IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/respol/v47y2018i6p1084-1095.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Nonlinear capital market payoffs to science-led innovation

Author

Listed:
  • Basse Mama, Houdou

Abstract

This study explores the extent to which cross-sectional differences in firms’ propensity to absorb and utilize scientific knowledge matter for their stock market and operating performance. Unlike previous empirical studies and given the coexistence of both benefits and potential costs to science-guided search, I conceptualize innovation as a recombinant search to hypothesize a non-monotonic relationship. Using patent data from the European Patent Office (EPO) relative to 3281 international firms over the 1999–2015 period, empirical tests yield evidence in support of the predictions. However, the effect varies with firm-level absorptive capacity, across industries and countries. As suggested by a limited attention model, I find a stronger payoff predictive power of science for firms with lower investor attention and higher valuation uncertainty. Besides, the association between science and future operating performance increases with time, indicating that firms’ scientific capabilities are a potent driver of long-term profitability. The conclusions are robust to controlling for the endogenous nature of firms’ use of scientific knowledge. By providing a useful basis upon which to judge the economic merit of firms’ innovation endeavors, this study contributes to reducing capital market imperfections that curtail access to external finance and ultimately spurring private-sector investment in R&D. It also provides evidence of diminishing marginal payoffs to science-led search. Finally, the evidence is likely to be relevant to policymakers, who might wish to influence the innovation ecosystem in a way to sustain long-term prosperity.

