The firm-level innovation impact of public R&D funding: Evidence from the German renewable energy sector

Energy Policy

Volumn 113, Issue , 2018, Pages 430-438

  Plank, Josef ^a   Doblinger, Claudia ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF REGENSBURG   (Germany)

Author keywords

Innovation; Public policy, R D funding; Renewable energy

Indexed keywords

ENERGY POLICY; FINANCE; KNOWLEDGE BASED SYSTEMS; PATENTS AND INVENTIONS; RENEWABLE ENERGY RESOURCES;

FINANCIAL RESOURCES; FUNDINGS; INNOVATION; PAPER ANALYSIS; PATENT CITATION; PERFORMANCE; PUBLIC POLICY, R&D FUNDING; RENEWABLE ENERGIES; RENEWABLE ENERGY SECTOR; RESOURCE-BASED VIEW;

REGRESSION ANALYSIS;

ALTERNATIVE ENERGY; INDUSTRIAL PERFORMANCE; INDUSTRIAL TECHNOLOGY; INNOVATION; KNOWLEDGE; RENEWABLE RESOURCE; RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT;

GERMANY;

EID: 85035142355     PISSN: 03014215     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.enpol.2017.11.031     Document Type: Article

References (76)

1. Aerts, K., Schmidt, T., Two for the price of one? Additionality effects of R&D subsidies: a comparison between Flanders and Germany. Res. Policy 37:5 (2008), 806–822.
2. Afcha, S., Analyzing the interaction between R&D subsidies and firm's innovation strategy. J. Technol. Manag. Innov. 7 (2012), 57–70.
3. Aghion, P., van Reenen, J., Zingales, L., Innovation and institutional ownership. Am. Econ. Rev. 103:1 (2013), 277–304.
4. Alessandri, T.M., Pattit, J.M., Drivers of R&D investment: the interaction of behavioral theory and managerial incentives. J. Bus. Res. 67:2 (2014), 151–158.
5. Arrow, K., 1962. Economic welfare and the allocation of resources for invention. In: Universities-National Bureau Committee for Economic Research, Committee on Economic Growth of the Social Science Research Council, The Rate and Direction of Inventive Activity: Economic and Social Factors. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ, pp. 609–626.
6. Aschhoff, B., 2009. The effect of subsidies on R&D investment and success—do subsidy history and size matter? ZEW Discussion Paper No. 09-032. ZEW-Zentrum für Europäische Wirtschaftsforschung/Center for European Economic Research. 〈http://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:zbw:zewdip:09032〉, (Accessed 1 March 2017).
7. Barney, J.B., Strategic factor markets: expectations, luck, and business strategy. Manag. Sci. 32:10 (1986), 1231–1241.
8. Barney, J.B., Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. J. Manag. 17:1 (1991), 99–120.
9. Barney, J.B., Arikan, A.M., The resource-based view: origins and implications. Hitt, M.A., Freeman, R.E., Harrison, J.S., (eds.) The Blackwell Handbook of Strategic Management, 2006, Blackwell Publishing Ltd., Oxford, UK, 124–188.
10. Battke, B., Schmidt, T., Stollenwerk, S., Hoffmann, V.H., Internal or external spillovers—which kind of knowledge is more likely to flow within or across technologies. Res. Policy 45:1 (2016), 27–41.
11. Belitz, H., Lejpras, A., Financing patterns of R&D in small and medium-sized enterprises and the perception of innovation barriers in Germany. Sci. Publ. Policy 43:2 (2016), 245–261.
12. Bergemann, D., Hege, U., The financing of innovation: learning and stopping. RAND J. Econ. 36:4 (2005), 719–752.
13. Bérubé, C., Mohnen, P., Are firms that receive R&D subsidies more innovative?. Can. J. Econ. 42:1 (2009), 206–225.
14. Blind, K., Edler, J., Frietsch, R., Schmoch, U., Motives to patent: empirical evidence from Germany. Res. Policy 35:5 (2006), 655–672.
15. Bointner, R., Innovation in the energy sector. lessons learnt from R&D expenditures and patents in selected IEA countries. Energy Policy 73 (2014), 733–747.
16. Braun, F.G., Hooper, E., Wand, R., Zloczysti, P., Holding a candle to innovation in concentrating solar power technologies: a study drawing on patent data. Energy Policy 39:5 (2011), 2441–2456.
17. Bronzini, R., Iachini, E., Are incentives for R&D effective? Evidence from a regression discontinuity approach. Am. Econ. J. – Econ. Polic. 6:4 (2014), 100–134.
18. Bundesministerium der Justiz und für Verbraucherschutz, 2014. Bekanntmachung Forschungsförderung im 6. Energieforschungsprogramm Forschung für eine umweltschonende, zuverlässige und bezahlbare Energieversorgung. Bundesanzeiger AT 30.12.2014 B1. In: Bundesanzeiger, pp. 1–22.
19. Chen, W.-R., Miller, K.D., Situational and institutional determinants of firms' R&D search intensity. Strateg. Manag. J. 28:4 (2007), 369–381.
