IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/sin/wpaper/06-a012.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Technological Regimes and Firm Survival: Evidence across Sectors and over Time

Author

Listed:

Abstract

In addition to the usual variables representing firm- and industry-specific features that impact the firm’s survival, this paper uses three R&D related variables to reflect two Schumpeterian technological regimes: creative destruction (the entrepreneurial regime) and creative accumulation (the routinized regime). After controlling for age, size, entry barriers, capital intensity, the profit margin, the concentration ratio, the profit-cost ratio and entry rates, the empirical results confirm the theoretical relationship between technological regimes and the survival rate of new firms: new firms are more likely to survive under the entrepreneurial regime. Moreover, this effect is larger within the younger cohorts of firms than within the older ones.

Suggested Citation

  • Pei-Chou Lin & Deng-Shing Huang, 2006. "Technological Regimes and Firm Survival: Evidence across Sectors and over Time," IEAS Working Paper : academic research 06-A012, Institute of Economics, Academia Sinica, Taipei, Taiwan.
    • Handle: RePEc:sin:wpaper:06-a012
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econ.sinica.edu.tw/~econ/pdfPaper/06-A012.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Reid, Gavin C., 1991. "Staying in business," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 9(4), pages 545-556, December.
    2. Audretsch, David B., 1995. "Innovation, growth and survival," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 13(4), pages 441-457, December.
    3. Dunne, Paul & Hughes, Alan, 1994. "Age, Size, Growth and Survival: UK Companies in the 1980s," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 42(2), pages 115-140, June.
    4. Robert Cressy, 2006. "Why do Most Firms Die Young?," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 26(2), pages 103-116, March.
    5. Pakes, Ariel & Ericson, Richard, 1998. "Empirical Implications of Alternative Models of Firm Dynamics," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 79(1), pages 1-45, March.
    6. José Calvo, 2006. "Testing Gibrat’s Law for Small, Young and Innovating Firms," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 26(2), pages 117-123, March.
    7. Marco Vivarelli, 2004. "Are All the Potential Entrepreneurs So Good?," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 23(1), pages 41-49, August.
    8. Malerba, Franco & Orsenigo, Luigi, 1995. "Schumpeterian Patterns of Innovation," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 19(1), pages 47-65, February.
    9. Evans, David S, 1987. "The Relationship between Firm Growth, Size, and Age: Estimates for 100 Manufacturing Industries," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 35(4), pages 567-581, June.
    10. Cabral, Luís M B, 1997. "Entry Mistakes," CEPR Discussion Papers 1729, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    11. Satu Nurmi, 2006. "Sectoral Differences in Plant Start-up Size in the Finnish Economy," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 26(1), pages 39-60, February.
    12. Foti, Alessandro & Vivarelli, Marco, 1994. "An Econometric Test of the Self-Employment Model: The Case of Italy," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 6(2), pages 81-93, April.
    13. Malerba, Franco & Orsenigo, Luigi, 1999. "Technological entry, exit and survival: an empirical analysis of patent data," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 28(6), pages 643-660, August.
    14. Winter, Sidney G., 1984. "Schumpeterian competition in alternative technological regimes," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 5(3-4), pages 287-320.
    15. Geroski, Paul A, 1989. "Entry, Innovation and Productivity Growth," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 71(4), pages 572-578, November.
    16. Anthony Endres & Christine Woods, 2006. "Modern Theories of Entrepreneurial Behavior: A Comparison and Appraisal," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 26(2), pages 189-202, March.
    17. Hall, Bronwyn H, 1987. "The Relationship between Firm Size and Firm Growth in the U.S. Manufacturing Sector," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 35(4), pages 583-606, June.
    18. Evans, David S, 1987. "Tests of Alternative Theories of Firm Growth," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 95(4), pages 657-674, August.
    19. Timothy Dunne & Mark J. Roberts & Larry Samuelson, 1989. "The Growth and Failure of U. S. Manufacturing Plants," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 104(4), pages 671-698.
    20. Agarwal, Rajshree & Audretsch, David B., 1999. "The two views of small firms in industry dynamics: a reconciliation," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 62(2), pages 245-251, February.
    21. Cabral, Luis, 1995. "Sunk Costs, Firm Size and Firm Growth," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 43(2), pages 161-172, June.
    22. William Norton & William Moore, 2006. "The Influence of Entrepreneurial Risk Assessment on Venture Launch or Growth Decisions," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 26(3), pages 215-226, April.
    23. Geroski, P. A., 1995. "What do we know about entry?," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 13(4), pages 421-440, December.
    24. Richard Ericson & Ariel Pakes, 1995. "Markov-Perfect Industry Dynamics: A Framework for Empirical Work," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 62(1), pages 53-82.
    25. Francesca Lotti & Enrico Santarelli & Marco Vivarelli, 2003. "Does Gibrat's Law hold among young, small firms?," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 13(3), pages 213-235, August.
    26. Jovanovic, Boyan, 1982. "Selection and the Evolution of Industry," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 50(3), pages 649-670, May.
    27. Audretsch, David B. & Santarelli, Enrico & Vivarelli, Marco, 1999. "Start-up size and industrial dynamics: some evidence from Italian manufacturing," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 17(7), pages 965-983, October.
    28. van Dijk, Machiel, 2000. "Technological Regimes and Industrial Dynamics: The Evidence from Dutch Manufacturing," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 9(2), pages 173-194, June.
    29. Rajshree Agarwal & David B. Audretsch, 2001. "Does Entry Size Matter? The Impact of the Life Cycle and Technology on Firm Survival," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 49(1), pages 21-43, March.
    30. Richard E. Caves, 1998. "Industrial Organization and New Findings on the Turnover and Mobility of Firms," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 36(4), pages 1947-1982, December.
    31. Bates, Timothy, 1990. "Entrepreneur Human Capital Inputs and Small Business Longevity," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 72(4), pages 551-559, November.
    32. Breschi, Stefano & Malerba, Franco & Orsenigo, Luigi, 2000. "Technological Regimes and Schumpeterian Patterns of Innovation," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 110(463), pages 388-410, April.
    33. Audretsch, David B, 1991. "New-Firm Survival and the Technological Regime," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 73(3), pages 441-450, August.
    34. Tatsuyoshi Masuda, 2006. "The Determinants of Latent Entrepreneurship in Japan," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 26(3), pages 227-240, April.
    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. Zoltán J. Ács & Catherine Armington & Ting Zhang, 2015. "The determinants of new-firm survival across regional economies: The role of human capital stock and knowledge spillover," Chapters, in: Global Entrepreneurship, Institutions and Incentives, chapter 18, pages 344-368, Edward Elgar Publishing.

