IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/respol/v45y2016i7p1474-1492.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Inverted-U relationship between R&D intensity and survival: Evidence on scale and complementarity effects in UK data

Author

Listed:
  • Ugur, Mehmet
  • Trushin, Eshref
  • Solomon, Edna

Abstract

Existing evidence on the relationship between R&D intensity and firm survival is varied and often conflicting. We argue that this may be due to overlooking R&D scale effects and complementarity between R&D intensity and market concentration. Drawing on Schumpeterian models of competition and innovation, we address these issues by developing a formal model of firm survival and using a panel dataset of 37,930 of R&D-active UK firms over 1998–2012. We report the following findings: (i) the relationship between R&D intensity and firm survival follows an inverted-U pattern that reflects diminishing scale effects; (ii) R&D intensity and market concentration are complements in that R&D-active firms have longer survival time if they are in more concentrated industries; and (iii) creative destruction as proxied by median R&D intensity in the industry and the premium on business lending have negative effects on firm survival. Other findings concerning age, size, productivity, relative growth, Pavitt technology classes and the macroeconomic environment are in line with the existing literature. The results are strongly or moderately robust to different samples, stepwise estimations, and controls for frailty and left truncation.

Suggested Citation

  • Ugur, Mehmet & Trushin, Eshref & Solomon, Edna, 2016. "Inverted-U relationship between R&D intensity and survival: Evidence on scale and complementarity effects in UK data," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(7), pages 1474-1492.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:respol:v:45:y:2016:i:7:p:1474-1492
    DOI: 10.1016/j.respol.2016.04.007
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0048733316300531
    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. Wagner, Joachim, 1994. "The Post-entry Performance of New Small Firms in German Manufacturing Industries," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 42(2), pages 141-154, June.
    2. Mata, Jose & Portugal, Pedro, 1994. "Life Duration of New Firms," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 42(3), pages 227-245, September.
    3. Hall, Bronwyn H. & Mairesse, Jacques & Mohnen, Pierre, 2010. "Measuring the Returns to R&D," Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, Elsevier.
    4. Casas, Isabel & Gao, Jiti, 2008. "Econometric estimation in long-range dependent volatility models: Theory and practice," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 147(1), pages 72-83, November.
    5. Jean Tirole, 1988. "The Theory of Industrial Organization," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262200716, January.
    6. Philippe Aghion & Nick Bloom & Richard Blundell & Rachel Griffith & Peter Howitt, 2005. "Competition and Innovation: an Inverted-U Relationship," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 120(2), pages 701-728.
    7. Christian Helmers & Mark Rogers, 2010. "Innovation and the Survival of New Firms in the UK," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 36(3), pages 227-248, May.
    8. Audretsch, David B., 1995. "Innovation, growth and survival," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 13(4), pages 441-457, December.
    9. Michael Fritsch & Udo Brixy & Oliver Falck, 2006. "The Effect of Industry, Region, and Time on New Business Survival – A Multi-Dimensional Analysis," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 28(3), pages 285-306, May.
    10. Jan Boone, 2008. "Competition: Theoretical Parameterizations and Empirical Measures," Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics (JITE), Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen, vol. 164(4), pages 587-611, December.
    11. Goudie, A W & Meeks, G, 1991. "The Exchange Rate and Company Failure in a Macro-Micro Model of the UK Company Sector," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 101(406), pages 444-457, May.
    12. Philippe Aghion & Richard Blundell & Rachel Griffith & Peter Howitt & Susanne Prantl, 2009. "The Effects of Entry on Incumbent Innovation and Productivity," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 91(1), pages 20-32, February.
    13. David Audretsch & Patrick Houweling & A. Thurik, 2000. "Firm Survival in the Netherlands," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 16(1), pages 1-11, February.
    14. Jan Boone, 2008. "A New Way to Measure Competition," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 118(531), pages 1245-1261, August.
    15. Giorgia Giovannetti & Giorgio Ricchiuti & Margherita Velucchi, 2011. "Size, innovation and internationalization: a survival analysis of Italian firms," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 43(12), pages 1511-1520.
    16. Timothy Dunne & Mark J. Roberts & Larry Samuelson, 1988. "Patterns of Firm Entry and Exit in U.S. Manufacturing Industries," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 19(4), pages 495-515, Winter.
    17. 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.
    18. Zvi Griliches, 1998. "Issues in Assessing the Contribution of Research and Development to Productivity Growth," NBER Chapters,in: R&D and Productivity: The Econometric Evidence, pages 17-45 National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    19. Peltzman, Sam, 1977. "The Gains and Losses from Industrial Concentration," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 20(2), pages 229-263, October.
