Currently, the dispersion and variety of both research and development (R&D) project management methods and their taxonomies pose difficulties in the selection of a management concept suitable for a particular type of R&D project. The paper attempts to assign a specified management concept to a given R&D project type. An in‐depth analysis of the literature was done, and dispersed information on the R&D project management were systemised and linked. More detailed classifications of R&D projects and agile project management (APM) methods were proposed. The paper as a result presents a new typology of R&D projects and a proposal of assignment of project management methods to individual types of R&D projects. Moreover, a case study of an R&D project is presented with outlining the major problems concerning its implementation, resulting, inter alia, from the selection of an inappropriate management concept made at the stage of project planning and application for funding. The authors also carried out an empirical research aimed at the confirmation of conclusions drawn from the relevant literature and the investigated case study. The main result of the paper is the assignment of different project management concepts to certain R&D project types as well as the distinction of two types of APM concepts. The final conclusion of the article is that most types of R&D projects, identified using the criterion of the degree of knowledge of their goals and methods of their implementation, should be managed by a customised concept of APM. It is, however, essential that one matches different types of Agile methods with different types of R&D project.
{"title":"Classification of R&D Projects and Selection of R&D Project Management Concept","authors":"D. Kuchta, Dorota Skowron","doi":"10.1111/radm.12112","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/radm.12112","url":null,"abstract":"Currently, the dispersion and variety of both research and development (R&D) project management methods and their taxonomies pose difficulties in the selection of a management concept suitable for a particular type of R&D project. The paper attempts to assign a specified management concept to a given R&D project type. An in‐depth analysis of the literature was done, and dispersed information on the R&D project management were systemised and linked. More detailed classifications of R&D projects and agile project management (APM) methods were proposed. The paper as a result presents a new typology of R&D projects and a proposal of assignment of project management methods to individual types of R&D projects. Moreover, a case study of an R&D project is presented with outlining the major problems concerning its implementation, resulting, inter alia, from the selection of an inappropriate management concept made at the stage of project planning and application for funding. The authors also carried out an empirical research aimed at the confirmation of conclusions drawn from the relevant literature and the investigated case study. The main result of the paper is the assignment of different project management concepts to certain R&D project types as well as the distinction of two types of APM concepts. The final conclusion of the article is that most types of R&D projects, identified using the criterion of the degree of knowledge of their goals and methods of their implementation, should be managed by a customised concept of APM. It is, however, essential that one matches different types of Agile methods with different types of R&D project.","PeriodicalId":320323,"journal":{"name":"ERPN: Research (Sub-Topic)","volume":"2 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2016-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"128647532","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
We focus on the evolution and behavior of firms that invest in research and development (R&D). We build upon the cross-sectional analysis in Foster and Grim (2010) that identified the characteristics of top R&D spending firms and follow up by charting the behavior of these firms over time. Our focus is dynamic in nature as we merge micro-level cross-sectional data from the Survey of Industrial Research and Development (SIRD) and the Business Research & Development and Innovation Survey (BRDIS) with the Longitudinal Business Database (LBD). The result is a panel firm-level data set from 1992 to 2011 that tracks firms’ performances as they enter and exit the R&D surveys. Using R&D expenditures to proxy R&D performance, we find the top R&D performing firms in the U.S. across all years to be large, old, multinational enterprises. However, we also find that the composition of R&D performing firms is gradually shifting more towards smaller domestic firms with expenditures being less sensitive to scale effects. We find a high degree of persistence for these firms over time. We chart the history of R&D performing firms and compare them to all firms in the economy and find substantial differences in terms of age, size, firm structure and international activity; these differences persist when looking at future firm outcomes.
