IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hal/journl/hal-05536446.html

A reexamination of the firm innovation process: sensitivity to sample and estimation methods

Author

Listed:
  • Océane Vernerey

    (LISA - Laboratoire « Lieux, Identités, eSpaces, Activités » (UMR CNRS 6240 LISA) - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique - Università di Corsica Pasquale Paoli [Université de Corse Pascal Paoli], LEDi - Laboratoire d'Economie de Dijon [Dijon] - UBE - Université Bourgogne Europe)

Abstract

In this article, we re-examine the innovation process through the CDM model. Compared to the existing literature, this study offers several contributions. First, it relies on an unusually large dataset of 509,033 firms from nine European countries – Bulgaria, the Czech Republic, Estonia, Spain, Hungary, Lithuania, Portugal, Romania, and Slovakia – over the period 1998–2016. This extensive dataset allows us to explore cross-country heterogeneity, as well as potential temporal trends across multiple survey waves. Second, the paper provides a systematic and detailed review of the vast CDM literature, offering a structured synthesis of prior findings and highlighting the main areas where results diverge across studies. Third, methodologically, we compare three alternative estimation strategies, which enables us to evaluate the robustness of our findings and to identify potential sources of heterogeneity in estimated relationships. Across all specifications, we find that R&D investment has a positive effect on the share of new products in sales, which subsequently enhances firm performance. Promoting innovation can have a substantial impact on performance. However, the magnitudes of these effects vary depending on the country, the estimation method, and the treatment of potential biases. In some countries, innovation generates stronger positive spillover effects on firm performance, while others are more effective at transforming R&D into innovation but face challenges in converting this innovation into productivity gains. This implies, on the one hand, that public policies must be context-specific, and on the other hand, that the choice of estimation method and the treatment of potential biases can significantly affect the robustness and validity of the results.

Suggested Citation

  • Océane Vernerey, 2026. "A reexamination of the firm innovation process: sensitivity to sample and estimation methods," Post-Print hal-05536446, HAL.
  • Handle: RePEc:hal:journl:hal-05536446
    DOI: 10.1080/10438599.2025.2612612
    Note: View the original document on HAL open archive server: https://hal.science/hal-05536446v1
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://hal.science/hal-05536446v1/document
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/10438599.2025.2612612?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Olfa Hajjem & Pierre Garrouste & Mohamed Ayadi, 2015. "Effets des innovations technologiques et organisationnelles sur la productivité : Une extension du modèle CDM," Post-Print halshs-01208095, HAL.
    2. Geweke, John, 1989. "Bayesian Inference in Econometric Models Using Monte Carlo Integration," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 57(6), pages 1317-1339, November.
    3. Mairesse, Jacques & Mohnen, Pierre, 2010. "Using Innovation Surveys for Econometric Analysis," Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, in: Bronwyn H. Hall & Nathan Rosenberg (ed.), Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, edition 1, volume 2, chapter 0, pages 1129-1155, Elsevier.
    4. Keane, Michael P, 1994. "A Computationally Practical Simulation Estimator for Panel Data," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 62(1), pages 95-116, January.
    5. Jacques Mairesse & Pierre Mohnen & Ad Notten, 2025. "Innovation and productivity: the recent empirical literature and the state of the art," Eurasian Business Review, Springer;Eurasia Business and Economics Society, vol. 15(1), pages 1-27, March.
    6. Hans Loof & Almas Heshmati, 2006. "On the relationship between innovation and performance: A sensitivity analysis," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 15(4-5), pages 317-344.
    7. Aghion, Philippe & Howitt, Peter, 1992. "A Model of Growth through Creative Destruction," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 60(2), pages 323-351, March.
    8. Roper, Stephen & Du, Jun & Love, James H., 2008. "Modelling the innovation value chain," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(6-7), pages 961-977, July.
    9. Cohen, Wesley M & Klepper, Steven, 1996. "A Reprise of Size and R&D," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 106(437), pages 925-951, July.
    10. Jose Miguel Benavente, 2006. "The role of research and innovation in promoting productivity in chile," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 15(4-5), pages 301-315.
    11. Dragan Tevdovski & Katerina Tosevska-Trpcevska & Elena Makrevska Disoska, 2017. "What is the role of innovation in productivity growth in Central and Eastern European countries?," The Economics of Transition, The European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, vol. 25(3), pages 527-551, July.
    12. Wiebke Bartz-Zuccala & Pierre Mohnen & Helena Schweiger, 2018. "The Role of Innovation and Management Practices in Determining Firm Productivity," Comparative Economic Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Association for Comparative Economic Studies, vol. 60(4), pages 502-530, December.
    13. David Roodman, 2011. "Fitting fully observed recursive mixed-process models with cmp," Stata Journal, StataCorp LLC, vol. 11(2), pages 159-206, June.
    14. Toshevska-Trpchevska, Katerina & Disoska, Elena Makrevska & Tevdovski, Dragan & Stojkoski, Viktor, 2019. "The Impact of a Crisis on the Innovation Systems in Europe: Evidence from the CIS10 Innovation Survey," European Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 27(4), pages 543-562, October.
    15. Raymond, Wladimir & Mairesse, Jacques & Mohnen, Pierre & Palm, Franz, 2015. "Dynamic models of R & D, innovation and productivity: Panel data evidence for Dutch and French manufacturing," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 285-306.
    16. Vassilis A. Hajivassiliou & Daniel L. McFadden, 1998. "The Method of Simulated Scores for the Estimation of LDV Models," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 66(4), pages 863-896, July.
    17. Vella, Francis & Verbeek, Marno, 1999. "Two-step estimation of panel data models with censored endogenous variables and selection bias," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 90(2), pages 239-263, June.
    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. Océane Vernerey & Jimmy Lopez, 2026. "Regulation in the Network Sectors: Impact on the Innovation Process and the Employment Rate," Comparative Economic Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Association for Comparative Economic Studies, vol. 68(1), pages 1-20, March.
    2. Océane Vernerey & Jimmy Lopez, 2026. "Regulation in the Network Sectors: Impact on the Innovation Process and the Employment Rate," Post-Print hal-05536453, HAL.

