IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/cambje/v35y2011i1p145-172.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Co-determination and innovation

Author

Listed:
  • Kornelius Kraft
  • Jörg Stank
  • Ralf Dewenter

Abstract

This paper examines the effect of the German co-determination law of 1976 (MitbestG) on the innovative activity of German firms. Co-determination applies to firms with 2,000 employees or more. Data from 1971--1976 and 1981--1990 on 148 firms are used to compare the number of patents granted to co-determined firms before and after the introduction of the law. Several control variables are applied and in particular, in order to avoid a possible bias from specific effects of firm size, we compare the co-determined firms with others before and after 1976. The results do not support the view that co-determination slows down technological progress and reduces innovativity. Copyright The Author 2009. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Cambridge Political Economy Society. All rights reserved., Oxford University Press.

Suggested Citation

  • Kornelius Kraft & Jörg Stank & Ralf Dewenter, 2011. "Co-determination and innovation," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 35(1), pages 145-172.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:cambje:v:35:y:2011:i:1:p:145-172
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/cje/bep080
    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 below or search for a different version of it.

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. George A. Akerlof & Janet L. Yellen, 1990. "The Fair Wage-Effort Hypothesis and Unemployment," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 105(2), pages 255-283.
    2. Bertschek, I., 1995. "How to Stay in The Market? - Products and Process Innovation as a Response to Increasing Imports and Foreign Direct Investment," SFB 373 Discussion Papers 1995,7, Humboldt University of Berlin, Interdisciplinary Research Project 373: Quantification and Simulation of Economic Processes.
    3. Ken Binmore & Ariel Rubinstein & Asher Wolinsky, 1986. "The Nash Bargaining Solution in Economic Modelling," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 17(2), pages 176-188, Summer.
    4. Bronwyn H. Hall & Grid Thoma & Salvatore Torrisi, 2006. "The market value of patents and R&D: Evidence from European firms," KITeS Working Papers 186, KITeS, Centre for Knowledge, Internationalization and Technology Studies, Universita' Bocconi, Milano, Italy, revised Nov 2006.
    5. 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.
    6. Valentina Meliciani, 2000. "The relationship between R&D, investment and patents: a panel data analysis," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 32(11), pages 1429-1437.
    7. Bronwyn H. Hall & Adam Jaffe & Manuel Trajtenberg, 2005. "Market Value and Patent Citations," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 36(1), pages 16-38, Spring.
    8. Zvi Griliches, 1998. "Productivity, R&D, and Basic Research at the Firm Level in the 1970s," NBER Chapters, in: R&D and Productivity: The Econometric Evidence, pages 82-99, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    9. Richard B. Freeman & Edward P. Lazear, 1995. "An Economic Analysis of Works Councils," NBER Chapters, in: Works Councils: Consultation, Representation, and Cooperation in Industrial Relations, pages 27-52, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    10. Felix FitzRoy & Kornelius Kraft, 2005. "Co‐determination, Efficiency and Productivity," British Journal of Industrial Relations, London School of Economics, vol. 43(2), pages 233-247, June.
    11. Bertschek, Irene, 1995. "Product and Process Innovation as a Response to Increasing Import and Foreign Direct Investment," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 43(4), pages 341-357, December.
    12. repec:fth:harver:1473 is not listed on IDEAS
    13. Jeremy Foltz & Bradford Barham & Kwansoo Kim, 2000. "Universities and agricultural biotechnology patent production," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 16(1), pages 82-95.
    14. 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.
    15. Suzumura, Kotaro, 1992. "Cooperative and Noncooperative R&D in an Oligopoly with Spillovers," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 82(5), pages 1307-1320, December.
    16. Dowrick, Steve, 1990. "The relative profitability of Nash bargaining on the labour demand curve or the contract curve," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 33(2), pages 121-125, June.
    17. Schnabel, Claus & Wagner, Joachim, 1992. "Unions and innovation : Evidence from German micro data," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 39(3), pages 369-373, July.
