IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Login to save this article or follow this journal

Mergers and innovation in big pharma

  • Ornaghi, Carmine

The aims of this paper are to study the effects of mergers on the R&D activity of consolidated firms and to explore the relationship between ex-ante relatedness of merging parties and their ex-post performances. The analysis is conducted using data of the pharmaceutical industry for the period 1988-2004. The empirical results suggest that merged companies have on average, worse performances than the group of non-merging firms. This result is confirmed when I account for the endogeneous formation of mergers by selecting a control group first using the propensity score method and then taking into account the technological relatedness of the firms. Finally, I find that higher levels of technological relatedness are not associated with better R&D outcomes.

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://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/B6V8P-4SFG4HD-1/2/114d55e2753c81ac8dc73f6fb79fbd92
Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

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.

Article provided by Elsevier in its journal International Journal of Industrial Organization.

Volume (Year): 27 (2009)
Issue (Month): 1 (January)
Pages: 70-79

as
in new window

Handle: RePEc:eee:indorg:v:27:y:2009:i:1:p:70-79
Contact details of provider: Web page: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/inca/505551

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. Nick Bloom & Mark Schankerman & John Van Reenen, 2013. "Identifying technology spillovers and product market rivalry," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 46852, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
  2. Hall, B. & Jaffe, A. & Trajtenberg, M., 2001. "The NBER Patent Citations Data File: Lessons, Insights and Methodological Tools," Papers 2001-29, Tel Aviv.
  3. Rajeev H. Dehejia & Sadek Wahba, 2002. "Propensity Score-Matching Methods For Nonexperimental Causal Studies," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 84(1), pages 151-161, February.
  4. David J. Ravenscraft & William F. Long, 2000. "Paths to Creating Value in Pharmaceutical Mergers," NBER Chapters, in: Mergers and Productivity, pages 287-326 National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  5. White, Lawrence J, 1987. "Antitrust and Merger Policy: A Review and Critique," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 1(2), pages 13-22, Fall.
  6. Richard Blundell & Monica Costa Dias, 2000. "Evaluation methods for non-experimental data," Fiscal Studies, Institute for Fiscal Studies, vol. 21(4), pages 427-468, January.
  7. Marco, Alan C. & Rausser, Gordon C., 2002. "Complementarities and spill-overs in mergers: an empirical investigation using patent data," Department of Agricultural & Resource Economics, UC Berkeley, Working Paper Series qt93s769k8, Department of Agricultural & Resource Economics, UC Berkeley.
  8. Patricia M. Danzon & Sean Nicholson & Nuno Sousa Pereira, 2003. "Productivity in Pharmaceutical Biotechnology R&D: The Role of Experience and Alliances," NBER Working Papers 9615, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  9. Michael L. Katz & Howard A. Shelanski, 2005. "Merger Policy and Innovation: Must Enforcement Change to Account for Technological Change?," NBER Chapters, in: Innovation Policy and the Economy, Volume 5, pages 109-165 National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  10. Patricia M. Danzon & Andrew Epstein & Sean Nicholson, 2007. "Mergers and acquisitions in the pharmaceutical and biotech industries," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 28(4-5), pages 307-328.
  11. Rebecca Henderson & Iain Cockburn, . "Scale, Scope and Spillovers: The Determinants of Research Productivity in Drug Discovery," Working Papers ec25/94, Department of Economics, University of Lancaster.
  12. Mueller, Dennis C., 1996. "Lessons from the United States's antitrust history," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 14(4), pages 415-445, June.
  13. Gregor Andrade & Mark Mitchell & Erik Stafford, 2001. "New Evidence and Perspectives on Mergers," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 15(2), pages 103-120, Spring.
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

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

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:indorg:v:27:y:2009:i:1:p:70-79. 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: (Zhang, Lei)

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.

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.