Dimensions of R&D location in the United States

R&D activities in the United States, as in other advanced economies, are geographically concentrated in certain types of locations. This study presents data on the location of four dimensions of R&D in the U.S.: industrial R&D laboratories, scientists and engineers engaged in R&D, scientists and engineers employed by the federal government, and research universities. Industrial R&D is much more concentrated in large urban areas than the other dimensions, and appears to locate more in response to the location of manufacturing activity than to the location of research universities and federal research facilities. The location of R&D employment, which includes government university, and industrial employees, is associated with facilities for all three types of R&D. Because of these factors, R&D in the U.S. is found on a significant per capita basis in 44 of 177 urban areas, most of them in the northeastern portion of the country. When two dimensions, industrial R&D laboratories and R&D employees, are combined as a measure of R&D concentration, the locational pattern is less clustered regionally. Ten urban areas in all regions of the U.S. are identified as important complexes of R&D. Since the location of R&D is a major indicator of comparative advantage for technological activities and the economic potential of urban regions, only a few areas of the U.S. are likely to remain important in the generation of innovations.     

The origin and direction of industrial R&D in India

This paper surveys the trends in industrial R&D in India over the last two decades. It shows that there has been a rapid rise in R&D expenditure and a shift in its composition towards in-house corporate R&D and away from R&D in government laboratories, which is explained by the laboratories' lack of market orientation and manufacturing experience. According to cross-section studies of corporate R&D, larger companies aim towards larger technological advances and take a longer view; but the overall composition of corporate R&D shows no discernible change. This apparent inconsistency is explained by the development of the technology market. Much R&D was triggered off by the need for import replacement arising from import controls till 1965 and later by the need for product diversification in the recession. But construction of new plants and mechanization for speeding up operations, activities where sustained R&D can yield large firms a steady flow of innovations, were unimportant or infrequent, and the demand for technology they gave rise to was largely met by imports.     

The effect of the triple helix system and habitat on regional entrepreneurship: Empirical evidence from the U.S.

The ‘triple helix’ of the university-industry-government relationship and habitat are accepted as important determinants of innovation and entrepreneurship. However, empirical explorations of the effects of these variables and their interrelationships on regional entrepreneurial activities are highly limited. To fill this gap, we investigate the effect of the triple helix system and habitat on birth and death rates of U.S. firms at the state level. As expected, we find that industrial R&D expenditure plays an important role in promoting regional firm birth. However, university and government R&D also generate a synergistic effect that indirectly influences regional firm birth rates. In addition, we find that the synergy between university and industrial R&D enhances the sustainability of firms, while the interactions between (1) university and government R&D and (2) government and industrial R&D are associated with an increase in firm death. Other factors linked to more favorable conditions for firm formation include higher educational attainment in a region, lower tax rate, and habitat factors affecting quality of life, such as lower housing prices and higher rates of health insurance coverage. In regions with high entrepreneurial activity, we find positive synergistic effects of the interactions between (1) university and government R&D and (2) university and industrial R&D on firm birth rate, suggesting that university R&D plays an important role as an ‘entrepreneurial mediator’ among the three spheres in the triple helix system. In low entrepreneurial regions, the only triple helix system factors significantly influencing firm birth rate were tax rate. This finding suggests that the independent and interdependent components of the triple helix system and habitat are less powerful in low entrepreneurial regions.     

Some determinants of cost distributions in the process of technological innovation

Industrial research and development (R&D) is a set of activities within the broader set of decisions and activities: the process of technological innovation (TI). It is technology transfer (commercialization of the innovation) that leads to technology diffusion that permits production and employment expansion and hence economic growth — an important goal of industrial policy. Firms' managements and government policy- makers should recognize the close relationships among the phases of TI and direct their policy, planning, budgeting and control decisions to the complete process. Many policies currently focus their attention to only one or a few points (such as R&D).In this study we conducted a detailed cost analysis of a limited number of innovation projects and studied the distributions of TI cost over the process phases. We find that almost half of TI costs are devoted to R&D, which implies that government support of this phase is important. Different cost patterns emerge when we classify innovations by industrial sectors, firms' sizes and project complexity. Complex innovations require larger and more variable (risky) R&D budgets. Smaller firms need more assistance in technology transfer. These are only a few important policy implications. This study emphasizes the importance of post-R&D phases and concludes that differential industrial policy may be required for technological innovations.     