Suggested Citation

  • Basse Mama, Houdou, 2018. "Nonlinear capital market payoffs to science-led innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(6), pages 1084-1095.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:respol:v:47:y:2018:i:6:p:1084-1095
    DOI: 10.1016/j.respol.2018.03.013
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0048733318300714
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.respol.2018.03.013?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Juan Alcácer & Michelle Gittelman, 2006. "Patent Citations as a Measure of Knowledge Flows: The Influence of Examiner Citations," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 88(4), pages 774-779, November.
    2. Harrison Hong & Terence Lim & Jeremy C. Stein, 2000. "Bad News Travels Slowly: Size, Analyst Coverage, and the Profitability of Momentum Strategies," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 55(1), pages 265-295, February.
    3. Fama, Eugene F. & French, Kenneth R., 2017. "International tests of a five-factor asset pricing model," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 123(3), pages 441-463.
    4. Salter, Ammon J. & Martin, Ben R., 2001. "The economic benefits of publicly funded basic research: a critical review," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 30(3), pages 509-532, March.
    5. Zoltan J. Acs & David B. Audretsch & Maryann P. Feldman, 2008. "R&D Spillovers and Recipient Firm Size," Chapters, in: Entrepreneurship, Growth and Public Policy, chapter 8, pages 88-94, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    6. Newey, Whitney K & West, Kenneth D, 1987. "Hypothesis Testing with Efficient Method of Moments Estimation," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 28(3), pages 777-787, October.
    7. Philippe Aghion & John Van Reenen & Luigi Zingales, 2013. "Innovation and Institutional Ownership," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 103(1), pages 277-304, February.
    8. Seru, Amit, 2014. "Firm boundaries matter: Evidence from conglomerates and R&D activity," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 111(2), pages 381-405.
    9. Jaffe, Adam B, 1989. "Real Effects of Academic Research," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 79(5), pages 957-970, December.
    10. Bruno Van Pottelsberghe & Eleftherios Sapsalis & Ran Navon, 2006. "Academic vs. industry patenting: an in-depth analysis of what determines patent value," ULB Institutional Repository 2013/6197, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
    11. Lippman, Steven A & McCall, John J, 1976. "The Economics of Job Search: A Survey: Part I," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 14(2), pages 155-189, June.
    12. Mark A. Lemley & Bhaven Sampat, 2012. "Examiner Characteristics and Patent Office Outcomes," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 94(3), pages 817-827, August.
    13. Julian Atanassov, 2016. "Arm’s Length Financing and Innovation: Evidence from Publicly Traded Firms," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 62(1), pages 128-155, January.
    14. Hicks, Diana, 1995. "Published Papers, Tacit Competencies and Corporate Management of the Public/Private Character of Knowledge," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 4(2), pages 401-424.
    15. Fleming, Lee & Sorenson, Olav, 2001. "Technology as a complex adaptive system: evidence from patent data," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 30(7), pages 1019-1039, August.
    16. Sorenson, Olav & Fleming, Lee, 2004. "Science and the diffusion of knowledge," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(10), pages 1615-1634, December.
    17. Chen, Jong-Rong & Kan, Kamhon & Tung, I-Hsuan, 2016. "Scientific linkages and firm productivity: Panel data evidence from Taiwanese electronics firms," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(7), pages 1449-1459.
    18. Lauren Cohen & Karl Diether & Christopher Malloy, 2013. "Misvaluing Innovation," The Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 26(3), pages 635-666.
    19. Wesley M. Cohen & Richard R. Nelson & John P. Walsh, 2003. "Links and Impacts: The Influence of Public Research on Industrial R&D," Chapters, in: Aldo Geuna & Ammon J. Salter & W. Edward Steinmueller (ed.), Science and Innovation, chapter 4, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    20. Escribano, Alvaro & Fosfuri, Andrea & Tribó, Josep A., 2009. "Managing external knowledge flows: The moderating role of absorptive capacity," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(1), pages 96-105, February.
    21. Ashish Arora & Sharon Belenzon & Andrea Patacconi, 2018. "The decline of science in corporate R&D," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 39(1), pages 3-32, January.
    22. James R. Brown & Steven M. Fazzari & Bruce C. Petersen, 2009. "Financing Innovation and Growth: Cash Flow, External Equity, and the 1990s R&D Boom," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 64(1), pages 151-185, February.
    23. Markus Simeth & Michele Cincera, 2016. "Corporate Science, Innovation, and Firm Value," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 62(7), pages 1970-1981, July.
    24. Arora, Ashish & Cohen, Wesley M. & Walsh, John P., 2016. "The acquisition and commercialization of invention in American manufacturing: Incidence and impact," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(6), pages 1113-1128.
    25. D'Este, P. & Patel, P., 2007. "University-industry linkages in the UK: What are the factors underlying the variety of interactions with industry?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(9), pages 1295-1313, November.
    26. Meyer-Krahmer, Frieder & Schmoch, Ulrich, 1998. "Science-based technologies: university-industry interactions in four fields," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 27(8), pages 835-851, December.
    27. Fama, Eugene F. & French, Kenneth R., 2015. "A five-factor asset pricing model," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 116(1), pages 1-22.
    28. Adam B. Jaffe & Gaétan de Rassenfosse, 2017. "Patent citation data in social science research: Overview and best practices," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 68(6), pages 1360-1374, June.
    29. 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.
    30. Gibbons, Michael & Johnston, Ron, 1974. "The roles of science in technological innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 3(3), pages 220-242, November.
    31. Scott Stern, 2004. "Do Scientists Pay to Be Scientists?," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 50(6), pages 835-853, June.
    32. Barletta, Florencia & Yoguel, Gabriel & Pereira, Mariano & Rodríguez, Sergio, 2017. "Exploring scientific productivity and transfer activities: Evidence from Argentinean ICT research groups," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(8), pages 1361-1369.
    33. Robert G. Eccles & Ioannis Ioannou & George Serafeim, 2014. "The Impact of Corporate Sustainability on Organizational Processes and Performance," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 60(11), pages 2835-2857, November.
    34. Rebecca Henderson & Iain Cockburn, 1994. "Measuring Competence? Exploring Firm Effects in Pharmaceutical Research," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 15(S1), pages 63-84, December.
    35. David Hirshleifer & Po-Hsuan Hsu & Dongmei Li, 2018. "Innovative Originality, Profitability, and Stock Returns," The Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 31(7), pages 2553-2605.
