IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/iae/iaewps/wp2004n27.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The Determinants of Research and Development and Intellectual Property Usage among Australian Companies, 1989 to 2002

Author

Listed:
  • William Griffiths

    (Centre for Microeconometrics, Department of Economics, The University of Melbourne)

  • Elizabeth Webster

    (Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research, The University of Melbourne)

Abstract

This paper traces the innovation pathways of new creations from R & D activity through to intellectual property (IP) applications using enterprise panel data from 1989 to 2002. Our estimation method explicitly addresses the selection issues associated with missing R&D data which is a common problem among this type of data set. We find that R&D activity is a highly path dependent process that relies heavily on firm specific effects. These firm specific effects were subsequently found to be correlated with managerial style – more aggressive and intuitive managers have higher R&D ceteris paribus – and extensive use of incentive schemes for employees within the firm. In addition, we find that R&D is higher when the previous year’s enterprise debt ratio is lower, the speed of technological change is faster, the firm’s ability to absorb knowledge spillovers is greater and the product market is less contestable. Furthermore, these firms appear to be using the various methods of appropriation, IP and non-IP, as complementary packages to capture the quasi-rents from previous R&D expenditure rather than as substitutes.

Suggested Citation

  • William Griffiths & Elizabeth Webster, 2004. "The Determinants of Research and Development and Intellectual Property Usage among Australian Companies, 1989 to 2002," Melbourne Institute Working Paper Series wp2004n27, Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research, The University of Melbourne.
    • Handle: RePEc:iae:iaewps:wp2004n27
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://melbourneinstitute.unimelb.edu.au/downloads/working_paper_series/wp2004n27.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Hall, Bronwyn H & Griliches, Zvi & Hausman, Jerry A, 1986. "Patents and R and D: Is There a Lag?," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 27(2), pages 265-283, June.
    2. Jaffe, Adam B, 1986. "Technological Opportunity and Spillovers of R&D: Evidence from Firms' Patents, Profits, and Market Value," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 76(5), pages 984-1001, December.
    3. J. M. Keynes, 1937. "The General Theory of Employment," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 51(2), pages 209-223.
    4. Zvi Griliches, 1984. "Market Value, R&D, and Patents," NBER Chapters, in: R&D, Patents, and Productivity, pages 249-252, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    5. repec:bla:scotjp:v:48:y:2001:i:3:p:260-82 is not listed on IDEAS
    6. repec:bla:obuest:v:63:y:2001:i:0:p:671-96 is not listed on IDEAS
    7. Alfred Kleinknecht & Jeroen O. N. Reijnen & Wendy Smits, 1993. "Collecting Literature-based Innovation Output Indicators. The Experience in the Netherlands," Palgrave Macmillan Books, in: Alfred Kleinknecht & Donald Bain (ed.), New Concepts in Innovation Output Measurement, chapter 3, pages 42-84, Palgrave Macmillan.
    8. Anne Leahy & Joanne Loundes & Elizabeth Webster & Jongsay Yong, 2004. "Industrial Capabilities in Victoria," The Economic and Labour Relations Review, , vol. 15(1), pages 74-98, June.
    9. Anne Leahy & Joanne Loundes & Elizabeth Webster & Jongsay Yong, 2003. "Industrial Capabilities and Productivity in Victoria: Part I The Company Survey," Melbourne Institute Working Paper Series wp2003n12, Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research, The University of Melbourne.
    10. Keith W. Chauvin & Mark Hirschey, 1997. "Market structure and the value of growth," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 18(3), pages 247-254.
    11. Chaoshin Chiao, 2002. "Relationship between debt, R&D and physical investment, evidence from US firm-level data," Applied Financial Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 12(2), pages 105-121.
    12. 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.
    13. C. Greenhalgh & M. Longland & D. Bosworth, 2001. "Technological Activity and Employment in a Panel of UK Firms," Scottish Journal of Political Economy, Scottish Economic Society, vol. 48(3), pages 260-282, August.
    14. Laurie Hunter, 2002. "Intellectual Capital: Accumulation and Appropriation," Melbourne Institute Working Paper Series wp2002n22, Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research, The University of Melbourne.
    15. Ester Martinez-Ros & José M. Labeaga, 2002. "Modelling Innovation Activities Using Discrete Choice Panel Data Models," Palgrave Macmillan Books, in: Alfred Kleinknecht & Pierre Mohnen (ed.), Innovation and Firm Performance, chapter 7, pages 150-171, Palgrave Macmillan.
    16. Richard Levin & Peter C. Reiss, 1984. "Tests of a Schumpeterian Model of R&D and Market Structure," NBER Chapters, in: R&D, Patents, and Productivity, pages 175-208, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    17. Uri Ben-Zion, 1984. "The R&D and Investment Decision and Its Relationship to the Firm's Market Value: Some Preliminary Results," NBER Chapters, in: R&D, Patents, and Productivity, pages 299-314, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    18. 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.
