IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/tefoso/v165y2021ics004016252031297x.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

An analysis of the paradox in R&D. Insight from a new spatial heterogeneity model

Author

Listed:
  • Yu, Haijing
  • Devece, Caarlos
  • Martinez, José Manuel Guaita
  • Xu, Bing

Abstract

The relationship between research and development (R&D) and economic growth is a hot topic. Most research indicates that R&D leads to innovation, which is conducive to economic growth. However, some scholars hold a different opinion, alleging that high R&D investment will not bring high economic growth. This scenario is also known as the Swedish paradox. We develop a new spatial heterogeneity model in the form of a mixed geographically weighted panel regression with spatial Durbin model (MGWPR-SDM). Using this model, we add to the debate over the possible existence of a Swedish paradox in China. The results show that the impact of aggregate R&D expenditure on economic growth follows an inverted U-shaped curve. The Swedish paradox appears after a threshold is reached, mainly due to business enterprise R&D expenditure rather than government R&D investment. However, from the perspective of R&D input per unit GDP, the impact of R&D intensity on economic growth is U-shaped, and the Swedish paradox occurs before the threshold is reached. Finally, the effect of government R&D expenditure and business enterprise R&D expenditure on economic growth has significant spatial heterogeneity.

Suggested Citation

  • Yu, Haijing & Devece, Caarlos & Martinez, José Manuel Guaita & Xu, Bing, 2021. "An analysis of the paradox in R&D. Insight from a new spatial heterogeneity model," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 165(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:tefoso:v:165:y:2021:i:c:s004016252031297x
    DOI: 10.1016/j.techfore.2020.120471
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S004016252031297X
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.techfore.2020.120471?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    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. Diego Comin, 2004. "R&D: A Small Contribution to Productivity Growth," Journal of Economic Growth, Springer, vol. 9(4), pages 391-421, December.
    2. Jan Mutl & Michael Pfaffermayr, 2011. "The Hausman test in a Cliff and Ord panel model," Econometrics Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 14, pages 48-76, February.
    3. 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.
    4. Geniaux, Ghislain & Martinetti, Davide, 2018. "A new method for dealing simultaneously with spatial autocorrelation and spatial heterogeneity in regression models," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 72(C), pages 74-85.
    5. Jacobsson, Staffan & Lindholm-Dahlstrand, Åsa & Elg, Lennart, 2013. "Is the commercialization of European academic R&D weak?—A critical assessment of a dominant belief and associated policy responses," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(4), pages 874-885.
    6. Henrekson, Magnus & Rosenberg, Nathan, 2001. "Designing Efficient Institutions for Science-Based Entrepreneurship: Lessons from the US and Sweden," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 26(3), pages 207-231, June.
    7. Romer, Paul M, 1990. "Endogenous Technological Change," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 98(5), pages 71-102, October.
    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. Hulya Ulku, 2004. "R&D, Innovation, and Economic Growth: An Empirical Analysis," IMF Working Papers 2004/185, International Monetary Fund.
    10. Xiong, Ailun & Xia, Senmao & Ye, Zhen Peter & Cao, Dongmei & Jing, Yanguo & Li, Hongyi, 2020. "Can innovation really bring economic growth? The role of social filter in China," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 50-61.
    11. Wang, David Han-Min & Yu, Tiffany Hui-Kuang & Liu, Hong-Quan, 2013. "Heterogeneous effect of high-tech industrial R&D spending on economic growth," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 66(10), pages 1990-1993.
    12. Edquist, Harald & Henrekson, Magnus, 2017. "Swedish lessons: How important are ICT and R&D to economic growth?," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 1-12.
    13. Minsung Kim, 2020. "Cross-industry distribution of R&D investments and economic growth," Applied Economics Letters, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 27(8), pages 679-684, May.
    14. Andrzej Kacprzyk & Iwona Świeczewska, 2019. "Is R&D always growth-enhancing? Empirical evidence from the EU countries," Applied Economics Letters, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 26(2), pages 163-167, January.
    15. Arash Ketabforoush Badri & Parsa Ketabforoush Badri & Mostafa Cham, 2019. "R&D Spending and Economic Growth in Selected OECD Countries," International Journal of Applied Economics, Finance and Accounting, Online Academic Press, vol. 5(2), pages 48-54.
    16. Yee Leung & Chang-Lin Mei & Wen-Xiu Zhang, 2000. "Statistical Tests for Spatial Nonstationarity Based on the Geographically Weighted Regression Model," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 32(1), pages 9-32, January.
    17. Ejermo, Olof & Kander, Astrid & Svensson Henning, Martin, 2011. "The R&D-growth paradox arises in fast-growing sectors," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(5), pages 664-672, June.
    18. Beñat Bilbao‐Osorio & Andrés Rodríguez‐Pose, 2004. "From R&D to Innovation and Economic Growth in the EU," Growth and Change, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 35(4), pages 434-455, September.
    19. Anders Granberg & Staffan Jacobsson, 2006. "Myths or reality - a scrutiny of dominant beliefs in the Swedish science policy debate," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 33(5), pages 321-340, June.
    20. Jacobsson, Staffan & Rickne, Annika, 2004. "How large is the Swedish 'academic' sector really?: A critical analysis of the use of science and technology indicators," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(9), pages 1355-1372, November.
    21. Maria Kaneva & Galina Untura, 2019. "The impact of R&D and knowledge spillovers on the economic growth of russian regions," Growth and Change, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 50(1), pages 301-334, March.
    22. Thanos Fragkandreas, 2013. "When Innovation Does Not Pay Off: Introducing the "European Regional Paradox"," European Planning Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 21(12), pages 2078-2086, December.
    23. repec:wly:soecon:v:82:3:y:2016:p:914-934 is not listed on IDEAS
    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. Xu, Aiting & Qiu, Keyang & Zhu, Yuhan, 2023. "The measurements and decomposition of innovation inequality: Based on Industry − University − Research perspective," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 157(C).
    2. Rolando Rubilar-Torrealba & Karime Chahuán-Jiménez & Hanns de la Fuente-Mella, 2022. "Analysis of the Growth in the Number of Patents Granted and Its Effect over the Level of Growth of the Countries: An Econometric Estimation of the Mixed Model Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(4), pages 1-12, February.
    3. Dai, Lu & Zhang, Jiajun & Luo, Shougui, 2022. "Effective R&D capital and total factor productivity: Evidence using spatial panel data models," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 183(C).