    18. Booth, Alison L & Chatterji, Monojit, 1995. "Union Membership and Wage Bargaining When Membership is Not Compulsory," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 105(429), pages 345-360, March.
    19. Bruno Crepon & Emmanuel Duguet & Jacques Mairesse, 1998. "Research, Innovation And Productivity: An Econometric Analysis At The Firm Level," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 7(2), pages 115-158.
    20. repec:adr:anecst:y:1998:i:49-50:p:12 is not listed on IDEAS
    21. Hausman, Jerry & Hall, Bronwyn H & Griliches, Zvi, 1984. "Econometric Models for Count Data with an Application to the Patents-R&D Relationship," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 52(4), pages 909-938, July.
    22. Baudry, Marc & Dumont, Beatrice, 2006. "Comparing firms' triadic patent applications across countries: Is there a gap in terms of R&D effort or a gap in terms of performances?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(2), pages 324-342, March.
    23. John Bound & Clint Cummins & Zvi Griliches & Bronwyn H. Hall & Adam B. Jaffe, 1984. "Who Does R&D and Who Patents?," NBER Chapters, in: R&D, Patents, and Productivity, pages 21-54, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    24. Connolly, Robert A & Hirsch, Barry T & Hirschey, Mark, 1986. "Union Rent Seeking, Intangible Capital, and Market Value of the Firm," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 68(4), pages 567-577, November.
    25. Henry G. Grabowksi & Dennis C. Mueller, 1978. "Industrial Research and Development, Intangible Capital Stocks, and Firm Profit Rates," Bell Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 9(2), pages 328-343, Autumn.
    26. Addison, John T & Schnabel, Claus & Wagner, Joachim, 2001. "Work Councils in Germany: Their Effects on Establishment Performance," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 53(4), pages 659-694, October.
    27. Wooldridge, Jeffrey M., 1997. "Multiplicative Panel Data Models Without the Strict Exogeneity Assumption," Econometric Theory, Cambridge University Press, vol. 13(5), pages 667-678, October.
    28. Crepon, Bruno & Duguet, Emmanuel, 1997. "Research and development, competition and innovation pseudo-maximum likelihood and simulated maximum likelihood methods applied to count data models with heterogeneity," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 79(2), pages 355-378, August.
    29. Gary Gorton & Frank Schmid, 2000. "Class Struggle Inside the Firm: A Study of German Codetermination," NBER Working Papers 7945, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    30. Smith, Stephen C., 1991. "On the economic rationale for codetermination law," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 16(3), pages 261-281, December.
    31. Kraft, Kornelius, 1989. "Market Structure, Firm Characteristics and Innovative Activity," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 37(3), pages 329-336, March.
    32. Gary Gorton & Frank A. Schmid, 2004. "Capital, Labor, and The Firm: A Study of German Codetermination," Journal of the European Economic Association, MIT Press, vol. 2(5), pages 863-905, September.
    33. Kornelius Kraft & Jörg Stank, 2004. "Die Auswirkungen der gesetzlichen Mitbestimmung auf die Innova-tionsaktivität deutscher Unternehmen," Schmollers Jahrbuch : Journal of Applied Social Science Studies / Zeitschrift für Wirtschafts- und Sozialwissenschaften, Duncker & Humblot, Berlin, vol. 124(3), pages 421-449.
    34. Pakes, Ariel & Griliches, Zvi, 1980. "Patents and R&D at the firm level: A first report," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 5(4), pages 377-381.
    35. repec:bla:econom:v:54:y:1987:i:216:p:493-504 is not listed on IDEAS
    36. Hall, Bronwyn H & Griliches, Zvi & Hausman, Jerry A, 1986. "Patents and R and D: Is There a Lag?," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 27(2), pages 265-283, June.
    37. Fallick, Bruce C & Hassett, Kevin A, 1999. "Investment and Union Certification," Journal of Labor Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 17(3), pages 570-582, July.
    38. Zvi Griliches, 1984. "R&D, Patents, and Productivity," NBER Books, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc, number gril84-1.
    39. Vuong, Quang H, 1989. "Likelihood Ratio Tests for Model Selection and Non-nested Hypotheses," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 57(2), pages 307-333, March.
    40. Luis M. Granero, 2006. "Codetermination, R&D, and Employment," Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics (JITE), Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen, vol. 162(2), pages 309-328, June.
    41. Zvi Griliches, 1998. "Patent Statistics as Economic Indicators: A Survey," NBER Chapters, in: R&D and Productivity: The Econometric Evidence, pages 287-343, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    42. Georg Licht & Konrad Zoz, 1998. "Patents and R&D, An Econometric Investigation Using Applications for German, European and US Patents by German Companies," Annals of Economics and Statistics, GENES, issue 49-50, pages 329-360.
