Productivity and R&D sources: Evidence for Catalan firms

Economics of Innovation and New Technology

Volumn 20, Issue 8, 2011, Pages 727-748

  Segarra, Agustí ^a   Teruel, Mercedes ^a  

^a UNIVERSITAT ROVIRA I VIRGILI   (Spain)

Author keywords

Innovation sources; Productivity; Quantile regression; Sample selection

Indexed keywords

EID: 80053454683     PISSN: 10438599     EISSN: 14768364     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/10438599.2010.529318     Document Type: Article

References (80)

1. Albrecht, J., A. van Vuuren, and S. Vroman. 2009. Counterfactual distributions with sample selection adjustments: Econometric theory and an application to the Netherlands. Labour Economics 16, no. 4: 383-96.
2. Arauzo, J.M., and A. Segarra. 2005. The determinants of entry are not independent of start-up size: Some evidence from Spanish manufacturing. Review of Industrial Organization 27, no. 2: 147-65.
3. Arbussà, A., and G. Coenders. 2007. Innovation activities, use of appropriation instruments and absorptive capacity: Evidence from Spanish firms. Research Policy 36, no. 10: 1545-58.
4. Arora, A., and A. Gambardella. 1994. The changing technology of technological change: General and abstract knowledge and the division of innovative labour. Research Policy 23, no. 5: 523-32.
5. Arrow, Kenneth J. 1962. Economic welfare and the allocation of resources for invention. In The rate and direction of inventive activity, ed. Richard R. Nelson, 609-25. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
6. Azevedo, J.P. 2006. GRQREG: Stata module to graph the coefficients of a quantile regression. Statistical Software Components S437001, Boston College. http://econpapers.repec.org/software/bocbocode/s437001.htm
7. Baldwin, J.R., and W. Gu. 2006. Plant turnover and productivity growth in Canadian manufacturing. Industrial and Corporate Change 15, no. 3: 417-65.
8. Bartelsman, E.J., and M. Doms. 2000. Understanding productivity: Lessons from longitudinal microdata. Journal of Economic Literature 38, no. 3: 569-94.
9. Belderbos, R., M. Carree, and B. Lokshin. 2006. Complementarity in R&D cooperation strategies. Review of Industrial Organization 28, no. 4: 401-26.
10. Beneito, P. 2006. The innovative performance of in-house and contracted R&D in terms of patents and utility models. Research Policy 35, no. 4: 502-17.
11. Bernard, A.B., and J.B. Jensen. 2004. Exporting and productivity in the USA. Oxford Review of Economic Policy 20, no. 3: 343-57.
12. Bönte, W. 2003. R&D and productivity: Internal vs. external R&D - evidence from West German manufacturing industries. Economics of Innovation and New Technology 12, no. 4: 343-60.
13. Bresnahan, T.F., E. Brynjolfsson, and L.M. Hitt. 2002. Information technology, workplace organization, and the demand for skilled labor: Firm-level evidence. Quarterly Journal of Economics 117, no. 1: 339-76.
14. Buchinsky, M. 1998. Recent advances in quantile regression models: A practical guideline for empirical research. Journal of Human Resources 33, no. 1: 88-126.
15. Buchinsky, M. 2001. Quantile regression with sample selection: Estimating women's return to education in the US. Empirical Economics 26, no. 1: 87-113.
16. Caroli, E., and J. Van Reenen. 2001. Skill-biased organizational change? Evidence from a panel of British and French establishments. Quarterly Journal of Economics 116, no. 4: 1449-92.
17. Caselli, F. 1999. Technological revolutions. American Economic Review 89, no. 1: 78-102.
18. Cassiman, B., and R. Veugelers. 2000. External technology sources: Embodied or disembodied technology acquisition. Economics Working Papers 444, Department of Economics and Business, Universitat Pompeu Fabra.
19. Cassiman, B., and R. Veugelers. 2002. R&D cooperation and spillovers: Some empirical evidence from Belgium. American Economic Review 92, no. 4: 1169-84.
20. Cassiman, B., and R. Veugelers. 2006. In search of complementarity in innovation strategy: Internal R&D and external technology acquisition. Management Science 52, no. 1: 68-82.
21. Coad, A., and R. Rao. 2006. Innovation and market value: A quantile regression analysis. Economics Bulletin 5, no. 13: 1-10.
22. Coad, A., and R. Rao. 2008. Innovation and firm growth in high-tech sectors: A quantile regression approach. Research Policy 37, no. 4: 633-48.
23. Cohen, W.M., and D.A. Levinthal. 1989. Innovation and learning: Two faces of R&D. Economic Journal 99, no. 397: 569-96.
24. Cohen, W.M., and D.A. Levinthal. 1990. Absorptive capacity: A new perspective on learning and innovation. Administrative Science Quarterly 35, no. 1: 128-52.
