IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
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: http://www.ec.unipg.it/DEFS/uploads/qd_94web.pdf
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.

as
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: http://www.econ.unipg.it/
Email:


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. 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.
  2. 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.
  3. Chol-Won Li, 2003. "Endogenous Growth Without Scale Effects: Comment," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 93(3), pages 1009-1017, June.
  4. Sul, Donggyu & Phillips, Peter & Choi, Chi-Young, 2003. "Prewhitening Bias in HAC Estimation," Working Papers 141, Department of Economics, The University of Auckland.
  5. Susanto Basu & John G. Fernald & Miles S. Kimball, 1998. "Are technology improvements contractionary?," International Finance Discussion Papers 625, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (U.S.).
  6. Richard Frensch & Vitalija Gaucaite-Wittich, 2006. "Product variety and technical change," Working Papers 265, Institut für Ost- und Südosteuropaforschung (Institute for East and South-East European Studies).
  7. Hulya Ulku, 2007. "R&D, innovation, and growth: evidence from four manufacturing sectors in OECD countries," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 59(3), pages 513-535, July.
  8. Zilibotti, Fabrizio & Aghion, Philippe & Acemoglu, Daron, 2006. "Distance to Frontier, Selection, and Economic Growth," Scholarly Articles 4554122, Harvard University Department of Economics.
  9. Bronwyn H. Hall & Grid Thoma & Salvatore Torrisi, 2007. "The market value of patents and R&D: Evidence from European firms," NBER Working Papers 13426, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  10. Madsen, Jakob & Ang, James & Banerjee, Rajabrata, 2010. "Four Centuries of British Economic Growth: The Roles of Technology and Population," MPRA Paper 23510, University Library of Munich, Germany.
  11. Bruno Amable & Lilas Demmou & Ivan Ledezma, 2010. "Product market regulation, innovation, and distance to frontier," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press, vol. 19(1), pages 117-159, February.
  12. Jakob Madsen & Shishir Saxena & James Ang, 2008. "The Indian Growth Miracle And Endogenous Growth," Monash Economics Working Papers 17/08, Monash University, Department of Economics.
  13. Philippe Aghion & Nicholas Bloom & Richard Blundell & Rachel Griffith & Peter Howitt, 2002. "Competition and innovation: an inverted U relationship," IFS Working Papers W02/04, Institute for Fiscal Studies.
  14. Aghion, P. & Howitt, P., 1989. "A Model Of Growth Through Creative Destruction," UWO Department of Economics Working Papers 8904, University of Western Ontario, Department of Economics.
  15. 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.
  16. Hadri, Kaddour & Kurozumi, Eiji, 2008. "A Simple Panel Stationarity Test in the Presence of Cross-Sectional Dependence," CCES Discussion Paper Series 7, Center for Research on Contemporary Economic Systems, Graduate School of Economics, Hitotsubashi University.
  17. Minniti, A. & Parello, C. & Segerstrom, P. S., 2008. "A Schumpeterian Growth Model with Heterogenous Firms," MPRA Paper 13674, University Library of Munich, Germany.
  18. Ram C. Acharya & Wolfgang Keller, 2007. "Technology Transfer through Imports," NBER Working Papers 13086, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  19. 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.
  20. Jakob Madsen, 2008. "Semi-endogenous versus Schumpeterian growth models: testing the knowledge production function using international data," Journal of Economic Growth, Springer, vol. 13(1), pages 1-26, March.
  21. 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.
  22. Marios Zachariadis, 2004. "R&D-induced Growth in the OECD?," Review of Development Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 8(3), pages 423-439, 08.
  23. Segerstrom, Paul S, 1998. "Endogenous Growth without Scale Effects," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 88(5), pages 1290-1310, December.
  24. "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.
  25. Andrea Bassanini & Ekkehard Ernst, 2002. "Labour Market Institutions, Product Market Regulation, and Innovation: Cross-Country Evidence," OECD Economics Department Working Papers 316, OECD Publishing.
  26. 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.
  27. Anna Ilyina & Roberto Samaniego, 2011. "Technology and Financial Development," Journal of Money, Credit and Banking, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 43(5), pages 899-921, 08.
  28. 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.
  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. Peretto, Pietro F., 1996. "Technological Change and Population Growth," Working Papers 96-28, Duke University, Department of Economics.
  31. 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.
  32. L. Rachel Ngai & Roberto M. Samaniego, 2009. "Accounting for research and productivity growth across industries," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 25496, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
  33. 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.
  34. 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.
  35. James B. Ang & Jakob B. Madsen, 2011. "Can Second-Generation Endogenous Growth Models Explain the Productivity Trends and Knowledge Production in the Asian Miracle Economies?," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 93(4), pages 1360-1373, November.
  36. 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.
  37. 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.
  38. Jakob B. Madsen & Md. Rabiul Islam & James B. Ang, 2010. "Catching up to the technology frontier: the dichotomy between innovation and imitation," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 43(4), pages 1389-1411, November.
  39. 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.
  40. 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.
  41. 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.
  42. Samuel S. Kortum, 1997. "Research, Patenting, and Technological Change," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 65(6), pages 1389-1420, November.
  43. David Roodman, 2007. "A Note on the Theme of Too Many Instruments," Working Papers 125, Center for Global Development.
  44. Diego Comin & Bart Hobijn, 2009. "Lobbies and Technology Diffusion," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 91(2), pages 229-244, May.
  45. E. Dinopoulos & F. Sener, 2007. "New Directions in Schumpeterian Growth Theory," Chapters, in: Elgar Companion to Neo-Schumpeterian Economics, chapter 42 Edward Elgar Publishing.
  46. Elias Dinopoulos & Peter Thompson, 1999. "Scale effects in Schumpeterian models of economic growth," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 9(2), pages 157-185.
  47. 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.
  48. Marios Zachariadis, . "R&D, Innovation, and Technological Progress: A Test of the Schumpeterian Framework Without Scale Effects," Departmental Working Papers 2002-18, Department of Economics, Louisiana State University.
  49. Venturini, Francesco, 2012. "Product variety, product quality, and evidence of endogenous growth," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 117(1), pages 74-77.
  50. 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.
  51. Ang, James B., 2011. "Financial development, liberalization and technological deepening," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 55(5), pages 688-701, June.
  52. Anna Ilyina & Roberto M. Samaniego, 2008. "Technology and Finance," IMF Working Papers 08/182, International Monetary Fund.
  53. 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.
  54. Alwyn Young, 1998. "Growth without Scale Effects," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 106(1), pages 41-63, February.
  55. 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.
  56. Jonathan Temple, 2003. "The Long-Run implications of Growth Theories," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 17(3), pages 497-510, 07.
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.