IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/cpb/memodm/189.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

R&D in Worldscan

Author

Listed:
  • Sabine Visser

Abstract

In March 2000, the European Union’s Lisbon Agenda identified the low level of R&D as an important reason for Europe’s lacking economic growth. Seven years later, innovation still has the full attention of policy makers around Europe. Given the prominent role of innovation in economic policy, the analysis of innovation is also important for policy-oriented economic research. A CGE model is a choice vehicle for the analysis of the long-term economic consequences of innovation policy. So far, attempts of such an analysis have however been rather scarce. In addition, in models that do incorporate innovation, R&D is frequently modelled as an exogenous rather than an endogenous event. Exceptions are the models Quest III, Mesemet and International Futures. WoldScan, the CGE model for the world economy of CPB Netherlands Bureau for Economic Policy Analysis, includes endogenous R&D, thus providing a flexible instrument for evaluating the effect of innovation policy.This memorandum analyses and checks whether the effect of R&D on total factor productivity (TFP) as modelled in WorldScan is consistent with the empirical estimates used for the calibration of the model.We find that the model deviates from these empirical estimates in two ways: i) the effect of R&D in WorldScan differs considerably over countries and sectors. Some validation for this sectoral pattern is found in the empirical literature; and ii) in WorldScan, R&D not only generates spillovers, but is also treated as a production factor. There is thus a potential for double-counting the effects of private R&D. We find that this risk is only partly realized. In addition, we have considered the effectiveness of an R&D tax credit in WorldScan and find that such a tax credit raises both R&D expenditures and welfare. The degree of effectiveness of the tax credit in raising R&D expenditures is broadly consistent with the empirical literature: 1 euro extra R&D credit raises total R&D expenditures by an equal amount.