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.     

R＆D的外部性及其内部化机制研究

与一般的产品竞争不一样 ,R&D竞争存在外部性。首先分析了R&D外部性 (溢出效应 )的产生机理及其对R&D激励的损害 ;接着考察了外部性的内部化机制 ,着重探讨如何通过专利保护、合作R&D、政府补贴及特许权经营等方法将R&D的溢出效应内部化。最后 ,讨论对我国企业R&D激励的启示     

Selective subsidies,entrepreneurial founders' human capital,and access to R&D alliances

We investigate if and to what extent the receipt of a “selective” subsidy – a public subsidy awarded through a competitive procedure – helps new technology-based firms (NTBFs) to access R&D alliances. In particular, we theoretically enquire and empirically analyze which founding team-level characteristics allow NTBFs to: i) get a selective subsidy; and ii) access an R&D alliance with another firm or a public research organization/university, once the subsidy is awarded. We use a sample of 902 NTBFs that operate in Italy, where industrial policy has never had an explicit and exclusive mandate neither for targeting NTBFs nor for easing their access to R&D networks. By means of several identification strategies and estimation methods, our results point to the relevance of selective subsidies in facilitating NTBFs to enter R&D alliances, independently from the objective of the policy measure. Second, founders’ technical education figures as a key determinant to get the first selective subsidy. Finally, founders’ previous industry-specific work experience allows NTBFs to better exploit the selective subsidy, by positively moderating the impact of the subsidy on the likelihood to establish a corporate R&D alliance.     

The disaggregated technology production function: A new model of university and corporate research

Technology and the process that produces it, research and development (R&D), are typically characterized as homogeneous entities. In reality, the typical industrial technology is composed of three elements: a generic technology base, supporting infratechnologies, and proprietary market applications (innovations). The first two have public good characteristics, and therefore, explicitly modeling them is essential for public policy purposes. The fundamental relationships among these elements require a technology production function that captures the supporting roles of the public good elements in creating proprietary applied technology. These critical quasi-public technology goods are supplied to a significant extent by exogenous (external) sources: central corporate research labs, government labs, and increasingly, universities. The expanding university role beyond basic research complicates the structure and functioning of the national R&D establishment and increases the need for a more accurate model of technological change to better inform R&D policy.Moreover, in assessing the resulting applied technology's impact on economic growth, both the general and partial equilibrium literatures enter the technology variable into a production function with the common “production” assets (physical capital and labor). Such models obscure an important distinction between technology and these production assets—namely, the fact that technology is primarily a “demand-shifting” asset. As such, its role is correctly specified only when combined with the other major demand-shifting asset, marketing. Allocations to these two assets vary across competing firms implying a spatial model of competition, while still providing traceability to the exogenous sources of public good technology elements, such as universities.     

中国高技术产业研发产出影响因素实证研究

基于文献研究和理论分析,构建高技术产业技术创新能力指标体系。采用2000—2015年中国高技术产业有关数据,利用统计分析方法和因子分析回归方法,从投入能力、创新能力、支撑能力和政策因素等方面实证分析各因素对高技术产业研发产出的影响。研究结果发现:知识产出与RD经费投入强度、企业资金投入、人员投入、企业数量和引进消化吸收再创新能力等有显著性关系;市场产出与企业资金投入、人员投入、RD经费投入强度、利润率和税负率等有显著性关系。最后,为政府及企业合理规划创新资源、科学提升产业研发产出提出相关对策建议。     

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.     

