IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hhs/fiefwp/0204.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Is There Really an Inverted U-shaped Relation Between Competition and R&D?

Author

Listed:
  • Poldahl, Andreas

    () (FIEF)

  • Gustavsson Tingvall, Patrik

    (FIEF)

Abstract

We test whether predictions of the Aghion and Howitt (2004) model are supported by firm level data. In particular, we analyze if there is an inverted U-shaped relation between competition and R&D. Results show that the inverted U-shaped relation is supported by the Herfindahl index but not by the price cost margin. Using the Herfindahl index results suggest that breaking up monopolies increases R&D while further increases in competition most likely leads to reduced R&D. Comparing different estimators, we find that time-series based estimators typically result in less clear-cut results, probably driven by a lack of time series variation in measures of competition.

Suggested Citation

  • Poldahl, Andreas & Gustavsson Tingvall, Patrik, 2005. "Is There Really an Inverted U-shaped Relation Between Competition and R&D?," Working Paper Series 204, Trade Union Institute for Economic Research.
  • Handle: RePEc:hhs:fiefwp:0204
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://swopec.hhs.se/fiefwp/papers/WP204.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Keller, Wolfgang, 2002. "Trade and the Transmission of Technology," Journal of Economic Growth, Springer, vol. 7(1), pages 5-24, March.
    2. Klette, Tor Jakob, 1999. "Market Power, Scale Economies and Productivity: Estimates from a Panel of Establishment Data," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 47(4), pages 451-476, December.
    3. Philippe Aghion & Nick Bloom & Richard Blundell & Rachel Griffith & Peter Howitt, 2005. "Competition and Innovation: an Inverted-U Relationship," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 120(2), pages 701-728.
    4. Blundell, Richard & Griffith, Rachel & Van Reenen, John, 1995. "Dynamic Count Data Models of Technological Innovation," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 105(429), pages 333-344, March.
    5. Keller, Wolfgang, 2000. "Do Trade Patterns and Technology Flows Affect Productivity Growth?," World Bank Economic Review, World Bank Group, vol. 14(1), pages 17-47, January.
    6. Aghion, Philippe & Howitt, Peter, 1992. "A Model of Growth through Creative Destruction," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 60(2), pages 323-351, March.
    7. Nickell, Stephen J, 1996. "Competition and Corporate Performance," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 104(4), pages 724-746, August.
    8. Leamer, Edward E. & Levinsohn, James, 1995. "International trade theory: The evidence," Handbook of International Economics,in: G. M. Grossman & K. Rogoff (ed.), Handbook of International Economics, edition 1, volume 3, chapter 26, pages 1339-1394 Elsevier.
    9. Benoît Mulkay & Bronwyn H, Hall & Jacques Mairesse, 2000. "Firm Level Investment and R&D in France and the United States : A Comparison," Working Papers 2000-49, Center for Research in Economics and Statistics.
    10. Klette, Tor Jakob & Griliches, Zvi, 1996. "The Inconsistency of Common Scale Estimators When Output Prices Are Unobserved and Endogenous," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 11(4), pages 343-361, July-Aug..
    11. Wolfgang Keller, 2002. "Geographic Localization of International Technology Diffusion," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 92(1), pages 120-142, March.
    12. Jones, Charles I, 1995. "R&D-Based Models of Economic Growth," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 103(4), pages 759-784, August.
    13. Cohen, Wesley M & Levinthal, Daniel A, 1989. "Innovation and Learning: The Two Faces of R&D," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 99(397), pages 569-596, September.
    14. S. W. Davies & Paul A. Geroski, 2000. "Changes In Concentration, Turbulence, And The Dynamics Of Market Shares," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 79(3), pages 383-391, August.
    15. Kraft, Kornelius, 1989. "Market Structure, Firm Characteristics and Innovative Activity," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 37(3), pages 329-336, March.
    16. Zvi Griliches, 1998. "The Search for R&D Spillovers," NBER Chapters,in: R&D and Productivity: The Econometric Evidence, pages 251-268 National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    17. Wolfgang Keller, 1997. "Technology Flows Between Industries: Identification and Productivity Effects," Economic Systems Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 9(2), pages 213-219.
    18. Geroski, P A, 1990. "Innovation, Technological Opportunity, and Market Structure," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 42(3), pages 586-602, July.
    19. Clarke, Roger & Davies, Stephen W, 1982. "Market Structure and Price-Cost Margins," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 49(195), pages 277-287, August.
    20. John Scott, 1984. "Firm versus Industry Variability in R&D Intensity," NBER Chapters,in: R&D, Patents, and Productivity, pages 233-248 National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    21. Moulton, Brent R., 1986. "Random group effects and the precision of regression estimates," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 32(3), pages 385-397, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    More about this item

    Keywords

    R&D; Competition; Firm size; Spillovers;

    JEL classification:

    • D40 - Microeconomics - - Market Structure, Pricing, and Design - - - General
    • L10 - Industrial Organization - - Market Structure, Firm Strategy, and Market Performance - - - General
    • L60 - Industrial Organization - - Industry Studies: Manufacturing - - - General
    • O30 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - General

    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:hhs:fiefwp:0204. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Sune Karlsson). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/fieffse.html .

    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 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.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.