25. Crépon, B., E. Duguet, and J. Mairesse. 1998. Research, innovation and productivity: An econometric analysis at the firm level. Economics of Innovation and New Technology 7, no. 2: 115-58.
26. Dierickx, I., and K. Cool. 1989. Asset stock accumulation and the sustainability of competitive advantage. Management Science 35, no. 12: 1504-11.
27. Fabrizio, K.R. 2009. Absorptive capacity and the search for innovation. Research Policy 38, no. 2: 255-67.
28. Fitzenberger, B., and R.A. Wilke. 2006. Using quantile regression for duration analysis. Allgemeines Statistisches Archiv 90, no. 1: 105-20.
29. Fosfuri, A., and J.A. Tribó. 2008. Exploring the antecedents of potential absorptive capacity and its impact on innovation performance. Omega 36, no. 2: 173-87.
30. Freel, M. 2006. Patterns of technological innovation in knowledge-intensive business services. Industry & Innovation 13, no. 3: 335-58.
31. Geroski, P.A. 1990. Innovation, technological opportunity, and market structure. Oxford Economic Papers 42, no. 3: 586-602.
32. Görg, H., E. Strobl, and F. Ruane. 2000. Determinants of firm start-up size: An application of quantile regression for Ireland. Small Business Economics 14, no. 3: 211-22.
33. Grasjo, U. 2005. Accessibility to R&D and patent production. Mimeo, Electronic Working Paper Series, No. 37, Jönköping International Business School.
34. Griffith, R., S. Redding, and J. Van Reenen. 2003. R&D and absorptive capacity: Theory and empirical evidence. Scandinavian Journal of Economics 105, no. 1: 99-108.
35. Griffith, R., S. Redding, and J. Van Reenen. 2004. Mapping the two faces of R&D: Productivity growth in a panel of OECD industries. Review of Economics and Statistics 86, no. 4: 883-95.
36. Griliches, Z. 1979. Issues in assessing the contribution of research and development to productivity growth. Bell Journal of Economics 10, no. 1: 92-116.
37. Griliches, Z. 1995. R&D and productivity: Econometric results and measurement issues. In Handbook of the economics of innovation and technological change, ed. P. Stoneman, 52-89. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishers.
38. Griliches, Z., and J. Mairesse. 1998. Production functions: The search for identification. In Econometrics and economic theory in the 20th century: The Ragnar Frisch centennial symposium, ed. S. Ström, 169-203, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
39. Hall, B.H., D. Foray, and J. Mairesse. 2007. Pitfalls in estimating the returns to corporate R&D using accounting data. Paper presented at the First European Conference on Knowledge for Growth, 8-9 October, in Seville, Spain. elsa.berkeley.edu/bhhall/papers/HallForayMairesse07_rndreturns_pdf
40. Hall, B.H., F. Lotti, and J. Mairesse. 2009. Innovation and productivity in SMEs: Empirical evidence for Italy. Small Business Economics 33, no. 1: 13-33.
41. Hall, B.H., and J. Mairesse. 2006. Empirical studies of innovation in the knowledge-driven economy. Economics of Innovation and New Technology 15, no. 4/5: 289-99.
42. Hall, B.H., J. Mairesse, and P. Mohnen. 2010. Measuring the returns to R&D. Working Paper 2010-006, UNU-MERIT.
43. Haltiwanger, J.C., J.I. Lane, and J.R. Spletzer. 2007. Wages, productivity and the dynamic interaction of businesses and workers. Labour Economics 14, no. 3: 575-602.
44. Heckman, J.J. 1979. Sample selection bias as a specification error. Econometrica 41, no. 1: 153-61.
45. Kneller, R., and P.A. Stevens. 2006. Frontier technology and absorptive capacity: Evidence from OECD manufacturing industries. Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics 68, no. 1: 1-21.
46. Koenker, R., and G. Bassett. 1978. Regression quantiles. Econometrica 46, no. 1: 33-50.
47. Koenker, R., and K.F. Hallock. 2001. Quantile regression. Journal of Economic Perspectives 15, no. 4: 143-56.
48. Krüger, J.J. 2006. Productivity dynamics beyond-the-mean in US manufacturing industries: An application of quantile regression. Empirical Economics 31, no. 1: 95-111.
49. Lokshin, B., R. Belderbos, and M. Carree. 2008. The productivity effects of internal and external R&D: Evidence from a dynamic panel data model. Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics 70, no. 3: 399-413.
50. Lööf, H., and A. Heshmati. 2002. Knowledge capital and performance heterogeneity: A firm-level innovation study. International Journal of Production Economics 76, no. 1: 61-85.
51. Love, J.H., and S. Roper. 2002. Internal versus external R&D: A study of R&D choice with sample selection. International Journal of the Economics of Business 9, no. 2: 239-55.
