IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/scient/v94y2013i2d10.1007_s11192-012-0711-z.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The more you spend, the more you get? The effects of R&D and capital expenditures on the patenting activities of biotechnology firms

Author

Listed:
  • Roberta Piergiovanni

    (Istat-Sede per l’Emilia-Romagna)

  • Enrico Santarelli

    (University of Bologna
    European Commission, Joint Research Centre (JRC), Institute for Prospective Technological Studies (IPTS))

Abstract

This paper provides evidence on the mechanisms influencing the patent output of a sample of small and large, entrepreneurial and established biotechnology firms from the input of indirect knowledge acquired from capital expenditures and direct knowledge from in-house R&D. Statistical models of counts are used to analyse the relationship between patent applications and R&D investment and capital expenditures. It focuses on biotechnology in the period 2002–2007 and is based on a unique data set drawn from various sources including the EU Industrial R&D Investment Scoreboard, the European Patent Office (EPO), the US Patent and Trademark Office, and the World Intellectual Property Organisation. The statistical models employed in the paper are Poisson distribution generalisations with the actual distribution of patent counts fitting the negative binomial distribution and gamma distribution very well. Findings support the idea that capital expenditures—taken as equivalent to technical change embodied in new machinery and capital equipment—may also play a crucial role in the development of new patentable items from scientific companies. For EPO patents, this role appears even more important than that played by R&D investment. The overall picture emerging from our analysis of the determinants of patenting in biotechnology is that the innovation process involves a well balanced combination of inputs from both R&D and new machinery and capital equipment.

Suggested Citation

  • Roberta Piergiovanni & Enrico Santarelli, 2013. "The more you spend, the more you get? The effects of R&D and capital expenditures on the patenting activities of biotechnology firms," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 94(2), pages 497-521, February.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:scient:v:94:y:2013:i:2:d:10.1007_s11192-012-0711-z
    DOI: 10.1007/s11192-012-0711-z
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11192-012-0711-z
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11192-012-0711-z?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version below or search for a different version of it.

