IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Login to save this paper or follow this series

Market Concentration, Corporate Governance and Innovation: Partial and Combined Effects in US-Listed Firms

  • Hashem, Nawar
  • Ugur, Mehmet

Existing research on the relationship between market concentration and innovation has produced conflicting findings. In addition, the emerging literature on the relationship between corporate governance and innovation tends to focus only on partial effects of corporate governance on innovation. We aim to contribute to the debate by investigating both partial and combined effects of corporate governance and market concentration on innovation. Utilising a dataset for 1,400 non-financial US-listed companies and two-way cluster-robust estimation methodology, we report several findings. First, the relationship between market concentration and innovation is non-linear. Secondly, the relationship has a U-shape in the case of input measure of innovation (research and development - R&D – expenditures); but it has an inverted-U shape when net book-value of brands and patents is used as output measure of innovation. Third, corporate governance indicators such as anti-takeover defences and insider control tend to have a negative partial effect on R&D expenditures but a positive partial effect on net book-value of brands and patents. Finally, when interacted with market concentration, anti-takeover defences and insider control act as complements to market concentration. Hence, firms with strong anti-take-over defences and under insider control tend to spend more on R&D but are less able to generate valuable brands and patents as market concentration increases. These results are based on two-way cluster-robust estimation, which takes account of both serial and cross-sectional dependence in the error terms.

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://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/44135/1/MPRA_paper_44135.pdf
File Function: original version
Download Restriction: no

Paper provided by University Library of Munich, Germany in its series MPRA Paper with number 44135.

as
in new window

Length:
Date of creation: Sep 2012
Date of revision: Sep 2012
Publication status: Published in Journal of Governance and Regulation Issue 3.Volume(2012): pp. 199-215
Handle: RePEc:pra:mprapa:44135
Contact details of provider: Postal: Schackstr. 4, D-80539 Munich, Germany
Phone: +49-(0)89-2180-2219
Fax: +49-(0)89-2180-3900
Web page: http://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de

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. Aghion, Philippe & Dewatripont, Mathias & Rey, Patrick, 1999. "Competition, Financial Discipline and Growth," Review of Economic Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 66(4), pages 825-52, October.
  2. Filippo Belloc, 2012. "Corporate Governance And Innovation: A Survey," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 26(5), pages 835-864, December.
  3. Reinganum, Jennifer R., 1982. "Uncertain Innovation and the Persistence of Monopoly," Working Papers 431, California Institute of Technology, Division of the Humanities and Social Sciences.
  4. Philippe Aghion & Nick Bloom & Richard Blundell & Rachel Griffith & Peter Howitt, 2005. "Competition and Innovation: An Inverted-U Relationship," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, MIT Press, vol. 120(2), pages 701-728, May.
  5. Michael Polder & Erik Veldhuizen, 2012. "Innovation and Competition in the Netherlands: Testing the Inverted-U for Industries and Firms," Journal of Industry, Competition and Trade, Springer, vol. 12(1), pages 67-91, March.
  6. Stein, Jeremy C, 1988. "Takeover Threats and Managerial Myopia," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 96(1), pages 61-80, February.
  7. Michael Peneder, 2012. "Competition and Innovation: Revisiting the Inverted-U Relationship," Journal of Industry, Competition and Trade, Springer, vol. 12(1), pages 1-5, March.
  8. Reinganum, Jennifer R., . "Innovation and Industry Evolution," Working Papers 426, California Institute of Technology, Division of the Humanities and Social Sciences.
  9. Whitney K. Newey & Kenneth D. West, 1986. "A Simple, Positive Semi-Definite, Heteroskedasticity and AutocorrelationConsistent Covariance Matrix," NBER Technical Working Papers 0055, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  10. Kamien, Morton I & Schwartz, Nancy L, 1976. "On the Degree of Rivalry for Maximum Innovative Activity," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, MIT Press, vol. 90(2), pages 245-60, May.
  11. Maria Rosa Battagion & Lucia Tajoli, 1999. "Ownership Structure, Innovation Process and Competitive Performance: the Case of Italy," KITeS Working Papers 120, KITeS, Centre for Knowledge, Internationalization and Technology Studies, Universita' Bocconi, Milano, Italy, revised Nov 2000.
  12. Gilbert, Richard J & Newbery, David M G, 1982. "Preemptive Patenting and the Persistence of Monopoly," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 72(3), pages 514-26, June.
  13. Charles Bérubé & Marc Duhamel & Daniel Ershov, 2012. "Market Incentives for Business Innovation: Results from Canada," Journal of Industry, Competition and Trade, Springer, vol. 12(1), pages 47-65, March.
  14. Doug Miller & A. Colin Cameron & Jonah B. Gelbach, 2006. "Bootstrap-Based Improvements for Inference with Clustered Errors," Working Papers 621, University of California, Davis, Department of Economics.
  15. Fama, Eugene F & MacBeth, James D, 1973. "Risk, Return, and Equilibrium: Empirical Tests," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 81(3), pages 607-36, May-June.
  16. Jeffrey M. Wooldridge, 2003. "Cluster-Sample Methods in Applied Econometrics," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 93(2), pages 133-138, May.
  17. Irena Grosfeld & Thierry Tressel, 2002. "Competition and ownership structure: Substitutes or complements? Evidence from the Warsaw Stock Exchange," The Economics of Transition, The European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, vol. 10(3), pages 525-551, November.
  18. Chiara Peroni & Ivete Ferreira, 2012. "Competition and Innovation in Luxembourg," Journal of Industry, Competition and Trade, Springer, vol. 12(1), pages 93-117, March.
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:pra:mprapa:44135. 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: (Ekkehart Schlicht)

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.