    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. Maza, Adolfo & Villaverde, José & Hierro, María, 2014. "Should cohesion policy focus on fostering R&D? Evidence from Spain," INVESTIGACIONES REGIONALES - Journal of REGIONAL RESEARCH, Asociación Española de Ciencia Regional, issue 29, pages 139-164.
    2. Haytem Ahmed Troug & Rashid Sbia, 2015. "Testing for the Presence of Asymmetric Information in the Oil Market: A Vector Autoregression Approach," International Journal of Economics and Financial Issues, Econjournals, vol. 5(3), pages 753-762.
    3. Cuma BOZKURT, 2015. "R&D Expenditures and Economic Growth Relationship in Turkey," International Journal of Economics and Financial Issues, Econjournals, vol. 5(1), pages 188-198.
    4. Abida Hafeez & Karim Bux Shah Syed & Fiza Qureshi, 2019. "Exploring the Relationship between Government R & D Expenditures and Economic Growth in a Global Perspective: A PMG Estimation Approach," International Business Research, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 12(4), pages 163-174, April.
    5. 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.
    6. Edquist , Charles & Zabala-Iturriagagoitia , Jon Mikel, 2015. "The Innovation Union Scoreboard is flawed: The Case of Sweden – not the innovation leader of the EU – updated version," Papers in Innovation Studies 2015/27, Lund University, CIRCLE - Centre for Innovation Research.
    7. Angus Chu, 2010. "Effects of patent length on R&D: a quantitative DGE analysis," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 99(2), pages 117-140, March.
    8. Mand, Matthias, 2016. "On the Cyclicality of R&D Activities," VfS Annual Conference 2016 (Augsburg): Demographic Change 145472, Verein für Socialpolitik / German Economic Association.
    9. Angus Chu, 2009. "Effects of blocking patents on R&D: a quantitative DGE analysis," Journal of Economic Growth, Springer, vol. 14(1), pages 55-78, March.
    10. Angus Chu, 2010. "Effects of patent length on R&D: a quantitative DGE analysis," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 99(2), pages 117-140, March.
    11. 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.
    12. Cristina CRISTE & Ciel BOVARY (MAN) & Nicoleta-Claudia MOLDOVAN & Raluca RĂCĂTĂIAN & Oana-Ramona LOBONȚ, 2024. "Eu Capacity To Bolster And Stimulate Research And Innovation: Who Is The Leader In Development?," Studies in Business and Economics, Lucian Blaga University of Sibiu, Faculty of Economic Sciences, vol. 19(2), pages 60-77, August.
    13. Lin, Hwan C., 2016. "The switch from patents to state-dependent prizes for technological innovation," Journal of Macroeconomics, Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 193-223.
    14. Teemu Makkonen & Timo Mitze, 2019. "Deconstructing the Education-Innovation-Development Nexus in the EU-28 Using Panel Causality and Poolability Tests," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 10(2), pages 516-549, June.
    15. Angus C. Chu & Guido Cozzi, 2014. "R&D And Economic Growth In A Cash‐In‐Advance Economy," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 55(2), pages 507-524, May.
    16. Diego Comin & Mark Gertler, 2006. "Medium-Term Business Cycles," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 96(3), pages 523-551, June.
    17. repec:pra:mprapa:52608 is not listed on IDEAS
    18. Xu, Aiting & Qiu, Keyang & Zhu, Yuhan, 2023. "The measurements and decomposition of innovation inequality: Based on Industry − University − Research perspective," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 157(C).
    19. A. Minniti & F. Venturini, 2014. "R&D Policy and Schumpeterian Growth: Theory and Evidence," Working Papers wp945, Dipartimento Scienze Economiche, Universita' di Bologna.
    20. Tiago Neves Sequeira & Pedro Cunha Neves, 2020. "Stepping on toes in the production of knowledge: a meta-regression analysis," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 52(3), pages 260-274, January.
    21. Mand, Matthias, 2019. "On the cyclicality of R&D activities," Journal of Macroeconomics, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 38-58.

    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:tefoso:v:165:y:2021:i:c:s004016252031297x. 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.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/00401625 .

    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.