IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/respol/v35y2006i4p562-580.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The value of innovation: The interaction of competition, R&D and IP

Author

Listed:
  • Greenhalgh, Christine
  • Rogers, Mark

Abstract

This paper analyses market valuations of UK companies using a new data set of their R&D and IP activities (1989-1999). In contrast to previous studies, the analysis is conducted at the sector level, where the sectors are based on the technological classification in Pavitt (1984). The first main result is that the valuation of R&D and IP varies substantially across these sectors. To explore these variations the paper links competitive conditions with the market valuation of innovation. Using profit persistence as a measure of competitive pressure, we find that the sectors that are the most competitive have the lowest market valuation of R&D. Furthermore, within the most competitive sector (`science based`), firms with larger market shares (an inverse indicator of competitive pressure) also have higher R&D valuations. Another important result is that, on average, firms that receive only UK patents tend to have no market premium. In direct contrast, patenting through the European Patent Office does raise market value, as does the registration of trade market in the UK.
(This abstract was borrowed from another version of this item.)

Suggested Citation

  • Greenhalgh, Christine & Rogers, Mark, 2006. "The value of innovation: The interaction of competition, R&D and IP," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(4), pages 562-580, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:respol:v:35:y:2006:i:4:p:562-580
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0048-7333(06)00035-7
    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 below or search for a different version of it.

