IDEAS home Printed from
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this paper

Looking into the black box of Schumpeterian Growth Theories: an empirical assessment of R&D races

  • Francesco Venturini

This paper assesses whether the most important R&D technologies at the roots of second-generation Schumpeterian growth theories are consistent with patenting and innovation statistics. Using US manufacturing industry data, we estimate various systems of simultaneous equations modeling the innovation functions underlying growth frameworks based on variety expansion, diminishing technological opportunities and rent protection activities. Our evidence indicates that innovation functions characterized by the increasing difficulty of R&D activity fit US data better. This finding relaunches the debate on the soundness of the new Schumpeterian strand of endogenous growth literature.

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:
Download Restriction: no

Paper provided by Università di Perugia, Dipartimento Economia in its series Quaderni del Dipartimento di Economia, Finanza e Statistica with number 94/2011.

in new window

Length: 31 pages
Date of creation: 01 Sep 2011
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:pia:wpaper:94/2011
Contact details of provider: Postal:
via Pascoli, 20 - 06123 Perugia

Phone: +39 075 5855279
Fax: +39 075 5855299
Web page:

More information through EDIRC

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. Susanto Basu & John G. Fernald & Miles S. Kimball, 2004. "Are technology improvements contractionary?," Working Paper Series WP-04-20, Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago.
  2. Elias Dinopoulos & Peter Thompson, 1999. "Scale effects in Schumpeterian models of economic growth," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 9(2), pages 157-185.
  3. Donggyu Sul & Peter C. B. Phillips & Chi-Young Choi, 2005. "Prewhitening Bias in HAC Estimation," Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, Department of Economics, University of Oxford, vol. 67(4), pages 517-546, 08.
  4. Zilibotti, Fabrizio & Aghion, Philippe & Acemoglu, Daron, 2006. "Distance to Frontier, Selection, and Economic Growth," Scholarly Articles 4554122, Harvard University Department of Economics.
  5. Bronwyn H. Hall & Grid Thoma & Salvatore Torrisi, 2006. "The market value of patents and R&D: Evidence from European firms," KITeS Working Papers 186, KITeS, Centre for Knowledge, Internationalization and Technology Studies, Universita' Bocconi, Milano, Italy, revised Nov 2006.
  6. James B. Ang & Jakob B. Madsen, 2010. "Can Second-Generation Endogenous Growth Models Explain The Productivity Trends And Knowledge Production In The Asian Miracle Economies?," CAMA Working Papers 2010-05, Centre for Applied Macroeconomic Analysis, Crawford School of Public Policy, The Australian National University.
  7. L. Rachel Ngai & Roberto M. Samaniego, 2009. "Accounting for Research and Productivity Growth Across Industries," CEP Discussion Papers dp0914, Centre for Economic Performance, LSE.
  8. Patel, Darshak & Ward, Michael R., 2011. "Using patent citation patterns to infer innovation market competition," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(6), pages 886-894, July.
  9. Bruno Amable & Lilas Demmou & Ivan Ledezma, 2010. "Product market regulation, innovation, and distance to frontier," Université Paris1 Panthéon-Sorbonne (Post-Print and Working Papers) hal-00464902, HAL.
  10. Madsen, Jakob B. & Saxena, Shishir & Ang, James B., 2010. "The Indian growth miracle and endogenous growth," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 93(1), pages 37-48, September.
  11. A. Minniti & C.P. Parello & P.S. Segerstrom, 2008. "A Schumpeterian Growth Model with Heterogenous Firms," Working Papers 645, Dipartimento Scienze Economiche, Universita' di Bologna.
  12. Frensch, Richard & Gaucaite Wittich, Vitalija, 2009. "Product variety and technical change," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 88(2), pages 242-257, March.
  13. Aghion, Philippe & Howitt, Peter, 1992. "A Model of Growth through Creative Destruction," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 60(2), pages 323-51, March.
  14. Daniel J. Wilson, 2009. "Beggar Thy Neighbor? The In-State, Out-of-State, and Aggregate Effects of R&D Tax Credits," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 91(2), pages 431-436, May.