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Manuel Trajtenberg & Gil Shiff & Ran Melamed, 2009. "The "Names Game": Harnessing Inventors, Patent Data for Economic Research," Annals of Economics and Statistics, GENES, issue 93-94, pages 67-77.
    2. repec:fth:harver:1473 is not listed on IDEAS
    3. Brouwer, Erik & Kleinknecht, Alfred, 1999. "Keynes-Plus? Effective Demand and Changes in Firm-Level R&D: An Empirical Note," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 23(3), pages 385-391, May.
    4. Raffo, Julio & Lhuillery, Stéphane, 2009. "How to play the "Names Game": Patent retrieval comparing different heuristics," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(10), pages 1617-1627, December.
    5. Utterback, James M & Abernathy, William J, 1975. "A dynamic model of process and product innovation," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 3(6), pages 639-656, December.
    6. Hagedoorn, John, 2002. "Inter-firm R&D partnerships: an overview of major trends and patterns since 1960," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 31(4), pages 477-492, May.
    7. Cohen, Wesley M & Klepper, Steven, 1996. "A Reprise of Size and R&D," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 106(437), pages 925-951, July.
    8. Hercowitz, Zvi, 1998. "The 'embodiment' controversy: A review essay," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 41(1), pages 217-224, February.
    9. Kleinknecht, Alfred, 1987. "Measuring R&D in Small Firms: How Much Are We Missing?," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 36(2), pages 253-256, December.
    10. Diego Comin & Bart Hobijn, 2010. "An Exploration of Technology Diffusion," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 100(5), pages 2031-2059, December.
    11. Santarelli, Enrico & Piergiovanni, Roberta, 1996. "Analyzing literature-based innovation output indicators: the Italian experience," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 25(5), pages 689-711, August.
    12. Hall, Bronwyn H. & Mairesse, Jacques, 1995. "Exploring the relationship between R&D and productivity in French manufacturing firms," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 65(1), pages 263-293, January.
    13. de Rassenfosse, Gaetan & van Pottelsberghe de la Potterie, Bruno, 2009. "A policy insight into the R&D-patent relationship," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(5), pages 779-792, June.
    14. Hausman, Jerry & Hall, Bronwyn H & Griliches, Zvi, 1984. "Econometric Models for Count Data with an Application to the Patents-R&D Relationship," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 52(4), pages 909-938, July.
    15. Christopher F. Baum & Mustafa Caglayan & Oleksandr Talavera, 2013. "The Effects of Future Capital Investment and R&D Expenditures on Firms' Liquidity," Review of International Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 21(3), pages 459-474, August.
    16. Heinzl, Harald & Mittlbock, Martina, 2003. "Pseudo R-squared measures for Poisson regression models with over- or underdispersion," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 44(1-2), pages 253-271, October.
    17. Zoltán J. Ács & Pontus Braunerhjelm & David B. Audretsch & Bo Carlsson, 2015. "The knowledge spillover theory of entrepreneurship," Chapters, in: Global Entrepreneurship, Institutions and Incentives, chapter 7, pages 129-144, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    18. Zvi Griliches, 1998. "Issues in Assessing the Contribution of Research and Development to Productivity Growth," NBER Chapters, in: R&D and Productivity: The Econometric Evidence, pages 17-45, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    19. Gregory Tassey, 2010. "Rationales and mechanisms for revitalizing US manufacturing R&D strategies," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 35(3), pages 283-333, June.
    20. Martin Carree & Antonio Malva & Enrico Santarelli, 2014. "The contribution of universities to growth: empirical evidence for Italy," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 39(3), pages 393-414, June.
    21. Thursby, Jerry & Fuller, Anne W. & Thursby, Marie, 2009. "US faculty patenting: Inside and outside the university," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(1), pages 14-25, February.
    22. Dosi, Giovanni, 1993. "Technological paradigms and technological trajectories : A suggested interpretation of the determinants and directions of technical change," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 22(2), pages 102-103, April.
    23. Lionel Nesta & Pier-Paolo Saviotti, 2006. "Firm knowledge and market value in biotechnology," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press, vol. 15(4), pages 625-652, August.
    24. Deng, Yi, 2007. "The effects of patent regime changes: A case study of the European patent office," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 25(1), pages 121-138, February.
    25. Grid Thoma & Salvatore Torrisi, 2007. "Creating Powerful Indicators for Innovation Studies with Approximate Matching Algorithms. A test based on PATSTAT and Amadeus databases," KITeS Working Papers 211, KITeS, Centre for Knowledge, Internationalization and Technology Studies, Universita' Bocconi, Milano, Italy, revised Dec 2007.
    26. Roijakkers, Nadine & Hagedoorn, John, 2006. "Inter-firm R&D partnering in pharmaceutical biotechnology since 1975: Trends, patterns, and networks," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(3), pages 431-446, April.
    27. Pakes, Ariel & Griliches, Zvi, 1980. "Patents and R&D at the firm level: A first report," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 5(4), pages 377-381.
