|
on Technology and Industrial Dynamics |
| By: | Jan Bena |
| Abstract: | Using a dynamic model of a step-by-step innovation race between financially constrained firms, I study how financial constraints affect innovation activity. The novel theoretical results derive from an analysis of the interaction between the incentive effect of competition on innovation and the effect competition has on the degree of credit rationing. I find that the negative effect of financial constraints on firm- and aggregate-level R&D investment is most pronounced at both high and low levels of competition. These predictions are supported by empirical evidence: The competition-innovation relationship has an inverted-U shape in less financially developed systems relative to the benchmark pattern observed in countries with highly developed financial systems. Innovation-enhancing policies implemented through competition reforms ought to be complemented by promoting financial development. |
| Date: | 2009–03 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:fmg:fmgdps:dp629&r=tid |
| By: | Andreia Cardoso (UITT; INESC Porto); Aurora A.C. Teixeira (INESC Porto, CEFUP, Faculdade de Economia, Universidade do Porto) |
| Abstract: | As technology and innovation seem to be contingent upon each other a great deal of attention has been given to the importance of assessing the contribution of R&D investment to firm and industry performance and, ultimately, to the economic performance of countries and regions. In industrialised societies not only private but also public agents have allocated increasing amounts of their resources to R&D activities, often considered the key path to innovativeness. At the same time, due to advances in empirical research, increasingly more focused on the micro (firms) rather than on the macro (country) level, old myths about the relationship between R&D, innovation and success began to fall down. Firstly, the idea that innovation is much broader than R&D has gained large support and has made it possible to identify other sources of innovation, beyond excellence in R&D, which had been largely hidden or neglected. As result, perceptions about small firms - or the so-called low-tech industries, which either do not carry out any significant R&D activities or are likely to perform them outside formal classifications - started to change. Secondly, the idea that more R&D investment is always automatically bond to success - whatever criteria one may choose to define success – has become nothing more than a utopia. In this paper we carry out an analysis of the literature on the magnitude and evaluation of R&D, and, possibly, of innovation. We identify the methodologies used and analyse to what extent the magnitude of (eventual) R&D returns is dependent on the methodology pursued and the level of analysis - firms (micro), industry (meso), and regions/countries (macro) - considered. We conclude that methodological approaches and levels of analysis determine, to a certain extent, the type of results obtained and, thus, variances between them. |
| Keywords: | Innovations and R&D indicators; Methodologies; Macro, meso and micro levels; R&D payoff |
| Date: | 2009–03 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:inc:wpaper:2009-03-wp1&r=tid |
| By: | Andersson, Martin (CESIS - Centre of Excellence for Science and Innovation Studies, Royal Institute of Technology); Lööf, Hans (CESIS - Centre of Excellence for Science and Innovation Studies, Royal Institute of Technology) |
| Abstract: | Despite broad agreement on the strategic role of SMEs (Small and Medium Sized Enterprises) in industrial renewal processes, the lack of systematized and comprehensive information on the nature and level of small innovative firms is striking. This bias is partly explained by an empirical shadow created by the limited availability of good, detailed data for comparable firm-level analyses. Based on extensive matched databases, the purpose of this paper is to provide new insights into the roles of micro and small innovative firms in research-based as well as tradition-based manufacture. The data consists of close to 160 000 observations of manufacturing firms in Sweden over the period 2000-2006, including information on innovation activities captured by patent applications, firm characteristics, international trade and the regional milieu. |
| Keywords: | Innovation; Innovative Firms; Entrepreneurship; Small firms; Intellectual Property Rights; Technology Transfer; Location |
| JEL: | F43 L26 M13 O31 O34 |
| Date: | 2009–03–25 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:hhs:cesisp:0175&r=tid |
| By: | Philip McCann; Les Oxley (University of Canterbury); Hong Shangqin |