{"title":"A Portrait of Firms that Invest in R&D","authors":"L. Foster, Cheryl Grim, Nikolas J. Zolas","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.2845982","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2845982","url":null,"abstract":"We focus on the evolution and behavior of firms that invest in research and development (R&D). We build upon the cross-sectional analysis in Foster and Grim (2010) that identified the characteristics of top R&D spending firms and follow up by charting the behavior of these firms over time. Our focus is dynamic in nature as we merge micro-level cross-sectional data from the Survey of Industrial Research and Development (SIRD) and the Business Research & Development and Innovation Survey (BRDIS) with the Longitudinal Business Database (LBD). The result is a panel firm-level data set from 1992 to 2011 that tracks firms’ performances as they enter and exit the R&D surveys. Using R&D expenditures to proxy R&D performance, we find the top R&D performing firms in the U.S. across all years to be large, old, multinational enterprises. However, we also find that the composition of R&D performing firms is gradually shifting more towards smaller domestic firms with expenditures being less sensitive to scale effects. We find a high degree of persistence for these firms over time. We chart the history of R&D performing firms and compare them to all firms in the economy and find substantial differences in terms of age, size, firm structure and international activity; these differences persist when looking at future firm outcomes.","PeriodicalId":320323,"journal":{"name":"ERPN: Research (Sub-Topic)","volume":"2 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2016-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"123949440","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Over the last decade, U.S. firms have used their large cash holdings to buyback shares and pay dividends, instead of investing in RD process-cost uncertainty using future cost of goods sold volatility; and technological disruption uncertainty using future special items volatility. Regarding product and process-cost uncertainties, we find that the association between R&D expenditures and subsequent volatilities of sales and cost of sales, is lower than our benchmark, tangible capital expenditures, generally considered a relatively safe investment. However, the association between R&D and future special items volatility is significantly higher than that of capital expenditures. Collectively, the findings show that the major uncertainty created by R&D is from technological disruptions and not product failures. By implication, firms should be using their large cash holdings to invest in radical R&D, which will enable them to be the leader in disruptive technology.
{"title":"R&D Volatility Drivers","authors":"B. Lev, S. Radhakrishnan, J. Tong","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.2763369","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2763369","url":null,"abstract":"Over the last decade, U.S. firms have used their large cash holdings to buyback shares and pay dividends, instead of investing in RD process-cost uncertainty using future cost of goods sold volatility; and technological disruption uncertainty using future special items volatility. Regarding product and process-cost uncertainties, we find that the association between R&D expenditures and subsequent volatilities of sales and cost of sales, is lower than our benchmark, tangible capital expenditures, generally considered a relatively safe investment. However, the association between R&D and future special items volatility is significantly higher than that of capital expenditures. Collectively, the findings show that the major uncertainty created by R&D is from technological disruptions and not product failures. By implication, firms should be using their large cash holdings to invest in radical R&D, which will enable them to be the leader in disruptive technology.","PeriodicalId":320323,"journal":{"name":"ERPN: Research (Sub-Topic)","volume":"16 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2016-04-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"126875975","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Previous research on medical devices research and development (R&D) paid close attention to the role of medical doctors as users of medical devices, but they did not examine enough the interdisciplinary collaboration between medical doctors and engineers as a team of developing a medical device. In this paper, I looked at the effect of collaborative relationship between medical doctors and engineers on the productivity of the development based on interviews on R&D of artificial retina and bibliometric analysis on R&D of cochlear implant. In the interviews with medical doctors and engineers involved in R&D of artificial retina in the United States, Germany, and Japan, we found that medical doctors and engineers perceive that the collaboration is one of the key factors to the success in inventing and developing medical devices, but that the good collaborative relationship is difficult to maintain. Next we examined such collaboration quantitatively by conducting bibliometric analysis of research articles and patents related to the development of cochlear implant, and found the important role played by medical doctors and their collaboration with engineers when designing and improving the medical device, and that more collaboration between medical doctors and engineers is seen in the more productive R&D group. Considering those findings, development of a medical device needs not only the ‘user‐led’ forces of medical doctors but also close interdisciplinary collaboration between medical doctors and engineers as a team. For such collaborative team effort to succeed, absorptive capacity of both sides and proximity between them are important, while there are barriers between a medical doctor and an engineer including cognitive, organizational, social, and institutional factors. To overcome those barriers, experiences of cooperation, education, geographic proximity, good leadership, or member's personality can promote some elements of proximity to compensate for lack or shortage of other elements of proximity.