    36. Lev, Baruch & Sougiannis, Theodore, 1996. "The capitalization, amortization, and value-relevance of R&D," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 21(1), pages 107-138, February.
    37. Fama, Eugene F & MacBeth, James D, 1973. "Risk, Return, and Equilibrium: Empirical Tests," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 81(3), pages 607-636, May-June.
    38. Julie Callaert & Maikel Pellens & Bart Looy, 2014. "Sources of inspiration? Making sense of scientific references in patents," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 98(3), pages 1617-1629, March.
    39. Narin, Francis & Hamilton, Kimberly S. & Olivastro, Dominic, 1997. "The increasing linkage between U.S. technology and public science," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 26(3), pages 317-330, October.
    40. Dirk Jenter & Katharina Lewellen & Jerold B. Warner, 2011. "Security Issue Timing: What Do Managers Know, and When Do They Know It?," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 66(2), pages 413-443, April.
    41. Lee Fleming, 2001. "Recombinant Uncertainty in Technological Search," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 47(1), pages 117-132, January.
    42. Houdou Basse Mama & Rachidi Kotchoni, 2017. "Investor Relations' Quality and Mispricing," EconomiX Working Papers 2017-33, University of Paris Nanterre, EconomiX.
    43. Deeds, David L. & Decarolis, Dona & Coombs, Joseph E., 1997. "The impact of firmspecific capabilities on the amount of capital raised in an initial public offering: Evidence from the biotechnology industry," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 12(1), pages 31-46, January.
    44. Hirshleifer, David & Hsu, Po-Hsuan & Li, Dongmei, 2013. "Innovative efficiency and stock returns," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 107(3), pages 632-654.
    45. Theodosia Konstantinidi & Arthur Kraft & Peter F. Pope, 2016. "Asymmetric Persistence and the Market Pricing of Accruals and Cash Flows," Abacus, Accounting Foundation, University of Sydney, vol. 52(1), pages 140-165, March.
    46. Mitchell A. Petersen, 2009. "Estimating Standard Errors in Finance Panel Data Sets: Comparing Approaches," The Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 22(1), pages 435-480, January.
    47. Jinyoung Kim & Gerald Marschke, 2005. "Labor Mobility of Scientists, Technological Diffusion, and the Firm's Patenting Decision," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 36(2), pages 298-317, Summer.
    48. Carhart, Mark M, 1997. "On Persistence in Mutual Fund Performance," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 52(1), pages 57-82, March.
    49. repec:bla:jfinan:v:59:y:2004:i:2:p:623-650 is not listed on IDEAS
    50. Douglas Staiger & James H. Stock, 1997. "Instrumental Variables Regression with Weak Instruments," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 65(3), pages 557-586, May.
    51. Arthur Kraft & Andrew J. Leone & Charles E. Wasley, 2007. "Regression‐Based Tests of the Market Pricing of Accounting Numbers: The Mishkin Test and Ordinary Least Squares," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 45(5), pages 1081-1114, December.
    52. Dedrick, Jason & Kraemer, Kenneth L., 2015. "Who captures value from science-based innovation? The distribution of benefits from GMR in the hard disk drive industry," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(8), pages 1615-1628.
    53. Laursen, Keld & Salter, Ammon, 2004. "Searching high and low: what types of firms use universities as a source of innovation?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(8), pages 1201-1215, October.
    54. Brown, James R. & Martinsson, Gustav & Petersen, Bruce C., 2017. "What promotes R&D? Comparative evidence from around the world," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(2), pages 447-462.
    55. Michael Roach & Wesley M. Cohen, 2013. "Lens or Prism? Patent Citations as a Measure of Knowledge Flows from Public Research," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 59(2), pages 504-525, October.
    56. Nelson, Richard R, 1986. "Institutions Supporting Technical Advance in Industry," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 76(2), pages 186-189, May.
    57. Bruno Cassiman & Reinhilde Veugelers & Pluvia Zuniga, 2008. "In search of performance effects of (in)direct industry science links," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 17(4), pages 611-646, August.
    58. Konstantinidi, Theodosia & Kraft, Arthur & Pope, Peter F., 2016. "Asymmetric persistence and the market pricing of accruals and cash flows," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 65445, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    59. Lippman, Steven A & McCall, John J, 1976. "The Economics of Job Search: A Survey," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 14(3), pages 347-368, September.
    60. Lee Fleming & Olav Sorenson, 2004. "Science as a map in technological search," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 25(8‐9), pages 909-928, August.
    61. Hirschey, Mark & Richardson, Vernon J., 2004. "Are scientific indicators of patent quality useful to investors?," Journal of Empirical Finance, Elsevier, vol. 11(1), pages 91-107, January.
    62. Pavitt, Keith, 1998. "The social shaping of the national science base," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 27(8), pages 793-805, December.
    63. Breschi, Stefano & Catalini, Christian, 2010. "Tracing the links between science and technology: An exploratory analysis of scientists' and inventors' networks," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(1), pages 14-26, February.
    64. Michelle Gittelman & Bruce Kogut, 2003. "Does Good Science Lead to Valuable Knowledge? Biotechnology Firms and the Evolutionary Logic of Citation Patterns," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 49(4), pages 366-382, April.
    65. Kumar, Alok, 2009. "Hard-to-Value Stocks, Behavioral Biases, and Informed Trading," Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 44(6), pages 1375-1401, December.
    66. Mariagrazia Squicciarini & Hélène Dernis & Chiara Criscuolo, 2013. "Measuring Patent Quality: Indicators of Technological and Economic Value," OECD Science, Technology and Industry Working Papers 2013/3, OECD Publishing.
    67. Sapsalis, Eleftherios & van Pottelsberghe de la Potterie, Bruno & Navon, Ran, 2006. "Academic versus industry patenting: An in-depth analysis of what determines patent value," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(10), pages 1631-1645, December.
    68. Oh, Jong-Min, 2017. "Absorptive capacity, technology spillovers, and the cross-section of stock returns," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 85(C), pages 146-164.
    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. Zofia Gródek-Szostak & Marcin Suder & Anna Szeląg-Sikora & Luis Ochoa Siguencia, 2020. "The “Dobry Czas Na Biznes” (“Good Time for Business”) Program as a Form of Support for Self-Employment in Poland. A Case Study of the Sub-Regions of the Małopolskie Province," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(22), pages 1-17, November.
    2. Shi, Xianwei & Liang, Xingkun & Luo, Yining, 2023. "Unpacking the intellectual structure of ecosystem research in innovation studies," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(6).
    3. Sergio Cuéllar & Maria Teresa Fernandez-Bajón & Felix Moya Anegón, 2024. "A New Approach to Measure Absorptive Capacity and Appropriability: a Case of Study in Emerging Markets," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 15(3), pages 15418-15446, September.