    19. Bronwyn H. Hall & Robert E. Hall, 1993. "The Value and Performance of U.S. Corporations," Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, Economic Studies Program, The Brookings Institution, vol. 24(1), pages 1-50.
    20. Heinz Hollenstein, 2002. "Determinants of the Adoption of Information and Communication Technologies (ICT)," WIFO Working Papers 183, WIFO.
    21. Spyros Arvanitis, 2008. "Explaining Innovative Activity In Service Industries: Micro Data Evidence For Switzerland," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 17(3), pages 209-225.
    22. Dietmar Harhoff & Francis Narin & F. M. Scherer & Katrin Vopel, 1999. "Citation Frequency And The Value Of Patented Inventions," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 81(3), pages 511-515, August.
    23. Rothwell, R. & Freeman, C. & Horlsey, A. & Jervis, V. T. P. & Robertson, A. B. & Townsend, J., 1974. "SAPPHO updated - project SAPPHO phase II," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 3(3), pages 258-291, November.
    24. Levin, Richard C & Cohen, Wesley M & Mowery, David C, 1985. "R&D Appropriability, Opportunity, and Market Structure: New Evidence on Some Schumpeterian Hypotheses," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 75(2), pages 20-24, May.
    25. Chang-Yang Lee, 2002. "Industry R&D intensity distributions: regularities and underlying determinants," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 12(3), pages 307-341.
    26. Paul Geroski & John Reenen & Chris Walters, 2002. "Innovations, Patents and Cash Flow," Palgrave Macmillan Books, in: Alfred Kleinknecht & Pierre Mohnen (ed.), Innovation and Firm Performance, chapter 2, pages 31-55, Palgrave Macmillan.
    27. Covin, Jeffrey G. & Slevin, Dennis P. & Heeley, Michael B., 2001. "Strategic decision making in an intuitive vs. technocratic mode: structural and environmental considerations," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 52(1), pages 51-67, April.
    28. Manuel Arellano & Stephen Bond, 1991. "Some Tests of Specification for Panel Data: Monte Carlo Evidence and an Application to Employment Equations," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 58(2), pages 277-297.
    29. 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.
    30. Alfred Kleinknecht & Pierre Mohnen (ed.), 2002. "Innovation and Firm Performance," Palgrave Macmillan Books, Palgrave Macmillan, number 978-0-230-59588-0, December.
    31. 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.
    32. Richard Blundell & Rachel Griffith & John van Reenen, 1999. "Market Share, Market Value and Innovation in a Panel of British Manufacturing Firms," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 66(3), pages 529-554.
    33. Nicholas Bloom & John Van Reenen, 2002. "Patents, Real Options and Firm Performance," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 112(478), pages 97-116, March.
    34. Richard C. Levin & Alvin K. Klevorick & Richard R. Nelson & Sidney G. Winter, 1988. "Appropriating the Returns from Industrial R&D," Cowles Foundation Discussion Papers 862, Cowles Foundation for Research in Economics, Yale University.
    35. Paul H. Jensen & Elizabeth Webster, 2004. "Examining Biases in Measures of Firm Innovation," Melbourne Institute Working Paper Series wp2004n10, Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research, The University of Melbourne.
    36. Paul Stoneman & Otto Toivanen, 2001. "The Impact of Revised Recommended Accounting Practices on R&D Reporting by UK Firms," International Journal of the Economics of Business, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 8(1), pages 123-136.
    37. Christine Greenhalgh & Mark Longland & Oxford Intellectual Property Research Centre, 2002. "Running to Stand Still? - Intellectual Property and Value Added in Innovating Firms," Economics Series Working Papers 134, University of Oxford, Department of Economics.
    38. 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.
    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. Paul H. Jensen & Elizabeth Webster, 2009. "Another Look At The Relationship Between Innovation Proxies," Australian Economic Papers, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 48(3), pages 252-269, September.
    2. Russell Thomson, 2010. "Tax Policy and R&D Investment by Australian Firms," The Economic Record, The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 86(273), pages 260-280, June.
    3. Elif Kalayci & Mehmet Teoman Pamukçu, 2011. "Analysis of Foreign Ownership, R&D and Spillovers in Developing Countries: Evidence from Turkey," Working Papers 642, Economic Research Forum, revised 10 Jan 2011.
    4. Alfons Palangkaraya, 2010. "Patent Application Databases," Australian Economic Review, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research, vol. 43(1), pages 77-87, March.
    5. Fosu, Prince, 2016. "Infrastructure and Foreign Direct Investment Inflows: Evidence from Ghana," MPRA Paper 100375, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 13 May 2020.

