IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this paper

Corporate R&D and firm efficiency: Evidence from Europe’s top R&D investors

Author Info

Listed author(s):
  • Subal C. Kumbhakar

    ()

    (State University of New York at Binghamton)

  • Raquel Ortega-Argilés

    ()

    (IN+ Centre for Innovation, Technology and Policy Research, Instituto Superior Técnico)

  • Lesley Potters

    ()

    (Utrecht School of Economics)

  • Marco Vivarelli

    ()

    (Università Cattolica, Milano-Piacenza)

  • Peter Voigt

    ()

    (European Commission - JRC)

Abstract

The main objective of this study is to investigate the impact of corporate R&D activities on firm performance, measured by labour productivity. To this end, the stochastic frontier technique is used on a unique unbalanced longitudinal dataset on top European R&D investors over the period 2000–2005. The study quantifies technical inefficiency of individual firms. From a policy perspective, the results of this study suggest that – if the aim is to leverage firms’ productivity – emphasis should be put on supporting corporate R&D in high-tech sectors and, to some ex-tent, in medium-tech sectors. On the other hand, corporate R&D in the low-tech sector is found to have a minor effect in explaining productivity. Instead, encouraging investment in fixed assets appears important for the productivity of low-tech industries. Hence, the allocation of support for corporate R&D seems to be as important as its overall increase and an ‘erga omnes’ approach across all sectors appears inappropriate. However, with regard to technical efficiency, R&D intensity is found to be a pivotal factor in explaining firm efficiency. This is true for all industries.

Download Info

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

File URL: http://iri.jrc.ec.europa.eu/documents/10180/20b6bb81-7eca-4603-b0d3-31ac0cea104e
Download Restriction: no

Paper provided by Joint Research Centre (Seville site) in its series JRC Working Papers on Corporate R&D and Innovation with number 2010-11.

as
in new window

Length: 29 pages
Date of creation: Dec 2010
Handle: RePEc:ipt:wpaper:201011
Contact details of provider: Postal:
C/ Inca Garcilaso, s/n 41092 Seville

Phone: +34 954 48 8318
Fax: +34 954 48 8300
Web page: https://ec.europa.eu/jrc/en

More information through EDIRC

Keywords: Corporate R&D; productivity; technical efficiency; stochastic frontier analysis;

Other versions of this item:

Find related papers by JEL classification:
  • L2 - Industrial Organization - - Firm Objectives, Organization, and Behavior
  • O3 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights

This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:

as
in new window


  1. J.W.B. Bos & C. Economidou & M. Koetter, 2008. "Technology Clubs and Growth Patterns: Evidence from EU Manufacturing," Working Papers 08-03, Utrecht School of Economics.
  2. Fernandez C. & Koop G. & Steel M.F.J., 2002. "Multiple-Output Production With Undesirable Outputs: An Application to Nitrogen Surplus in Agriculture," Journal of the American Statistical Association, American Statistical Association, vol. 97, pages 432-442, June.
  3. Van Reenen, John, 1997. "Employment and Technological Innovation: Evidence from U.K. Manufacturing Firms," Journal of Labor Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 15(2), pages 255-284, April.
  4. Los, Bart & Timmer, Marcel P., 2005. "The 'appropriate technology' explanation of productivity growth differentials: An empirical approach," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 77(2), pages 517-531, August.
  5. Zvi Griliches, 1998. "Comparing Productivity Growth: An Exploration of French and U.S. Industrial and Firm Data," NBER Chapters,in: R&D and Productivity: The Econometric Evidence, pages 157-186 National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  6. Rachel Griffith & Stephen Redding & John Van Reenen, 2004. "Mapping the Two Faces of R&D: Productivity Growth in a Panel of OECD Industries," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 86(4), pages 883-895, November.
  7. Subal Kumbhakar & Raquel Ortega-Argilés & Lesley Potters & Marco Vivarelli & Peter Voigt, 2012. "Corporate R&D and firm efficiency: evidence from Europe’s top R&D investors," Journal of Productivity Analysis, Springer, vol. 37(2), pages 125-140, April.
  8. Yasmina Reem Limam & Stephen M. Miller, 2004. "Explaining Economic Growth: Factor Accumulation, Total Factor Productivity Growth, and Production Efficiency Improvement," Working papers 2004-20, University of Connecticut, Department of Economics.
  9. Susanto Basu & David N. Weil, 1998. "Appropriate Technology and Growth," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 113(4), pages 1025-1054.
  10. Adams, Robert M & Berger, Allen N & Sickles, Robin C, 1999. "Semiparametric Approaches to Stochastic Panel Frontiers with Applications in the Banking Industry," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, American Statistical Association, vol. 17(3), pages 349-358, July.
  11. M. Koetter & J.W.B. Bos & C. Economidou & J. Kolari, 2007. "Do Technology and Efficiency Differences determine Productivity?," Working Papers 07-14, Utrecht School of Economics.
  12. Mariacristina Piva & Marco Vivarelli, 2005. "Innovation and Employment: Evidence from Italian Microdata," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 86(1), pages 65-83, October.
  13. Andrew Worthington & Brian Dollery, 2002. "Incorporating contextual information in public sector efficiency analyses: a comparative study of NSW local government," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 34(4), pages 453-464.
  14. White, Halbert, 1980. "A Heteroskedasticity-Consistent Covariance Matrix Estimator and a Direct Test for Heteroskedasticity," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 48(4), pages 817-838, May.
  15. Schankerman, Mark & Pakes, Ariel, 1986. "Estimates of the Value of Patent Rights in European Countries during the Post-1950 Period," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 96(384), pages 1052-1076, December.
  16. Hans Lööf & Almas Heshmati, 2003. "The link between firm-level innovation and aggregate productivity growth: a cross-country examination," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 12(2), pages 131-147, August.
  17. Jacques Mairesse & Pierre Mohnen, 2001. "To Be or Not To Be Innovative: An Exercise in Measurement," NBER Working Papers 8644, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  18. Pitt, Mark M. & Lee, Lung-Fei, 1981. "The measurement and sources of technical inefficiency in the Indonesian weaving industry," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 9(1), pages 43-64, August.
  19. Stefano Scarpetta & Thierry Tressel, 2002. "Productivity and Convergence in a Panel of OECD Industries: Do Regulations and Institutions Matter?," OECD Economics Department Working Papers 342, OECD Publishing.
  20. 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, 01.
  21. Bronwyn H. Hall, 2010. "Measuring the Returns to R&D: The Depreciation Problem," NBER Chapters,in: Contributions in Memory of Zvi Griliches, pages 341-381 National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  22. Winter, Sidney G., 1984. "Schumpeterian competition in alternative technological regimes," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 5(3-4), pages 287-320.
  23. Durlauf, Steven N & Johnson, Paul A, 1995. "Multiple Regimes and Cross-Country Growth Behaviour," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 10(4), pages 365-384, Oct.-Dec..
  24. Stanton, Kenneth R., 2002. "Trends in relationship lending and factors affecting relationship lending efficiency," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 26(1), pages 127-152, January.
  25. 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.
  26. Koop, Gary, 2001. "Cross-Sectoral Patterns of Efficiency and Technical Change in Manufacturing," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 42(1), pages 73-103, February.
  27. Fried, Harold O. & Lovell, C. A. Knox & Schmidt, Shelton S. (ed.), 2008. "The Measurement of Productive Efficiency and Productivity Growth," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780195183528.
  28. M. Sanders & J.W.B. Bos & C. Economidou, 2007. "R&D over the Life Cycle," Working Papers 07-18, Utrecht School of Economics.
  29. Cameron, Gavin & Proudman, James & Redding, Stephen, 2005. "Technological convergence, R&D, trade and productivity growth," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 49(3), pages 775-807, April.
  30. Zhang, Yaoqi, 2002. "The impacts of economic reform on the efficiency of silviculture: a non-parametric approach," Environment and Development Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 7(01), pages 107-122, February.
  31. Dosi, Giovanni, 1997. "Opportunities, Incentives and the Collective Patterns of Technological Change," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 107(444), pages 1530-1547, September.
  32. Hunt-McCool, Janet & Koh, Samuel C & Francis, Bill B, 1996. "Testing for Deliberate Underpricing in the IPO Premarket: A Stochastic Frontier Approach," Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 9(4), pages 1251-1269.
  33. Bettina Becker & Nigel Pain, 2008. "What Determines Industrial R&D Expenditure In The Uk?," Manchester School, University of Manchester, vol. 76(1), pages 66-87, 01.
  34. Pavitt, Keith, 1984. "Sectoral patterns of technical change: Towards a taxonomy and a theory," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 13(6), pages 343-373, December.