20. Clancy, M.S., Moschini, G., Incentives for innovation: patents, prizes, and research contracts. Appl. Econ. Perspect. Policy 35:2 (2013), 206–241.
21. Clausen, T.H., Do subsidies have positive impacts on R&D and innovation activities at the firm level?. Struct. Change Econ. Dyn. 20:4 (2009), 239–253.
22. Czarnitzki, D., Ebersberger, B., Fier, A., The relationship between R&D collaboration, subsidies and R&D performance: empirical evidence from Finland and Germany. J. Appl. Econ. 22:7 (2007), 1347–1366.
23. Czarnitzki, D., Fier, A., 2003. Publicly funded R&D collaborations and patent outcome in Germany. ZEW Discussion Paper No. 03-24. ZEW-Zentrum für Europäische Wirtschaftsforschung/Center for European Economic Research.
24. Del Canto, J.G., Suárez-González, I., A resource-based analysis of the factors determining a firm's R&D activities. Res. Policy 28:8 (1999), 891–905.
25. Dernis, H., Guellec, D., Using patent counts for cross-country comparisons of technology output. STI Rev. 27 (2002), 129–146.
26. Dierickx, I., Cool, K., Asset stock accumulation and sustainability of competitive advantage. Manag. Sci. 35:12 (1989), 1504–1511.
27. Dimos, C., Pugh, G., The effectiveness of R&D subsidies: a meta-regression analysis of the evaluation literature. Res. Policy 45:4 (2016), 797–815.
28. Dosi, G., Sources, procedures, and microeconomic effects of innovation. J. Econ. Lit. 26:3 (1988), 1120–1171.
29. Drivas, K., Economidou, C., Is geographic nearness important for trading ideas? Evidence from the US. J. Technol. Transf. 40:4 (2015), 629–662.
30. Galbreath, J., Which resources matter the most to firm success? An exploratory study of resource-based theory. Technovation 25:9 (2005), 979–987.
31. Gallagher, K.S., Grübler, A., Kuhl, L., Nemet, G., Wilson, C., The energy technology innovation system. Annu. Rev. Environ. Resour. 37:1 (2012), 137–162.
32. Gallagher, K.S., Holdren, J.P., Sagar, A.D., Energy-technology innovation. Annu. Rev. Environ. Resour. 31:1 (2006), 193–237.
33. González, X., Pazó, C., Do public subsidies stimulate private R&D spending?. Res. Policy 37:3 (2008), 371–389.
34. Grant, R.M., Toward a knowledge-based theory of the firm. Strateg. Manag. J. 17:S2 (1996), 109–122.
35. Griliches, Z., Patent statistics as economic indicators: a survey. J. Econ. Lit. 28:4 (1990), 1661–1707.
36. Grübler, A., Aguayo, F., Gallagher, K., Hekkert, M., Jiang, K., Mytelka, L, Neij, L., Nemet, G. Wilson, C., 2012. Policies for the energy technology innovation system (ETIS). In: Johansson, Thomas B., Nakicenovic, Nebojsa, Patwardhan, Anand, Gomez-Echeverri, Luis (Eds.), Global Energy Assessment: Towards a Sustainable Future. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK and New York, NY, and the International Institute for applied Systems Analysis, Laxenburg, Austria, pp. 1665–1743.
37. Hair, J.F., Multivariate Data Analysis. A Global Perspective, seventh ed, 2010, Pearson, Upper Saddle River, NJ.
38. Hall, B.H., Jaffe, A.B., Trajtenberg, M., 2001. The NBER patent citations data file: lessons, insights and methodological tools. NBER Working Paper Series 8498, pp. 1–74.
39. Hall, B.H., Jaffe, A.B., Trajtenberg, M., Market value and patent citations. RAND J. Econ. 36:1 (2005), 16–38.
40. Hall, B.H., Lerner, J., The financing of R&D and innovation. Handbook of The Economics of Innovation, 1, 2010, Elsevier, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 609–639.
41. Hausman, J., Hall, B.H., Griliches, Z., Econometric models for count data with an application to the patents-R&D relationship. Econometrica 52:4 (1984), 909–938.
42. Holmstrom, B., Agency costs and innovation. J. Econ. Behav. Organ. 12:3 (1989), 305–327.
43. Howell, S.T., Financing innovation: evidence from R&D grants. Am. Econ. Rev. 107:4 (2017), 1136–1164, 10.1257/aer.20150808.
44. Huenteler, J., Schmidt, T.S., Ossenbrink, J., Hoffmann, V.H., Technology life-cycles in the energy sector—technological characteristics and the role of deployment for innovation. Technol. Forecast. Soc. 104 (2016), 102–121.
45. Hussinger, K., R&D and subsidies at the firm level: an application of parametric and semiparametric two-step selection models. J. Appl. Econ. 23:6 (2008), 729–747.
46. Jaffe, A.B., Technological opportunity and spillovers of R&D: evidence from firms' patents, profits, and market value. Am. Econ. Rev. 76:5 (1986), 984–1001.
47. Jaffe, A.B., Trajtenberg, M., Henderson, R., Geographic localization of knowledge spillovers as evidenced by patent citations. Q. J. Econ. 108:3 (1993), 577–598.