  15. Kaddour Hadri & Eiji Kurozumi, 2009. "A Simple Panel Stationarity Test in the Presence of Cross-Sectional Dependence," Economics Working Papers 09-01, Queen's Management School, Queen's University Belfast.
  16. Paul Conway & Giuseppe Nicoletti, 2006. "Product Market Regulation in the Non-Manufacturing Sectors of OECD Countries: Measurement and Highlights," OECD Economics Department Working Papers 530, OECD Publishing.
  17. Ulku, Hulya, 2005. "R&D, Innovation and Growth: Evidence from Four Manufacturing Sectors in OECD Countries," Development Economics and Public Policy Working Papers 30542, University of Manchester, Institute for Development Policy and Management (IDPM).
  18. Segerstrom, Paul S, 1998. "Endogenous Growth without Scale Effects," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 88(5), pages 1290-1310, December.
  19. Elias Dinopoulos & Constantinos Syropoulos, 2007. "Rent Protection as a Barrier to Innovation and Growth," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 32(2), pages 309-332, August.
  20. Nicholas Bloom & Paul M. Romer & Stephen J. Terry & John Van Reenen, 2013. "A Trapped-Factors Model of Innovation," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 103(3), pages 208-13, May.
  21. Charles I. Jones, 1995. "Time Series Tests of Endogenous Growth Models," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 110(2), pages 495-525.
  22. Peretto, Pietro F., 1996. "Technological Change and Population Growth," Working Papers 96-28, Duke University, Department of Economics.
  23. Alwyn Young, 1998. "Growth without Scale Effects," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 106(1), pages 41-63, February.
  24. Norman H. Sedgley, 2006. "A Time Series Test of Innovation-Driven Endogenous Growth," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 44(2), pages 318-332, April.
  25. Philippe Aghion & Nicholas Bloom & Richard Blundell & Rachel Griffith & Peter Howitt, 2002. "Competition and Innovation: An Inverted U Relationship," NBER Working Papers 9269, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  26. Bronwyn H. Hall & Jacques Mairesse, 1992. "Exploring the Relationship Between R&D and Productivity in French Manufacturing Firms," NBER Working Papers 3956, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  27. Ricardo J. Caballero & Adam B. Jaffe, 1993. "How High are the Giants' Shoulders: An Empirical Assessment of Knowledge Spillovers and Creative Destruction in a Model of Economic Growth," NBER Chapters, in: NBER Macroeconomics Annual 1993, Volume 8, pages 15-86 National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  28. Madsen, Jakob & Islam, Md Rabiul & Ang, James, 2010. "Catching Up to the Technology Frontier: The Dichotomy between Innovation and Imitation," MPRA Paper 21701, University Library of Munich, Germany.
  29. Jakob B. Madsen, 2006. "Are there Diminishing Returns to R&D?," EPRU Working Paper Series 06-05, Economic Policy Research Unit (EPRU), University of Copenhagen. Department of Economics.
  30. Jakob B. Madsen & James B. Ang & Rajabrata Banerjee, 2010. "Four Centuries of British Economic Growth: The Roles of Technology and Population," CAMA Working Papers 2010-18, Centre for Applied Macroeconomic Analysis, Crawford School of Public Policy, The Australian National University.
  31. Richard, Blundell & Rachel, Griffith & Peter, Howitt & Susanne, Prantl & Aghion, Philippe, 2009. "The Effects of Entry on Incumbent Innovation and Productivity," Scholarly Articles 4554222, Harvard University Department of Economics.
  32. Laura Bottazzi & Giovanni Peri, 2005. "The International Dynamics of R&D and Innovation in the Short and in the Long Run," NBER Working Papers 11524, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  33. E. Dinopoulos & F. Sener, 2007. "New Directions in Schumpeterian Growth Theory," Chapters, in: Elgar Companion to Neo-Schumpeterian Economics, chapter 42 Edward Elgar Publishing.
  34. Ram C. Acharya & Wolfgang Keller, 2009. "Technology transfer through imports," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 42(4), pages 1411-1448, November.
  35. David Roodman, 2007. "A Note on the Theme of Too Many Instruments," Working Papers 125, Center for Global Development.
