IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/eec/wpaper/1601.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

In-house versus External Basic Research and First-to-market Innovations

Author

Listed:
  • Dolores Añón Higón

    (Departamento de Economía Aplicada II, Universitat de València)

Abstract

This paper explores to what extent conducting internal basic research, as opposed to external basic research (i.e. outsourcing and collaboration with universities) encourages firms to bring new products into the market ahead of competitors, and contributes to innovation performance. The analysis is based on a sample of Spanish manufacturing firms over the period 2006-2012. Our findings suggest that conducting in-house basic research affects firm’s propensity to introduce product novelties. Furthermore, performing this activity continuously affects the probability of being product-pioneer in low and medium-low tech sectors. Collaboration with universities also helps in introducing new products ahead of competitors, but contracting scientific research from universities does not lead to a pioneer strategy

Suggested Citation

  • Dolores Añón Higón, 2016. "In-house versus External Basic Research and First-to-market Innovations," Working Papers 1601, Department of Applied Economics II, Universidad de Valencia.
    • Handle: RePEc:eec:wpaper:1601
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://repecsrv.uv.es/paper/RePEc/pdf/eec_1601.pdf
    File Function: First version, 2016
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Vega-Jurado, Jaider & Gutiérrez-Gracia, Antonio & Fernández-de-Lucio, Ignacio & Manjarrés-Henri­quez, Liney, 2008. "The effect of external and internal factors on firms' product innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(4), pages 616-632, May.
    2. Iain M. Cockburn & Rebecca M. Henderson, 1998. "Absorptive Capacity, Coauthoring Behavior, and the Organization of Research in Drug Discovery," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 46(2), pages 157-182, June.
    3. Wladimir Raymond & Pierre Mohnen & Franz Palm & Sybrand Schim van der Loeff, 2010. "Persistence of Innovation in Dutch Manufacturing: Is It Spurious?," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 92(3), pages 495-504, August.
    4. Ufuk Akcigit & William R. Kerr, 2018. "Growth through Heterogeneous Innovations," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 126(4), pages 1374-1443.
    5. David J. Teece, 2003. "Competition, Cooperation, and Innovation Organizational Arrangements for Regimes of Rapid Technological Progress," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Essays In Technology Management And Policy Selected Papers of David J Teece, chapter 16, pages 447-474, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    6. 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.
    7. Fabrizio, Kira R., 2009. "Absorptive capacity and the search for innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(2), pages 255-267, March.
    8. Zoltan J. Acs & David B. Audretsch, 2008. "Innovation in Large and Small Firms: An Empirical Analysis," Chapters, in: Entrepreneurship, Growth and Public Policy, chapter 1, pages 3-15, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    9. Jacques Mairesse & Pierre Mohnen, 2005. "The Importance of R&D for Innovation: A Reassessment Using French Survey Data," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 30(2_2), pages 183-197, January.
    10. 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.
    11. Slivko, Olga, 2012. "Innovation strategies of German firms: The effect of competition and intellectual property protection," ZEW Discussion Papers 12-089, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    12. Mansfield, Edwin, 1980. "Basic Research and Productivity Increase in Manufacturing," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 70(5), pages 863-873, December.
    13. Cassiman, Bruno & Perez-Castrillo, David & Veugelers, Reinhilde, 2002. "Endogenizing know-how flows through the nature of R&D investments," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 20(6), pages 775-799, June.
    14. Pavitt, Keith, 1991. "What makes basic research economically useful?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 20(2), pages 109-119, April.
    15. Lee Fleming & Olav Sorenson, 2004. "Science as a map in technological search," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 25(8‐9), pages 909-928, August.
    16. Czarnitzki, Dirk & Thorwarth, Susanne, 2012. "Productivity effects of basic research in low-tech and high-tech industries," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(9), pages 1555-1564.
    17. Scott Stern, 2004. "Do Scientists Pay to Be Scientists?," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 50(6), pages 835-853, June.
    18. Becker, Wolfgang & Dietz, Jurgen, 2004. "R&D cooperation and innovation activities of firms--evidence for the German manufacturing industry," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(2), pages 209-223, March.