    20. Mata, Jose & Portugal, Pedro & Guimaraes, Paulo, 1995. "The survival of new plants: Start-up conditions and post-entry evolution," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 13(4), pages 459-481, December.
    21. Elena Cefis & Orietta Marsili, 2005. "A matter of life and death: innovation and firm survival," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press, vol. 14(6), pages 1167-1192, December.
    22. Luís M B Cabral & José Mata, 2003. "On the Evolution of the Firm Size Distribution: Facts and Theory," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 93(4), pages 1075-1090, September.
    23. Berger, Allen N, 1995. "The Profit-Structure Relationship in Banking--Tests of Market-Power and Efficient-Structure Hypotheses," Journal of Money, Credit and Banking, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 27(2), pages 404-431, May.
    24. Aghion, Philippe & Akcigit, Ufuk & Howitt, Peter, 2014. "What Do We Learn From Schumpeterian Growth Theory?," Handbook of Economic Growth,in: Handbook of Economic Growth, edition 1, volume 2, chapter 0, pages 515-563 Elsevier.
    25. Joe S. Bain, 1951. "Relation of Profit Rate to Industry Concentration: American Manufacturing, 1936–1940," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 65(3), pages 293-324.
    26. Olley, G Steven & Pakes, Ariel, 1996. "The Dynamics of Productivity in the Telecommunications Equipment Industry," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 64(6), pages 1263-1297, November.
    27. Philippe Aghion & Christopher Harris & Peter Howitt & John Vickers, 2001. "Competition, Imitation and Growth with Step-by-Step Innovation," Review of Economic Studies, Oxford University Press, vol. 68(3), pages 467-492.
    28. Jaap H. Abbring & Gerard J. Van Den Berg, 2007. "The unobserved heterogeneity distribution in duration analysis," Biometrika, Biometrika Trust, vol. 94(1), pages 87-99.
    29. Dirk Czarnitzki & Andrew A. Toole, 2013. "The R&D Investment–Uncertainty Relationship: Do Strategic Rivalry and Firm Size Matter?," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 34(1), pages 15-28, January.
    30. Levinthal, D.A. & Fichman, M., 1991. "Honeymoons and the Liability of Adolescence : A New Perspective on Duration Dependence in Social Organizational Relationships," GSIA Working Papers 1991-34, Carnegie Mellon University, Tepper School of Business.
    31. Bogliacino, Francesco & Pianta, Mario, 2010. "Innovation and Employment: a Reinvestigation using Revised Pavitt classes," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(6), pages 799-809, July.
    32. Roberto G. Gutierrez, 2002. "Parametric frailty and shared frailty survival models," Stata Journal, StataCorp LP, vol. 2(1), pages 22-44, February.
    33. Jia Liu, 2004. "Macroeconomic determinants of corporate failures: evidence from the UK," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 36(9), pages 939-945.
    34. Pavitt, Keith, 1984. "Sectoral patterns of technical change: Towards a taxonomy and a theory," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 13(6), pages 343-373, December.
    35. Tor Jakob Klette & Samuel Kortum, 2004. "Innovating Firms and Aggregate Innovation," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 112(5), pages 986-1018, October.
    36. Geroski, P. A., 1995. "What do we know about entry?," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 13(4), pages 421-440, December.
    37. Richard Ericson & Ariel Pakes, 1995. "Markov-Perfect Industry Dynamics: A Framework for Empirical Work," Review of Economic Studies, Oxford University Press, vol. 62(1), pages 53-82.
    38. Fuss, Melvyn & McFadden, Daniel & Mundlak, Yair, 1978. "A Survey of Functional Forms in the Economic Analysis of Production," Histoy of Economic Thought Chapters,in: Fuss, Melvyn & McFadden, Daniel (ed.), Production Economics: A Dual Approach to Theory and Applications, volume 1, chapter 4 McMaster University Archive for the History of Economic Thought.
    39. Louis K.C. Chan & Josef Lakonishok & Theodore Sougiannis, 1999. "The Stock Market Valuation of Research and Development Expenditures," NBER Working Papers 7223, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    40. Boris Lokshin & René Belderbos & Martin Carree, 2008. "The Productivity Effects of Internal and External R&D: Evidence from a Dynamic Panel Data Model," Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, Department of Economics, University of Oxford, vol. 70(3), pages 399-413, June.
    41. Richard Disney & Jonathan Haskel & Ylva Heden, 2003. "Entry, Exit and Establishment Survival in UK Manufacturing," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 51(1), pages 91-112, March.
    42. Greening, Daniel W. & Barringer, Bruce R. & Macy, Granger, 1996. "A qualitative study of managerial challenges facing small business geographic expansion," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 11(4), pages 233-256, July.
    43. Kortum, Samuel, 1993. "Equilibrium R&D and the Patent-R&D Ratio: U.S. Evidence," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 83(2), pages 450-457, May.
    44. Kevin W. Chauvin & Mark Hirschey, 1993. "Advertising, R&D Expenditures and the Market Value of the Firm," Financial Management, Financial Management Association, vol. 22(4), Winter.
