The value of innovation: The interaction of competition, R&D and IP
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.)
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.
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.
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.:
- 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).
- repec:dgr:rugsom:98b43 is not listed on IDEAS
- Hall, Bronwyn H., 1999.
"Innovation and Market Value,"
Department of Economics, Working Paper Series
qt9f31v1rw, Department of Economics, Institute for Business and Economic Research, UC Berkeley.
- Bronwyn Hall, 1998. "Innovation and Market Value," Economics Series Working Papers 1999-W03, University of Oxford, Department of Economics.
- Bronwyn H. Hall., 1999. "Innovation and Market Value," Economics Working Papers E99-265, University of California at Berkeley.
- Bronwyn H. Hall, 1999. "Innovation and Market Value," Finance 9902009, EconWPA.
- Bronwyn H. Hall, 1999. "Innovation and Market Value," NBER Working Papers 6984, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Hall, B.H., 1999. "Innovation and Market Value," Economics Papers 1999-w3, Economics Group, Nuffield College, University of Oxford.
- Griliches, Zvi, 1981.
"Market value, R&D, and patents,"
Elsevier, vol. 7(2), pages 183-187.
- Heckman, James, 2013.
"Sample selection bias as a specification error,"
Publishing House "SINERGIA PRESS", vol. 31(3), pages 129-137.
- 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 323-37, December.
- Kee H. Chung & Stephen W. Pruitt, 1994. "A Simple Approximation of Tobin's q," Financial Management, Financial Management Association, vol. 23(3), Fall.
- Nickell, Stephen J, 1996.
"Competition and Corporate Performance,"
Journal of Political Economy,
University of Chicago Press, vol. 104(4), pages 724-46, August.
- Pavitt, Keith, 1984. "Sectoral patterns of technical change: Towards a taxonomy and a theory," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 13(6), pages 343-373, December.
- Boone, Jan, 2001. "Intensity of competition and the incentive to innovate," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 19(5), pages 705-726, April.
- 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 569-96, September.
- Christine Greenhalgh & Mark Longland, 2002. "Running to Stand Still? - Intellectual Property and Value Added in Innovating Firms," Economics Series Working Papers 134, University of Oxford, Department of Economics.
- 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.
- Glenn C. Loury, 1979. "Market Structure and Innovation," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 93(3), pages 395-410.
- 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.
- Morton I. Kamien & Nancy L. Schwartz, 1976. "On the Degree of Rivalry for Maximum Innovative Activity," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 90(2), pages 245-260.
- 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 671-96, Special I.
- Geroski, Paul A & Jacquemin, Alexis, 1988. "The Persistence of Profits: A European Comparison," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 98(391), pages 375-89, June.
- Nickell, Stephen J, 1981. "Biases in Dynamic Models with Fixed Effects," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 49(6), pages 1417-26, November.
- Andrew Benito, 2001. "'Oscillate Wildly': asymmetries and persistence in company-level profitability," Bank of England working papers 128, Bank of England.
- Toivanen, Otto & Stoneman, Paul & Bosworth, Derek, 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.
- Richard Blundell & Rachel Griffith & John van Reenen, 1999. "Market Share, Market Value and Innovation in a Panel of British Manufacturing Firms," Review of Economic Studies, Oxford University Press, vol. 66(3), pages 529-554.
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.
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.