1,723,191 research outputs found
Competition favors the prepared firm: Firms RD responses to competitive market pressure
No full textThis paper aims to contribute to the literature on the long-debated relationship between market competition and firm research and development (R&D) by investigating the effect of competitive market pressure on firms' incentives to invest in R&D. The paper shows that a firm's R&D response to competitive market pressure depends primarily on its level of technological competence or R&D productivity: firms with high levels of technological competence tend to respond aggressively (i.e., exhibit a higher level of R&D efforts) to intensifying competitive market pressure, while firms with low levels of technological competence tend to respond submissively (i.e., exhibit a lower level of R&D efforts). The differential effect of competitive market pressure on firm R&D, conditioned primarily by the level of firms' technological competence, is empirically supported by unique firm-level data from the World Bank. Furthermore, the role of firm-specific technological competence in conditioning the R&D-competition relationship is more evident and statistically more significant for firms facing consumers whose utility is relatively more elastic to product quality than to price. (C) 2009 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.The author thanks his dissertation advisor at Harvard, Frederic
M. Scherer, and other seminar participants at Harvard and KAIST
Business School for their invaluable comments and advice on the
early version of this paper. The author also thanks Editor Stefan
Kuhlman andtwo anonymousreferees for their encouragement and
invaluable comments.
Resume: Jie-chang YANG 杨诘苍
Get PDFThis resume briefly records the artist, Jie-Chang Yang\u27s educational background and exhibition history from his birth to 1989. (Zhuocheng Jiang \u2726)https://digital.kenyon.edu/zhoudocs/1355/thumbnail.jp
Learning-by-doing in RD, knowledge threshold, and technological divide
No full textThis paper presents a simple R&D-based growth model of the "technological divide," in which learning-by-doing (investing) in R&D and a threshold level of technological knowledge jointly determine the pattern of economic growth. Specifically, the model generates differences in the growth pattern primarily by modifying the underlying parameters that govern the evolution of economy-wide technological competence or dynamic R&D productivity. The technological divide arises at the threshold level of technological knowledge, which is largely affected by the quality of socio-technological infrastructure. Government policies aimed at enhancing the quality of socio-technological infrastructure can help countries escape from the "technology divide" trap by lowering the knowledge threshold. While the model preserves the spirit of the R&D-based endogenous growth model in the sense of its policy effects and the endogenous evolution of technological competence, the model does not need to reach the scale effect directly, where an increase in the size of an economy generates more rapid growth.The author thanks Editor Luigi Orsenigo and two anonymous reviewers for
their invaluable and constructive comments and suggestions.
Do firms in clusters invest in R&D more intensively? Theory and evidence from multi-country data
No full textThis study aims to evaluate whether firms located in clusters invest more intensively in research and development (R&D) than their non-clustered counterparts. Specifically, it proposes a model of firm R&D and tests empirically its implications for the effect of being located in a cluster on firm R&D intensity. The key ideas underlying the theory are as follows: (I) due either to natural excludability or to a high degree of stickiness of R&D-opportunity-bearing technological knowledge, geographical proximity per se is limited in the (automatic) spillover of knowledge with promising R&D opportunities to nearby firms: (2) geographical proximity may, however, help enhance the effectiveness or efficiency of knowledge exchange through market mechanisms (e.g., through contract R&D, R&D collaboration); (3) potential advantages (or disadvantages) in firm R&D of being located in a cluster also depend on the degree of asymmetry in technological competence among firms located in the cluster. The key ideas are supported by an empirical analysis of a multi-industry, multi-country data set compiled by the World Bank. In particular, the results show that being located in a cluster per se actually has a negative effect on firm R&D intensity, which is in contrast to the conventional wisdom of pure or automatic localized knowledge spillovers, as far as firm R&D intensity is concerned. (C) 2009 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.This study was financially supported by Korea’s Science and
Technology Policy Institute (STEPI). The author thanks Editor Martin
Bell and two anonymous reviewers for their encouragement and
invaluable comments on the early version of this paper.
Geographical clustering and firm growth: Differential growth performance among clustered firms
No full textThis paper investigates the effect of being located in a cluster on firm growth. In particular, it focuses on the differential growth effect of being located in a cluster, or a growth divide among clustered firms, based on the idea that, contrary to the conventional wisdom, advantages of geographical clustering are not randomly or equally available to clustered firms. Due to the intense competition among clustered firms for resources such as creative talent, firms who are more attractive to the resources are more likely to entice better resources and hence achieve higher growth. Our empirical analysis of firms in nine industries across six countries shows that being located in a cluster per se does not have a positive effect on firm growth and that domestic technological leaders with a sufficient technological distance to the global technological frontier show differentially higher growth due both to the attractiveness to promising resources and to the opportunity for incoming knowledge spillovers from global technological leaders.
Firm density and industry R&D intensity: Theory and evidence
No full textBy deriving a formal model of industry R&D that identifies factors influencing industry R&D intensity, this paper first suggests firm density, defined as the inverse of average firm sales or simply the number of firms divided by industry sales, as a measure of market structure that is appropriate in explaining industry R&D intensity. The model shows that the cost structure of R&D, consumer preference over quality and price, the appropriability of R&D, firm density, and the average level of firm R&D intensity jointly determine industry R&D intensity. In particular, firm density has a positive relationship with industry R&D intensity, implying that firms in higher firm-density industries feel fiercer competitive pressure and thus engage more intensively in R&D. An empirical analysis of panel data on industry R&D activities of Korean manufacturing industries during the period 1991-1996 provides supportive evidence for the predictions of the model including the positive relationship between firm density and industry R&D intensity. The theoretical model and the empirical results are also consistent with the recent survey of U. S. corporate R&D activities by the U.S. Department of Commerce and the National Science Foundation (1999).
A theory of firm growth: Learning capability, knowledge threshold, and patterns of growth
No full textThis paper focuses on the dual role of R&D - knowledge generation and the technological-competence-enhancing effect of R&D - and its implication for the endogenous evolution of R&D productivity and the pattern of firm growth. In particular, based on the evolution of firm-specific R&D productivity or technological competence, this paper derives a simple R&D-based model of firm growth capable of explaining Various aspects of firm growth. The model proposes three prototype patterns of firm growth, depending on both firm- and industry-specific characteristics. The former includes firm-specific technological competence-enhancing capability and the initial level of technological knowledge, and the latter includes industry-specific R&D appropriability. Specifically, firms with low technological-competence-enhancing capability tend to follow a convergent growth pattern in which firm growth gradually declines, while firms with high technological-competence-enhancing capability tend to exhibit either a sustained or a vicious growth pattern depending on the initial size of their technological knowledge stock. An empirical analysis of unique data on firm growth and technological capability provides Supportive evidence for the role of technological-competence-enhancing capability in conditioning the pattern of firm growth. (C) 2010 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
A simple model of RD: An extension of the Dorfman-Steiner theorem
No full textThis paper extends the seminal Dorfman- Steiner (American Economic Review, 44, 826- 36, 1954) theorem by putting underlying structures on the determination of market share and on the production of quality or technology. The model developed in this paper yields a demand- pull, technology- push theory of R& D, where the profit- maximizing R& D intensity (i. e., the ratio of R& D expenditure to sales) is determined jointly by consumer characteristics, represented by the elasticities of consumer value with respect to price and quality, and firm- specific technological competence or simply R& D productivity, measured as the R& D elasticity of quality or technological output.
- …
