IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/rif/report/60.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Firm Subsidies, Wages and Labor Mobility

Author

Listed:
  • Maliranta, Mika
  • Määttänen, Niku
  • Pajarinen, Mika

Abstract

The bulk of innovation subsidies in Finland are allocated to firms in industries where the employment share of “innovators,” i.e., workers who are specialized in R&D&I, is very high. The average subsidy per employee is typically the highest among young firms. At the firm level, an increase in innovation subsidies is typically associated with an inflow of innovators from high-productivity firms. These findings suggest that innovation subsidies contribute to economic renewal and the diffusion of knowledge between firms. Non-innovation subsidies, in contrast, appear to support established industry structures: a large share of them has been granted to relatively old firms within “traditional” manufacturing industries. Since non-innovation subsidies are systematically allocated to different types of firms than innovation subsidies, they may also crowd out resources from firms that receive innovation subsidies, thereby overriding some of the possible beneficial effects of innovation subsidies.

Suggested Citation

  • Maliranta, Mika & Määttänen, Niku & Pajarinen, Mika, 2016. "Firm Subsidies, Wages and Labor Mobility," ETLA Reports 60, The Research Institute of the Finnish Economy.
  • Handle: RePEc:rif:report:60
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.etla.fi/wp-content/uploads/ETLA-Raportit-Reports-60.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Bresnahan, Timothy F. & Trajtenberg, M., 1995. "General purpose technologies 'Engines of growth'?," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 65(1), pages 83-108, January.
    2. Mika Maliranta & Pierre Mohnen & Petri Rouvinen, 2009. "Is inter-firm labor mobility a channel of knowledge spillovers? Evidence from a linked employer--employee panel," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press, vol. 18(6), pages 1161-1191, December.
    3. Bagger, Jesper & Maliranta, Mika & Määttänen, Niku & Pajarinen, Mika, 2016. "Innovator Mobility in Finland and Denmark," ETLA Reports 48, The Research Institute of the Finnish Economy.
    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. Aalto, Eero & Gustafsson, Robin, 2020. "Innovation Promotion Rationales and Impacts – A Review," ETLA Reports 99, The Research Institute of the Finnish Economy.

    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. Patricia Crifo & Etienne Lehmann, 2001. "Why the Kuznets Curve Will Always Reverse," Post-Print halshs-00150773, HAL.
    2. Antonelli, Cristiano, 2017. "Digital knowledge generation and the appropriability trade-off," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(10), pages 991-1002.
    3. Aghion, Philippe & Akcigit, Ufuk & Howitt, Peter, 2014. "What Do We Learn From Schumpeterian Growth Theory?," Handbook of Economic Growth, in: Philippe Aghion & Steven Durlauf (ed.), Handbook of Economic Growth, edition 1, volume 2, chapter 0, pages 515-563, Elsevier.
    4. Ghisetti, Claudia, 2017. "Demand-pull and environmental innovations: Estimating the effects of innovative public procurement," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 125(C), pages 178-187.
    5. Battke, Benedikt & Schmidt, Tobias S. & Stollenwerk, Stephan & Hoffmann, Volker H., 2016. "Internal or external spillovers—Which kind of knowledge is more likely to flow within or across technologies," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(1), pages 27-41.
    6. Alje van Dam & Koen Frenken, 2020. "Vertical vs. Horizontal Policy in a Capabilities Model of Economic Development," Papers in Evolutionary Economic Geography (PEEG) 2037, Utrecht University, Department of Human Geography and Spatial Planning, Group Economic Geography, revised Aug 2020.
    7. P. Guerrieri & M. Luciani & V. Meliciani, 2011. "The determinants of investment in information and communication technologies," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 20(4), pages 387-403.
    8. repec:dgr:rugggd:gd-79 is not listed on IDEAS
    9. Conti, Raffaele & Gambardella, Alfonso & Novelli, Elena, 2018. "Specializing in Generality: Firm Strategies When Intermediate Markets Work," CEPR Discussion Papers 12782, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    10. Stavins, Robert & Jaffe, Adam & Newell, Richard, 2000. "Technological Change and the Environment," Working Paper Series rwp00-002, Harvard University, John F. Kennedy School of Government.
    11. R. Nahuis & H. van der Wiel, 2005. "How Should Europe’s ICT Ambitions look like? An Interpretative Review of the Facts," Working Papers 05-22, Utrecht School of Economics.
    12. Shane Greenstein, 2001. "Commercialization of the Internet: The Interaction of Public Policy and Private Choices or Why Introducing the Market Worked So Well," NBER Chapters, in: Innovation Policy and the Economy, Volume 1, pages 151-186, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    13. Franck, Raphaël & Galor, Oded, 2021. "Flowers of evil? Industrialization and long run development," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 117(C), pages 108-128.
    14. Edquist, Harald & Henrekson, Magnus, 2004. "Technological Breakthroughs and Productivity Growth," SSE/EFI Working Paper Series in Economics and Finance 0562, Stockholm School of Economics, revised 23 Jan 2006.
    15. Magnus Lodefalk, 2014. "The role of services for manufacturing firm exports," Review of World Economics (Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv), Springer;Institut für Weltwirtschaft (Kiel Institute for the World Economy), vol. 150(1), pages 59-82, February.
    16. Adam Jaffe & Nathan Chappell, 2018. "Worker flows, entry, and productivity in New Zealand’s construction industry," Working Papers 18_02, Motu Economic and Public Policy Research.
    17. Yang, Chia-Hsuan & Nugent, Rebecca & Fuchs, Erica R.H., 2016. "Gains from others’ losses: Technology trajectories and the global division of firms," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(3), pages 724-745.
    18. repec:zbw:rwimat:036 is not listed on IDEAS
    19. Adel Ben Youssef & Ludovic Ragni, 2008. "Uses of Information and Communication Technologies in Europe's Higher Education Institutions: From Digital Divides to Digital Trajectories," Post-Print halshs-00937212, HAL.
    20. Peter Howitt, 2007. "Innovation, Competition and Growth: A Schumpeterian Perspective on Canada’s Economy," C.D. Howe Institute Commentary, C.D. Howe Institute, issue 246, February.
    21. Libaers, Dirk & Meyer, Martin, 2011. "Highly innovative small technology firms, industrial clusters and firm internationalization," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(10), pages 1426-1437.
    22. Chris Forman & Avi Goldfarb & Shane Greenstein, 2003. "How did Location Affect Adoption of the Commercial Internet? Global Village, Urban Density, and Industry Composition," NBER Working Papers 9979, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Firm subsidies; Innovation; Productivity; Labor mobility;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • O31 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Innovation and Invention: Processes and Incentives
    • O33 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Technological Change: Choices and Consequences; Diffusion Processes
    • O38 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Government Policy
    • J62 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Mobility, Unemployment, Vacancies, and Immigrant Workers - - - Job, Occupational and Intergenerational Mobility; Promotion

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:rif:report:60. 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: . General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/etlaafi.html .

    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: Kaija Hyvönen-Rajecki (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/etlaafi.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.