IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/cde/cdewps/265.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The Innovation-R&D Nexus- Evidence from the Indian Manufacturing Sector

Author

Listed:
  • Sunil Kanwar

    (Department of Economics, Delhi School of Economics)

  • Shailu Singh

    (Department of Economics, Delhi School of Economics)

Abstract

While there is consensus that innovation is a prime motive force in the process of modern economic growth, there continues to be lack of clarity about how best to capture this process of innovation. Although it is relatively clear that research and development expenditure constitutes an important, perhaps even the most important, input into the innovation process, its relationship with the output of this process remains enigmatic. A sizeable literature considers this relationship in the developed country context, though primarily the US, and sheds light on a number of aspects. Evidence for developing countries, in contrast, is sparse. This study intends to fill this gap by exploring the innovation-R&D relationship as exemplified by the influence of knowledge capital on patents, in the context of the emerging economy of India. Using a relatively large sample of 380 manufacturing firms spanning 22 industries over the recent period 2001-2010, we find weak evidence at best for this relationship. A one unit (dollar or rupee) increase in the knowledge capital stock is likely to raise the expected patent count by only about 0.7%, which given the current average patent count per firm per year, is only a marginal change. In addition, we also find that patent experience and the firm’s access to resources are both strongly significant factors explaining changes in expected patent counts, although their magnitudes are equally small. Our semi-elasticity estimate w.r.t knowledge capital translates to an elasticity of about 0.02 at the means, which is in line with that for enterprises in Spanish manufacturing. However, it is an order of magnitude smaller than the 0.1 to 0.2 reported for the Dutch pharmaceuticals sector, and the 0.3 to 0.6 for firms in the US manufacturing sector. Given the many reasons why most firms appear not to patent even when they conduct some research, policy makers would have to address multiple issues to bring about a more effective conversion of research into formal intellectual property in the developing country context.

Suggested Citation

  • 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.
  • Handle: RePEc:cde:cdewps:265
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.cdedse.org/pdf/work265.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Deolalikar, Anil B & Roller, Lars-Hendrik, 1989. "Patenting by Manufacturing Firms in India: Its Production and Impact," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 37(3), pages 303-314, March.
    2. 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.
    3. Beneito, Pilar & Rochina-Barrachina, María Engracia & Sanchis, Amparo, 2014. "Learning through experience in Research & Development: An empirical analysis with Spanish firms," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 88(C), pages 290-305.
    4. 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.
    5. Zvi Griliches, 1998. "Productivity and R&D at the Firm Level," NBER Chapters, in: R&D and Productivity: The Econometric Evidence, pages 100-133, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    6. 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.
    7. Zvi Griliches, 1984. "R&D, Patents, and Productivity," NBER Books, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc, number gril84-1, March.
    8. 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.
    9. Ariel Pakes & Zvi Griliches, 1984. "Patents and R&D at the Firm Level: A First Look," NBER Chapters, in: R&D, Patents, and Productivity, pages 55-72, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    10. repec:fth:harver:1473 is not listed on IDEAS
    11. Blind, Knut & Edler, Jakob & Frietsch, Rainer & Schmoch, Ulrich, 2006. "Motives to patent: Empirical evidence from Germany," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(5), pages 655-672, June.
    12. Montalvo, Jose G, 1997. "GMM Estimation of Count-Panel-Data Models with Fixed Effects and Predetermined Instruments," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, American Statistical Association, vol. 15(1), pages 82-89, January.
    13. 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.
    14. Zoltan Acs & David Audretsch, 1990. "Innovation and Small Firms," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262011131, December.
    15. 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.
    16. Bruce A. Desmarais & Jeffrey J. Harden, 2013. "Testing for zero inflation in count models: Bias correction for the Vuong test," Stata Journal, StataCorp LP, vol. 13(4), pages 810-835, December.
    17. Horstmann, Ignatius & MacDonald, Glenn M & Slivinski, Alan, 1985. "Patents as Information Transfer Mechanisms: To Patent or (Maybe) Not to Patent," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 93(5), pages 837-858, October.
    18. Sunil Kanwar, 2013. "Innovation, Productivity and IPRs," Working papers 230, Centre for Development Economics, Delhi School of Economics.
    19. 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.
    20. 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.
    21. A. Colin Cameron & Pravin K. Trivedi, 2010. "Microeconometrics Using Stata, Revised Edition," Stata Press books, StataCorp LP, number musr, March.
    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. Sunil Kanwar & Shailu Singh, 2018. "The Innovation†R&D Nexus in an Emerging Economy: Evidence from the Indian Manufacturing Sector," Australian Economic Papers, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 57(1), pages 35-54, March.
    2. 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.
    3. 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.
    4. Hagedoorn, John & Wang, Ning, 2012. "Is there complementarity or substitutability between internal and external R&D strategies?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(6), pages 1072-1083.
    5. Chadha, Alka, 2009. "TRIPs and patenting activity: Evidence from the Indian pharmaceutical industry," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 26(2), pages 499-505, March.
    6. 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.
    7. 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.
    8. 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.
    9. Hagedoorn, John & Cloodt, Myriam, 2003. "Measuring innovative performance: is there an advantage in using multiple indicators?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(8), pages 1365-1379, September.
    10. Arora, Ashish & Ceccagnoli, Marco & Cohen, Wesley M., 2008. "R&D and the patent premium," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 26(5), pages 1153-1179, September.
    11. 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.
    12. 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.
    13. 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.
    14. 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.
    15. 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).
    16. Maria Luisa Mancusi, 2004. "International Spillovers and Absorptive Capacity: A cross-country, cross-sector analysis based on European patents and citations," STICERD - Economics of Industry Papers 35, Suntory and Toyota International Centres for Economics and Related Disciplines, LSE.
    17. Rentocchini, Francesco, 2011. "Sources and characteristics of software patents in the European Union: Some empirical considerations," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 23(1), pages 141-157, March.
    18. Li, Xibao, 2011. "Sources of External Technology, Absorptive Capacity, and Innovation Capability in Chinese State-Owned High-Tech Enterprises," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 39(7), pages 1240-1248, July.
    19. Czarnitzki, Dirk & Kraft, Kornelius & Thorwarth, Susanne, 2009. "The knowledge production of 'R' and 'D'," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 105(1), pages 141-143, October.
    20. Erik Brouwer & Alfred Kleinknecht & Pierre Mohnen & Hans van Ophem, 2001. "R&D and Patents: Which Way Does the Causality Run?," CIRANO Working Papers 2001s-31, CIRANO.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Patents; r&d; manufacturing; India;
    All these keywords.

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:cde:cdewps:265. 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: Sanjeev Sharma (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cdudein.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.