Does public R&D funding crowd-in private R&D investment? Evidence from military R&D expenditures for US states

Defense R&D represents the largest component of US public R&D spending and historically has promoted a wide range of civilian innovations. However, the empirical evidence on the impact of defense R&D is scant and it does not provide conclusive results on the possible crowding-in (-out) effects on private R&D investment. Exploiting a longitudinal dataset linking public R&D obligations to private R&D expenditures for US states, we investigate the impact of defense R&D on privately-financed R&D. To address potential endogeneity in the allocation of funds, we use an instrumental variable identification strategy leveraging the differential exposure of US states to national shocks in federal military R&D. We document considerable crowding-in effects with elasticities in the 0.11–0.14 range. These positive effects extend also to the labor market, when focusing on employment in selected R&D intensive industries and especially for engineers.     

What determines knowledge sourcing from host locations of overseas R&D operations?: A study of global R&D activities of Japanese multinationals

What determines knowledge sourcing from host locations of overseas R&D operations? We investigate factors that influence the extent to which overseas R&D laboratories source knowledge from host locations. Drawing on both the capabilities perspective and the embeddedness perspective, we have developed a conceptual model and then examined it empirically focusing on overseas R&D labs of Japanese multinationals. Statistical findings from negative binomial regressions show that both technological capabilities of the lab and external embeddedness in the local scientific and engineering communities matter.     

M&A and R&D: Asymmetric Effects on acquirers and targets?

We evaluate the impact of M&A activity on the growth of R&D spending and R&D intensity of 265 acquiring firms and 133 merger targets between 1990 and 2009. We use different matching techniques to construct separate control groups for acquirers and targets and use appropriate difference-in-difference estimation methods to single out the causal effect of mergers on R&D growth and intensity. We find that target firms substantially decrease their R&D efforts after a merger, while the R&D intensity of acquirers drops due to a sharp increase in sales.     

R&D drivers and age: Are young firms different?

This study examines the relationship between R&D drivers and firm's age, taking into account the autoregressive nature of innovation.     

Can intellectual property rights protection and governmental R&D investment promote Chinese enterprises’ R&D investment?

This paper establishes an impact factor model among government R&D input, enterprise R&D input and IPRP in China. It uses data from 1992 to 2012 for regression analysis and finds that government R&D input in enterprises, institutions and universities has a leverage effect on enterprise R&D input, although the leverage effect caused by government R&D input in universities is not prominent, and proper IPRP can promote Chinese enterprise R&D input. The further Granger causality test shows that IPRP produced structural changes in Chinese enterprise R&D input in approximately 2002, and its leverage effect reached 0.147, which is double the previous effect and exceeds the leverage effect caused by government R&D in institutions and in universities. The findings verify that IPRP is the source of power for promoting Chinese enterprises’ technology innovation.     

Does Europe perform too little corporate R&D? A comparison of EU and non-EU corporate R&D performance

This paper examines whether there are significant differences in private R&D investment performance between the EU and the US and, if so, why. The study is based on data from the 2008 EU Industrial R&D Investment Scoreboard. The investigation assesses the effects of three very distinct factors that can determine the relative size of the overall R&D intensities of the two economies: these are the influence of sector composition (structural effect) vis-à-vis the intensity of R&D in each sector (intrinsic effect) and company demographics. The paper finds that the lower overall corporate R&D intensity for the EU is the result of sector specialisation (structural effect) - the US has a stronger sectoral specialisation in the high R&D intensity (especially ICT-related) sectors than the EU does, and also has a much larger population of R&D investing firms within these sectors. Since aggregate R&D indicators are so closely dependent on industrial structures, many of the debates and claims about differences in comparative R&D performance are in effect about industrial structure rather than sectoral R&D performance. These have complex policy implications that are discussed in the closing section.     

What determines the location choice of R&D activities by multinational firms?

We analyse 446 location decisions of R&D activities by multinational firms incorporated in the European Union over 1999–2006. Our results suggest that on average, the location probability of a representative R&D foreign affiliate increased with agglomeration economies from foreign R&D activities, human capital, proximity to centres of research excellence and the research and innovation capacity of the region. Further, our evidence suggests that in comparison to European multinational firms, the effects of patents intensity and proximity to centres of research excellence were stronger in the case of North American multinational firms. While government R&D expenditure intensity increased the probability of location of R&D activities by European multinational firms in the region, it did not have a significant effect on the probability of location of R&D activities by North American multinational firms.     

What determines overseas R&D activities? The case of Japanese multinational firms

This paper explores what factors determine the nature, extent, and location of Japanese multinationals’ R&D activities abroad. Taking advantage of a rich micro-level dataset from the survey on Japanese overseas subsidiaries, the study distinguishes between two types of overseas R&D: basic/applied research and development/design. We find several differences between the determinants of those R&D activities. These differences confirm the view that basic/applied research of overseas subsidiaries aims at the exploitation of foreign advanced knowledge, whereas their development/design activities are mostly influenced by the market size of the host country. Our results provide a convincing and comprehensive explanation of the geographical distribution of overseas R&D by Japanese MNEs.     

