IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/cen/wpaper/91-2.html

R&D Reactions To High-Technology Import Competition

Author

Listed:
  • F M Scherer

Abstract

For a seventeen-year panel covering 308 U.S. manufacturing corporations, we analyze firms' R&D spending reactions to changes in high-technology imports. On average, companies reduced their R&D/sales ratios in the short run as imports rose. Individual company reactions were heterogeneous, especially for multinational firms. Short-run reactions were more aggressive (i.e., tending toward R&D/sales ratio increases), the more concentrated the markets were in which the companies operated, the larger the company was, and the more diversified the firm's sales mix was. Reactions were less aggressive when special trade barriers had been erected or patent protection was strong in the impacted industries. Companies with a top executive officer educated in science or engineering were more likely to increase R&D/sales ratios in response to an import shock, all else equal. Over the full 17-year sample period, reactions may have shifted toward greater average aggressiveness.

Suggested Citation

  • F M Scherer, 1991. "R&D Reactions To High-Technology Import Competition," Working Papers 91-2, Center for Economic Studies, U.S. Census Bureau.
    • Handle: RePEc:cen:wpaper:91-2
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www2.census.gov/ces/wp/1991/CES-WP-91-02.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Cohen, Wesley M & Levin, Richard C & Mowery, David C, 1987. "Firm Size and R&D Intensity: A Re-examination," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 35(4), pages 543-565, June.
    2. Lichtenberg, Frank R, 1988. "The Private R&D Investment Response to Federal Design and Technical Competitions," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 78(3), pages 550-559, June.
    3. Richard C. Levin & Alvin K. Klevorick & Richard R. Nelson & Sidney G. Winter, 1987. "Appropriating the Returns from Industrial Research and Development," Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, Economic Studies Program, The Brookings Institution, vol. 18(3, Specia), pages 783-832.
    4. 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.
    5. Griliches, Zvi & Hausman, Jerry A., 1986. "Errors in variables in panel data," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 31(1), pages 93-118, February.
    6. Wesley M. Cohen & Richard C. Levin & David C. Mowery, 1987. "Firm Size and R&D Intensity: A Re-Examination," NBER Working Papers 2205, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    7. Mansfield, Edwin, 1988. "Industrial R&D in Japan and the United States: A Comparative Study," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 78(2), pages 223-228, May.
    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. 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.
    2. Wolfgang Becker & Juergen Peters, 2000. "Technological Opportunities, Absorptive Capacities, and Innovation," Discussion Paper Series 195, Universitaet Augsburg, Institute for Economics.
    3. Un, C. Annique & Cuervo-Cazurra, Alvaro, 2008. "Do subsidiaries of foreign MNEs invest more in R&D than domestic firms?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(10), pages 1812-1828, December.
    4. Najib Harabi, 2002. "The Impact of Vertical R&D Cooperation on Firm Innovation: An Empirical Investigation," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 11(2), pages 93-108.
    5. Harabi, Najib, 1994. "Technischer Fortschritt in der Schweiz: Empirische Ergebnisse aus industrieökonomischer Sicht [Technischer Fortschritt in der Schweiz:Empirische Ergebnisse aus industrieökonomischer Sicht]," MPRA Paper 6725, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    6. Nelson, Richard R. & Wolff, Edward N., 1997. "Factors behind cross-industry differences in technical progress," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 8(2), pages 205-220, June.
    7. Stefano Breschi, 2000. "The Geography of Innovation: A Cross-sector Analysis," Regional Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 34(3), pages 213-229.
    8. Bastian Rake, 2017. "Determinants of pharmaceutical innovation: the role of technological opportunities revisited," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 27(4), pages 691-727, September.
    9. Cuervo-Cazurra, Alvaro & Un, C. Annique, 2007. "Regional economic integration and R&D investment," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(2), pages 227-246, March.
    10. Barge-Gil, Andrés & López, Alberto, 2014. "R&D determinants: Accounting for the differences between research and development," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(9), pages 1634-1648.
    11. Kumar, Nagesh & Saqib, Mohammed, 1996. "Firm size, opportunities for adaptation and in-house R & D activity in developing countries: the case of Indian manufacturing," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 25(5), pages 713-722, August.
    12. Schimmelpfennig, David E. & Pray, Carl E. & Brennan, Margaret F., 2004. "The impact of seed industry concentration on innovation: a study of US biotech market leaders," Agricultural Economics, Blackwell, vol. 30(2), pages 157-167, March.
    13. Amy Kahn & Atoko Kasongo & Moses M. Sithole & Kgabo Hector Ramoroka, 2024. "An analysis of the micro- and macro-economic determinants of firm R&D intensity in the South African business sector," African Journal of Science, Technology, Innovation and Development, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 16(3), pages 297-308, April.
    14. Huang, Yanghua & Salike, Nimesh & Yin, Zhifeng & Zeng, Douglas Zhihua, 2017. "Enterprise innovation in China: Does ownership or size matter?," RIEI Working Papers 2017-06, Xi'an Jiaotong-Liverpool University, Research Institute for Economic Integration.
    15. Jaakko Simonen, 2005. "The innovativeness of the Finnish high technology firms – The role of internal factors, cooperation, and the mobility of labour," ERSA conference papers ersa05p462, European Regional Science Association.
    16. Klette, Tor Jakob & Griliches, Zvi, 2000. "Empirical Patterns of Firm Growth and R&D Investment: A Quality Ladder Model Interpretation," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 110(463), pages 363-387, April.
    17. Fors, Gunnar & Svensson, Roger, 2002. "R&D and foreign sales in Swedish multinationals: a simultaneous relationship?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 31(1), pages 95-107, January.
    18. Minniti, Antonio, 2011. "Knowledge appropriability, firm size, and growth," Journal of Macroeconomics, Elsevier, vol. 33(3), pages 438-454, September.
    19. Duysters, Geert & Hagedoorn, John, 1996. "The effect of core competence building on companies performance," Research Memorandum 010, Maastricht University, Maastricht Economic Research Institute on Innovation and Technology (MERIT).
    20. Xulia Gonzalez & Consuelo Pazo, 2004. "Firms' R&D dilemma: to undertake or not to undertake R&D," Applied Economics Letters, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 11(1), pages 55-59.

    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:cen:wpaper:91-2. 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: Dawn Anderson (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cesgvus.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.