IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/dyncon/v32y2008i12p3895-3916.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

R&D policies, endogenous growth and scale effects

Author

Listed:
  • Sener, Fuat

Abstract

This paper constructs a scale-free endogenous growth model and studies the determinants of optimal R&D policy. The model combines two of the main approaches to removal of scale effects: the rent protection approach and the diminishing technological opportunities approach. The steady-state rate of innovation is a function of all of the model's parameters including the R&D subsidy/tax rate. Thus, growth is fully endogenous. Numerical simulations imply that it is optimal to tax R&D when innovations are of very small and very large magnitudes, and to subsidize R&D when innovations are of medium size. Under a wide range of empirically relevant calibrations, the subsidy rate turns out to be positive and fluctuates between 5% and 25%.

Suggested Citation

  • Sener, Fuat, 2008. "R&D policies, endogenous growth and scale effects," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 32(12), pages 3895-3916, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:dyncon:v:32:y:2008:i:12:p:3895-3916
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0165-1889(08)00065-1
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Mehra, Rajnish & Prescott, Edward C., 1985. "The equity premium: A puzzle," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 15(2), pages 145-161, March.
    2. Aghion, Philippe & Howitt, Peter, 1992. "A Model of Growth through Creative Destruction," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 60(2), pages 323-351, March.
    3. Charles I. Jones, 1999. "Growth: With or Without Scale Effects?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 89(2), pages 139-144, May.
    4. Charles I. Jones, 1995. "Time Series Tests of Endogenous Growth Models," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 110(2), pages 495-525.
    5. Lundborg, Per & Segerstrom, Paul S., 2002. "The growth and welfare effects of international mass migration," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 56(1), pages 177-204, January.
    6. Jones, Charles I & Williams, John C, 2000. "Too Much of a Good Thing? The Economics of Investment in R&D," Journal of Economic Growth, Springer, vol. 5(1), pages 65-85, March.
    7. Marios Zachariadis, 2004. "R&D‐induced Growth in the OECD?," Review of Development Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 8(3), pages 423-439, August.
    8. Marios Zachariadis, 2003. "R&D, innovation, and technological progress: a test of the Schumpeterian framework without scale effects," Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d'économique, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 36(3), pages 566-586, August.
    9. Jones, Charles I., 2005. "Growth and Ideas," Handbook of Economic Growth, in: Philippe Aghion & Steven Durlauf (ed.), Handbook of Economic Growth, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 16, pages 1063-1111, Elsevier.
    10. Peretto, Pietro F, 1998. "Technological Change and Population Growth," Journal of Economic Growth, Springer, vol. 3(4), pages 283-311, December.
    11. Charles I. Jones, 2002. "Sources of U.S. Economic Growth in a World of Ideas," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 92(1), pages 220-239, March.
    12. Alvarez-Pelaez, Maria J. & Groth, Christian, 2005. "Too little or too much R&D?," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 49(2), pages 437-456, February.
    13. Norrbin, Stefan C, 1993. "The Relation between Price and Marginal Cost in U.S. Industry: A Contradiction," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 101(6), pages 1149-1164, December.
    14. E. Dinopoulos & F. Sener, 2007. "New Directions in Schumpeterian Growth Theory," Chapters, in: Horst Hanusch & Andreas Pyka (ed.), Elgar Companion to Neo-Schumpeterian Economics, chapter 42, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    15. Paul S. Segerstrom, 2007. "Intel Economics," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 48(1), pages 247-280, February.
    16. Thomas M. Steger, 2003. "The Segerstrom Model: Stability, Speed of Convergence and Policy Implications," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 15(4), pages 1-8.
    17. Wesley M. Cohen & Richard R. Nelson & John P. Walsh, 2000. "Protecting Their Intellectual Assets: Appropriability Conditions and Why U.S. Manufacturing Firms Patent (or Not)," NBER Working Papers 7552, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    18. Chol-Won Li, 2003. "Endogenous Growth Without Scale Effects: Comment," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 93(3), pages 1009-1017, June.
    19. Horst Hanusch & Andreas Pyka (ed.), 2007. "Elgar Companion to Neo-Schumpeterian Economics," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 2973.
    20. Romer, Paul M, 1990. "Endogenous Technological Change," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 98(5), pages 71-102, October.
    21. Charles I. Jones & John C. Williams, 1998. "Measuring the Social Return to R&D," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 113(4), pages 1119-1135.
    22. Philippe Aghion & Steven Durlauf (ed.), 2005. "Handbook of Economic Growth," Handbook of Economic Growth, Elsevier, edition 1, volume 1, number 1.