52. Machado, J.A.F., and J. Mata. 2000. Box-Cox quantile regression and the distribution of firm sizes. Journal of Applied Econometrics 15, no. 4: 253-74.
53. Mairesse, J., and P. Mohnen. 2005. The importance of R&D for innovation: A reassessment using French survey data. The Journal of Technology Transfer 30, no. 1-2: 183-97
54. Mansfield, E. 1986. Patents and innovation: An empirical study. Management Science 32, no. 2: 173-81.
55. Marsili, O., and A. Salter. 2005. Inequality of innovation: Skewed distributions and the returns to innovation in Dutch manufacturing. Economics of Innovation and New Technology 14, no. 1-2: 83-102.
56. Mata, J., and J.A.F. Machado. 1996. Firm start-up size: A conditional quantile approach. European Economic Review 40, no. 6: 1305-23.
57. Miles, I. 2005. Innovation in services. In The Oxford handbook of innovation, ed. J. Fagerberg, D.C. Mowery, and R.R. Nelson, 433-58. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
58. Mohnen, P., J. Mairesse, and M. Dagenais. 2006. Innovativity: A comparison across seven European countries. Economics of Innovation and New Technology 15, no. 4-5: 391-413.
59. Mohnen, P., and L.H. Röller. 2005. Complementarities in innovation policy. European Economic Review 49, no. 6: 1431-540.
60. Mueller, R.E. 1998. Public-private sector wage differentials in Canada: Evidence from quantile regressions. Economics Letters 60, no. 2: 229-35.
61. Nahm, J.W. 2001. Nonparametric quantile regression analysis of R&D-sales relationship for Korean firms. Empirical Economics 26, no. 1: 259-70.
62. Nakamura, K., and H. Odagiri. 2005. R&D boundaries of the firm: An estimation of the double-hurdle model on commissioned R&D, joint R&D, and licensing in Japan. Economics of Innovation and New Technology 14, no. 7: 583-615.
63. Nelson, R.R., and K. Nelson. 2002. Technology, institutions, and innovation systems. Research Policy 31, no. 2: 265-72.
64. Nieto, M., and P. Quevedo. 2005. Absorptive capacity, technological opportunity, knowledge spillovers, and innovative effort. Technovation 25, no. 1: 1141-57.
65. Nordhaus, W.D. 1962. Invention, growth and welfare. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
66. Pagano, P., and F. Schivardi. 2003. Firm size distribution and growth. Scandinavian Journal of Economics 105, no. 2: 255-74.
67. Papapetrou, E. 2006. The unequal distribution of the public-private sector wage gap in Greece: Evidence from quantile regression. Applied Economics Letters 13, no. 4: 205-10.
68. Parisi, M.L., F. Schiatarelli, and A. Sembenelli. 2006. Productivity, innovation and R&D: Micro evidence for Italy. European Economic Review 50, no. 8: 2037-61.
69. Roper, S., J. Du, and J.H. Love. 2008. Modelling the innovation value chain. Research Policy 37, no. 6-7: 961-77.
70. Salter, A., and B.S. Tether. 2006. Innovation in services. Through the looking glass of innovation studies. A background review paper prepared for the inaugural meeting of the Grand Challenges in Services (GCS) forum, held in May 2006, at Said Business School, Oxford.
71. Segarra, A. 2010. Innovation and productivity in manufacturing and service firms in Catalonia: A regional approach. Economics of Innovation and New Technology 19, no. 3: 233-58.
72. Segarra, A., and J.M. Arauzo. 2008. Sources of innovation and industry-university interaction: Evidence from Spanish firms. Research Policy 37, no. 8: 1283-95.
73. Segarra, A., M. Teruel, J.M. Arauzo, S. Iranzo, and V. Gombau. 2008. Dinámica empresarial, creación de empleo y productividad en las manufacturas españolas. Madrid: Ministry of Industry, Tourism and Trade (Spanish Government).
74. Sirilli, G., and R. Evangelista. 1998. Technological innovation in services and manufacturing: Results from Italian surveys. Research Policy 27, no. 9: 881-99.
75. Stieglitz, N., and K. Heine. 2007. Innovations and the role of complementarities in a strategic theory of the firm. Strategic Management Journal 28, no. 1: 1-15.
76. Teece, D.J. 1986. Profiting from technological innovation. Research Policy 15, no. 6: 285-305.
77. Tether, B.S. 2003. The sources and aims of innovation in services: Variety between and within sectors. Economics of Innovation and New Technology 12, no. 6: 481-505.
78. Tether, B.S. 2004. Do services innovate (differently)? CRIC Discussion Paper 66, University of Manchester.
79. Veugelers, R. 1997. Internal R&D expenditures and external technology sourcing. Research Policy 26, no. 3: 303-15.
80. Zahra, S.A., and G. George. 2003. Absorptive capacity: A review, reconceptualization, and extension. Academy of Management Review 27, no. 2: 185-203.