    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. William Griffiths & Elizabeth Webster, 2009. "What Governs Firm-Level R&D: Internal or External Factors?," Melbourne Institute Working Paper Series wp2009n13, Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research, The University of Melbourne.
    2. Paul H. Jensen & Elizabeth Webster, 2004. "Examining Biases in Measures of Firm Innovation," Melbourne Institute Working Paper Series wp2004n10, Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research, The University of Melbourne.
    3. 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.
    4. Paul H. Jensen & Elizabeth Webster, 2004. "SMEs and Their Use of Intellectual Property Rights in Australia," Melbourne Institute Working Paper Series wp2004n17, Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research, The University of Melbourne.
    5. Serena Morricone & Raffaele Oriani, 2011. "Stock Market Valuation of Patent Portfolios," Chapters, in: Federico Munari & Raffaele Oriani (ed.), The Economic Valuation of Patents, chapter 13, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    6. Federico Munari & Raffaele Oriani (ed.), 2011. "The Economic Valuation of Patents," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 13561.
    7. 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.
    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. Yosuke Okada, 2005. "Competition and Productivity in Japanese Manufacturing Industries," NBER Working Papers 11540, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    10. Cuervo-Cazurra, Alvaro & Un, C. Annique, 2007. "Regional economic integration and R&D investment," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(2), pages 227-246, March.
    11. Okada, Yosuke, 2005. "Competition and productivity in Japanese manufacturing industries," Journal of the Japanese and International Economies, Elsevier, vol. 19(4), pages 586-616, December.
    12. Bruno Cassiman & Reinhilde Veugelers, 1998. "R&D cooperation and spillovers: Some empirical evidence," Economics Working Papers 328, Department of Economics and Business, Universitat Pompeu Fabra.
    13. Stefano Breschi, 2000. "The Geography of Innovation: A Cross-sector Analysis," Regional Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 34(3), pages 213-229.
    14. Chang-Yang Lee & Ji-Hwan Lee & Ajai S. Gaur, 2017. "Are large business groups conducive to industry innovation? The moderating role of technological appropriability," Asia Pacific Journal of Management, Springer, vol. 34(2), pages 313-337, June.
    15. Per Botolf Maurseth, 2005. "Lovely but dangerous: The impact of patent citations on patent renewal," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 14(5), pages 351-374.
    16. Dirk Czarnitzki & Katrin Hussinger & Bart Leten, 2020. "How Valuable are Patent Blocking Strategies?," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 56(3), pages 409-434, May.
    17. Michele Cincera, 2005. "Firms' productivity growth and R&D spillovers: An analysis of alternative technological proximity measures," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 14(8), pages 657-682.
    18. Yu-Shan Chen & Chun-Yu Shih, 2011. "Re-examine the relationship between patents and Tobin’s q," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 89(3), pages 781-794, December.
    19. Anna Laura Baraldi & Claudia Cantabene & Giulio Perani, 2014. "Reverse causality in the R&D-patents relationship: an interpretation of the innovation persistence," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 23(3), pages 304-326, April.
    20. Lambertini, Luca & Poyago-Theotoky, Joanna & Tampieri, Alessandro, 2017. "Cournot competition and “green” innovation: An inverted-U relationship," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(C), pages 116-123.

    More about this item

    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:iae:iaewps:wp2004n27. 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: Sheri Carnegie (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/mimelau.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.