  35. Charles R. Hulten, 1991. "The Measurement of Capital," NBER Chapters,in: Fifty Years of Economic Measurement: The Jubilee of the Conference on Research in Income and Wealth, pages 119-158 National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  36. Peters, Bettina & Lööf, Hans & Janz, Norbert, 2003. "Firm Level Innovation and Productivity: Is there a Common Story Across Countries?," ZEW Discussion Papers 03-26, ZEW - Zentrum für Europäische Wirtschaftsforschung / Center for European Economic Research.
  37. repec:adr:anecst:y:1994:i:33:p:11 is not listed on IDEAS
  38. Lichtenberg, Frank R & Siegel, Donald, 1991. "The Impact of R&D Investment on Productivity--New Evidence Using Linked R&D-LRD Data," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 29(2), pages 203-229, April.
  39. Tor Jakob Klette & Samuel Kortum, 2004. "Innovating Firms and Aggregate Innovation," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 112(5), pages 986-1018, October.
  40. Luis Orea & Subal C. Kumbhakar, 2004. "Efficiency measurement using a latent class stochastic frontier model," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 29(1), pages 169-183, January.
  41. Conte, Andrea & Vivarelli, Marco, 2005. "One or Many Knowledge Production Functions? Mapping Innovative Activity Using Microdata," IZA Discussion Papers 1878, Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA).
  42. Hall, Bronwyn H. & Mairesse, Jacques, 1995. "Exploring the relationship between R&D and productivity in French manufacturing firms," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 65(1), pages 263-293, January.
  43. Jacques Mairesse & Mohamed Sassenou, 1991. "R&D Productivity: A Survey of Econometric Studies at the Firm Level," NBER Working Papers 3666, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  44. Charles I. Jones, 2005. "The Shape of Production Functions and the Direction of Technical Change," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 120(2), pages 517-549.
  45. Koop, Gary & Osiewalski, Jacek & Steel, Mark F J, 2000. "Modeling the Sources of Output Growth in a Panel of Countries," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, American Statistical Association, vol. 18(3), pages 284-299, July.
  46. Kuen-Hung Tsai & Jiann-Chyuan Wang, 2004. "R&D Productivity and the Spillover Effects of High-tech Industry on the Traditional Manufacturing Sector: The Case of Taiwan," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 27(10), pages 1555-1570, November.
  47. Hung-Jen Wang, 2002. "Heteroscedasticity and Non-Monotonic Efficiency Effects of a Stochastic Frontier Model," Journal of Productivity Analysis, Springer, vol. 18(3), pages 241-253, November.
  48. Abdul Wadud & Ben White, 2000. "Farm household efficiency in Bangladesh: a comparison of stochastic frontier and DEA methods," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 32(13), pages 1665-1673.
  49. Wang, Hung-Jen, 2006. "Stochastic frontier models," MPRA Paper 31079, University Library of Munich, Germany.
  50. 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.
  51. Raquel Ortega-Argilés & Mariacristina Piva & Lesley Potters & Marco Vivarelli, 2010. "Is Corporate R&D Investment In High-Tech Sectors More Effective?," Contemporary Economic Policy, Western Economic Association International, vol. 28(3), pages 353-365, 07.
  52. Bruno Crepon & Emmanuel Duguet & Jacques Mairesse, 1998. "Research, Innovation And Productivity: An Econometric Analysis At The Firm Level," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 7(2), pages 115-158.
  53. Stijn Reinhard & C.A. Knox Lovell & Geert Thijssen, 1999. "Econometric Estimation of Technical and Environmental Efficiency: An Application to Dutch Dairy Farms," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 81(1), pages 44-60.
  54. Maria Laura Parisi & Fabio Schiantarelli & Alessandro Sembenelli, 2002. "Productivity, Innovation Creation and Absorption, and R&D: Micro Evidence for Italy," Boston College Working Papers in Economics 526, Boston College Department of Economics.
  55. repec:fth:harver:1487 is not listed on IDEAS
  56. Mark Rogers, 2006. "R&D and Productivity in the UK: evidence from firm-level data in the 1990s," Economics Series Working Papers 255, University of Oxford, Department of Economics.
  57. Lozano-Vivas, Ana & Humphrey, David B., 2002. "Bias in Malmquist index and cost function productivity measurement in banking," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 76(2), pages 177-188, March.
  58. Colin Thirtle & Bhavani Shankar & Puneet Chitkara & Somnath Chatterjee & Madhu S. Mohanty, 2000. "Size Does Matter: Technical and Scale Efficiency in Indian State Tax Jurisdictions," Review of Development Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 4(3), pages 340-352, October.
  59. Bos, J.W.B. & Economidou, C. & Koetter, M. & Kolari, J.W., 2010. "Do all countries grow alike?," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 91(1), pages 113-127, January.
  60. Aigner, Dennis & Lovell, C. A. Knox & Schmidt, Peter, 1977. "Formulation and estimation of stochastic frontier production function models," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 6(1), pages 21-37, July.
  61. Bos, J.W.B. & Economidou, C. & Koetter, M., 2010. "Technology clubs, R&D and growth patterns: Evidence from EU manufacturing," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 54(1), pages 60-79, January.
  62. Zvi Griliches & Jacques Mairesse, 1981. "Productivity and R and D at the Firm Level," NBER Working Papers 0826, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  63. Thomas Hatzichronoglou, 1997. "Revision of the High-Technology Sector and Product Classification," OECD Science, Technology and Industry Working Papers 1997/2, OECD Publishing.
  64. Piesse, Jenifer & Thirtle, Colin, 2000. "A Stochastic Frontier Approach to Firm Level Efficiency, Technological Change, and Productivity during the Early Transition in Hungary," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 28(3), pages 473-501, September.
  65. Thirtle, Colin, et al, 2000. "Size Does Matter: Technical and Scale Efficiency in Indian State Tax Jurisdictions," Review of Development Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 4(3), pages 340-352, October.
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

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

as
in new window


Cited by:
This item has more than 25 citations. To prevent cluttering this page, these citations are listed on a separate page.

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

Access and download statistics

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ipt:wpaper:201011. 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: (Publication Officer)

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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 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.

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.