{"title":"The Effect of Collaborative Relationship between Medical Doctors and Engineers on the Productivity of Developing Medical Devices","authors":"Tatsuro Yoda","doi":"10.1111/radm.12131","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/radm.12131","url":null,"abstract":"Previous research on medical devices research and development (R&D) paid close attention to the role of medical doctors as users of medical devices, but they did not examine enough the interdisciplinary collaboration between medical doctors and engineers as a team of developing a medical device. In this paper, I looked at the effect of collaborative relationship between medical doctors and engineers on the productivity of the development based on interviews on R&D of artificial retina and bibliometric analysis on R&D of cochlear implant. In the interviews with medical doctors and engineers involved in R&D of artificial retina in the United States, Germany, and Japan, we found that medical doctors and engineers perceive that the collaboration is one of the key factors to the success in inventing and developing medical devices, but that the good collaborative relationship is difficult to maintain. Next we examined such collaboration quantitatively by conducting bibliometric analysis of research articles and patents related to the development of cochlear implant, and found the important role played by medical doctors and their collaboration with engineers when designing and improving the medical device, and that more collaboration between medical doctors and engineers is seen in the more productive R&D group. Considering those findings, development of a medical device needs not only the ‘user‐led’ forces of medical doctors but also close interdisciplinary collaboration between medical doctors and engineers as a team. For such collaborative team effort to succeed, absorptive capacity of both sides and proximity between them are important, while there are barriers between a medical doctor and an engineer including cognitive, organizational, social, and institutional factors. To overcome those barriers, experiences of cooperation, education, geographic proximity, good leadership, or member's personality can promote some elements of proximity to compensate for lack or shortage of other elements of proximity.","PeriodicalId":320323,"journal":{"name":"ERPN: Research (Sub-Topic)","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2016-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"130973655","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
In 2004, Canada changed the eligibility rules for its Scientific Research and Experimental Development (SRED) tax credit, which provides tax incentives for R&D conducted by small private firms. Difference-in-difference estimates show a 17 percent increase in total R&D among eligible firms. The impact was larger for firms that took the tax credits as refunds because they had no current tax liability. Contract R&D expenditures were more elastic than the R&D wage bill. The response was also greater for firms that invested in R&D capital before the policy change. (JEL D22, G32, H25, L25, O32, O38)
{"title":"Tax Credits and Small Firm R&D Spending","authors":"A. Agrawal, Carlos Rosell, Timothy S. Simcoe","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.2951105","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2951105","url":null,"abstract":"In 2004, Canada changed the eligibility rules for its Scientific Research and Experimental Development (SRED) tax credit, which provides tax incentives for R&D conducted by small private firms. Difference-in-difference estimates show a 17 percent increase in total R&D among eligible firms. The impact was larger for firms that took the tax credits as refunds because they had no current tax liability. Contract R&D expenditures were more elastic than the R&D wage bill. The response was also greater for firms that invested in R&D capital before the policy change. (JEL D22, G32, H25, L25, O32, O38)","PeriodicalId":320323,"journal":{"name":"ERPN: Research (Sub-Topic)","volume":"9 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2014-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"124214563","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This paper looks at the effects of demand uncertainty and stagnancy on firms’ decisions to engage in R&D activities and the amount of financial effort devoted to these. The paper provides a number of contributions to the innovation literature: first, it adds to the revived debate on demand-pull perspectives in innovation studies by examining demand-related (lack of) incentives to invest in innovation. Second, it complements the literature on barriers to innovation by focusing on demand-related obstacles rather than the more frequently explored financial barriers. Third, it analyses whether experiencing demand barriers is a sector-specific feature. Firms active in high- or low-tech manufacturing or in knowledge-intensive or low-tech services might be more or less dependent on demand conditions when deciding to perform R&D. We find that uncertain demand and lack of demand are perceived as two quite distinct barriers. While the perception of a lack of demand has a marked negative impact not only on the amount of investment in R&D but also the likelihood of firms to engage in R&D activities, demand uncertainty seems, on the contrary, to represent an incentive to spend more in R&D, although only in low-tech sectors. We interpret this evidence in terms of the specific phase of the innovation cycle in which decisions to invest in R&D are taken. Sectoral affiliation seems to be playing a role only for demand uncertainty, supporting the conjecture that positive expectations on the presence of adequate market demand are a necessary condition to invest in R&D.
