooled data sample of 11 major drug firms over the period 1974 to 1994. We find that expected returns and cash flows are important explanatory variables of firm research intensities during this period. This is consistent with our results for an earlier sample period characterized by very different growth patterns on R&D.     

A comparison of diffusion approximations and actual limits in birth and death processes of noisy evolution

The stationary distribution of a birth and death process may not be approximated by a diffusion. The general situation is illustrated on the “musical chairs” model by Binmore et al. (1995). This model is shown to generate outcomes which are not captured by the concept of the ultralong run equilibrium selection introduced in Binmore et al. (1995).     

Knowledge of growth and the growth of knowledge

The central theme of this address is the complicated relationship between the growth of the economy and the growth of knowledge. This theme is explored with the help of a single concept “restless capitalism” which is used to capture the idea that capitalism in equilibrium is a contradiction in terms precisely because the growth of knowledge cannot be meaningfully formulated as the outcome of a constellation of equilibrating forces. This theme is explored through a discussion of growth accounting, the relationship between innovation, markets and institutions and, as an example, the development of innovation in the field of ophthalmology. We also discuss some pioneering contributions made by Simon Kuznets and Arthur Burns to the discussion of evolutionary growth. From this Schumpeterian perspective we see the economy as an ensemble not an aggregate entity and so see more clearly the importance of microdiversity in the relationship between growth of knowledge and growth of the economy.