Suggested Citation

  • Sabine Visser, 2007. "R&D in Worldscan," CPB Memorandum 189, CPB Netherlands Bureau for Economic Policy Analysis.
  • Handle: RePEc:cpb:memodm:189
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cpb.nl/sites/default/files/publicaties/download/memo189.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Diao, Xinshen & Roe, Terry & Yeldan, Erinc, 1999. "Strategic policies and growth: an applied model of R&D-driven endogenous growth," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 60(2), pages 343-380, December.
    2. Wolff, Guntram B. & Reinthaler, Volker, 2008. "The effectiveness of subsidies revisited: Accounting for wage and employment effects in business R&D," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(8), pages 1403-1412, September.
    3. Mauro Giorgio Marrano & Jonathan Haskel & Gavin Wallis, 2009. "What Happened To The Knowledge Economy? Ict, Intangible Investment, And Britain'S Productivity Record Revisited," Review of Income and Wealth, International Association for Research in Income and Wealth, vol. 55(3), pages 686-716, September.
    4. Dominique Guellec & Bruno Van Pottelsberghe De La Potterie, 2003. "The impact of public R&D expenditure on business R&D," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 12(3), pages 225-243.
    5. Sid Shanks & Simon Zheng, 2006. "Econometric Modelling of R&D and Australia's Productivity," Staff Working Papers 0604, Productivity Commission, Government of Australia.
    6. Adam B. Jaffe & Manuel Trajtenberg & Rebecca Henderson, 1993. "Geographic Localization of Knowledge Spillovers as Evidenced by Patent Citations," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 108(3), pages 577-598.
    7. Wolfgang Keller, 2002. "Geographic Localization of International Technology Diffusion," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 92(1), pages 120-142, March.
    8. Christoph Meister & Bart Verspagen & Guntram B. Wolff, 2006. "European Productivity Gaps: Is R&D the Solution?," Chapters, in: Susanne Mundschenk & Michael H. Stierle & Ulrike Stierle-von Schütz & Iulia Traistaru-Siedschlag (ed.), Competitiveness and Growth in Europe, chapter 8, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    9. Nadiri, M Ishaq & Prucha, Ingmar R, 1996. "Estimation of the Depreciation Rate of Physical and R&D Capital in the U.S. Total Manufacturing Sector," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 34(1), pages 43-56, January.
    10. Marga Peeters & Paul Ghijsen, 2000. "Capital, Labour, Materials and Additional R&D Investment in Japan - The Issue of Double-Counting," Annals of Economics and Statistics, GENES, issue 58, pages 165-184.
    11. Michele Cincera, 2005. "Firms' productivity growth and R&D spillovers: An analysis of alternative technological proximity measures," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 14(8), pages 657-682.
    12. Nadiri, M.I., 1993. "Innovations and Technological Spillovers," Working Papers 93-31, C.V. Starr Center for Applied Economics, New York University.
    13. B. Los & B. Verspagen, 2007. "Technology Spillovers and their Impact on Productivity," Chapters, in: Horst Hanusch & Andreas Pyka (ed.), Elgar Companion to Neo-Schumpeterian Economics, chapter 35, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    14. Sean M. Dougherty & Robert Inklaar & Robert H. McGuckin & Bart van Ark, 2007. "International Comparisons of R&D Expenditure: Does an R&D PPP Make a Difference?," NBER Chapters, in: Hard-to-Measure Goods and Services: Essays in Honor of Zvi Griliches, pages 291-322, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    15. Wolfgang Keller, 2004. "International Technology Diffusion," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 42(3), pages 752-782, September.
    16. Jürgen Bitzer, 2005. "Measuring Knowledge Stocks: A Process of Creative Destruction," Kyklos, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 58(3), pages 379-393, July.
    17. Schankerman, Mark, 1981. "The Effects of Double-Counting and Expensing on the Measured Returns to R&D," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 63(3), pages 454-458, August.
    18. Bernstein, Jeffrey I. & Mamuneas, Theofanis P., 2006. "R&D depreciation, stocks, user costs and productivity growth for US R&D intensive industries," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 17(1), pages 70-98, January.
    19. Lee Branstetter, 1998. "Looking for International Knowledge Spillovers: A Review of the Literature with Suggestions for New Approaches," Annals of Economics and Statistics, GENES, issue 49-50, pages 517-540.
    20. repec:adr:anecst:y:1998:i:49-50:p:20 is not listed on IDEAS
    21. Goto, Akira & Suzuki, Kazuyuki, 1989. "R&D Capital, Rate of Return on R&D Investment and Spillover of R&D in Japanese Manufacturing Industries," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 71(4), pages 555-564, November.
    22. Bruno Van Pottelsberghe & Dominique Guellec, 1999. "Does government support stimulates private R&D," ULB Institutional Repository 2013/6231, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
    23. repec:adr:anecst:y:2000:i:58:p:06 is not listed on IDEAS
    24. M. Ishaq Nadiri, 1993. "Innovations and Technological Spillovers," NBER Working Papers 4423, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    25. van Bergeijk, Peter A. G. & van Hagen, Gilbert H. A. & de Mooij, Ruud A. & van Sinderen, Jarig, 1997. "Endogenizing technological progress: The MESEMET Model," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 14(3), pages 341-367, July.
    26. Hall, Bronwyn & Van Reenen, John, 2000. "How effective are fiscal incentives for R&D? A review of the evidence," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 29(4-5), pages 449-469, April.
    27. repec:adr:anecst:y:2000:i:58:p:07 is not listed on IDEAS
    28. Christine Greenhalgh & Mark Longland & Oxford Intellectual Property Research Centre, 2002. "Running to Stand Still? - Intellectual Property and Value Added in Innovating Firms," Economics Series Working Papers 134, University of Oxford, Department of Economics.
    29. Bart Verspagen, 1997. "Estimating international technology spillovers using technology flow matrices," Review of World Economics (Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv), Springer;Institut für Weltwirtschaft (Kiel Institute for the World Economy), vol. 133(2), pages 226-248, June.
    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. Hong, Chanyoung & Yang, Heewon & Hwang, Wonsik & Lee, Jeong-Dong, 2014. "Validation of an R&D-based computable general equilibrium model," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 454-463.
    2. Jung, Sungmoon & Lee, Jeong-Dong & Hwang, Won-Sik & Yeo, Yeongjun, 2017. "Growth versus equity: A CGE analysis for effects of factor-biased technical progress on economic growth and employment," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 424-438.