{"title":"Reviving Demand-Pull Perspectives: The Effect of Demand Uncertainty and Stagnancy on R&D Strategy.","authors":"J. García‐Quevedo, Gabriele Pellegrino, M. Savona","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.2742123","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2742123","url":null,"abstract":"This paper looks at the effects of demand uncertainty and stagnancy on firms’ decisions to engage in R&D activities and the amount of financial effort devoted to these. The paper provides a number of contributions to the innovation literature: first, it adds to the revived debate on demand-pull perspectives in innovation studies by examining demand-related (lack of) incentives to invest in innovation. Second, it complements the literature on barriers to innovation by focusing on demand-related obstacles rather than the more frequently explored financial barriers. Third, it analyses whether experiencing demand barriers is a sector-specific feature. Firms active in high- or low-tech manufacturing or in knowledge-intensive or low-tech services might be more or less dependent on demand conditions when deciding to perform R&D. We find that uncertain demand and lack of demand are perceived as two quite distinct barriers. While the perception of a lack of demand has a marked negative impact not only on the amount of investment in R&D but also the likelihood of firms to engage in R&D activities, demand uncertainty seems, on the contrary, to represent an incentive to spend more in R&D, although only in low-tech sectors. We interpret this evidence in terms of the specific phase of the innovation cycle in which decisions to invest in R&D are taken. Sectoral affiliation seems to be playing a role only for demand uncertainty, supporting the conjecture that positive expectations on the presence of adequate market demand are a necessary condition to invest in R&D.","PeriodicalId":320323,"journal":{"name":"ERPN: Research (Sub-Topic)","volume":"5 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2014-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"132676204","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This paper studies the case of the Marche footwear districts. Statistical evidence and interviews with entrepreneurs suggest that the traditional inter-firm relationships within these districts have significantly changed during the past decade. Some leading firms have been building up more exclusive relations with their suppliers, including those abroad, along i?½buyer-driveni?½ value chains. Moreover, firms have been adopting different strategies, following two main paths: the first is a i?½focusing-on-qualityi?½ strategy, based on upgrading the quality of the goods and investing in brands, RD the second is a i?½focusing-on-costsi?½ strategy, which aims at minimizing the production costs of a medium-quality range of goods, including outsourcing abroad. This study shows that firms which focused on quality did better than others, both in the years before the crisis of 2008-09 and during the recession.
{"title":"Traditional Industrial Districts in the Face of Globalization: The Case of the Marche Footwear District","authors":"Eleonora Cutrini, G. Micucci, P. Montanaro","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.2243579","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.2243579","url":null,"abstract":"This paper studies the case of the Marche footwear districts. Statistical evidence and interviews with entrepreneurs suggest that the traditional inter-firm relationships within these districts have significantly changed during the past decade. Some leading firms have been building up more exclusive relations with their suppliers, including those abroad, along i?½buyer-driveni?½ value chains. Moreover, firms have been adopting different strategies, following two main paths: the first is a i?½focusing-on-qualityi?½ strategy, based on upgrading the quality of the goods and investing in brands, RD the second is a i?½focusing-on-costsi?½ strategy, which aims at minimizing the production costs of a medium-quality range of goods, including outsourcing abroad. This study shows that firms which focused on quality did better than others, both in the years before the crisis of 2008-09 and during the recession.","PeriodicalId":320323,"journal":{"name":"ERPN: Research (Sub-Topic)","volume":"42 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2013-02-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"129847194","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Richard T Woodward, Elżbieta Wojnicka, Wojciech Pander
This study surveys the current state of affairs in Poland with regard to the development of knowledge-intensive entrepreneurship (KIE), or new firm creation in industries considered to be science-based or to use research and development (RD moreover, we observe a significant degree of internationalization of innovation-related cooperation. Another optimistic development is that the level of activity of venture capitalists seems to be fairly high in Poland considering the relatively low degree of development of capital markets offering VC investors exit opportunities. Moreover, after almost two decades of decline in the share of R&D spending in GDP, there are signs that this is beginning to rise, and that businesses are beginning to spend more on R&D. While demand-side problems continue to be significant barriers for the development of KIE, due to the relatively low level of education and GDP per capita in the country, the trends here are optimistic, with high rates of economic growth and improvements in the level of education of younger generations. Significant improvement is still needed in the area of intellectual property protection.