Family firms and R&D behavior – New evidence from a large-scale survey

This paper analyzes how founders and their families influence R&D intensity. Information on R&D comes from a large-scale, bi-annual survey among listed German firms. We find that R&D intensity is higher in firms that are actively managed by the family. The impact of family control (via voting rights) is negative, but mostly not significant. While this negative family control effect is in line with hitherto existing literature, the positive impact of family management is surprising. Indeed, this positive effect disappears if we follow previous research and use R&D information from financial statements. We show that this puzzling result is related to corporate opacity. Opaque family managed firms report too conservative R&D expenditures, especially if they face financial constraints. This leads to an under-estimation of R&D intensity in these firms if accounting figures are used.     

Do firms in clusters invest in R&D more intensively? Theory and evidence from multi-country data

This study aims to evaluate whether firms located in clusters invest more intensively in research and development (R&D) than their non-clustered counterparts. Specifically, it proposes a model of firm R&D and tests empirically its implications for the effect of being located in a cluster on firm R&D intensity. The key ideas underlying the theory are as follows: (1) due either to natural excludability or to a high degree of stickiness of R&D-opportunity-bearing technological knowledge, geographical proximity per se is limited in the (automatic) spillover of knowledge with promising R&D opportunities to nearby firms; (2) geographical proximity may, however, help enhance the effectiveness or efficiency of knowledge exchange through market mechanisms (e.g., through contract R&D, R&D collaboration); (3) potential advantages (or disadvantages) in firm R&D of being located in a cluster also depend on the degree of asymmetry in technological competence among firms located in the cluster. The key ideas are supported by an empirical analysis of a multi-industry, multi-country data set compiled by the World Bank. In particular, the results show that being located in a cluster per se actually has a negative effect on firm R&D intensity, which is in contrast to the conventional wisdom of pure or automatic localized knowledge spillovers, as far as firm R&D intensity is concerned.     

Safety crises and R&D outsourcing alliances: Which governance mode minimizes negative spillovers?

This study examines how R&D alliance governance affects both the probability and magnitude of negative spillovers triggered by a partner’s safety crisis. I show that hierarchical governance leads to a lower probability that a partner will suffer a crisis and thus trigger a negative spillover, yet this governance mode leads to negative spillovers of greater magnitude should they happen. Because expected spillover costs are calculated as the probability of occurrence times the magnitude of such costs, it is not clear which governance mode best minimizes expected spillover costs. I combine transaction costs economics and signaling theory to develop a contingency model that identifies which effect is more likely to dominate, as a way to address the reported dilemma. I found evidence in support of the described dilemma and the contingency model in a sample of 296 R&D outsourcing alliances in the biopharmaceutical industry.     

Impacts of internal R&D on firms’ performance and energy consumption: Evidence from Ethiopian firms

In recent decades, with the rapid development of the knowledge economy and science, countries have embraced technical innovation and have gradually increased investment in research and development (R&D). A vast literature indicates that the relationship between R&D and firm performance is highly complex. The evidence suggests that R&D positively influences firm performance, yet findings on the process by which this happens are mixed. Rigorous analyses are required on how R&D investments affect energy consumption. This study explores the impact of R&D investment on the performance and energy consumption of 476 firms in Ethiopia by employing a combination of fixed-effect, propensity score matching, and endogenous treatment effect estimation methods. The empirical results reveal that investment in R&D positively influences both innovation and long-term financial performance but negatively impacts short-term financial performance and energy consumption. The results also show that the impacts of R&D activities vary significantly across different categories of firms, confirming that heterogeneity may be an issue among the firms considered. The results also indicate that the availability of credit is a more important moderating factor in the relationship between R&D investment and firm performance than the legal system is. These results have important implications for firms with growing R&D operations, especially those in developing countries such as Ethiopia. Ethiopian firms should invest more in R&D activities, such as in fundamental and applied research, to improve performance and enhance competitiveness.     

Do public subsidies stimulate private R&D spending?

The objective of this paper is to contribute to the empirical literature that evaluates the effects of public R&D support on private R&D investment. We apply a matching approach to analyze the effects of public R&D support in Spanish manufacturing firms. We examine whether or not the effects are different depending on the size of the firm and the technological level of the sectors in which the firms operate. We evaluate the effect of R&D subsidies on the subsidized firms, considering both the effect of subsidies on firms that would have performed R&D in the absence of public support and also the effect of inducement to undertake R&D activities. We also analyze the effect that concession of subsidies might have on firms which do not enjoy this type of support. The main conclusions indicate absence of “crowding-out”, either full or partial, between public and private spending and that some firms - mainly small and operating in low technology sectors - might not have engaged in R&D activities in the absence of subsidies.     

