IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/zbw/wzbdiv/fsiv9128.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Does the hazard rate for new plants vary between low- and high-tech industries?

Author

Listed:
  • Mahmood, Talat

Abstract

Based on a longitudinal data base the hazard rate of over 12,000 newly established plants in U.S. manufacturing industry in 1976 are estimated and then compared between low and high-tech industries. It is found that the hazard rate differs across industries, and it also varies between low- and high-tech industries. The hazard rate in low-tech industries is reduced in the presence of scale economies, whereas the exposure to risk tends to be higher in high-tech industries. The influence of start-up size in reducing the hazard rate is apparently similar between low and high-tech industries, but its role is found to be more important in the high-technological industries. Market growth and R&D intensity exert no influence on the hazard rate in either the low- or high-tech industries.

Suggested Citation

  • Mahmood, Talat, 1991. "Does the hazard rate for new plants vary between low- and high-tech industries?," Discussion Papers, various Research Units FS IV 91-28, WZB Berlin Social Science Center.
    • Handle: RePEc:zbw:wzbdiv:fsiv9128
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/83021/1/731833236.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Evans, David S, 1987. "The Relationship between Firm Growth, Size, and Age: Estimates for 100 Manufacturing Industries," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 35(4), pages 567-581, June.
    2. Acs, Zoltan J & Audretsch, David B, 1988. "Innovation in Large and Small Firms: An Empirical Analysis," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 78(4), pages 678-690, September.
    3. Kiefer, Nicholas M, 1988. "Economic Duration Data and Hazard Functions," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 26(2), pages 646-679, June.
    4. Winter, Sidney G., 1984. "Schumpeterian competition in alternative technological regimes," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 5(3-4), pages 287-320.
    5. Jovanovic, Boyan, 1982. "Selection and the Evolution of Industry," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 50(3), pages 649-670, May.
    6. Acs, Zoltan J & Audretsch, David B, 1987. "Innovation, Market Structure, and Firm Size," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 69(4), pages 567-574, November.
    7. Acs, Zoltan J & Audretsch, David B, 1989. "Small-Firm Entry in U.S. Manufacturing," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 56(222), pages 255-265, May.
    8. Hall, Bronwyn H, 1987. "The Relationship between Firm Size and Firm Growth in the U.S. Manufacturing Sector," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 35(4), pages 583-606, June.
    9. Timothy Dunne & Mark J. Roberts & Larry Samuelson, 1989. "The Growth and Failure of U. S. Manufacturing Plants," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 104(4), pages 671-698.
    10. Zoltan Acs & David Audretsch, 1990. "Innovation and Small Firms," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262011131, December.
    11. Audretsch, David B, 1991. "New-Firm Survival and the Technological Regime," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 73(3), pages 441-450, August.
    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. Nerlinger, Eric A. & Berger, Georg, 1995. "Technologieorientierte Industrien und Unternehmen: Alternative Definitionen," ZEW Discussion Papers 95-20, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.

    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. David B. Audretsch & Max Keilbach, 2006. "Entrepreneurship, Growth and Restructuring," Papers on Entrepreneurship, Growth and Public Policy 2006-13, Max Planck Institute of Economics, Entrepreneurship, Growth and Public Policy Group.
    2. Audretsch, David B., 1995. "Innovation, growth and survival," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 13(4), pages 441-457, December.
    3. Yang, Qing Gong & Temple, Paul, 2012. "Reform and competitive selection in China: An analysis of firm exits," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 23(3), pages 286-299.
    4. Calá, Carla Daniela, 2009. "Spatial issues on firm demography: an analysis for Argentina," Nülan. Deposited Documents 1379, Universidad Nacional de Mar del Plata, Facultad de Ciencias Económicas y Sociales, Centro de Documentación.
    5. Marco Vivarelli, 2013. "Is entrepreneurship necessarily good? Microeconomic evidence from developed and developing countries," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 22(6), pages 1453-1495, December.
    6. Enrico Santarelli & Marco Vivarelli, 2007. "Entrepreneurship and the process of firms’ entry, survival and growth," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 16(3), pages 455-488, June.
    7. Pei-Chou Lin & Deng-Shing Huang, 2008. "Technological Regimes and Firm Survival: Evidence Across Sectors and Over Time," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 30(2), pages 175-186, February.
    8. Pei-Chou Lin & Deng-Shing Huang, 2006. "Technological Regimes and Firm Survival: Evidence across Sectors and over Time," IEAS Working Paper : academic research 06-A012, Institute of Economics, Academia Sinica, Taipei, Taiwan.
    9. Agustí Segarra & Maria Callejón, 2002. "New Firms' Survival and Market Turbulence: New Evidence from Spain," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 20(1), pages 1-14, February.
    10. Bruno Cassiman & Masako Ueda, 2006. "Optimal Project Rejection and New Firm Start-ups," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 52(2), pages 262-275, February.
    11. Mulligan, Robert F., 2004. "Fractal analysis of highly volatile markets: an application to technology equities," The Quarterly Review of Economics and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 44(1), pages 155-179, February.
    12. Guidi, Francesco & Solomon, Edna & Trushin, Eshref & Ugur, Mehmet, 2015. "Inverted-U relationship between innovation and survival: Evidence from firm-level UK data," EconStor Preprints 110896, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics.
    13. Blonigen, Bruce A. & Tomlin, KaSaundra, 2001. "Size and growth of Japanese plants in the United States," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 19(6), pages 931-952, May.
    14. Farasat A. S. Bokhari & Franco Mariuzzo & Anna Rita Bennato, 2021. "Innovation and growth in the UK pharmaceuticals: the case of product and marketing introductions," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 57(1), pages 603-634, June.
    15. Silviano Esteve-Pérez & Fabio Pieri & Diego Rodriguez, 2018. "Age and productivity as determinants of firm survival over the industry life cycle," Industry and Innovation, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 25(2), pages 167-198, February.
    16. D.B. Audretsch & L. Klomp & E. Santarelli & A.R. Thurik, 2004. "Gibrat's Law: Are the Services Different?," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 24(3), pages 301-324, May.
    17. Giorgio Barba Navaretti & Davide Castellani & Fabio Pieri, 2014. "Age and firm growth: evidence from three European countries," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 43(4), pages 823-837, December.
    18. John Sutton, 1996. "Gibrats Legacy," STICERD - Economics of Industry Papers 14, Suntory and Toyota International Centres for Economics and Related Disciplines, LSE.
    19. Harald Strotmann, 2007. "Entrepreneurial Survival," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 28(1), pages 87-104, January.
    20. Emmanuelle Fauchart & Max Keilbach, 2009. "Testing a model of exploration and exploitation as innovation strategies," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 33(3), pages 257-272, October.

    More about this item

    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:zbw:wzbdiv:fsiv9128. 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: ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/wzbbbde.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.