  36. Andrea Bassanini & Ekkehard Ernst, 2002. "Labour Market Institutions, Product Market Regulation, and Innovation: Cross-Country Evidence," OECD Economics Department Working Papers 316, OECD Publishing.
  37. Venturini, Francesco, 2012. "Product variety, product quality, and evidence of endogenous growth," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 117(1), pages 74-77.
  38. Jonathan Temple, 2003. "The Long-Run implications of Growth Theories," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 17(3), pages 497-510, 07.
  39. Marios Zachariadis, 2004. "R&D-induced Growth in the OECD?," Review of Development Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 8(3), pages 423-439, 08.
  40. Ang, James B., 2011. "Financial development, liberalization and technological deepening," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 55(5), pages 688-701, June.
  41. Francesco VENTURINI, 2006. "ICT and Productivity Resurgence: a growth model for the Information Age," Working Papers 259, Universita' Politecnica delle Marche (I), Dipartimento di Scienze Economiche e Sociali.
  42. Chol-Won Li, 2003. "Endogenous Growth Without Scale Effects: Comment," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 93(3), pages 1009-1017, June.
  43. Marios Zachariadis, 2003. "R&D, innovation, and technological progress: a test of the Schumpeterian framework without scale effects," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 36(3), pages 566-586, August.
  44. Daniel J. Wilson, 2002. "Is Embodied Technology the Result of Upstream R&D? Industry-Level Evidence," Review of Economic Dynamics, Elsevier for the Society for Economic Dynamics, vol. 5(2), pages 285-317, April.
  45. Anna Ilyina & Roberto M. Samaniego, 2008. "Technology and Finance," IMF Working Papers 08/182, International Monetary Fund.
  46. Anna Ilyina & Roberto Samaniego, 2011. "Technology and Financial Development," Journal of Money, Credit and Banking, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 43(5), pages 899-921, 08.
  47. Samuel S. Kortum, 1997. "Research, Patenting, and Technological Change," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 65(6), pages 1389-1420, November.
  48. Diego Comin & Bart Hobijn, 2005. "Lobbies and Technology Diffusion," NBER Working Papers 11022, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  49. Kul B. Luintel & Mosahid Khan, 2004. "Are International R&D Spillovers Costly for the United States?," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 86(4), pages 896-910, November.
  50. Christopher Laincz & Pietro Peretto, 2006. "Scale effects in endogenous growth theory: an error of aggregation not specification," Journal of Economic Growth, Springer, vol. 11(3), pages 263-288, September.
  51. Barry T. Hirsch & David A. MacPherson, 2003. "Union Membership and Coverage Database from the Current Population Survey: Note," ILR Review, Cornell University, ILR School, vol. 56(2), pages 349-354, January.
  52. Peter Howitt, 1999. "Steady Endogenous Growth with Population and R & D Inputs Growing," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 107(4), pages 715-730, August.
  53. Jean O. Lanjouw & Mark Schankerman, 2004. "Patent Quality and Research Productivity: Measuring Innovation with Multiple Indicators," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 114(495), pages 441-465, 04.
  54. Grieben, Wolf-Heimo & Sener, Fuat, 2009. "Globalization, rent protection institutions, and going alone in freeing trade," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 53(8), pages 1042-1065, November.
  55. "Jakob B." "Madsen", 2008. "Economic Growth, TFP Convergence and the World Export of Ideas: A Century of Evidence," Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 110(1), pages 145-167, 03.
  56. Jakob B. Madsen & EPRU & FRU, 2007. "Semi-Endogenous Versus Schumpeterian Growth Models: Testing The Knowledge Production Function Using International Data," Monash Economics Working Papers 26-07, Monash University, Department of Economics.
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

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

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:pia:wpaper:94/2011. 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: (Davide Castellani)

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.