    19. K. J. Arrow, 1971. "The Economic Implications of Learning by Doing," Palgrave Macmillan Books, in: F. H. Hahn (ed.), Readings in the Theory of Growth, chapter 11, pages 131-149, Palgrave Macmillan.
    20. Papke, Leslie E & Wooldridge, Jeffrey M, 1996. "Econometric Methods for Fractional Response Variables with an Application to 401(K) Plan Participation Rates," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 11(6), pages 619-632, Nov.-Dec..
    21. Nathan ROSENBERG, 2009. "Why do firms do basic research (with their own money)?," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Nathan Rosenberg (ed.), Studies On Science And The Innovation Process Selected Works of Nathan Rosenberg, chapter 11, pages 225-234, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    22. Ashish Arora & Sharon Belenzon & Andrea Patacconi, 2015. "Killing the Golden Goose? The Decline of Science in Corporate R&D," NBER Working Papers 20902, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    23. Josh Lerner, 2009. "The Empirical Impact of Intellectual Property Rights on Innovation: Puzzles and Clues," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 99(2), pages 343-348, May.
    24. Glen L. Urban & Theresa Carter & Steven Gaskin & Zofia Mucha, 1986. "Market Share Rewards to Pioneering Brands: An Empirical Analysis and Strategic Implications," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 32(6), pages 645-659, June.
    25. Boris Lokshin & René Belderbos & Martin Carree, 2008. "The Productivity Effects of Internal and External R&D: Evidence from a Dynamic Panel Data Model," Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, Department of Economics, University of Oxford, vol. 70(3), pages 399-413, June.
    26. Gambardella, Alfonso, 1992. "Competitive advantages from in-house scientific research: The US pharmaceutical industry in the 1980s," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 21(5), pages 391-407, October.
    27. Bruno Cassiman & Reinhilde Veugelers, 2006. "In Search of Complementarity in Innovation Strategy: Internal R& D and External Knowledge Acquisition," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 52(1), pages 68-82, January.
    28. Schankerman, Mark, 1981. "The Effects of Double-Counting and Expensing on the Measured Returns to R&D," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 63(3), pages 454-458, August.
    29. Jaider Vega-Jurado & Antonio Gutiérrez-Gracia & Ignacio Fernández-de-Lucio, 2009. "Does external knowledge sourcing matter for innovation? Evidence from the Spanish manufacturing industry," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 18(4), pages 637-670, August.
    30. Philippe Cuneo & Jacques Mairesse, 1984. "Productivity and R&D at the Firm Level in French Manufacturing," NBER Chapters, in: R&D, Patents, and Productivity, pages 375-392, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    31. Tijssen, Robert J. W., 2004. "Is the commercialisation of scientific research affecting the production of public knowledge?: Global trends in the output of corporate research articles," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(5), pages 709-733, July.
    32. Alfred Kleinknecht & Kees Van Montfort & Erik Brouwer, 2002. "The Non-Trivial Choice between Innovation Indicators," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 11(2), pages 109-121.
    33. Lim, Kwanghui, 2004. "The relationship between research and innovation in the semiconductor and pharmaceutical industries (1981-1997)," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(2), pages 287-321, March.
    34. repec:bla:jindec:v:46:y:1998:i:2:p:157-82 is not listed on IDEAS
    35. Marion Frenz & Martha Prevezer, 2012. "What Can CIS Data Tell Us about Technological Regimes and Persistence of Innovation?," Industry and Innovation, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 19(4), pages 285-306, May.
    36. Anker Lund Vinding, 2006. "Absorptive capacity and innovative performance: A human capital approach," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 15(4-5), pages 507-517.
    37. Mueller, Dennis C., 1997. "First-mover advantages and path dependence," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 15(6), pages 827-850, October.
    38. Richard R. Nelson, 1959. "The Simple Economics of Basic Scientific Research," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 67(3), pages 297-297.
    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. Uluc Aysun & Zeynep Yom, 2019. "R&D, innovation spillover and business cycles," Working Papers 2019-04, University of Central Florida, Department of Economics.
    2. Gnekpe, Christian & Coeurderoy, Regis & Mulotte, Louis, 2023. "How a firm's knowledge base influences its external technology sourcing strategy : The case of biopharmaceutical firms," Other publications TiSEM 8f11908f-00fd-4ab3-b93f-d, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    3. Uluc Aysun & Zeynep Yom, 2021. "R&D Characteristics, Innovation Spillover, and Technology-Driven Business Cycles," Journal of Industry, Competition and Trade, Springer, vol. 21(3), pages 339-365, September.