{"title":"Innovation Systems and Knowledge-Intensive Enterpreneurship: A Country Case Study of Poland","authors":"Richard T Woodward, Elżbieta Wojnicka, Wojciech Pander","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.2158719","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2158719","url":null,"abstract":"This study surveys the current state of affairs in Poland with regard to the development of knowledge-intensive entrepreneurship (KIE), or new firm creation in industries considered to be science-based or to use research and development (RD moreover, we observe a significant degree of internationalization of innovation-related cooperation. Another optimistic development is that the level of activity of venture capitalists seems to be fairly high in Poland considering the relatively low degree of development of capital markets offering VC investors exit opportunities. Moreover, after almost two decades of decline in the share of R&D spending in GDP, there are signs that this is beginning to rise, and that businesses are beginning to spend more on R&D. While demand-side problems continue to be significant barriers for the development of KIE, due to the relatively low level of education and GDP per capita in the country, the trends here are optimistic, with high rates of economic growth and improvements in the level of education of younger generations. Significant improvement is still needed in the area of intellectual property protection.","PeriodicalId":320323,"journal":{"name":"ERPN: Research (Sub-Topic)","volume":"47 1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2012-10-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"116697895","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Using count data models controlling for unobserved heterogeneity, this study shows for a large sample of R&D-active manufacturing firms in Flanders that collaborative R&D has a positive effect on firms’ patenting in terms of both quantity and quality. However, when distinguishing between alliances that aim at joint creation of new knowledge and alliances that aim at the exchange of existing knowledge, the results suggest that the positive effect on patenting quantity is to a large extent driven by knowledge exchange alliances rather than joint R&D. Firms engaged in creation alliances, on the other hand, receive more forward citations per patent which indicates that joint R&D enhances patent quality. In the light of the literature on strategic patenting, our results may further suggest that creation alliances lead to patents that are filed to protect valuable intellectual property, while exchange alliances drive “portfolio patenting” which has been shown to result in fewer citations for the individual patent.
{"title":"Quantity or Quality? Collaboration Strategies in Research and Development and Incentives to Patent","authors":"Hanna Hottenrott, Cindy Lopes-Bento","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.2118511","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2118511","url":null,"abstract":"Using count data models controlling for unobserved heterogeneity, this study shows for a large sample of R&D-active manufacturing firms in Flanders that collaborative R&D has a positive effect on firms’ patenting in terms of both quantity and quality. However, when distinguishing between alliances that aim at joint creation of new knowledge and alliances that aim at the exchange of existing knowledge, the results suggest that the positive effect on patenting quantity is to a large extent driven by knowledge exchange alliances rather than joint R&D. Firms engaged in creation alliances, on the other hand, receive more forward citations per patent which indicates that joint R&D enhances patent quality. In the light of the literature on strategic patenting, our results may further suggest that creation alliances lead to patents that are filed to protect valuable intellectual property, while exchange alliances drive “portfolio patenting” which has been shown to result in fewer citations for the individual patent.","PeriodicalId":320323,"journal":{"name":"ERPN: Research (Sub-Topic)","volume":"129 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2012-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"132899385","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This study presents new estimates of business R&D capital stocks for 22 countries at the aggregate and industry levels. At 9 percent of GDP, the EU business R&D capital stock falls short of its US and Japanese counterparts. Within the EU, R&D capital stocks are much lower in the southern and the new member states, reflecting large and persistent disparities in R&D expenditure. There was hardly any convergence over the past decade. The R&D capital stock is concentrated on three technologyintensive manufacturing industries and is positively correlated with growth in total factor productivity across countries and industries. Finally, the ratios between the stocks of R&D capital and tangible capital suggest marked differences in how R&D and tangible capital are combined in production.
{"title":"Business R&D Expenditure and Capital in Europe","authors":"C. Helmers, C. Schulte, Hubert Strauss","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.1816426","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1816426","url":null,"abstract":"This study presents new estimates of business R&D capital stocks for 22 countries at the aggregate and industry levels. At 9 percent of GDP, the EU business R&D capital stock falls short of its US and Japanese counterparts. Within the EU, R&D capital stocks are much lower in the southern and the new member states, reflecting large and persistent disparities in R&D expenditure. There was hardly any convergence over the past decade. The R&D capital stock is concentrated on three technologyintensive manufacturing industries and is positively correlated with growth in total factor productivity across countries and industries. Finally, the ratios between the stocks of R&D capital and tangible capital suggest marked differences in how R&D and tangible capital are combined in production.","PeriodicalId":320323,"journal":{"name":"ERPN: Research (Sub-Topic)","volume":"28 4-5 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2009-12-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"131676641","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：