    23. Holger Strulik, 2007. "Too Much of a Good Thing? The Quantitative Economics of R&D‐driven Growth Revisited," Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 109(2), pages 369-386, June.
    24. Elias Dinopoulos & Constantinos Syropoulos, 2007. "Rent Protection as a Barrier to Innovation and Growth," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 32(2), pages 309-332, August.
    25. Selin Sayek & Fuat Şener, 2006. "Outsourcing and Wage Inequality in a Dynamic Product Cycle Model," Review of Development Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 10(1), pages 1-19, February.
    26. Etro, Federico, 2008. "Growth leaders," Journal of Macroeconomics, Elsevier, vol. 30(3), pages 1148-1172, September.
    27. Nancy L. Stokey, 1995. "R&D and Economic Growth," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 62(3), pages 469-489.
    28. Susanto Basu, 1996. "Procyclical Productivity: Increasing Returns or Cyclical Utilization?," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 111(3), pages 719-751.
    29. Norrbin, Stefan C, 1993. "The Relation between Price and Marginal Cost in U.S. Industry: A Contradiction," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 101(6), pages 1149-1164, December.
    30. Alwyn Young, 1998. "Growth without Scale Effects," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 106(1), pages 41-63, February.
    31. Segerstrom, Paul S, 1998. "Endogenous Growth without Scale Effects," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 88(5), pages 1290-1310, December.
    32. Jones, Charles I, 1995. "R&D-Based Models of Economic Growth," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 103(4), pages 759-784, August.
    33. Elias Dinopoulos & Peter Thompson, 1999. "Scale effects in Schumpeterian models of economic growth," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 9(2), pages 157-185.
    34. Joonkyung Ha & Peter Howitt, 2007. "Accounting for Trends in Productivity and R&D: A Schumpeterian Critique of Semi-Endogenous Growth Theory," Journal of Money, Credit and Banking, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 39(4), pages 733-774, June.
    35. Samuel S. Kortum, 1997. "Research, Patenting, and Technological Change," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 65(6), pages 1389-1420, November.
    36. Thomas M. Steger, 2005. "Welfare Implications of Non‐scale R&D‐based Growth Models," Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 107(4), pages 737-757, December.
    37. Lerner, Josh, 1995. "Patenting in the Shadow of Competitors," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 38(2), pages 463-495, October.
    38. World Bank, 2003. "World Development Indicators 2003," World Bank Publications - Books, The World Bank Group, number 13920.
    39. Segerstrom, Paul S & Anant, T C A & Dinopoulos, Elias, 1990. "A Schumpeterian Model of the Product Life Cycle," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 80(5), pages 1077-1091, December.
    40. Peter Howitt, 1999. "Steady Endogenous Growth with Population and R & D Inputs Growing," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 107(4), pages 715-730, August.
    41. Dinopoulos, Elias & Thompson, Peter, 1998. "Schumpeterian Growth without Scale Effects," Journal of Economic Growth, Springer, vol. 3(4), pages 313-335, December.
    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. Grossmann, Volker & Steger, Thomas & Trimborn, Timo, 2013. "Dynamically optimal R&D subsidization," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 37(3), pages 516-534.
    2. Minford, Lucy & Meenagh, David, 2019. "Testing a model of UK growth: A role for R&D subsidies," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 82(C), pages 152-167.
    3. Voyvoda, Ebru & Yeldan, Erinç, 2015. "Public policy and growth in Canada: An applied endogenous growth model with human and knowledge capital accumulation," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 298-309.
    4. Ruiyang Hu & Yibai Yang & Zhijie Zheng, 2023. "Effects of subsidies on growth and welfare in a quality‐ladder model with elastic labor," Journal of Public Economic Theory, Association for Public Economic Theory, vol. 25(5), pages 1096-1137, October.
    5. Lu, You-Xun & Chen, Shi-kuan & Lai, Ching-chong, 2022. "Subsidies, Entry, and Economic Growth in a Schumpeterian Model with Incumbents and Entrants," MPRA Paper 112179, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    6. Elie Gray & André Grimaud, 2016. "The Lindahl equilibrium in Schumpeterian growth models," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 26(1), pages 101-142, March.
    7. Michael Klein & Fuat Sener, 2023. "Product Innovation, Diffusion and Endogenous Growth," Review of Economic Dynamics, Elsevier for the Society for Economic Dynamics, vol. 48, pages 178-201, April.
    8. Richard Gretz & Jannett Highfill & Robert Scott, 2012. "R&D subsidy games: a cost sharing approach vs. reward for performance," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 37(4), pages 385-403, August.
    9. Venturini, Francesco, 2012. "Looking into the black box of Schumpeterian growth theories: An empirical assessment of R&D races," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 56(8), pages 1530-1545.