    45. McCloughan, Patrick & Stone, Ian, 1998. "Life duration of foreign multinational subsidiaries: Evidence from UK northern manufacturing industry 1970-93," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 16(6), pages 719-747, November.
    46. Jovanovic, Boyan, 1982. "Selection and the Evolution of Industry," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 50(3), pages 649-670, May.
    47. Doms, Mark & Dunne, Timothy & Roberts, Mark J., 1995. "The role of technology use in the survival and growth of manufacturing plants," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 13(4), pages 523-542, December.
    48. Hopenhayn, Hugo A, 1992. "Entry, Exit, and Firm Dynamics in Long Run Equilibrium," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 60(5), pages 1127-1150, September.
    49. Agarwal, Rajshree & Audretsch, David B, 2001. "Does Entry Size Matter? The Impact of the Life Cycle and Technology on Firm Survival," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 49(1), pages 21-43, March.
    50. Ana M. Fernandes & Caroline Paunov, 2015. "The Risks of Innovation: Are Innovating Firms Less Likely to Die?," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 97(3), pages 638-653, July.
    51. Miguel Manjón-Antolín & Josep-Maria Arauzo-Carod, 2008. "Firm survival: methods and evidence," Empirica, Springer;Austrian Institute for Economic Research;Austrian Economic Association, vol. 35(1), pages 1-24, March.
    52. Audretsch, David B & Mahmood, Talat, 1995. "New Firm Survival: New Results Using a Hazard Function," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 77(1), pages 97-103, February.
    53. A. Bhattacharjee & C. Higson & S. Holly & P. Kattuman, 2009. "Macroeconomic Instability and Business Exit: Determinants of Failures and Acquisitions of UK Firms," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 76(301), pages 108-131, February.
    54. Hielke Buddelmeyer & Paul H. Jensen & Elizabeth Webster, 2010. "Innovation and the determinants of company survival," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 62(2), pages 261-285, April.
    55. Basant, Rakesh & Fikkert, Brian, 1996. "The Effects of R&D, Foreign Technology Purchase, and Domestic and International Spillovers on Productivity in Indian Firms," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 78(2), pages 187-199, May.
    56. Cefis, Elena & Marsili, Orietta, 2006. "Survivor: The role of innovation in firms' survival," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(5), pages 626-641, June.
    57. Richard E. Caves, 1998. "Industrial Organization and New Findings on the Turnover and Mobility of Firms," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 36(4), pages 1947-1982, December.
    58. McDonald, Robert L & Siegel, Daniel R, 1985. "Investment and the Valuation of Firms When There Is an Option to Shut Down," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 26(2), pages 331-349, June.
    59. Richard Gilbert, 2006. "Looking for Mr. Schumpeter: Where Are We in the Competition-Innovation Debate?," NBER Chapters,in: Innovation Policy and the Economy, Volume 6, pages 159-215 National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    60. Paul H. Jensen & Elizabeth Webster & Hielke Buddelmeyer, 2008. "Innovation, Technological Conditions and New Firm Survival," The Economic Record, The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 84(267), pages 434-448, December.
    61. 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.
    62. Silviano Pérez & Amparo Llopis & Juan Llopis, 2004. "The Determinants of Survival of Spanish Manufacturing Firms," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 25(3), pages 251-273, August.
    63. Slade, Margaret E., 2004. "Competing models of firm profitability," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 22(3), pages 289-308, March.
    64. Ehie, Ike C. & Olibe, Kingsley, 2010. "The effect of R&D investment on firm value: An examination of US manufacturing and service industries," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 128(1), pages 127-135, November.
    65. P. Holmes & A. Hunt & I. Stone, 2010. "An analysis of new firm survival using a hazard function," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 42(2), pages 185-195.
    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. repec:eee:reveco:v:51:y:2017:i:c:p:391-404 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. Trushin, Eshref & Ugur, Mehmet, 2018. "Ecosystem complexity, firm learning and survival: UK evidence on intra-industry age and size diversity as exit hazards," Greenwich Papers in Political Economy 19095, University of Greenwich, Greenwich Political Economy Research Centre.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    R&D; Innovation; Firm dynamics; Survival analysis;

    JEL classification:

    • C41 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric and Statistical Methods: Special Topics - - - Duration Analysis; Optimal Timing Strategies
    • D21 - Microeconomics - - Production and Organizations - - - Firm Behavior: Theory
    • D22 - Microeconomics - - Production and Organizations - - - Firm Behavior: Empirical Analysis
    • L1 - Industrial Organization - - Market Structure, Firm Strategy, and Market Performance

    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:45:y:2016:i:7:p:1474-1492. 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: (Dana Niculescu). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/respol .

    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 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.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.