    43. Henriques, Irene, 1990. "Cooperative and Noncooperative R&D in Duopoly with Spillovers: Comment," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 80(3), pages 638-640, June.
    44. Wesley M. Cohen & Richard R. Nelson & John P. Walsh, 2000. "Protecting Their Intellectual Assets: Appropriability Conditions and Why U.S. Manufacturing Firms Patent (or Not)," NBER Working Papers 7552, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    45. Hall, Bronwyn H & Ziedonis, Rosemarie Ham, 2001. "The Patent Paradox Revisited: An Empirical Study of Patenting in the U.S. Semiconductor Industry, 1979-1995," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 32(1), pages 101-128, Spring.
    46. Cincera, Michele, 1997. "Patents, R&D, and Technological Spillovers at the Firm Level: Some Evidence from Econometric Count Models for Panel Data," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 12(3), pages 265-280, May-June.
    47. Moulton, Brent R., 1986. "Random group effects and the precision of regression estimates," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 32(3), pages 385-397, August.
    48. Hirschey, Robert C & Caves, Richard E, 1981. "Research and Transfer of Technology by Multinational Enterprises," Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, Department of Economics, University of Oxford, vol. 43(2), pages 115-130, May.
    49. Menezes-Filho, Naercio & Ulph, David & Van Reenen, John, 1998. "The determination of R&D: Empirical evidence on the role of unions," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 42(3-5), pages 919-930, May.
    50. Raymond De Bondt & Irene Henriques, 1995. "Strategic Investment with Asymmetric Spillovers," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 28(3), pages 656-674, August.
    51. repec:bla:scandj:v:95:y:1993:i:3:p:365-75 is not listed on IDEAS
    52. Kamien,Morton I. & Schwartz,Nancy L., 1982. "Market Structure and Innovation," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521293853, December.
    53. Cameron, A. Colin & Trivedi, Pravin K., 1990. "Regression-based tests for overdispersion in the Poisson model," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 46(3), pages 347-364, December.
    54. William H. Greene, 1994. "Accounting for Excess Zeros and Sample Selection in Poisson and Negative Binomial Regression Models," Working Papers 94-10, New York University, Leonard N. Stern School of Business, Department of Economics.
    55. Crepon, Bruno & Duguet, Emmanuel, 1997. "Estimating the Innovation Function from Patent Numbers: GMM on Count Panel Data," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 12(3), pages 243-263, May-June.
    56. Zvi Griliches & Ariel Pakes & Bronwyn H. Hall, 1986. "The Value of Patents as Indicators of Inventive Activity," NBER Working Papers 2083, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    57. 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.
    58. Finegold, David & Soskice, David, 1988. "The Failure of Training in Britain: Analysis and Prescription," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press and Oxford Review of Economic Policy Limited, vol. 4(3), pages 21-53, Autumn.
    59. Joel Rogers & Wolfgang Streeck, 1995. "Works Councils: Consultation, Representation, and Cooperation in Industrial Relations," NBER Books, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc, number roge95-1.
    60. Moulton, Brent R, 1990. "An Illustration of a Pitfall in Estimating the Effects of Aggregate Variables on Micro Unit," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 72(2), pages 334-338, May.
    61. Chamberlain, Gary, 1992. "Sequential Moment Restrictions in Panel Data: Comment," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, American Statistical Association, vol. 10(1), pages 20-26, January.
    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. Filippo Belloc, 2015. "Employee Representation Legislations and Innovation," Department of Economics University of Siena 719, Department of Economics, University of Siena.
    2. Rapp, Marc Steffen & Wolff, Michael & Hennig, Jan C. & Udoieva, Iuliia, 2019. "Mitbestimmung im Aufsichtsrat und ihre Wirkung auf die Unterenhmensführung: Eine empirische Analyse vor dem Hintergrund der Finanz- und Wirtschaftskrise," Study / edition der Hans-Böckler-Stiftung, Hans-Böckler-Stiftung, Düsseldorf, volume 127, number 424, March.
    3. Toon Van Overbeke, 2023. "Conflict or cooperation? Exploring the relationship between cooperative institutions and robotisation," British Journal of Industrial Relations, London School of Economics, vol. 61(3), pages 550-573, September.