    28. Santamara, Llus & Nieto, Mara Jess & Barge-Gil, Andrs, 2009. "Beyond formal R&D: Taking advantage of other sources of innovation in low- and medium-technology industries," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(3), pages 507-517, April.
    29. Maskus, Keith E. & McDaniel, Christine, 1999. "Impacts of the Japanese patent system on productivity growth," Japan and the World Economy, Elsevier, vol. 11(4), pages 557-574, December.
    30. Charles R. Hulten, 1992. "Growth Accounting When Technical Change is Embodied in Capital," NBER Working Papers 3971, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    31. Blundell, Richard & Griffith, Rachel & Windmeijer, Frank, 2002. "Individual effects and dynamics in count data models," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 108(1), pages 113-131, May.
    32. van Pottelsberghe de la Potterie, Bruno, 2011. "Europe should stop taxing innovation," World Patent Information, Elsevier, vol. 33(1), pages 16-22, March.
    33. Enrico Santarelli, 1995. "Finance and Technological Change," Palgrave Macmillan Books, Palgrave Macmillan, number 978-0-230-37503-1, December.
    34. Mariacristina Piva & Marco Vivarelli, 2007. "Is demand-pulled innovation equally important in different groups of firms?," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 31(5), pages 691-710, September.
    35. Pavitt, Keith, 1984. "Sectoral patterns of technical change: Towards a taxonomy and a theory," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 13(6), pages 343-373, December.
    36. Zvi Griliches, 1998. "Patent Statistics as Economic Indicators: A Survey," NBER Chapters, in: R&D and Productivity: The Econometric Evidence, pages 287-343, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    37. Saul Lach & Mark Schankerman, 1987. "The Interaction Between Capital Investment and R&D in Science-Based Firms," NBER Working Papers 2377, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    38. Hall, Bronwyn H & Ziedonis, Rosemarie Ham, 2001. "The Patent Paradox Revisited: An Empirical Study of Patenting in the U.S. Semiconductor Industry, 1979-1995," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 32(1), pages 101-128, Spring.
    39. Cincera, Michele, 1997. "Patents, R&D, and Technological Spillovers at the Firm Level: Some Evidence from Econometric Count Models for Panel Data," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 12(3), pages 265-280, May-June.
    40. David, Paul A, 1990. "The Dynamo and the Computer: An Historical Perspective on the Modern Productivity Paradox," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 80(2), pages 355-361, May.
    41. Hulten, Charles R, 1992. "Growth Accounting When Technical Change Is Embodied in Capital," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 82(4), pages 964-980, September.
    42. Diego A. Comin & Martí Mestieri, 2010. "An Intensive Exploration of Technology Diffusion," NBER Working Papers 16379, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    43. Hopkins, Michael M. & Martin, Paul A. & Nightingale, Paul & Kraft, Alison & Mahdi, Surya, 2007. "The myth of the biotech revolution: An assessment of technological, clinical and organisational change," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(4), pages 566-589, May.
    44. Enrico Santarelli & Francesca Lotti, 2008. "Innovative Output, Productivity and Profitability. A Test Comparing USPTO and EPO Data," Industry and Innovation, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 15(4), pages 393-409.
    45. David B. Audretsch, 1995. "Innovation and Industry Evolution," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262011468, December.
    46. Scherer, F M, 1982. "Demand-Pull and Technological Invention: Schmookler Revisited," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 30(3), pages 225-237, March.
    47. Crepon, Bruno & Duguet, Emmanuel, 1997. "Estimating the Innovation Function from Patent Numbers: GMM on Count Panel Data," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 12(3), pages 243-263, May-June.
    48. Arora, Ashish & Gambardella, Alfonso, 1990. "Complementarity and External Linkages: The Strategies of the Large Firms in Biotechnology," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 38(4), pages 361-379, June.
    49. Jean O. Lanjouw & Mark Schankerman, 2004. "Patent Quality and Research Productivity: Measuring Innovation with Multiple Indicators," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 114(495), pages 441-465, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Csomós, György & Tóth, Géza, 2016. "Exploring the position of cities in global corporate research and development: A bibliometric analysis by two different geographical approaches," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 10(2), pages 516-532.
    2. Enrico Santarelli & Hien Thu Tran, 2017. "Young innovative companies: Are they high performers in transition economies? Evidence for Vietnam," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 42(5), pages 1052-1076, October.
    3. Davit Khachatryan & Brigitte Muehlmann, 2017. "Determinants of successful patent applications to combat financial fraud," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 111(3), pages 1353-1383, June.
    4. Csomós György, 2017. "Mapping Spatial and Temporal Changes of Global Corporate Research and Development Activities by Conducting a Bibliometric Analysis," Quaestiones Geographicae, Sciendo, vol. 36(1), pages 65-77, March.
    5. Chojnacki, Piotr & Kijek, Tomasz, 2014. "R&D Expenditures And Market Value Of Biotechnology Firms," Roczniki (Annals), Polish Association of Agricultural Economists and Agribusiness - Stowarzyszenie Ekonomistow Rolnictwa e Agrobiznesu (SERiA), vol. 2014(6).