48. Jaumotte, F., Pain, N., 2005. From ideas to development: the determinants of R&D and patenting. OECD Economics Department Working Paper No. 457, ECO/WKP (2005)44.
49. Johnstone, N., Haščič, I., Popp, D., Renewable energy policies and technological innovation: evidence based on patent counts. Environ. Resour. Econ. 45:1 (2010), 133–155.
50. Kahouli-Brahmi, S., Testing for the presence of some features of increasing returns to adoption factors in energy system dynamics: an analysis via the learning curve approach. Ecol. Econ. 68:4 (2009), 1195–1212.
51. Karki, M.M.S., Patent citation analysis: a policy analysis tool. World Pat. Inform. 19:4 (1997), 269–272.
52. Klaassen, G., Miketa, A., Larsen, K., Sundqvist, T., The impact of R&D on innovation for wind energy in Denmark, Germany and the United Kingdom. Ecol. Econ. 54:2–3 (2005), 227–240.
53. Kobos, P.H., Erickson, J.D., Drennen, T.E., Technological learning and renewable energy costs: implications for US renewable energy policy. Energy Policy 34:13 (2006), 1645–1658.
54. Lee, C., Lee, K., Pennings, J.M., Internal capabilities, external networks, and performance: a study on technology-based ventures. Strateg. Manag. J. 22:6–7 (2001), 615–640.
55. Manso, G., Motivating innovation. J. Financ. 66:5 (2011), 1823–1860.
56. Miller, M.H., Modigliani, F., Dividend policy, growth, and the valuation of shares. J. Bus. 34:4 (1961), 411–433.
57. Modigliani, F., Miller, M.H., The cost of capital, corporation finance, and the theory of investment: reply. Am. Econ. Rev. 49:4 (1959), 655–669.
58. Nelson, A.J., Measuring knowledge spillovers: what patents, licenses and publications reveal about innovation diffusion. Res. Policy 38:6 (2009), 994–1005.
59. Nelson, R.R., The simple economics of basic scientific research. J. Polit. Econ. 67:3 (1959), 297–306.
60. Nemet, G.F., Inter-technology knowledge spillovers for energy technologies. Energy Econ. 34:5 (2012), 1259–1270.
61. Oliver, C., Sustainable competitive advantage: combining institutional and resource-based views. Strateg. Manag. J. 18:9 (1997), 697–713.
62. Olmos, L., Ruester, S., Liong, S.-J., On the selection of financing instruments to push the development of new technologies: application to clean energy technologies. Energy Policy 43 (2012), 252–266.
63. Penrose, E.T., The Theory of the Growth of the Firm. 1959, Wiley, New York.
64. Peters, M., Schneider, M., Griesshaber, T., Hoffmann, V.H., The impact of technology-push and demand-pull policies on technical change—does the locus of policies matter?. Res. Policy 41:8 (2012), 1296–1308.
65. Polzin, F., Migendt, M., Täube, F.A., von Flotow, P., Public policy influence on renewable energy investments—a panel data study across OECD countries. Energy Policy 80 (2015), 98–111.
66. Popp, D., Lessons from patents: using patents to measure technological change in environmental models. Ecol. Econ. 54:2–3 (2005), 209–226.
67. Popp, D., Hascic, I., Medhi, N., Technology and the diffusion of renewable energy. Energy Econ. 33:4 (2011), 648–662.
68. Porter, M.E., How competitive forces shape strategy. Harv. Bus. Rev., 1979, 137–156.
69. Ramana, N., Younge, K., Fleming, Lee, Innovation and entrepreneurship in renewable energy. Jaffe, A.B., Jones, B.F., (eds.) The Changing Frontier: Rethinking Science and Innovation Policy, 2015, The University of Chicago Press, Chicago, London, 199–232.
70. Takalo, T., Tanayama, T., Adverse selection and financing of innovation: is there a need for R&D subsidies?. J. Technol. Transf. 35:1 (2010), 16–41.
71. Tian, X., Wang, T.Y., Tolerance for failure and corporate innovation. Rev. Financ. Stud. 27:1 (2014), 211–255.
72. Trajtenberg, M., Henderson, R., Jaffe, A., University versus corporate patents: a window on the basicness of invention. Econ. Innov. New Technol. 5:1 (1997), 19–50.
73. United Nations, 2015. Transforming our world: the 2030 agenda for sustainable development. 〈https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/post2015/transformingourworld/publication〉, (Accessed 1 March 2017).
74. von Wartburg, I., Teichert, T., Rost, K., Inventive progress measured by multi-stage patent citation analysis. Res. Policy 34:10 (2005), 1591–1607.
75. Watanabe, C., Wakabayashi, K., Miyazawa, T., Industrial dynamism and the creation of a “virtuous cycle” between R&D, market growth and price reduction: the case of photovoltaic power generation (PV) development in Japan. Technovation 20:6 (2000), 299–312.
76. Wernerfelt, B., A resource-based view of the firm. Strateg. Manag. J. 5:2 (1984), 171–180.