    4. Balsmeier, Benjamin & Bermig, Andreas & Dilger, Alexander, 2013. "Corporate governance and employee power in the boardroom: An applied game theoretic analysis," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 91(C), pages 51-74.
    5. F. Landini & C. Franco, 2020. "Organizational Drivers of Innovation: The Role of Workforce Agility," Economics Department Working Papers 2020-EP01, Department of Economics, Parma University (Italy).
    6. Filippo Belloc, 2015. "Employee Representation Legislations and Innovation," Department of Economics University of Siena 719, Department of Economics, University of Siena.
    7. John T. Addison & Claus Schnabel, 2011. "Worker Directors: A German Product that Did Not Export?," Industrial Relations: A Journal of Economy and Society, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 50(2), pages 354-374, April.
    8. Addison, John T. & Teixeira, Paulino & Evers, Katalin & Bellmann, Lutz, 2013. "Collective Bargaining and Innovation in Germany: Cooperative Industrial Relations?," IZA Discussion Papers 7871, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    9. Belloc, Filippo, 2019. "Institutional complementarities between labour laws and innovation," Journal of Institutional Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 15(2), pages 235-258, April.
    10. Kerstin Lopatta & Katarina Böttcher & Sumit K. Lodhia & Sebastian A. Tideman, 2020. "Parity codetermination at the board level and labor investment efficiency: evidence on German listed firms," Journal of Business Economics, Springer, vol. 90(1), pages 57-108, February.
    11. Gilbert L. Skillman, 2022. "The Nash bargaining solution in labor market analysis," Metroeconomica, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 73(3), pages 884-899, July.
    12. Filippo Belloc & Gabriel Burdin & Fabio Landini, 2020. "Corporate Hierarchies and Labor Institutions," Department of Economics University of Siena 827, Department of Economics, University of Siena.
    13. Belloc, Filippo & Burdin, Gabriel & Landini, Fabio, 2020. "Corporate Hierarchies under Employee Representation," IZA Discussion Papers 13717, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    14. Fanti, Luciano & Gori, Luca & Sodini, Mauro, 2018. "Codetermination and product differentiation," International Review of Economics & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 58(C), pages 390-403.
    15. Burdin, Gabriel & Pérotin, Virginie, 2019. "Employee representation and flexible working time," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 61(C).
    16. John T. Addison & Paulino Teixeira & Katalin Evers & Lutz Bellmann, 2017. "Collective Bargaining and Innovation in Germany: A Case of Cooperative Industrial Relations?," Industrial Relations: A Journal of Economy and Society, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 56(1), pages 73-121, January.
    17. Franco, Chiara & Landini, Fabio, 2022. "Organizational drivers of innovation: The role of workforce agility," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(2).
    18. Arkhangelskiy , Vladimir (Архангельский, Владимир) & Shulgin, Sergei (Шульгин, Сергей) & Efremov, Igor (Ефремов, Игорь) & Pustovalov, Denis Nikolaevich (Пустовалов, Денис Николаевич), 2016. "Russia's Possible Demographic Scenarios and Their Consequences [Возможные Демографические Сценарии России И Их Последствия]," Working Papers 761, Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration.
    19. Marc van Essen & J. (Hans) van Oosterhout & Pursey P. M. A. R. Heugens, 2013. "Competition and Cooperation in Corporate Governance: The Effects of Labor Institutions on Blockholder Effectiveness in 23 European Countries," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 24(2), pages 530-551, April.
    20. Gregorič, Aleksandra, 2022. "Board-level worker representation," GLO Discussion Paper Series 1136, Global Labor Organization (GLO).
    21. Daniel Herrero & Julián López-Gallego, 2022. "Revisiting varieties of capitalism: an empirical analysis of the institutional determinants of innovation in Germany," SN Business & Economics, Springer, vol. 2(8), pages 1-31, August.
    22. Kerstin Lopatta & Katarina Böttcher & Reemda Jaeschke, 2018. "When labor representatives join supervisory boards: empirical evidence of the relationship between the change to parity codetermination and working capital and operating cash flows," Journal of Business Economics, Springer, vol. 88(1), pages 1-39, January.
    23. Prasnikar, Janez & Mikerevic, Dragan & Voje, Damjan, 2014. "Blockholding and organisational diversity: the case of a transition economy," Journal of East European Management Studies, Nomos Verlagsgesellschaft mbH & Co. KG, vol. 19(3), pages 277-304.
    24. Balsmeier, Benjamin, 2017. "Unions, collective relations laws and R&D investment in emerging and developing countries," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(1), pages 292-304.