    6. Kotiranta, Annu – Kulvik & Tahvanainen, Antti – Trieste, . "Raiders Of Lost Value," ETLA B, The Research Institute of the Finnish Economy, number 267.
    7. Ferreira, Paulo Jorge Silveira & Dionísio, Andreia Teixeira Marques, 2016. "What are the conditions for good innovation results? A fuzzy-set approach for European Union," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 69(11), pages 5396-5400.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Pellegrino, Gabriele & Piva, Mariacristina & Vivarelli, Marco, 2012. "Young firms and innovation: A microeconometric analysis," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 23(4), pages 329-340.
    2. Andrea Conte & Marco Vivarelli, 2014. "Succeeding in innovation: key insights on the role of R&D and technological acquisition drawn from company data," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 47(4), pages 1317-1340, December.
    3. Hagedoorn, John & Wang, Ning, 2012. "Is there complementarity or substitutability between internal and external R&D strategies?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(6), pages 1072-1083.
    4. Cohen, Wesley M., 2010. "Fifty Years of Empirical Studies of Innovative Activity and Performance," Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, in: Bronwyn H. Hall & Nathan Rosenberg (ed.), Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 0, pages 129-213, Elsevier.
    5. Gabriele Pellegrino & Mariacristina Piva & Marco Vivarelli, 2015. "How do new entrepreneurs innovate?," Economia e Politica Industriale: Journal of Industrial and Business Economics, Springer;Associazione Amici di Economia e Politica Industriale, vol. 42(3), pages 323-341, September.
    6. Pellegrino, Gabriele & Piva, Mariacristina & Vivarelli, Marco, 2009. "How Do Young Innovative Companies Innovate?," IZA Discussion Papers 4301, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    7. Harabi, Najib, 1994. "Technischer Fortschritt in der Schweiz: Empirische Ergebnisse aus industrieökonomischer Sicht [Technischer Fortschritt in der Schweiz:Empirische Ergebnisse aus industrieökonomischer Sicht]," MPRA Paper 6725, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    8. Raquel Ortega‐Argilés & Mariacristina Piva & Marco Vivarelli, 2014. "The transatlantic productivity gap: Is R&D the main culprit?," Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d'économique, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 47(4), pages 1342-1371, November.
    9. Czarnitzki, Dirk & Kraft, Kornelius & Thorwarth, Susanne, 2009. "The knowledge production of 'R' and 'D'," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 105(1), pages 141-143, October.
    10. Nicolas van Zeebroeck & Bruno van Pottelsberghe de la Potterie, 2011. "Filing strategies and patent value," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 20(6), pages 539-561, February.
    11. Hagedoorn, John & Wang, Ning, 2010. "Is there complementarity or substitutability between internal and external R&D strategies?," MERIT Working Papers 2010-005, United Nations University - Maastricht Economic and Social Research Institute on Innovation and Technology (MERIT).
    12. Dziallas, Marisa & Blind, Knut, 2019. "Innovation indicators throughout the innovation process: An extensive literature analysis," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 80, pages 3-29.
    13. Rexhäuser, Sascha & Löschel, Andreas, 2015. "Invention in energy technologies: Comparing energy efficiency and renewable energy inventions at the firm level," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 83(C), pages 206-217.
    14. Danguy, Jérôme & de Rassenfosse, Gaétan & van Pottelsberghe de la Potterie, Bruno, 2010. "The R&D-patent relationship: An industry perspective," EIB Papers 7/2009, European Investment Bank, Economics Department.
    15. Li, Xibao, 2011. "Sources of External Technology, Absorptive Capacity, and Innovation Capability in Chinese State-Owned High-Tech Enterprises," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 39(7), pages 1240-1248, July.
    16. Kornelius Kraft & Jörg Stank & Ralf Dewenter, 2011. "Co-determination and innovation," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 35(1), pages 145-172.
    17. Anna Laura Baraldi & Claudia Cantabene & Giulio Perani, 2014. "Reverse causality in the R&D-patents relationship: an interpretation of the innovation persistence," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 23(3), pages 304-326, April.
    18. José García-Quevedo & Gabriele Pellegrino & Marco Vivarelli, 2011. "The determinants of YICs’ R&D activity," Working Papers 2011/31, Institut d'Economia de Barcelona (IEB).
    19. García-Quevedo, José & Pellegrino, Gabriele & Vivarelli, Marco, 2011. "R&D Drivers in Young Innovative Companies," IZA Discussion Papers 6136, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    20. Ann-Kathrine Ejsing & Ulrich Kaiser & Hans Christian Kongsted & Keld Laursen, 2013. "The Role of University Scientist Mobility for Industrial Innovation," Working Papers 332, University of Zurich, Department of Business Administration (IBW).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Patents; R&D; Capital expenditure; Poisson models; Biotechnology;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • L25 - Industrial Organization - - Firm Objectives, Organization, and Behavior - - - Firm Performance
    • L65 - Industrial Organization - - Industry Studies: Manufacturing - - - Chemicals; Rubber; Drugs; Biotechnology; Plastics
    • O34 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Intellectual Property and Intellectual Capital

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:scient:v:94:y:2013:i:2:d:10.1007_s11192-012-0711-z. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.