Fishing upstream: Firm innovation strategy and university research alliances

This paper examines how innovation strategy influences firms’ level of involvement with university-based research. Our results suggest that firms with internal R&D strategies more heavily weighted toward exploratory activities allocate a greater share of their R&D resources to exploratory university research and develop deeper multifaceted relationships with their university research partners. In addition, firms with more centralized internal R&D organizations spend a greater share of their R&D dollars on exploratory research conducted at universities. In contrast to other external partners, we find evidence suggesting that universities are preferred when the firm perceives potential conflicts over intellectual property.     

政产学协同视角下R&D投入与高校科技成果转化——基于长三角高校数据的互动关系研究

从政产学协同的视角出发,将R&D投入划分为政府扶持、企业投入和高校科研人员投入。基于长三角62所高校数据,构建面板向量自回归（PVAR）模型,分别从政府扶持和企业投入两条路径出发,通过脉冲响应函数和方差分解等步骤来分析R&D投入和高校科技成果转化之间的互动关系。分析结果表明：R&D投入难以对高校科技成果转化起到积极的作用;高校科技成果转化和外部R&D经费投入对高校科研人员投入的正向影响显著;高校科技成果转化和科研人员投入对外部R&D经费投入的正向冲击明显。基于此,提出应提高并保障科研人员福利待遇、完善科研绩效分类评价制度、强化政产学研协同创新的政策建议。     

资本市场业绩预期压力、投资者情绪与企业研发投资

本文在投资者非理性、管理者理性框架下探讨投资者情绪能否通过理性迎合渠道对企业研发投资产生影响,以及资本市场业绩预期压力能否对这种迎合效应起到抑制作用,并进一步比较不同规模、盈利能力和管理层持股企业间迎合效应的差异。研究结果显示:总体而言,投资者情绪对企业研发投资的影响支持了迎合假说;资本市场业绩预期压力能够抑制企业研发投资对投资者情绪的迎合程度;而以上效应只存在于小规模、低盈利能力以及管理层高持股的企业,说明企业规模、盈利能力和管理层持股是管理层迎合投资者情绪和维护资本市场形象动机的重要影响因素。本文研究结论对于上市公司、投资者、证券分析师以及市场监管部门都具有重要的政策涵义。     

R&D priority-setting for global catastrophic risks: The case of the NASA planetary defense mission

"Mission-oriented" public research organizations invest in R&D to improve decision-making around complex policy problems from climate change to asteroid impacts, thus producing public value. However, the estimation of benefits produced by such R&D projects is notoriously difficult to predict and measure - a challenge that is magnified for global catastrophic risks (GCRs). GCRs are highly uncertain risks that may pose enormous negative consequences for humanity. This article explores how public research organizations systematically reduce key uncertainties associated with GCRs. Building off of recent literature highlighting the organizational and political factors that influence R&D priority-setting at public research organizations, this article develops an analytical framework for explaining R&D priority-setting outcomes that integrates the key stages of decision analysis with organizational and political dynamics identified in the literature. This framework is then illustrated with a case study of the NASA Planetary Defense Coordination Office, which addresses the GCR of near-Earth object (asteroid and comet) impacts. The case study reveals how organizational and political factors interact with every stage in the R&D priority-setting process - from initial problem definition to project selection. Lastly, the article discusses the extent to which the case study can inform R&D priority-setting at other public organizations, particularly those addressing GCRs.     