    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. Hsu, David H. & Hsu, Po-Hsuan & Zhao, Qifeng, 2021. "Rich on paper? Chinese firms’ academic publications, patents, and market value," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(9).
    2. Chen, Sheng-Syan & Chen, Yan-Shing & Liang, Woan-lih & Wang, Yanzhi, 2020. "Public R&D spending and cross-sectional stock returns," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(1).
    3. Ugo Rizzo & Nicolò Barbieri & Laura Ramaciotti & Demian Iannantuono, 2020. "The division of labour between academia and industry for the generation of radical inventions," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 45(2), pages 393-413, April.
    4. Kenneth Zahringer & Christos Kolympiris & Nicholas Kalaitzandonakes, 2017. "Academic knowledge quality differentials and the quality of firm innovation," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 26(5), pages 821-844.
    5. David Hirshleifer & Po-Hsuan Hsu & Dongmei Li, 2018. "Innovative Originality, Profitability, and Stock Returns," The Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 31(7), pages 2553-2605.
    6. Wang, Fang, 2024. "Does the recombination of distant scientific knowledge generate valuable inventions? An analysis of pharmaceutical patents," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 130(C).
    7. Beck, Mathias & Junge, Martin & Kaiser, Ulrich, 2017. "Public Funding and Corporate Innovation," IZA Discussion Papers 11196, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    8. Cassiman, Bruno & Veugelers, Reinhilde & Arts, Sam, 2018. "Mind the gap: Capturing value from basic research through combining mobile inventors and partnerships," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(9), pages 1811-1824.
    9. Basse Mama, Houdou, 2018. "Innovative efficiency and stock returns: Should we care about nonlinearity?," Finance Research Letters, Elsevier, vol. 24(C), pages 81-89.
    10. Manuel Acosta & Daniel Coronado & Esther Ferrándiz & Manuel Jiménez, 2022. "Effects of knowledge spillovers between competitors on patent quality: what patent citations reveal about a global duopoly," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 47(5), pages 1451-1487, October.
    11. Leten, Bart & Kelchtermans, Stijn & Belderbos, Ren, 2010. "Internal Basic Research, External Basic Research and the Technological Performance of Pharmaceutical Firms," Working Papers 2010/12, Hogeschool-Universiteit Brussel, Faculteit Economie en Management.
    12. Sheer, Lia, 2022. "Sitting on the Fence: Integrating the two worlds of scientific discovery and invention within the firm," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(7).
    13. Felix Poege & Dietmar Harhoff & Fabian Gaessler & Stefano Baruffaldi, 2019. "Science Quality and the Value of Inventions," Papers 1903.05020, arXiv.org, revised Apr 2019.
    14. Matt Marx & Aaron Fuegi, 2020. "Reliance on science: Worldwide front‐page patent citations to scientific articles," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 41(9), pages 1572-1594, September.
    15. Ke, Qing, 2020. "Technological impact of biomedical research: The role of basicness and novelty," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(7).
    16. Oh, Jong-Min, 2017. "Absorptive capacity, technology spillovers, and the cross-section of stock returns," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 85(C), pages 146-164.
    17. Veugelers, Reinhilde & Wang, Jian, 2019. "Scientific novelty and technological impact," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(6), pages 1362-1372.
    18. Bryan, Kevin A. & Ozcan, Yasin & Sampat, Bhaven, 2020. "In-text patent citations: A user's guide," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(4).
    19. Dirk Czarnitzki & Katrin Hussinger & Cédric Schneider, 2012. "The nexus between science and industry: evidence from faculty inventions," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 37(5), pages 755-776, October.
    20. Barbieri, Nicolò & Marzucchi, Alberto & Rizzo, Ugo, 2020. "Knowledge sources and impacts on subsequent inventions: Do green technologies differ from non-green ones?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(2).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Science; Innovation; Stock returns; Firm value; Profitability; Limited attention;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • O16 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Economic Development - - - Financial Markets; Saving and Capital Investment; Corporate Finance and Governance
    • O30 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - 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
    • G11 - Financial Economics - - General Financial Markets - - - Portfolio Choice; Investment Decisions
    • G12 - Financial Economics - - General Financial Markets - - - Asset Pricing; Trading Volume; Bond Interest Rates

    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:47:y:2018:i:6:p:1084-1095. 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.