Advanced Search
MyIDEAS: Login to save this paper or follow this series

Returns on R&D investment: A comprehensive survey on the magnitude and evaluation methodologies

Contents:

Author Info

  • Andreia Cardoso

    ()
    (UITT; INESC Porto)

  • Aurora A.C. Teixeira

    ()
    (INESC Porto, CEFUP, Faculdade de Economia, Universidade do Porto)

Abstract

As technology and innovation seem to be contingent upon each other a great deal of attention has been given to the importance of assessing the contribution of R&D investment to firm and industry performance and, ultimately, to the economic performance of countries and regions. In industrialised societies not only private but also public agents have allocated increasing amounts of their resources to R&D activities, often considered the key path to innovativeness. At the same time, due to advances in empirical research, increasingly more focused on the micro (firms) rather than on the macro (country) level, old myths about the relationship between R&D, innovation and success began to fall down. Firstly, the idea that innovation is much broader than R&D has gained large support and has made it possible to identify other sources of innovation, beyond excellence in R&D, which had been largely hidden or neglected. As result, perceptions about small firms - or the so-called low-tech industries, which either do not carry out any significant R&D activities or are likely to perform them outside formal classifications - started to change. Secondly, the idea that more R&D investment is always automatically bond to success - whatever criteria one may choose to define success – has become nothing more than a utopia. In this paper we carry out an analysis of the literature on the magnitude and evaluation of R&D, and, possibly, of innovation. We identify the methodologies used and analyse to what extent the magnitude of (eventual) R&D returns is dependent on the methodology pursued and the level of analysis - firms (micro), industry (meso), and regions/countries (macro) - considered. We conclude that methodological approaches and levels of analysis determine, to a certain extent, the type of results obtained and, thus, variances between them.

Download Info

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
File URL: http://matasetix.inescporto.pt/RePEc/pdf/09.03.19_WP1_CardosoTeixeira.pdf
File Function: Full text
Download Restriction: No restriction to downloads

As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.

Bibliographic Info

Paper provided by INESC Porto, Unidade de Inovação e Transferência de Tecnologia(UITT) in its series UITT Working Papers with number 2009-03-wp1.

as in new window
Length: 25 pages
Date of creation: Mar 2009
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:inc:wpaper:2009-03-wp1

Contact details of provider:
Postal: Rua Dr. Roberto Frias, 378, 4200-465, Porto, Portugal
Phone: (+351)222094215
Fax: (+351)222094215
Web page: http://www.inescporto.pt/uitt

Order Information:
Postal: Rua Dr. Roberto Frias, 378, 4200-465, Porto, Portugal
Email:
Web: http://www.inescporto.pt/uitt

Related research

Keywords: Innovations and R&D indicators; Methodologies; Macro; meso and micro levels; R&D payoff;

This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

References

References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
as in new window
  1. Del Monte, Alfredo & Papagni, Erasmo, 2003. "R&D and the growth of firms: empirical analysis of a panel of Italian firms," Research Policy, Elsevier, Elsevier, vol. 32(6), pages 1003-1014, June.
  2. Acs, Zoltan J & Audretsch, David B, 1988. "Innovation in Large and Small Firms: An Empirical Analysis," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, American Economic Association, vol. 78(4), pages 678-90, September.
  3. Bernstein, Jeffrey I, 1989. "The Structure of Canadian Inter-industry R&D Spillovers, and the Rates of Return to R&D," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 37(3), pages 315-28, March.
  4. Beñat Bilbao-Osorio & Andrés Rodríguez-Pose, 2004. "From R&D to Innovation and Economic Growth in the EU," Growth and Change, Gatton College of Business and Economics, University of Kentucky, Gatton College of Business and Economics, University of Kentucky, vol. 35(4), pages 434-455.
  5. Howells, Jeremy, 2005. "Innovation and regional economic development: A matter of perspective?," Research Policy, Elsevier, Elsevier, vol. 34(8), pages 1220-1234, October.
  6. Bougrain, Frederic & Haudeville, Bernard, 2002. "Innovation, collaboration and SMEs internal research capacities," Research Policy, Elsevier, Elsevier, vol. 31(5), pages 735-747, July.
  7. Hall, Bronwyn H. & Mairesse, Jacques, 1995. "Exploring the relationship between R&D and productivity in French manufacturing firms," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, Elsevier, vol. 65(1), pages 263-293, January.
  8. Aurora Teixeira & Natércia Fortuna, 2003. "Human Capital, Innovation Capability and Economic Growth," FEP Working Papers 131, Universidade do Porto, Faculdade de Economia do Porto.
  9. Marcel Bogers & Stéphane Lhuillery, 2006. "Measuring Informal Innovation: From Non-R&D to On-line Knowledge Production," CEMI Working Papers, Ecole Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne, Collège du Management de la Technologie, Management of Technology and Entrepreneurship Institute, Chaire en Economie et Management de cemi-report-2006-009, Ecole Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne, Collège du Management de la Technologie, Management of Technology and Entrepreneurship Institute, Chaire en Economie et Management de l'Innovation.
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 in new window

Cited by:
  1. Westerberg, Hans Seerar, 2014. "The Return to R&D and Seller-buyer Interactions: A Quantile Regression Approach," Ratio Working Papers, The Ratio Institute 231, The Ratio Institute.

Lists

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

Statistics

Access and download statistics

Corrections

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:inc:wpaper:2009-03-wp1. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Andreia Passos).

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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

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