IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/h/nbr/nberch/10043.html
   My bibliography  Save this book chapter

Who Does R&D and Who Patents?

In: R&D, Patents, and Productivity

Author

Listed:
  • John Bound
  • Clint Cummins
  • Zvi Griliches
  • Bronwyn H. Hall
  • Adam B. Jaffe

Abstract

This paper describes the construction of a large panel data set covering about 2600 firms in the U.S. manufacturing sector for up to twenty years which contains annual data on financial variables, employment, research and development expenditures, and aggregate patent applications. This data set is to be used in a larger study of R&D, inventive output and technological change. In the present paper we present preliminary results on the R&D and patenting behavior of the 1976 cross section of these firms. We find an elasticity of R&D with respect to sales of close to unity, with both very small and very large firms being slightly more R&D intensive than average. Because only 60% of the firms report R&D expenditures, we attempt to correct for selectivity bias and find that though the correction is small, it increases the estimated complementarity between capital intensity and R&D intensity. In exploring the relationship of the patenting activity of these firms to their contemporaneous R&D expenditures, we look with some care at the choice of econometric specifications since the discrete nature of the patents variable for our smaller firms may cause difficulties with the conventional log linear model. The choice of specification does indeed make a difference, and the negative binomial model, which is a Poisson-type model with a disturbance, is preferred. Substantively, we find a much larger output of patents per R&D dollar for the small firms, with a decreasing propensity to patent with size of R&D programs throughout the sample. However, this conclusion is highly tentative both because of its sensitivity to specification and choice of sample and also because we expect that errors in variables bias due to our focus on R&D and patent applications in a single year is far worse for the small firms.
(This abstract was borrowed from another version of this item.)

Suggested Citation

  • 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.
  • Handle: RePEc:nbr:nberch:10043
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.nber.org/chapters/c10043.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. James J. Heckman, 1976. "The Common Structure of Statistical Models of Truncation, Sample Selection and Limited Dependent Variables and a Simple Estimator for Such Models," NBER Chapters, in: Annals of Economic and Social Measurement, Volume 5, number 4, pages 475-492, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    2. William S. Comanor, 1967. "Market Structure, Product Differentiation, and Industrial Research," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 81(4), pages 639-657.
    3. Kamien, Morton I & Schwartz, Nancy L, 1975. "Market Structure and Innovation: A Survey," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 13(1), pages 1-37, March.
    4. 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.
    5. Fisher, Franklin M & Temin, Peter, 1973. "Returns to Scale in Research and Development: What Does the Schumpeterian Hypothesis Imply ?," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 81(1), pages 56-70, Jan.-Feb..
    6. 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.
    7. Forrest D. Nelson, 1974. "Censored Regression Models with Unobserved Stochastic Censoring Thresholds," NBER Working Papers 0063, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    8. Nelson, Forrest D., 1977. "Censored regression models with unobserved, stochastic censoring thresholds," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 6(3), pages 309-327, November.
    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. Shah, Anwar & DEC, 1994. "The economics of research and development : how research and development capital affects production and markets and is affected by tax incentives," Policy Research Working Paper Series 1325, The World Bank.
    2. 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.
    3. Karbowski Adam, 2016. "The Elasticity-Based Approach to Enterprise Innovation," International Journal of Management and Economics, Warsaw School of Economics, Collegium of World Economy, vol. 49(1), pages 58-78, March.
    4. Wladimir Raymond & Pierre Mohnen & Franz Palm & Sybrand Schim van der Loeff, 2009. "Innovative Sales, R&D and Total Innovation Expenditures: Panel Evidence on their Dynamics," CESifo Working Paper Series 2716, CESifo.
    5. Zoltan J. Acs & David B. Audretsch, 2005. "Entrepreneurship and Innovation," Papers on Entrepreneurship, Growth and Public Policy 2005-21, Max Planck Institute of Economics, Entrepreneurship, Growth and Public Policy Group.
    6. Grafström, Jonas & Poudineh, Rahmat, 2023. "No evidence of counteracting policy effects on European solar power invention and diffusion," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 172(C).
    7. Michael L. Katz & Howard A. Shelanski, 2005. "Merger Policy and Innovation: Must Enforcement Change to Account for Technological Change?," NBER Chapters, in: Innovation Policy and the Economy, Volume 5, pages 109-165, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    8. Kurt Brännäs & Uno Zackrisson, 1992. "On forecasting of innovations," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 26(1), pages 95-112, February.
    9. Sun, Xiuli & Li, Haizheng & Ghosal, Vivek, 2020. "Firm-level human capital and innovation: Evidence from China," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 59(C).
    10. Bettina Peters & Rebecca Riley & Iulia Siedschlag & Priit Vahter & John McQuinn, 2018. "Internationalisation, innovation and productivity in services: evidence from Germany, Ireland and the United Kingdom," Review of World Economics (Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv), Springer;Institut für Weltwirtschaft (Kiel Institute for the World Economy), vol. 154(3), pages 585-615, August.
    11. Hall, Bronwyn H. & Ham, Rose Marie, 1999. "The Patent Paradox Revisited: Determinants of Patenting in the US Semiconductor Industry, 1980-94," Department of Economics, Working Paper Series qt2nk0w2hz, Department of Economics, Institute for Business and Economic Research, UC Berkeley.
    12. van Pottelsberghe de la Potterie, Bruno & de Rassenfosse, Gaétan & Danguy, Jérôme, 2010. "The R&D-patent relationship: An industry perspective," CEPR Discussion Papers 8145, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    13. Daniel Johnson, 2002. ""Learning-by-Licensing": R&D and Technology Licensing in Brazilian Invention," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 11(3), pages 163-177.
    14. Drivas, Kyriakos & Economidou, Claire & Karamanis, Dimitrios & Sanders, Mark, 2020. "Mobility of highly skilled individuals and local innovation activity," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 158(C).
    15. Erik Brouwer & Tom Poot & Kees Montfort, 2008. "The Innovation Threshold," De Economist, Springer, vol. 156(1), pages 45-71, March.
    16. Roberta Piergiovanni & Enrico Santarelli, 2013. "The more you spend, the more you get? The effects of R&D and capital expenditures on the patenting activities of biotechnology firms," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 94(2), pages 497-521, February.
    17. Jouni Kuha & Myrsini Katsikatsou & Irini Moustaki, 2018. "Latent variable modelling with non‐ignorable item non‐response: multigroup response propensity models for cross‐national analysis," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 181(4), pages 1169-1192, October.
    18. Gopinath, Munisamy & Vasavada, Utpal, 1999. "Patents, R&D, And Market Structure In The U.S. Food Processing Industry," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 24(1), pages 1-13, July.
    19. Yang, 2003. "Protecting foreign inventors or a learning channel? Evidence from patents granted in Taiwan," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 81(2), pages 227-231, November.
    20. 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.

    More about this item

    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:nbr:nberch:10043. 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: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/nberrus.html .

    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.