创新生态系统理论视域下广州高校新型研发机构发展路径研究

当前学界从创新生态系统理论视角对高校新型研发机构发展现状、运行机制开展的研究较为不足,为此,根据创新生态系统理论,将高校新型研发机构看作一个创新生态系统,认为其是一种以管理系统为中心的知识型组织结构,具有开放自由、共生演进的主要特征,并通过持续的输入、输出及反馈机制为客户提供更具个性和创造性的产品和服务。基于创新生态系统理论视角,系统梳理总结广州高校新型研发机构发展路径的五大特点：与地方产业和市场需求密切联动、与金融企业联系紧密、政策支撑体系健全以及能够充分挖掘内部资源,并以清华珠三角研究院为例,总结分析其积极围绕国家及广东省战略性新兴产业,专注于高科技项目投资合作和孵化服务等创新发展路径。最后针对广州高校新型研发机构进一步发展面临的问题挑战提出相关对策建议。     

Technological innovation in a corporatist state: The case of biotechnology in the Federal Republic of Germany

This article examines a decade of federal support for biotechnology in the Federal Republic of Germany in order to determine the impact of liberal corporatist patterns of decision-making on industrial policy. For this purpose, industrial policy is taken to include both public initiatives aimed at promoting the new technology and those designed to control its risks.Two distinct forms of corporatism are discernible in this case study. In the first, the principal actors are large businesses, the state, and to a lesser extent, the academic reserch community. These actors have been most influential in defining the scope and specific objectives of the federally funced R&D program in biotechnology. A more traditional form of corporatism, including organized labor, has been engaged in the debate on regulatory policies.In the case of biotechnology, these patterns of corporatism have created the consensus necessary for the adoption of a comprehensive R&D program, but have perpetuated certain barriers to technological innovation. In particular, the reliance on established peak organizations to formulate policy has discouraged structural changes that could have enhanced Germany's early competitiveness in biotechnology. Incrementalism has produced more favorable results in the context of regulatory policy, by permitting control strategies to develop in step with technological progress.     

新型研发机构发展机制：以南京为例

为加快我国新型研发机构建设进程、提高建设质量,以南京推进新型研发机构建设为例,通过主要建设成效和具体举措分析,结合典型案例,研究其在功能定位、组织机构、共建模式、协同机制等方面的建设经验,探索新型研发机构在科技成果转化方面的新路径。分析表明,南京新型研发机构建设的主要功能定位于科技成果转移转化、产业孵化、合同研发、公共技术服务和人才培养五方面;完善顶层设计、强化统一领导,明确功能定位、聚焦重大需求,优化政策体系、注重落地实施,创新发展机制、激发要素活力,加强分类指导、突出绩效导向,是其建设发展提供的重要经验启示。     

Absorptive capacity and the reach of collaboration in high technology small firms

The current paper is concerned with exploring the role of absorptive capacity in extending the reach of innovation-related collaboration in high technology small firms. Drawing on survey data from a sample of 316 Dutch high-tech small firms, engaged in 1245 collaborations, we explore the relationship between R&D expenditure and distance to collaboration partners. In general terms, we find most partners to be ‘local’. However, controlling for a variety of potential influences, higher R&D expenditure is positively related to collaboration with more distant organizations. The implications of our results for policy, practice and future research are discussed.     

Innovation and government intervention: A comparison of Singapore and Hong Kong

Government is one of the determinants for innovation capacity although its role and degree of involvement in innovation is debatable. Government intervention can be vital in supporting R&D and innovation as market alone cannot provide adequate incentives for knowledge production. Degrees of government intervention, however, vary in different economies and range from directive intervention by actively advising industrial policy and investing in selected areas, to facilitative intervention by creating positive environment and providing public goods for industry. This study uses Singapore and Hong Kong as two cases to explore the influence of government intervention on innovation performance. Singapore is known for strong government intervention while Hong Kong is famous for its positive non-intervention policy that minimizes the power of government in influencing the market. The comparison shows that innovation activities in Singapore are largely policy driven and dominated by big players, while in Hong Kong industry innovation is less active but the local industry has a dynamic innovation base contributed by small firms. Using a difference-in-differences analysis of USPTO patents filed by Singapore and Hong Kong, we find evidence for the effectiveness of government intervention on enhancing the technological significance and scope of innovation. The findings could shed light on the implication of government involvement in innovation.