IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hal/journl/hal-00480067.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Noncapital Investment Costs and the Adoption of CAD and CNC in U.S. Metalworking Industries

Author

Listed:
  • Thomas Astebro

    (University of Waterloo [Waterloo])

Abstract

Many studies have shown that firm size is the strongest and most consistent predictor of the adoption of technological innovations, but the causes for this relationship are debated. I investigate the relationships between various size measures and the adoption of computer-aided design (CAD) and computer numerically controlled (CNC) machine tools. Plant size is the dominant factor in predicting CAD and CNC adoption. Other measures such as firm size or multiplant operations have independent effects that are not present after controlling for plant size. I test four potential explanations for the results: noncapital cost spreading, equipment replacement, risk aversion, and learning. There is support only for the first explanation.

Suggested Citation

  • Thomas Astebro, 2002. "Noncapital Investment Costs and the Adoption of CAD and CNC in U.S. Metalworking Industries," Post-Print hal-00480067, HAL.
    • Handle: RePEc:hal:journl:hal-00480067
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    Other versions of this item:

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Arthur Grimes & Cleo Ren & Philip Stevens, 2012. "The need for speed: impacts of internet connectivity on firm productivity," Journal of Productivity Analysis, Springer, vol. 37(2), pages 187-201, April.
    2. Carlos J. Serrano, 2011. "Estimating the Gains from Trade in the Market for Innovation: Evidence from the Transfer of Patents," NBER Working Papers 17304, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    3. López, Alberto, 2012. "Productivity effects of ICTs and organizational change: A test of the complementarity hypothesis in Spain," MPRA Paper 40400, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    4. Tobias Schultheiss & Uschi Backes-Gellner, 2024. "Does updating education curricula accelerate technology adoption in the workplace? Evidence from dual vocational education and training curricula in Switzerland," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 49(1), pages 191-235, February.
    5. Gómez, Jaime & Vargas, Pilar, 2012. "Intangible resources and technology adoption in manufacturing firms," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(9), pages 1607-1619.
    6. A. Mahathi & Rupayan Pal & Vinay Ramani, 2016. "Competition, strategic delegation and delay in technology adoption," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 25(2), pages 143-171, March.
    7. Wm. Alan Bartley & Geoffrey Fain Williams, 2022. "The role of gun supply in 1980s and 1990s youth violence," Contemporary Economic Policy, Western Economic Association International, vol. 40(2), pages 323-348, April.
    8. Carlos J. Serrano, 2010. "The dynamics of the transfer and renewal of patents," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 41(4), pages 686-708, December.
    9. Alipranti, Maria & Milliou, Chrysovalantou & Petrakis, Emmanuel, 2015. "On vertical relations and the timing of technology adoption," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 117-129.
    10. Jae Young Choi & Yeonbae Kim & Yungman Jun & Yunhee Kim, 2009. "A Multivariate Probit Analysis of Korean Firms Information System Adoption: An Empirical Analysis on the Determinants of the Adoption and Complementarity Among the Information Systems," TEMEP Discussion Papers 200926, Seoul National University; Technology Management, Economics, and Policy Program (TEMEP), revised Nov 2009.
    11. Anthony Creane & Hideo Konishi, 2009. "Goldilocks and the Licensing Firm: Choosing a Partner when Rivals are Heterogeneous," Boston College Working Papers in Economics 720, Boston College Department of Economics.
    12. Gomez, Jaime & Vargas, Pilar, 2009. "The effect of financial constraints, absorptive capacity and complementarities on the adoption of multiple process technologies," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(1), pages 106-119, February.
    13. Pilar Beneito & María E. Rochina-Barrachina & Amparo Sanchis, 2013. "Ownership and cyclicality of firms’ R&D investment," Working Papers 1306, Department of Applied Economics II, Universidad de Valencia.
    14. Greenstein, Shane, 2010. "Innovative Conduct in Computing and Internet Markets," 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 477-537, Elsevier.

    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:hal:journl:hal-00480067. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: CCSD (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/ .

    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.