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

Is demand-pulled innovation equally important in different groups of firms?

  • Mariacristina Piva
  • Marco Vivarelli

Previous empirical literature - mainly cross-sectional - has tested the demand-pull hypothesis and found that overall, evidence does not conflict with the idea that innovation may be driven by output. Using a balanced panel of 216 Italian manufacturing firms over the 1995-2000 period, and checking for fixed effects, time, sectoral and size dummies and for the path-dependent nature of R&D, we also find a (barely significant) role of sales in inducing R&D expenditures. However, at the micro level, the demand-pull effect plays a varying role for the different sub-samples of firms. In particular, exporting firms, those which are liquidity-constrained, those not receiving public subsidies and those not heading a business group, seem to be particularly sensitive to sales in deciding their R&D expenditures. These microeconometric results have been obtained using a Least Squares Dummy Variable Corrected (LSDVC) estimator, a recently-proposed panel data technique particularly suitable for small samples.

(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.

File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/cje/bem010
Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

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 Oxford University Press in its journal Cambridge Journal of Economics.

Volume (Year): 31 (2007)
Issue (Month): 5 (September)
Pages: 691-710

as
in new window

Handle: RePEc:oup:cambje:v:31:y:2007:i:5:p:691-710
Contact details of provider: Postal: Oxford University Press, Great Clarendon Street, Oxford OX2 6DP, UK
Fax: 01865 267 985
Web page: http://www.cje.oupjournals.org/
Email:

Order Information: Web: http://www.oup.co.uk/journals

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. Schmookler, Jacob, 1962. "Economic Sources of Inventive Activity," The Journal of Economic History, Cambridge University Press, vol. 22(01), pages 1-20, March.
  2. Giovanni S.F. Bruno, 2005. "Estimation and inference in dynamic unbalanced panel data models with a small number of individuals," KITeS Working Papers 165, KITeS, Centre for Knowledge, Internationalization and Technology Studies, Universita' Bocconi, Milano, Italy, revised Jun 2005.
  3. Blundell, R. & Bond, S., 1995. "Initial Conditions and Moment Restrictions in Dynamic Panel Data Models," Economics Papers 104, Economics Group, Nuffield College, University of Oxford.
  4. Judson, Ruth A. & Owen, Ann L., 1999. "Estimating dynamic panel data models: a guide for macroeconomists," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 65(1), pages 9-15, October.
  5. Cohen, Wesley M & Klepper, Steven, 1996. "A Reprise of Size and R&D," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 106(437), pages 925-51, July.
  6. Pavitt, Keith, 1984. "Sectoral patterns of technical change: Towards a taxonomy and a theory," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 13(6), pages 343-373, December.
  7. Valeria Mastrostefano & Mario Pianta, 2009. "Technology and jobs," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 18(8), pages 729-741.
  8. Cohen, Wesley M. & Levin, Richard C., 1989. "Empirical studies of innovation and market structure," Handbook of Industrial Organization, in: R. Schmalensee & R. Willig (ed.), Handbook of Industrial Organization, edition 1, volume 2, chapter 18, pages 1059-1107 Elsevier.
  9. Oecd, 1998. "OECD Data on Skills: Employment by Industry and Occupation," OECD Science, Technology and Industry Working Papers 1998/4, OECD Publishing.
  10. M Arellano & O Bover, 1990. "Another Look at the Instrumental Variable Estimation of Error-Components Models," CEP Discussion Papers dp0007, Centre for Economic Performance, LSE.
  11. Bruno, Giovanni S.F., 2005. "Approximating the bias of the LSDV estimator for dynamic unbalanced panel data models," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 87(3), pages 361-366, June.
  12. Malerba, Franco & Orsenigo, Luigi, 1996. "The Dynamics and Evolution of Industries," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press, vol. 5(1), pages 51-87.
  13. Timothy F. Bresnahan & Erik Brynjolfsson & Lorin M. Hitt, 1999. "Information Technology, Workplace Organization and the Demand for Skilled Labor: Firm-Level Evidence," NBER Working Papers 7136, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  14. Bronwyn H. Hall & Jacques Mairesse & Benoit Mulkay, 1998. "Does cash flow cause investment and R&D: an exploration using panel data for French, Japanes and United States scientific firms," IFS Working Papers W98/11, Institute for Fiscal Studies.
  15. Celia COSTA CABRAL & Praveen KUJAL & Emmanuel PETRAKIS, 1998. "Incentives for Cost Reducing Innovations under Quantitative Import Restraints," Annales d'Economie et de Statistique, ENSAE, issue 49-50, pages 479-493.
  16. Bun, Maurice J. G. & Kiviet, Jan F., 2003. "On the diminishing returns of higher-order terms in asymptotic expansions of bias," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 79(2), pages 145-152, May.
  17. Colombo, Massimo G. & Garrone, Paola, 1996. "Technological cooperative agreements and firm's R & D intensity. A note on causality relations," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 25(6), pages 923-932, September.
  18. repec:dgr:uvatin:20010006 is not listed on IDEAS
  19. von Tunzelmann, G. N., 1990. "Cliometrics and technology," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 1(2), pages 291-310, December.
  20. Scherer, F M, 1982. "Demand-Pull and Technological Invention: Schmookler Revisited," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 30(3), pages 225-37, March.
  21. Zvi Griliches, 1979. "Issues in Assessing the Contribution of Research and Development to Productivity Growth," Bell Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 10(1), pages 92-116, Spring.
  22. Giovanni Dosi & Daniel A. Levinthal & Luigi Marengo, 2003. "Bridging contested terrain: linking incentive-based and learning perspectives on organizational evolution," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press, vol. 12(2), pages 413-436, April.
  23. Veugelers, Reinhilde, 1997. "Internal R & D expenditures and external technology sourcing," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 26(3), pages 303-315, October.
  24. Bruno Cassiman & Reinhilde Veugelers, 2002. "R&D Cooperation and Spillovers: Some Empirical Evidence from Belgium," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 92(4), pages 1169-1184, September.
  25. Claudio A. Piga & Marco Vivarelli, 2003. "Internal and External R&D: A Sample Selection Approach," Papers on Entrepreneurship, Growth and Public Policy 2004-05, Max Planck Institute of Economics, Entrepreneurship, Growth and Public Policy Group.
  26. Corinne BARLET & Emmanuel DUGUET & David ENCAOUA & Jacqueline PRADEL, 1998. "The Commercial Success of Innovations: an Econometric Analysis at the Firm Lebel in French Manufacturing," Annales d'Economie et de Statistique, ENSAE, issue 49-50, pages 457-478.
  27. Brouwer, Erik & Kleinknecht, Alfred, 1996. " Firm Size, Small Business Presence and Sales of Innovative Products: A Micro-econometric Analysis," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 8(3), pages 189-201, June.
  28. Atkinson, Anthony B & Stiglitz, Joseph E, 1969. "A New View of Technological Change," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 79(315), pages 573-78, September.
  29. Arellano, Manuel & Bond, Stephen, 1991. "Some Tests of Specification for Panel Data: Monte Carlo Evidence and an Application to Employment Equations," Review of Economic Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 58(2), pages 277-97, April.
  30. Stoneman, P, 1979. "Patenting Activity: A Re-evaluation of the Influence of Demand Pressures," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 27(4), pages 385-401, June.
  31. Kleinknecht, Alfred & Verspagen, Bart, 1990. "Demand and innovation: Schmookler re-examined," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 19(4), pages 387-394, August.
  32. Arellano, M., 1989. "A Note On The Anderson-Hsiao Estimator For Panel Data," Economics Series Working Papers 9975, University of Oxford, Department of Economics.
  33. Cordes, Joseph J., 1989. "Tax incentives and R&D spending: A review of the evidence," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 18(3), pages 119-133, June.
  34. Massimo G. Colombo & Marco Delmastro, 2002. "The Determinants of Organizational Change and Structural Inertia: Technological and Organizational Factors," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 11(4), pages 595-635, December.
  35. Franco Malerba, 2005. "Sectoral systems of innovation: a framework for linking innovation to the knowledge base, structure and dynamics of sectors," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 14(1-2), pages 63-82.
  36. Antonelli, Cristiano, 2003. "Localized Technological Change," Department of Economics and Statistics Cognetti de Martiis LEI & BRICK - Laboratory of Economics of Innovation "Franco Momigliano", Bureau of Research in Innovation, Complexity and Knowledge, Collegio 200305, University of Turin.
  37. C. Piga & M. Vivarelli, 2003. "Sample selection in estimating the determinants of cooperative R&D," Applied Economics Letters, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 10(4), pages 243-246.
  38. repec:dgr:vuarem:1997-38 is not listed on IDEAS
  39. Geroski, P A & Walters, C F, 1995. "Innovative Activity over the Business Cycle," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 105(431), pages 916-28, July.
  40. David, Paul A, 1985. "Clio and the Economics of QWERTY," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 75(2), pages 332-37, May.
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:oup:cambje:v:31:y:2007:i:5:p:691-710. 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: (Oxford University Press)

or (Christopher F. Baum)

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.