IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/indinn/v24y2017i6p633-658.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

What determines firms’ R&D intensity in business groups with cross-ownership structures?

Author

Listed:
  • Taeyoon Sung
  • Chang-Yang Lee
  • Hyeonmi Ahn

Abstract

This paper examines the impact of group-controlling shareholders’ interests on the R&D decision of group-affiliated firms in business groups with cross-ownership structures, especially with regard to the impact of control-ownership disparities or cash-flow rights. We show that R&D intensity across group-affiliated firms, in business groups with cross-ownership structures, is higher when control-ownership disparities are low or when group-controlling shareholders have higher cash-flow rights. Particularly in publicly listed firms, we find that the cash-flow rights of group-controlling shareholders are one of the most important determinants of the R&D intensity for group-affiliated firms.

Suggested Citation

  • Taeyoon Sung & Chang-Yang Lee & Hyeonmi Ahn, 2017. "What determines firms’ R&D intensity in business groups with cross-ownership structures?," Industry and Innovation, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 24(6), pages 633-658, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:taf:indinn:v:24:y:2017:i:6:p:633-658
    DOI: 10.1080/13662716.2016.1261694
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/13662716.2016.1261694
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/13662716.2016.1261694?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. John Bound & Clint Cummins & Zvi Griliches & Bronwyn H. Hall & Adam B. Jaffe, 1984. "Who Does R&D and Who Patents?," NBER Chapters, in: R&D, Patents, and Productivity, pages 21-54, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    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. BeomJu Park & Chang-Yang Lee, 2023. "Does R&D cooperation with competitors cause firms to invest in R&D more intensively? evidence from Korean manufacturing firms," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 48(3), pages 1045-1076, June.

    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. Manuel Ammann & Philipp Horsch & David Oesch, 2016. "Competing with Superstars," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 62(10), pages 2842-2858, October.
    2. Kelly D. Edmiston, 2007. "The role of small and large businesses in economic development," Economic Review, Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City, vol. 92(Q II), pages 73-97.
    3. da Motta e Albuquerque, Eduardo, 2000. "Domestic patents and developing countries: arguments for their study and data from Brazil (1980-1995)," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 29(9), pages 1047-1060, December.
    4. Stavins, Robert & Jaffe, Adam & Newell, Richard, 2000. "Technological Change and the Environment," Working Paper Series rwp00-002, Harvard University, John F. Kennedy School of Government.
    5. Joel Peress & jim goldman, 2016. "Firm Innovation and Financial Analysis: How Do They Interact?," 2016 Meeting Papers 531, Society for Economic Dynamics.
    6. Hall, Bronwyn H. & Oriani, Raffaele, 2006. "Does the market value R&D investment by European firms? Evidence from a panel of manufacturing firms in France, Germany, and Italy," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 24(5), pages 971-993, September.
    7. Veugelers, Reinhilde, 1997. "Internal R & D expenditures and external technology sourcing," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 26(3), pages 303-315, October.
    8. Zvi Griliches, 1998. "Productivity, R&D, and Basic Research at the Firm Level in the 1970s," NBER Chapters, in: R&D and Productivity: The Econometric Evidence, pages 82-99, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    9. Kogut, Bruce & Walker, Gordon & Kim, Dong-Jae, 1995. "Cooperation and entry induction as an extension of technological rivalry," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 24(1), pages 77-95, January.
    10. Blundell, Richard & Griffith, Rachel & Windmeijer, Frank, 2002. "Individual effects and dynamics in count data models," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 108(1), pages 113-131, May.
    11. Hart E. Posen & Dirk Martignoni & Daniel A. Levinthal, 2013. "E Pluribus Unum: Organizational Size and the Efficacy of Learning," DRUID Working Papers 13-09, DRUID, Copenhagen Business School, Department of Industrial Economics and Strategy/Aalborg University, Department of Business Studies.
    12. Hans Lööf & Jacques Mairesse & Pierre Mohnen, 2017. "CDM 20 years after," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 26(1-2), pages 1-5, February.
    13. Daniel Johnson, 2002. ""Learning-by-Licensing": R&D and Technology Licensing in Brazilian Invention," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 11(3), pages 163-177.
    14. Gugler, Klaus, 2003. "Corporate governance, dividend payout policy, and the interrelation between dividends, R&D, and capital investment," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 27(7), pages 1297-1321, July.
    15. Ernst, Holger, 1998. "Industrial research as a source of important patents," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 27(1), pages 1-15, May.
    16. Bronwyn H. Hall & Christian Helmers & Mark Rogers & Vania Sena, 2013. "The importance (or not) of patents to UK firms," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 65(3), pages 603-629, July.
    17. Lucia Foster & Cheryl Grim & Nikolas Zolas, 2020. "A portrait of U.S. firms that invest in R&D," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 29(1), pages 89-111, January.
    18. Kim, Hyung-Tae & Lee, Seungwon & Park, Sung-Jin & Lee, Brandon, 2019. "Audit fees and corporate innovation: Auditors' response to corporate innovation," MPRA Paper 101081, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    19. Ushijima, Tatsuo, 2009. "R&D intensity and acquisition and divestiture of corporate assets: Evidence from Japan," Journal of Economics and Business, Elsevier, vol. 61(5), pages 415-433, September.
    20. Klette, Tor Jakob & Griliches, Zvi, 2000. "Empirical Patterns of Firm Growth and R&D Investment: A Quality Ladder Model Interpretation," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 110(463), pages 363-387, April.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:taf:indinn:v:24:y:2017:i:6:p:633-658. 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: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/CIAI20 .

    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.