Böckerman, Petri and Eero, Lehto and Huovari, Janne (2008): The return to the technological frontier: The conditional effect of plants’ R&D on their productivity in Finnish manufacturing.
Download (276Kb) | Preview
This paper examines, through the use of plant-level data, whether R&D’s productivity impact is contingent on the distance of a plant’s productivity from the industry’s technological frontier. R&D is specified as an accumulated stock from R&D investments. We analyse the productivity effect of a plant’s own R&D as well as the productivity impact of the plant’s parent firm’s and other firms’ proximity-weighted R&D stocks. The results show that a plant’s own and a parent firm’s R&D have a positive productivity impact and that the former impact decreases as the distance from the industry’s technological frontier increases. Furthermore, the productivity effect of other firms’ proximity-weighted R&D is, on average, positive, but this impact increases in the distance from the technological frontier. Another important finding is that all the plants tend to converge towards the industry’s technological frontier despite the size of external R&D spillovers.
|Item Type:||MPRA Paper|
|Original Title:||The return to the technological frontier: The conditional effect of plants’ R&D on their productivity in Finnish manufacturing|
|Keywords:||productivity; efficiency; technological frontier; spillovers; convergence|
|Subjects:||D - Microeconomics > D2 - Production and Organizations > D24 - Production; Cost; Capital; Capital, Total Factor, and Multifactor Productivity; Capacity
L - Industrial Organization > L0 - General > L00 - General
|Depositing User:||Petri Böckerman|
|Date Deposited:||13. May 2008 01:16|
|Last Modified:||13. Feb 2013 12:40|
Acemoglu, D., P. Aghion and F. Zilibotti (2006), ‘Distance to frontier, selection and economic growth,’ Journal of European Economic Association, 4, 37-74.
Breschi, S. and F. Lissoni (2001a), ‘Localised knowledge spillovers versus innovative milieux: knowledge “tacitness” reconsidered,’ Papers in Regional Science, 80, 255-273.
Breschi, S. and F. Lissoni (2001b), ‘Knowledge spillovers and local innovative systems: a critical survey,’ Industrial and Corporate Change, 10, 975-1005.
Caves, D., L. Christensen and W. Diewert (1982), ‘Multilateral comparisons of output, input and productivity using superlative index numbers,’ Economic Journal, 92, 73-86
Cohen, W. and D. Levinthal (1989), ‘Innovation and learning: the two faces of R&D,’ The Economic Journal, 99, 569-596.
Feyrer, J. (2003), ‘Convergence by parts,’ Manuscript, Dartmouth College, (Available at http://www.dartmouth.edu/~jfeyrer/parts.pdf).
Girma, S. (2005), ‘Absorptive capacity and productivity spillovers from FDI: A threshold regression analysis,’ Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, 67, 281-305.
Griffith, R., S. Redding and J. Van Reenen (2004), ‘Mapping the two faces of R&D: Productivity growth in a panel of OECD industries,’ Review of Economics and Statistics, 86, 883-895.
Harris, C. (1954), ‘The market as a factor in the localization of industry in the United States,’ Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 64, 315-348.
Ilmakunnas, P. and M. Maliranta (2004), ‘Foreign medicine: a treatment effect analysis of the productivity effects of foreign ownership,’ Applied Economics Quarterly, 50, 41-59.
Lehto, E. (2007), ‘Regional impact of research and development on productivity,’ Regional Studies, 41, 623-638.
Lehto, E. and O. Lehtoranta (2004), ‘Becoming an acquirer and becoming acquired,’ Technological Change and Social Change, 71, 635-650.
Morgan, K. (2004), ‘The exaggerated death of geography: learning, proximity and territorial innovation systems,’ Journal of Economic Geography, 4, 3-21.
Nadiri, M. and I. Prucha (1996), ‘Estimation of the depreciation rate of physical and R&D capital in the U.S. total manufacturing sector,’ Economic Inquiry, 34, 43–56.
Orlando, M. (2004), ‘Measuring spillovers from industrial R&D: on the importance of geographical and technological proximity,’ RAND Journal of Economics, 35, 777-786.
Ottaviano, G. and J-F Thisse (2001), ‘On economic geography in economic theory: increasing returns and pecuniary externalities,’ Journal of Economic Geography, 1, 153-179.
Rouvinen, P. (2002), ‘R&D-productivity dynamics: causality, lags and ‘dry holes’,’ Journal of Applied Economics, 5, 123-156.
Scarpetta, S. and T. Tressel (2004), ‘Boosting productivity via innovation and adoption of new technologies: any role for labour market institutions?,’ Working Paper No. 3273, World Bank.
Scitovsky, T. (1954), ‘Two concepts of external economies,’ Journal of Political Economy, 62, 143-151.
Vandenbussche, J., P. Aghion and C. Meghir (2006), ‘Growth, distance to frontier and composition of human capital,’ Journal of Economic Growth, 11, 97-127.
Von Hippel, E. (1994), ‘Sticky information and the locus of problem solving: implications for innovation,’ Management Science, 40, 429-439.