    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. Elena Makrevska Disoska & Katerina Toshevska-Trpchevska & Dragan Tevdovski & Petar Jolakoski & Viktor Stojkoski, 2024. "A Pooled Overview of the European National Innovation Systems Through the Lenses of the Community Innovation Survey," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 15(1), pages 3660-3684, March.
    2. Wadho, Waqar & Chaudhry, Azam, 2022. "Innovation strategies and productivity growth in developing countries: Firm-level evidence from Pakistani manufacturers," Journal of Asian Economics, Elsevier, vol. 81(C).
    3. Makrevska Disoska, Elena & Toshevska-Trpchevska, Katerina & Tevdovski, Dragan & Jolakoski, Petar & Stojkoski, Viktor, 2021. "A longitudinal overview of the European national innovation systems through the lenses of the Community Innovation Survey," MPRA Paper 108399, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    4. Wadho, Waqar & Chaudhry, Azam, 2018. "Innovation and firm performance in developing countries: The case of Pakistani textile and apparel manufacturers," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(7), pages 1283-1294.
    5. Teimuraz Gogokhia & George Berulava, 2021. "Business environment reforms, innovation and firm productivity in transition economies," Eurasian Business Review, Springer;Eurasia Business and Economics Society, vol. 11(2), pages 221-245, June.
    6. Wadho, Waqar & Chaudhry, Azam, 2020. "Innovation Strategies and Productivity Growth in Developing Countries: Evidence from Pakistan," GLO Discussion Paper Series 466, Global Labor Organization (GLO).
    7. Cui, Jingbo & Li, Xiaogang, 2016. "Innovation and Firm Productivity: Evidence from the US Patent Data," 2016 Annual Meeting, July 31-August 2, Boston, Massachusetts 235603, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    8. Pierre Mohnen & Bronwyn Hall, 2013. "Innovation and Productivity: An Update," Eurasian Business Review, Springer;Eurasia Business and Economics Society, vol. 3(1), pages 47-65, June.
    9. Berlingieri, Francesco & Zierahn, Ulrich, 2014. "Field of study, qualification mismatch, and wages: Does sorting matter?," ZEW Discussion Papers 14-076, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    10. Jianhua Zhang & Mohammad Shahidul Islam, 2020. "The Heterogeneous Impacts of R&D on Innovation in Services Sector: A Firm-Level Study of Developing ASEAN," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(4), pages 1-22, February.
    11. Foreman-Peck, James & Zhou, Peng, 2022. "R&D subsidies and productivity in eastern European countries," Economic Systems, Elsevier, vol. 46(2).
    12. Steve Bradley & Rob Crouchley, 2020. "The effects of test scores and truancy on youth unemployment and inactivity: a simultaneous equations approach," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 59(4), pages 1799-1831, October.
    13. Jacques Mairesse & Pierre Mohnen & Ad Notten, 2025. "Innovation and productivity: the recent empirical literature and the state of the art," Eurasian Business Review, Springer;Eurasia Business and Economics Society, vol. 15(1), pages 1-27, March.
    14. Burcu Fazlıoğlu & Başak Dalgıç & Ahmet Burçin Yereli, 2019. "The effect of innovation on productivity: evidence from Turkish manufacturing firms," Industry and Innovation, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 26(4), pages 439-460, April.
    15. Cristian Barra & Nazzareno Ruggiero, 2023. "Quality of Government and Types of Innovation—Empirical Evidence for Italian Manufacturing Firms," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 14(2), pages 1749-1789, June.
    16. JongRoul Woo & HyungBin Moon & Jongsu Lee & Jinyong Jang, 2017. "Public attitudes toward the construction of new power plants in South Korea," Energy & Environment, , vol. 28(4), pages 499-517, June.
    17. Crespi, Gustavo & Zuniga, Pluvia, 2012. "Innovation and Productivity: Evidence from Six Latin American Countries," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 40(2), pages 273-290.
    18. Pigini, Claudia & Presbitero, Andrea F. & Zazzaro, Alberto, 2016. "State dependence in access to credit," Journal of Financial Stability, Elsevier, vol. 27(C), pages 17-34.
    19. Coban, Mustafa, 2020. "Redistribution Preferences, Attitudes towards Immigrants, and Ethnic Diversity," IAB-Discussion Paper 202023, Institut für Arbeitsmarkt- und Berufsforschung (IAB), Nürnberg [Institute for Employment Research, Nuremberg, Germany].
    20. Coban, Mustafa, 2017. "I'm fine with Immigrants, but ...: Attitudes, ethnic diversity, and redistribution preference," Discussion Paper Series 137, Julius Maximilian University of Würzburg, Chair of Economic Order and Social Policy.

    More about this item

    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:hal:journl:hal-05536446. 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: 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.