    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. Capolupo, Rosa, 2009. "The New Growth Theories and Their Empirics after Twenty Years," Economics - The Open-Access, Open-Assessment E-Journal (2007-2020), Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW Kiel), vol. 3, pages 1-72.
    2. Gray, Elie & Grimaud, André, 2014. "The Lindahl equilibrium in Schumpeterian growth models: Knowledge diffusion, social value of innovations and optimal R&D incentives," TSE Working Papers 14-469, Toulouse School of Economics (TSE).
    3. Gray, Elie & Grimaud, André, 2014. "The Lindahl equilibrium in Schumpeterian growth models: Knowledge diffusion, social value of innovations and optimal R&D incentives," IDEI Working Papers 821, Institut d'Économie Industrielle (IDEI), Toulouse.
    4. Minniti, Antonio & Venturini, Francesco, 2017. "The long-run growth effects of R&D policy," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(1), pages 316-326.
    5. Elie Gray & André Grimaud, 2014. "The Lindahl Equilibrium in Schumpeterian Growth Models: Knowledge Diffusion, Social Value of Innovations and Optimal R&D Incentives," CESifo Working Paper Series 4678, CESifo.
    6. Dean Scrimgeour, 2015. "Dynamic Scoring in a Romer‐Style Economy," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 81(3), pages 697-723, January.
    7. Elie Gray & André Grimaud, 2016. "The Lindahl equilibrium in Schumpeterian growth models," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 26(1), pages 101-142, March.
    8. Venturini, Francesco, 2012. "Looking into the black box of Schumpeterian growth theories: An empirical assessment of R&D races," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 56(8), pages 1530-1545.
    9. Benjamin Montmartin & Nadine Massard, 2015. "Is Financial Support For Private R&D Always Justified? A Discussion Based On The Literature On Growth," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(3), pages 479-505, July.
    10. Minniti, A. & Parello, C. & Segerstrom, P. S., 2008. "A Schumpeterian Growth Model with Heterogenous Firms," MPRA Paper 13674, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    11. A. Minniti & F. Venturini, 2014. "R&D Policy and Schumpeterian Growth: Theory and Evidence," Working Papers wp945, Dipartimento Scienze Economiche, Universita' di Bologna.
    12. Dean Scrimgeour, 2015. "Dynamic Scoring in a Romer-Style Economy," Southern Economic Journal, Southern Economic Association, vol. 81(3), pages 697-723, January.
    13. repec:wly:soecon:v:81:3:y:2015:p:697-723 is not listed on IDEAS
    14. Guido Cozzi & Silvia Galli, 2009. "Upstream Innovation Protection: Common Law Evolution and the Dynamics of Wage Inequality," Working Papers 2009_20, Business School - Economics, University of Glasgow.
    15. Christopher Laincz & Pietro Peretto, 2006. "Scale effects in endogenous growth theory: an error of aggregation not specification," Journal of Economic Growth, Springer, vol. 11(3), pages 263-288, September.
    16. Volker Grossmann & Thomas Steger, 2007. "Growth, Development, and Technological Change," CESifo Working Paper Series 1913, CESifo.
    17. Cozzi, Guido & Galli, Silvia, 2011. "Privatization of Knowledge: Did the U.S. Get It Right? (New Version)," MPRA Paper 29710, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    18. Segerstrom, Paul & Dinopoulos, Elias, 2006. "North-South Trade and Economic Growth," CEPR Discussion Papers 5887, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    19. Holger Strulik, 2007. "Too Much of a Good Thing? The Quantitative Economics of R&D‐driven Growth Revisited," Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 109(2), pages 369-386, June.
    20. Volker Grossmann, 2008. "Entrepreneurial Innovation and Sustained Long-run Growth without Weak or Strong Scale Effects," CESifo Working Paper Series 2264, CESifo.
    21. Richard M. H. Suen, 2013. "Research Policy and U.S. Economic Growth," Working papers 2013-18, University of Connecticut, Department of Economics.

    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:eee:dyncon:v:32:y:2008:i:12:p:3895-3916. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/jedc .

    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.