    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. Sabine Visser, 2007. "R&D in Worldscan," CPB Memorandum 189.rdf, CPB Netherlands Bureau for Economic Policy Analysis.
    2. Gelauff, George & Lejour, Arjan, 2006. "The new Lisbon Strategy: An estiamtion of the impact of reaching 5 Lisbon targets," MPRA Paper 16168, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    3. Hall, Bronwyn H. & Mairesse, Jacques & Mohnen, Pierre, 2010. "Measuring the Returns to R&D," Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, in: Bronwyn H. Hall & Nathan Rosenberg (ed.), Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, edition 1, volume 2, chapter 0, pages 1033-1082, Elsevier.
    4. George Gelauff & Arjan Lejour, 2006. "Five Lisbon highlights; the economic impact of reaching these targets," CPB Document 104.rdf, CPB Netherlands Bureau for Economic Policy Analysis.
    5. Arjan Lejour & Paul Veenendaal & Gerard Verweij & Nico van Leeuwen, 2006. "Worldscan; a model for international economic policy analysis," CPB Document 111.rdf, CPB Netherlands Bureau for Economic Policy Analysis.
    6. Arjan Lejour & Paul Veenendaal & Gerard Verweij & Nico van Leeuwen, 2006. "Worldscan; a model for international economic policy analysis," CPB Document 111, CPB Netherlands Bureau for Economic Policy Analysis.
    7. Pedro de Faria & Francisco Lima, 2012. "Interdependence and spillovers: is firm performance affected by others’ innovation activities?," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 44(36), pages 4765-4775, December.
    8. Sergey Lychagin & Joris Pinkse & Margaret E. Slade & John Van Reenen, 2016. "Spillovers in Space: Does Geography Matter?," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 64(2), pages 295-335, June.
    9. Lisa Evers & Helen Miller & Christoph Spengel, 2015. "Intellectual property box regimes: effective tax rates and tax policy considerations," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 22(3), pages 502-530, June.
    10. G Cameron, 1996. "Innovation and Economic Growth," CEP Discussion Papers dp0277, Centre for Economic Performance, LSE.
    11. Pierre Koning & Karen Wiel, 2012. "School Responsiveness to Quality Rankings: An Empirical Analysis of Secondary Education in the Netherlands," De Economist, Springer, vol. 160(4), pages 339-355, December.
    12. Markus Eberhardt & Christian Helmers & Hubert Strauss, 2013. "Do Spillovers Matter When Estimating Private Returns to R&D?," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 95(2), pages 436-448, May.
    13. Martin Mellens & Herman Noordman & Johan Verbruggen, 2007. "Re-exports: international comparison and implications for performance indicators," CPB Document 149.rdf, CPB Netherlands Bureau for Economic Policy Analysis.
    14. Castellacci, Fulvio, 2008. "Innovation and the competitiveness of industries: comparing the mainstream and the evolutionary approaches," MPRA Paper 27523, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    15. Amoroso, Sara & Martino, Roberto, 2020. "Regulations and technology gap in Europe: The role of firm dynamics," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 129(C).
    16. de Faria, Pedro & Sofka, Wolfgang, 2010. "Knowledge protection strategies of multinational firms--A cross-country comparison," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(7), pages 956-968, September.
    17. Ana Lara GÓMEZ, 2015. "Technological Spillovers of Research Infrastructures," Departmental Working Papers 2015-18, Department of Economics, Management and Quantitative Methods at Università degli Studi di Milano.
    18. Bretschger, Lucas & Lechthaler, Filippo & Rausch, Sebastian & Zhang, Lin, 2017. "Knowledge diffusion, endogenous growth, and the costs of global climate policy," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 93(C), pages 47-72.
    19. Henrik Braconier & Fredrik Sjöholm, 1998. "National and international spillovers from R&D: Comparing a neoclassical and an endogenous growth approach," Review of World Economics (Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv), Springer;Institut für Weltwirtschaft (Kiel Institute for the World Economy), vol. 134(4), pages 638-663, December.
    20. Dominique Guellec & Bruno Van Pottelsberghe de la Potterie, 2004. "From R&D to Productivity Growth: Do the Institutional Settings and the Source of Funds of R&D Matter?," Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, Department of Economics, University of Oxford, vol. 66(3), pages 353-378, July.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • C68 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Mathematical Methods; Programming Models; Mathematical and Simulation Modeling - - - Computable General Equilibrium Models
    • O38 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Government Policy
    • O4 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Economic Growth and Aggregate Productivity

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:cpb:memodm:189. 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: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cpbgvnl.html .

    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.