    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. Pei-Chou Lin & Deng-Shing Huang, 2008. "Technological Regimes and Firm Survival: Evidence Across Sectors and Over Time," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 30(2), pages 175-186, February.
    2. Enrico Santarelli & Marco Vivarelli, 2007. "Entrepreneurship and the process of firms’ entry, survival and growth," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 16(3), pages 455-488, June.
    3. Marco Vivarelli, 2013. "Is entrepreneurship necessarily good? Microeconomic evidence from developed and developing countries," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 22(6), pages 1453-1495, December.
    4. Vivarelli, Marco, 2012. "Drivers of entrepreneurship and post-entry performance : microeconomic evidence from advanced and developing countries," Policy Research Working Paper Series 6245, The World Bank.
    5. Vivarelli, Marco, 2012. "Entrepreneurship in Advanced and Developing Countries: A Microeconomic Perspective," IZA Discussion Papers 6513, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    6. Marco Vivarelli, 2012. "Entrepreneurship and Post-Entry Performance: the Microeconomic Evidence," DISCE - Quaderni del Dipartimento di Scienze Economiche e Sociali dises1286, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Dipartimenti e Istituti di Scienze Economiche (DISCE).
    7. Francesca Lotti & Enrico Santarelli & Marco Vivarelli, 2009. "Defending Gibrat’s Law as a long-run regularity," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 32(1), pages 31-44, January.
    8. Kim, Jungho & Lee, Chang-Yang, 2016. "Technological regimes and firm survival," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(1), pages 232-243.
    9. Cefis, Elena & Marsili, Orietta, 2006. "Survivor: The role of innovation in firms' survival," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(5), pages 626-641, June.
    10. Ugur, Mehmet & Trushin, Eshref & Solomon, Edna M. & Guidi, Francesco, 2015. "Inverted-U relationship between innovation and survival: evidence from firm-level UK data," Greenwich Papers in Political Economy 14073, University of Greenwich, Greenwich Political Economy Research Centre.
    11. Sven-Olov Daunfeldt & Niklas Elert, 2013. "When is Gibrat’s law a law?," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 41(1), pages 133-147, June.
    12. Francesco Quatraro & Marco Vivarelli, 2015. "Drivers of Entrepreneurship and Post-entry Performance of Newborn Firms in Developing Countries," The World Bank Research Observer, World Bank, vol. 30(2), pages 277-305.
    13. Geurts, Karen & Van Biesebroeck, Johannes, 2016. "Firm creation and post-entry dynamics of de novo entrants," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 59-104.
    14. Daria Ciriaci & Pietro Moncada-Paternò-Castello & Peter Voigt, 2016. "Innovation and job creation: a sustainable relation?," Eurasian Business Review, Springer;Eurasia Business and Economics Society, vol. 6(2), pages 189-213, August.
    15. Daunfeldt, Sven-Olov & Elert, Niklas & Lang, Ã…sa, 2012. "Does Gibrat's law hold for retailing? Evidence from Sweden," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 19(5), pages 464-469.
    16. Francesco Quatraro & Marco Vivarelli, 2013. "Entry and Post-Entry Dynamics in Developing Countries," GREDEG Working Papers 2013-20, Groupe de REcherche en Droit, Economie, Gestion (GREDEG CNRS), Université Côte d'Azur, France.
    17. Quatraro, Francesco & Vivarelli, Marco, 2013. "Entrepreneurship In A Developing Country Context," Department of Economics and Statistics Cognetti de Martiis LEI & BRICK - Laboratory of Economics of Innovation "Franco Momigliano", Bureau of Research in Innovation, Complexity and Knowledge, Collegio 201314, University of Turin.
    18. Lee, Chang-Yang, 2010. "A theory of firm growth: Learning capability, knowledge threshold, and patterns of growth," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(2), pages 278-289, March.
    19. Harald Strotmann, 2007. "Entrepreneurial Survival," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 28(1), pages 87-104, January.
    20. Cefis, Elena & Marsili, Orietta, 2012. "Going, going, gone. Exit forms and the innovative capabilities of firms," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(5), pages 795-807.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Firm Survival; Technological Regimes; Taiwanese Manufacturing;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • L1 - Industrial Organization - - Market Structure, Firm Strategy, and Market Performance
    • L2 - Industrial Organization - - Firm Objectives, Organization, and Behavior

    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:sin:wpaper:06-a012. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    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: HsiaoyunLiu (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/sinictw.html .

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.