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Baumol, William J, 1982. "Contestable Markets: An Uprising in the Theory of Industry Structure," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 72(1), pages 1-15, March.
    2. Geroski, Paul A & Jacquemin, Alexis, 1988. "The Persistence of Profits: A European Comparison," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 98(391), pages 375-389, June.
    3. Griliches, Zvi & Hausman, Jerry A., 1986. "Errors in variables in panel data," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 31(1), pages 93-118, February.
    4. Kee H. Chung & Stephen W. Pruitt, 1994. "A Simple Approximation of Tobin's q," Financial Management, Financial Management Association, vol. 23(3), Fall.
    5. 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.
    6. Glenn C. Loury, 1979. "Market Structure and Innovation," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 93(3), pages 395-410.
    7. Mendonca, Sandro & Pereira, Tiago Santos & Godinho, Manuel Mira, 2004. "Trademarks as an indicator of innovation and industrial change," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(9), pages 1385-1404, November.
    8. repec:dgr:rugsom:98b43 is not listed on IDEAS
    9. Glen, Jack & Lee, Kevin & Singh, Ajit, 2001. "Persistence of profitability and competition in emerging markets," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 72(2), pages 247-253, August.
    10. Derek Bosworth & Mark Rogers, 2001. "Market Value, R&D and Intellectual Property: An Empirical Analysis of Large Australian Firms," The Economic Record, The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 77(239), pages 323-337, December.
    11. Cohen, Wesley M & Levinthal, Daniel A, 1989. "Innovation and Learning: The Two Faces of R&D," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 99(397), pages 569-596, September.
    12. Vossen, R.W., 1998. "R&D, firm size and branch of industry: policy implications," Research Report 98B43, University of Groningen, Research Institute SOM (Systems, Organisations and Management).
    13. Bronwyn H. Hall, 1999. "Innovation and Market Value," Finance 9902009, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    14. Morton I. Kamien & Nancy L. Schwartz, 1976. "On the Degree of Rivalry for Maximum Innovative Activity," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 90(2), pages 245-260.
    15. Heckman, James, 2013. "Sample selection bias as a specification error," Applied Econometrics, Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration (RANEPA), vol. 31(3), pages 129-137.
    16. Waring, Geoffrey F, 1996. "Industry Differences in the Persistence of Firm-Specific Returns," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 86(5), pages 1253-1265, December.
    17. 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.
    18. Andrew Benito, 2001. "'Oscillate Wildly': asymmetries and persistence in company-level profitability," Bank of England working papers 128, Bank of England.
    19. Otto Toivanen & Paul Stoneman & Derek Bosworth, 2002. "Innovation and the Market Value of UK Firms, 1989–1995," Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, Department of Economics, University of Oxford, vol. 64(1), pages 39-61, February.
    20. Kenneth Arrow, 1962. "Economic Welfare and the Allocation of Resources for Invention," NBER Chapters, in: The Rate and Direction of Inventive Activity: Economic and Social Factors, pages 609-626, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    21. Pavitt, Keith, 1984. "Sectoral patterns of technical change: Towards a taxonomy and a theory," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 13(6), pages 343-373, December.
    22. Greenhalgh, Christine & Longland, Mark, 2001. "Intellectual Property in UK Firms: Creating Intangible Assets and Distributing the Benefits via Wages and Jobs," Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, Department of Economics, University of Oxford, vol. 63(0), pages 671-696, Special I.
    23. van der Zwaan, B. C. C. & Gerlagh, R. & G. & Klaassen & Schrattenholzer, L., 2002. "Endogenous technological change in climate change modelling," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 24(1), pages 1-19, January.
    24. Nickell, Stephen J, 1996. "Competition and Corporate Performance," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 104(4), pages 724-746, August.
    25. Nickell, Stephen J, 1981. "Biases in Dynamic Models with Fixed Effects," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 49(6), pages 1417-1426, November.
    26. Bosworth, Derek & Rogers, Mark, 2001. "Market Value, R&D and Intellectual Property: An Empirical Analysis of Large Australian Firms," The Economic Record, The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 77(239), pages 323-337, December.
    27. Richard Blundell & Rachel Griffith & John van Reenen, 1999. "Market Share, Market Value and Innovation in a Panel of British Manufacturing Firms," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 66(3), pages 529-554.
    28. Boone, Jan, 2001. "Intensity of competition and the incentive to innovate," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 19(5), pages 705-726, April.
    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. Mark Rogers, 2002. "Firm Performance and Investment in R&D and Intellectual Property," Melbourne Institute Working Paper Series wp2002n15, Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research, The University of Melbourne.
    2. Cátia Felisberto, 2013. "Liberalisation, competition and innovation in the postal sector," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 44(3), pages 1407-1434, June.
    3. Christine Greenhalgh & Mark Rogers, 2006. "Trade Marks and Performance in UK Firms: Evidence of Schumpeterian Competition through Innovation," Discussion Papers 06-034, Stanford Institute for Economic Policy Research.
    4. Crass, Dirk & Schwiebacher, Franz, 2013. "Do trademarks diminish the substitutability of products in innovative knowledge-intensive services?," ZEW Discussion Papers 13-061, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    5. Andrei Barbos, 2015. "Information Acquisition and Innovation under Competitive Pressure," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 24(2), pages 325-347, June.
    6. Philipp Schautschick & Christine Greenhalgh, 2016. "Empirical studies of trade marks -- The existing economic literature," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 25(4), pages 358-390, June.
    7. Cátia Felisberto, 2012. "The Relationship Between Competition and Incumbent’s Innovation," Journal of Industry, Competition and Trade, Springer, vol. 12(1), pages 21-46, March.
    8. Christine Greenhalgh & Mark Rogers, 2006. "Trade Marks and Market Value in UK Firms," Melbourne Institute Working Paper Series wp2006n04, Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research, The University of Melbourne.
    9. Nasirov, Shukhrat, 2020. "Trademark value indicators: Evidence from the trademark protection lifecycle in the U.S. pharmaceutical industry," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(4).
    10. Christine Greenhalgh & Padraig Dixon, 2002. "The Economics of Intellectual Property: A Review to Identify Themes for Future Research," Economics Series Working Papers 135, University of Oxford, Department of Economics.
    11. Andersson, David E. & Ekman, Anton & Huila, Anton & Tell, Fredrik, 2023. "Industrial design rights and the market value of firms," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 196(C).
    12. Cohen, Wesley M., 2010. "Fifty Years of Empirical Studies of Innovative Activity and Performance," Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, in: Bronwyn H. Hall & Nathan Rosenberg (ed.), Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 0, pages 129-213, Elsevier.
    13. 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.
    14. Yu-Shan Chen & Chun-Yu Shih, 2011. "Re-examine the relationship between patents and Tobin’s q," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 89(3), pages 781-794, December.
    15. Paul H. Jensen & Elizabeth Webster, 2004. "Examining Biases in Measures of Firm Innovation," Melbourne Institute Working Paper Series wp2004n10, Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research, The University of Melbourne.
    16. Charles Bérubé & Marc Duhamel & Daniel Ershov, 2012. "Market Incentives for Business Innovation: Results from Canada," Journal of Industry, Competition and Trade, Springer, vol. 12(1), pages 47-65, March.
    17. Muhammad Zeeshan Younas & Muhammad Iftikhar Husnain, 2022. "Role of market structure in firm-level innovation: an extended CDM model for a developing economy," DECISION: Official Journal of the Indian Institute of Management Calcutta, Springer;Indian Institute of Management Calcutta, vol. 49(1), pages 91-104, March.
    18. William Griffiths & Elizabeth Webster, 2004. "The Determinants of Research and Development and Intellectual Property Usage among Australian Companies, 1989 to 2002," Melbourne Institute Working Paper Series wp2004n27, Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research, The University of Melbourne.
    19. Banerjee, Rajabrata & Gupta, Kartick, 2021. "Do country or firm-specific factors matter more to R&D spending in firms?," International Review of Economics & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 76(C), pages 75-95.
    20. Devin Garcia & Levent Kutlu & Robin C. Sickles, 2022. "Market Structures in Production Economics," Springer Books, in: Subhash C. Ray & Robert G. Chambers & Subal C. Kumbhakar (ed.), Handbook of Production Economics, chapter 13, pages 537-574, Springer.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • L10 - Industrial Organization - - Market Structure, Firm Strategy, and Market Performance - - - General
    • O31 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Innovation and Invention: Processes and Incentives
    • O34 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Intellectual Property and Intellectual Capital

    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:respol:v:35:y:2006:i:4:p:562-580. 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/respol .

    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.