IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ecolet/v82y2004i3p377-384.html

Innovation indicators and corporate credit ratings: evidence from German firms

Author

Listed:
  • Czarnitzki, Dirk
  • Kraft, Kornelius

Abstract

No abstract is available for this item.

Suggested Citation

  • Czarnitzki, Dirk & Kraft, Kornelius, 2004. "Innovation indicators and corporate credit ratings: evidence from German firms," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 82(3), pages 377-384, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:ecolet:v:82:y:2004:i:3:p:377-384
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0165-1765(03)00309-4
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to

    for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Zvi Griliches, 1984. "Market Value, R&D, and Patents," NBER Chapters, in: R&D, Patents, and Productivity, pages 249-252, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    2. Fisher, Franklin M & McGowan, John J, 1983. "On the Misuse of Accounting Rates of Return to Infer Monopoly Profits," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 73(1), pages 82-97, March.
    3. Barrell,Ray & Mason,Geoff & O'Mahony,Mary (ed.), 2000. "Productivity, Innovation and Economic Performance," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521780315, November.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Nagaoka, Sadao, 2006. "R&D and market value of Japanese firms in the 1990s," Journal of the Japanese and International Economies, Elsevier, vol. 20(2), pages 155-176, June.
    2. Gatti, Corrado & Volpe, Loredana & Vagnani, Gianluca, 2015. "Interdependence among productive activities: Implications for exploration and exploitation," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 68(3), pages 711-722.
    3. Arnold, Denis G. & Amato, Louis H. & Troyer, Jennifer L. & Stewart, Oscar Jerome, 2022. "Innovation and misconduct in the pharmaceutical industry," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 144(C), pages 1052-1063.
    4. Anandhi S. Bharadwaj & Sundar G. Bharadwaj & Benn R. Konsynski, 1999. "Information Technology Effects on Firm Performance as Measured by Tobin's q," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 45(7), pages 1008-1024, July.
    5. Jaffe, Adam B, 1986. "Technological Opportunity and Spillovers of R&D: Evidence from Firms' Patents, Profits, and Market Value," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 76(5), pages 984-1001, December.
    6. 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.
    7. Dirk Czarnitzki & Kornelius Kraft, 2006. "R&D and Firm Performance in a Transition Economy," Kyklos, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 59(4), pages 481-496, November.
    8. O'Connor, Matthew L. & Rafferty, Matthew, 2010. "Incentive effects of executive compensation and the valuation of firm assets," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 16(4), pages 431-442, September.
    9. Kraft, Kornelius & Czarnitzki, Dirk, 2002. "Measuring the impact of innovation on firm value: a new approach," ZEW Discussion Papers 02-73, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    10. Callen, Jeffrey L. & Morel, Mindy, 2005. "The valuation relevance of R&D expenditures: Time series evidence," International Review of Financial Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 14(3), pages 304-325.
    11. Hall, B.H., 1999. "Innovation and Market Value," Economics Papers 1999-w3, Economics Group, Nuffield College, University of Oxford.
    12. Chang-Yang Lee & Ji-Hwan Lee & Ajai S. Gaur, 2017. "Are large business groups conducive to industry innovation? The moderating role of technological appropriability," Asia Pacific Journal of Management, Springer, vol. 34(2), pages 313-337, June.
    13. Kaplow, Louis & Shapiro, Carl, 2007. "Antitrust," Handbook of Law and Economics, in: A. Mitchell Polinsky & Steven Shavell (ed.), Handbook of Law and Economics, edition 1, volume 2, chapter 15, pages 1073-1225, Elsevier.
    14. Crass, Dirk & Garcia Valero, Francisco & Pitton, Francesco & Rammer, Christian, 2016. "Protecting innovation through patents and trade secrets: Determinants and performance impacts for firms with a single innovation," ZEW Discussion Papers 16-061, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    15. Stanley C. W. Salvary, 2003. "Financial accounting information and the relevance/irrelevance issue," Global Business and Economics Review, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 5(2), pages 140-175.
    16. Frey, Rainer & Hussinger, Katrin, 2006. "The role of technology in M&As: a firm-level comparison of cross-border and domestic deals," Discussion Paper Series 1: Economic Studies 2006,45, Deutsche Bundesbank.
    17. Villalonga, Belen, 2004. "Intangible resources, Tobin's q, and sustainability of performance differences," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 54(2), pages 205-230, June.
    18. Hall, Bronwyn H. & Oriani, R, 2006. "Does the market value R&D investment by European firms? Evidence from a panel of manufacturing firms in France, Germany, and Italy," Department of Economics, Working Paper Series qt8wc513c1, Department of Economics, Institute for Business and Economic Research, UC Berkeley.
    19. Efstathios G. Parcharidis & Nikos C. Varsakelis, 2010. "R&D and Tobin's q in an emerging financial market: the case of the Athens Stock Exchange," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 31(5), pages 353-361.
    20. Cockburn, Iain & Griliches, Zvi, 1988. "Industry Effects and Appropriability Measures in the Stock Market's Valuation of R&D and Patents," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 78(2), pages 419-423, May.

    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:eee:ecolet:v:82:y:2004:i:3:p:377-384. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/ecolet .

    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.