    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. Czarnitzki, Dirk & Kraft, Kornelius & Thorwarth, Susanne, 2009. "The knowledge production of 'R' and 'D'," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 105(1), pages 141-143, October.
    2. Jérôme Danguy & Gaetan de Rassenfosse & Bruno van Pottelsberghe de la Potterie, 2014. "On the origins of the worldwide surge in patenting: an industry perspective on the R&D–patent relationship," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 23(2), pages 535-572.
    3. 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.
    4. Haschka, Rouven E. & Herwartz, Helmut, 2020. "Innovation efficiency in European high-tech industries: Evidence from a Bayesian stochastic frontier approach," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(8).
    5. Wang, Ning & Hagedoorn, John, 2014. "The lag structure of the relationship between patenting and internal R&D revisited," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(8), pages 1275-1285.
    6. de Rassenfosse, Gaétan & Schoen, Anja & Wastyn, Annelies, 2014. "Selection bias in innovation studies: A simple test," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 81(C), pages 287-299.
    7. Danguy, Jérôme & de Rassenfosse, Gaétan & van Pottelsberghe de la Potterie, Bruno, 2010. "The R&D-patent relationship: An industry perspective," EIB Papers 7/2009, European Investment Bank, Economics Department.
    8. Sunil Kanwar & Shailu Singh, 2016. "The Innovation-R&D Nexus- Evidence from the Indian Manufacturing Sector," Working papers 265, Centre for Development Economics, Delhi School of Economics.
    9. Shiferaw Gurmu & Fidel Pérez-Sebastián, 2008. "Patents, R&D and lag effects: evidence from flexible methods for count panel data on manufacturing firms," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 35(3), pages 507-526, November.
    10. Chih-Hai Yang & Chia-Hui Huang, 2013. "Is Taiwan's R&D productivity in decline? A microeconometric analysis," Journal of Business Economics and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 14(1), pages 137-155, February.
    11. Alexandre Almeida & Aurora A.C. Teixeira, 2007. "Does Patenting negatively impact on R&D investment?An international panel data assessment," FEP Working Papers 255, Universidade do Porto, Faculdade de Economia do Porto.
    12. Mahdiyeh Entezarkheir, 2017. "Patent thickets, defensive patenting, and induced R&D: an empirical analysis of the costs and potential benefits of fragmentation in patent ownership," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 52(2), pages 599-634, March.
    13. Uchida, Yuichiro & Cook, Paul, 2005. "Innovation and Market Structure in the Manufacturing Sector: An Application of Linear Feedback Models," Centre on Regulation and Competition (CRC) Working papers 30702, University of Manchester, Institute for Development Policy and Management (IDPM).
    14. Beneito, Pilar, 2006. "The innovative performance of in-house and contracted R&D in terms of patents and utility models," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(4), pages 502-517, May.
    15. AndreÌ s LoÌ pez & Eugenia Orlicki, 2009. "Who Uses the Patent System in Developing Countries? A Study of Patent Propensities in Argentina, 1992-2001," Microeconomics Working Papers 22785, East Asian Bureau of Economic Research.
    16. James Bessen & Robert M. Hunt, 2007. "An Empirical Look at Software Patents," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 16(1), pages 157-189, March.
    17. Blundell, Richard & Griffith, Rachel & Windmeijer, Frank, 2002. "Individual effects and dynamics in count data models," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 108(1), pages 113-131, May.
    18. Stiebale, Joel, 2016. "Cross-border M&As and innovative activity of acquiring and target firms," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 99(C), pages 1-15.
    19. Landon Kleis & Paul Chwelos & Ronald V. Ramirez & Iain Cockburn, 2012. "Information Technology and Intangible Output: The Impact of IT Investment on Innovation Productivity," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 23(1), pages 42-59, March.
    20. Choi, Mincheol & Lee, Chang-Yang, 2021. "Technological diversification and R&D productivity: The moderating effects of knowledge spillovers and core-technology competence," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 104(C).

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • J5 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Labor-Management Relations, Trade Unions, and Collective Bargaining
    • L2 - Industrial Organization - - Firm Objectives, Organization, and Behavior
    • O3 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights

    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:oup:cambje:v:35:y:2011:i:1:p:145-172. 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: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/cje .

    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.