IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/enejou/v30y2009i2p41-80.html

Powering Progress: Restructuring, Competition, and R&D in the U.S. Electric Utility Industry

Author

Listed:
  • Paroma Sanyal
  • Linda R. Cohen

Abstract

This paper investigates the R&D behavior of regulated firms when they transition to a competitive environment. Using data from the US electricity market from 1990-2000, we analyze how competition, institutional changes, and political constraints have contributed to the precipitous decline in R&D expenditure by regulated utilities. We find that firms reduce their R&D significantly at the very early stages of restructuring or even when they expect restructuring to occur. Once the emerging institutional structure becomes clear, R&D spending recovers but is later offset by another decline when restructuring legislation is enacted. In addition, greater competition and the nearing of such competition adversely affects research spending. In aggregate, R&D declines by 78.6 percent after electricity markets are restructured. Firm and state characteristics matter, and a majority of the research is conducted by large generation companies located in pro-research states, especially if they are part of a larger holding company. Such characteristics have a different impact on research spending in the pre- and post-restructured periods.

Suggested Citation

  • Paroma Sanyal & Linda R. Cohen, 2009. "Powering Progress: Restructuring, Competition, and R&D in the U.S. Electric Utility Industry," The Energy Journal, , vol. 30(2), pages 41-80, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:sae:enejou:v:30:y:2009:i:2:p:41-80
    DOI: 10.5547/ISSN0195-6574-EJ-Vol30-No2-3
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.5547/ISSN0195-6574-EJ-Vol30-No2-3
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.5547/ISSN0195-6574-EJ-Vol30-No2-3?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Edwin Mansfield & Lorne Switzer, 1985. "How Effective Are Canada's Direct Tax Incentives for R and D?," Canadian Public Policy, University of Toronto Press, vol. 11(2), pages 241-246, June.
    2. 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.
    3. Jaffe, Adam B, 1988. "Demand and Supply Influences in R&D Intensity and Productivity Growth," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 70(3), pages 431-437, August.
    4. Vella, Francis & Verbeek, Marno, 1999. "Two-step estimation of panel data models with censored endogenous variables and selection bias," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 90(2), pages 239-263, June.
    5. Wooldridge, Jeffrey M., 1995. "Selection corrections for panel data models under conditional mean independence assumptions," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 68(1), pages 115-132, July.
    6. Giovanni Dosi & Christopher Freeman & Richard Nelson & Gerarld Silverberg & Luc Soete (ed.), 1988. "Technical Change and Economic Theory," LEM Book Series, Laboratory of Economics and Management (LEM), Sant'Anna School of Advanced Studies, Pisa, Italy, number dosietal-1988.
    7. Paroma Sanyal, 2007. "The effect of deregulation on environmental research by electric utilities," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 31(3), pages 335-353, June.
    8. Fernández-Val, Iván & Vella, Francis, 2011. "Bias corrections for two-step fixed effects panel data estimators," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 163(2), pages 144-162, August.
    9. Nadiri, M. Ishaq, 1979. "Contributions and Determinants of Research and Development Expenditures in the US Manufacturing Industries," Working Papers 79-16, C.V. Starr Center for Applied Economics, New York University.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Heijs, Joost, 2003. "Freerider behaviour and the public finance of R&D activities in enterprises: the case of the Spanish low interest credits for R&D," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(3), pages 445-461, March.
    2. D'Addio, Anna Cristina & De Greef, Isabelle & Rosholm, Michael, 2002. "Assessing Unemployment Traps in Belgium Using Panel Data Sample Selection Models," IZA Discussion Papers 669, IZA Network @ LISER.
    3. Stavins, Robert & Jaffe, Adam & Newell, Richard, 2000. "Technological Change and the Environment," Working Paper Series rwp00-002, Harvard University, John F. Kennedy School of Government.
    4. Frésard, Laurent & Salva, Carolina, 2010. "The value of excess cash and corporate governance: Evidence from US cross-listings," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 98(2), pages 359-384, November.
    5. Dominique Guellec & Bruno Van Pottelsberghe de la Potterie, 2004. "From R&D to Productivity Growth: Do the Institutional Settings and the Source of Funds of R&D Matter?," Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, Department of Economics, University of Oxford, vol. 66(3), pages 353-378, July.
    6. Keld Laursen & Valentina Meliciani, 2000. "The importance of technology-based intersectoral linkages for market share dynamics," Review of World Economics (Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv), Springer;Institut für Weltwirtschaft (Kiel Institute for the World Economy), vol. 136(4), pages 702-723, December.
    7. Ma Lan & Wang Qi & Wang Dalei, 2023. "Measurement and Analysis of the Scientific and Technological Innovation Efficiency of Industrial Enterprises above a Designated Scale in China," SAGE Open, , vol. 13(3), pages 21582440231, August.
    8. Mora, Jhon James & Muro, Juan, 2014. "Consistent estimation in pseudo panels in the presence of selection bias," Economics - The Open-Access, Open-Assessment E-Journal (2007-2020), Kiel Institute for the World Economy, vol. 8, pages 1-25.
    9. Jochmans, Koen, 2015. "Multiplicative-error models with sample selection," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 184(2), pages 315-327.
    10. Michael Peneder & Karl Aiginger & Gernot Hutschenreiter & Markus Marterbauer, 2001. "Structural Change and Economic Growth," WIFO Studies, WIFO, number 20668.
    11. Antonelli, Cristiano & Gehringer, Agnieszka, 2015. "Knowledge externalities and demand pull: The European evidence," Economic Systems, Elsevier, vol. 39(4), pages 608-631.
    12. Giulia Bettin & Riccardo Lucchetti & Claudia Pigini, 2016. "State dependence and unobserved heterogeneity in a double hurdle model for remittances: evidence from immigrants to Germany," Mo.Fi.R. Working Papers 127, Money and Finance Research group (Mo.Fi.R.) - Univ. Politecnica Marche - Dept. Economic and Social Sciences.
    13. Neil Foster-McGregor, 2012. "Innovation and Technology Transfer across Countries," wiiw Research Reports 380, The Vienna Institute for International Economic Studies, wiiw.
    14. Fernández-Val, Iván & Savchenko, Yevgeniya & Vella, Francis, 2017. "Evaluating the role of income, state dependence and individual specific heterogeneity in the determination of subjective health assessments," Economics & Human Biology, Elsevier, vol. 25(C), pages 85-98.
    15. William Greene, 2007. "Discrete Choice Modeling," Working Papers 07-6, New York University, Leonard N. Stern School of Business, Department of Economics.
    16. Wladimir Raymond & Pierre Mohnen & Franz Palm & Sybrand Schim van der Loeff, 2007. "The Behavior of the Maximum Likelihood Estimator of Dynamic Panel Data Sample Selection Models," CIRANO Working Papers 2007s-06, CIRANO.
    17. Cristiano Antonelli & Alessandra Colombelli, 2017. "The locus of knowledge externalities and the cost of knowledge," Regional Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 51(8), pages 1151-1164, August.
    18. Dieter Schumacher & Florian Straßberger, 1994. "Broadening the Scope for Reporting on the Technological Competitiveness of the Federal Republic of Germany," Discussion Papers of DIW Berlin 100, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research.
    19. Mark L. Bryan, 2007. "Free to choose? Differences in the hours determination of constrained and unconstrained workers," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 59(2), pages 226-252, April.
    20. Petralia, Sergio & Balland, Pierre-Alexandre & Morrison, Andrea, 2017. "Climbing the ladder of technological development," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(5), pages 956-969.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    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:sae:enejou:v:30:y:2009:i:2:p:41-80. 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: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    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.