Is there complementarity or substitutability between internal and external R&D strategies?

The various strands of extant empirical research are inconclusive about the complementarity or substitutability between different innovation mechanisms, such as internal and external R&D. Using a panel sample of 83 incumbent pharmaceutical firms covering the period 1986-2000, our empirical analysis suggests that, instead of a clear-cut answer to the question of whether internal and external R&D are complementary or substitutive innovation activities, there appears to be a contingent relationship between internal and external R&D strategies in shaping a firm's innovative output. The results from our study indicate that the level of in-house R&D investments, which is characterized by decreasing marginal returns, is a contingency variable that critically influences the association between internal and external R&D strategies. In particular, internal R&D and external R&D, through either R&D alliances or R&D acquisitions, are complementary innovation activities at higher levels of in-house R&D investments, whereas at lower levels of in-house R&D efforts, internal and external R&D turn out to be substitutive strategic options.     

Do R&D subsidies affect SMEs’ access to external financing?

Many countries spend sizeable sums of public money on R&D grants to alleviate debt and equity gaps for small firms’ innovation projects. In making such awards, knowledgeable government officials may certify firms to private financiers. Using a unique Belgian dataset of 1107 approved requests and a control group of denied requests for a specific type of R&D grant, we examine the impact of subsidies on small firms’ access to external equity, short term and long term debt financing. We find that obtaining an R&D subsidy provides a positive signal about SME quality and results in better access to long-term debt.     

税收优惠刺激了企业R&D投资吗?

作为有效干预和刺激企业RD投资的重要政策手段,税收优惠已为越来越多的国家所运用,且有理论和实践方面的有力证据。为评估我国税收优惠政策对企业RD投资的效果,首先在水平创新的框架下构建由RD部门组成的多部门经济的数理模型,对模型的推导及分析发现,税前加计扣除率与企业RD投资正相关,在税前加计扣除保持不变且RD费用扣除范围扩大时,适用高税率的企业RD投资更高。其次,选取沪深上市公司的数据,建立双重差分模型评估我国2013年正式实施的税收优惠政策的效果。研究发现,税收优惠政策对国家重点扶持以及小微高新技术企业RD投资并未达到预期的激励效果,这也与数理模型中推导的结论一致。最后,对全文进行简要总结并提出相关的政策建议。     

Is a higher rate of R&D tax credit a panacea for low levels of R&D in disadvantaged regions?

This paper studies the impact of R&D spending on output as well as forecasting the impact of a regionally enhanced R&D tax credit on the ‘user cost’ (or price) of R&D expenditure and subsequently the demand for R&D. The example we use of a ‘disadvantaged’ region is Northern Ireland (partly because it has the lowest levels of R&D spending in the UK, and partly because the necessary data is available for this region). We find that in the long run, R&D spending has a mostly positive impact on output across various manufacturing industries. In addition, plants with a zero R&D stock experience significant one-off negative productivity effects. As to the adjustment of R&D in response to changes in the ‘user cost’, our results suggest a rather slow adjustment over time, and a long-run own-price elasticity of around −1.4 for Northern Ireland. We also find that to have a major impact on R&D spending in the Province, the R&D tax credit would need to be increased substantially; this would be expensive in terms of the net exchequer cost.     

Theoretically sound: practically useless? Government grants for industrial R&D in Australia

For nearly twenty years the Australian government has relied on a system of grants to encourage R&D activity in firms. Despite low and declining R&D effort in this sector and only equivocal evidence that grants were having the desired effect, the Board that administers the grants programme has regularly expressed its total confidence in its success. Indeed. the government has long relied on grants as the foundation of its industrial R&D policy - until recently at the cost of any major alternative programme. Much of this confidence has been encouraged by the combined influence of market failure theory and faith in the linear model of technological change. the first explaining what is wrong rather than how it may be put right and the second imputing a simplicity to the innovative process which suggests that if something is wrong it can be easily and assuredly rectified by stimulating R&D.     

Reassessing patent propensity: Evidence from a dataset of R&D awards, 1977–2004

It is well known that not all innovations are patented, but the exact volume of innovative activities undertaken outside the coverage of patent protection and, relatedly, the actual propensity to patent an innovation in different contexts remain, to a major degree, a matter of speculation. This paper presents an exploratory study comparing systematically patented and unpatented innovations over the period 1977–2004 across industrial sectors. The main data source is the ‘R&D 100 Awards’ competition organized by the journal Research and Development. Since 1963, the magazine has been awarding this prize to the 100 most technologically significant new products available for sale or licensing in the year preceding the judgments. We match the products winners of the R&D 100 awards competition with USPTO patents and we examine the variation of patent propensity across different contexts (industries, geographical areas and organizations). Finally we compare our findings with previous assessments of patent propensity based on several sources of data.