    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. Añón Higón, Dolores, 2016. "In-house versus external basic research and first-to-market innovations," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(4), pages 816-829.
    2. Leten, Bart & Kelchtermans, Stijn & Belderbos, Ren, 2010. "Internal Basic Research, External Basic Research and the Technological Performance of Pharmaceutical Firms," Working Papers 2010/12, Hogeschool-Universiteit Brussel, Faculteit Economie en Management.
    3. Cao, Qinwei & Li, Yi & Peng, Huatao, 2023. "From university basic research to firm innovation: diffusion mechanism and boundary conditions under a U-shaped relationship," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 123(C).
    4. Beatriz Pereira Almeida & Eduardo Gonçalves & André Suriane Silva & Raquel Coelho Reis, 2021. "Internalization of knowledge spillovers by regions: a measure based on self-citation patents," The Annals of Regional Science, Springer;Western Regional Science Association, vol. 66(2), pages 309-330, April.
    5. Alex Coad & Agustí Segarra-Blasco & Mercedes Teruel, 2021. "A bit of basic, a bit of applied? R&D strategies and firm performance," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 46(6), pages 1758-1783, December.
    6. Choi, Jin-Uk & Lee, Chang-Yang, 2022. "The differential effects of basic research on firm R&D productivity: The conditioning role of technological diversification," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 118(C).
    7. Becker, Annette & Hottenrott, Hanna & Mukherjee, Anwesha, 2022. "Division of labor in R&D? Firm size and specialization in corporate research," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 194(C), pages 1-23.
    8. Czarnitzki, Dirk & Thorwarth, Susanne, 2012. "Productivity effects of basic research in low-tech and high-tech industries," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(9), pages 1555-1564.
    9. 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.
    10. Antonio Malva & Stijn Kelchtermans & Bart Leten & Reinhilde Veugelers, 2015. "Basic science as a prescription for breakthrough inventions in the pharmaceutical industry," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 40(4), pages 670-695, August.
    11. Simeth, Markus & Raffo, Julio D., 2013. "What makes companies pursue an Open Science strategy?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(9), pages 1531-1543.
    12. Gombau, Verònica & Segarra Blasco, Agustí, 2011. "Innovation and absorptive capacity: What is the role of technological frontier?," Working Papers 2072/179622, Universitat Rovira i Virgili, Department of Economics.
    13. René Belderbos & Marcelina Grabowska & Stijn Kelchtermans & Bart Leten & Jojo Jacob & Massimo Riccaboni, 2021. "Whither geographic proximity? Bypassing local R&D units in foreign university collaboration," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 52(7), pages 1302-1330, September.
    14. Markus Simeth & Michele Cincera, 2016. "Corporate Science, Innovation, and Firm Value," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 62(7), pages 1970-1981, July.
    15. Hottenrott, Hanna & Lopes-Bento, Cindy & Veugelers, Reinhilde, 2017. "Direct and cross scheme effects in a research and development," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(6), pages 1118-1132.
    16. Waverly W. Ding, 2011. "The Impact of Founders' Professional-Education Background on the Adoption of Open Science by For-Profit Biotechnology Firms," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 57(2), pages 257-273, February.
    17. Hottenrott, Hanna & Lopes-Bento, Cindy & Veugelers, Reinhilde, 2014. "Direct and cross-scheme effects in a research and development subsidy program," ZEW Discussion Papers 14-107, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    18. Sheer, Lia, 2022. "Sitting on the Fence: Integrating the two worlds of scientific discovery and invention within the firm," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(7).
    19. repec:wip:wpaper:6 is not listed on IDEAS
    20. Rotolo, Daniele & Camerani, Roberto & Grassano, Nicola & Martin, Ben R., 2022. "Why do firms publish? A systematic literature review and a conceptual framework," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(10).
    21. Pellens, Maikel & Della Malva, Antonio, 2016. "Changing of the guard: Structural change and corporate science in the semiconductor industry," ZEW Discussion Papers 16-050, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    basic research; in-house; outsourcing; collaboration; pioneer; imitation;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • D22 - Microeconomics - - Production and Organizations - - - Firm Behavior: Empirical Analysis
    • L21 - Industrial Organization - - Firm Objectives, Organization, and Behavior - - - Business Objectives of the Firm
    • O32 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Management of Technological Innovation and R&D

    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:eec:wpaper:1601. 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: Vicente Esteve (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/dsvales.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.