| Abstract: | In this paper we report empirical evidence from a mixed methods approach to investigating the drivers of innovation in New Zealand. The evidence comes from a primary questionnaire survey we conducted across seventy-five local firms plus fifteen face-to-face case study interviews. Our survey response data is analysed using four different types of probability models and the various models are all found to be largely consistent with each other. The insights from these estimation methods are then bolstered by detailed follow-up case studies of individual firms in different industries and product groups regarding their innovation and competition experiences. Our results from both forms of evidence-gathering suggest that in a small and isolated local market such as New Zealand, smallness in terms of firm size may not be an advantage for innovation. The reason appears to be that the notion of ‘small’ itself may have an absolute minimum threshold, below which translating entrepreneurship into innovation becomes problematic. As such, applying theories of local economic development to local economies which exhibit similar features to New Zealand may require us to adjust our thinking in order to take account of different absolute scale effects in different types of economies. |
| Keywords: | Innovation; New Zealand; SME; Economic Geography |
| JEL: | O31 O33 O38 |
| Date: | 2009–04–01 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:cbt:econwp:09/04&r=tid |
| By: | Donja Darai (Socioeconomic Institute, University of Zurich); Jens Grosser (Departments of Political Science and Economics, Florida State University); Nadja Trhal (Economics Department, University of Cologne) |
| Abstract: | This paper studies the effects of patents and subsidies on R&D investment decisions. The theoretical framework is a two-stage game consisting of an investment and a market stage. In equilibrium, both patents and subsidies induce the same amount of R&D investment, which is higher than the investment without governmental incentives. In the first stage, the firms can invest in a stochastic R&D project which might lead to a reduction of the marginal production costs and in the second stage, the firms face price competition. Both stages of the game are implemented in a laboratory experiment and the obtained results support the theoretical predictions. Patents and subsidies increase investment in R&D and the observed amounts of investment in the patent and subsidy treatment do not differ significantly across both instruments. However, we observe overinvestment in all three treatments. Observed prices in the market stage converge to equilibrium price levels. |
| Keywords: | R&D investment, oligopoly, patents, subsidies, experiment |
| JEL: | C90 L13 O31 |
| Date: | 2009–03 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:soz:wpaper:0905&r=tid |
| By: | Bruno Versaevel (GATE - Groupe d'analyse et de théorie économique - CNRS : UMR5824 - Université Lumière - Lyon II - Ecole Normale Supérieure Lettres et Sciences Humaines) |
| Abstract: | This paper investigates the combined impact of a first-mover advantage and of firms' limited mobility on the equilibrium outcomes of a continuous-time model adapted from by Boyer, Lasserre, and Moreaux (2007). Two firms face market development uncertainty and may enter by investing in lumpy capacity units. With perfect mobility, when the first entrant plays as aStackelberg leader a Markov perfect preemption equilibrium obtains in which the leader invests earlier, and the follower later, than in the Cournot benchmark scenario. There is rent equalization, and the two firms' equilibrium value is lower. This result is not robust to the introduction of firm-specific limited mobility constraints. If one firm is sufficiently less able than its rival to mobilize resources at early stages of the market development process, there is less rent dissipation, and no equalization, in a constrained preemption equilibrium. The first-mover advantage on the product market then results in more value for the less constrained firm, and in less value for the follower than when they play `a la Cournot with perfect mobility. The leading firm maximizes value by entering immediately before its constrained rival, though later than made possible by its superior mobility. Greater uncertainty reduces the value differential to the benefit of thefollower. It also increases the distance between the firms' respective investment triggers. The specifications and results are discussed in light of recent developments in the market for music downloads. |
| Keywords: | Real options; Preemption; First-mover advantage; Mobility |
| Date: | 2009 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:hal:journl:halshs-00371847_v1&r=tid |
| By: | Lei Fang |
| Abstract: | There are large differences in income per capita across countries. Growth accounting finds that a large part of the differences comes from the differences in total factor productivity (TFP). This paper explores whether barrier to entry is an important factor for the cross-country differences in TFP. The paper develops a new model to link entry barriers and technology adoption. In the model, higher barriers to entry effectively reduce entry threat, and lower entry threat leads to adoption of less productive technologies. The paper demonstrates that technology adopted in the economy with entry threats is at least as good as the technology adopted in the economy without entry threats. Moreover, the paper presents numerical simulations that suggest entry barriers could be a quantitatively important reason for cross-country differences in TFP and are more harmful to productivity in the countries with monopolists facing inelastic demand. incompl s |
| Keywords: | entry barriers, technology adoption, total factor productivity CL HG2567 A4A5 |
| Date: | 2009 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:fip:fedawp:2009-08&r=tid |