IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/canjec/v36y2003i3p566-586.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

R&D, innovation, and technological progress: a test of the Schumpeterian framework without scale effects

Author

Listed:
  • Marios Zachariadis

Abstract

. I use U.S. manufacturing industry data to estimate a system of three equations implied by a model of R&D‐induced growth in steady state. These equations relate R&D intensity to patenting, patenting to technological progress, and technological progress to economic growth. In each case, I find evidence of positive impact. Thus, I reject the null hypothesis that growth is not induced by R&D in favour of the Schumpeterian endogenous growth framework without scale effects. I also find strong support for technological spillovers from aggregate research intensity to industry‐level innovation success. JEL Classification: O40, O30 R&D, innovation, et progrès technologique: un test du cadre schumpétérien en l’absenced’effets d’échelle. L’auteur utilise des données de l’industrie manufacturière pour calibrer un système de trois équations émergeant d’un modèle de croissance en régime permanent induite par le R&D. Ces équations relient l’intensité de R&D à l’obtention de brevets, l’obtention de brevets au progrès technologique, et le progrès technologique à la croissance économique. Dans chaque cas, on trouve un impact positif. En conséquence, l’auteur rejette l’hypothèse nulle que la croissance n’est pas engendrée par le R&D en faveur de l’hypothèse de croissance endogène à la Schumpeter sans effets d’échelle. L’auteur confirme fortement l’hypothèse d’effets de retombées technologiques sur le succès de l’innovation au niveau de l’industrie en conséquence d’une forte intensité de recherche.

Suggested Citation

  • 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.
  • Handle: RePEc:wly:canjec:v:36:y:2003:i:3:p:566-586
    DOI: 10.1111/1540-5982.t01-2-00003
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/1540-5982.t01-2-00003
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/1540-5982.t01-2-00003?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
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Rachel Griffith & Stephen Redding & John Van Reenen, 2004. "Mapping the Two Faces of R&D: Productivity Growth in a Panel of OECD Industries," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 86(4), pages 883-895, November.
    2. Miles S. Kimball & John G. Fernald & Susanto Basu, 2006. "Are Technology Improvements Contractionary?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 96(5), pages 1418-1448, December.
    3. Coe, David T. & Helpman, Elhanan, 1995. "International R&D spillovers," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 39(5), pages 859-887, May.
    4. Fatas, Antonio, 2000. "Do Business Cycles Cast Long Shadows? Short-Run Persistence and Economic Growth," Journal of Economic Growth, Springer, vol. 5(2), pages 147-162, June.
    5. repec:fth:harver:1473 is not listed on IDEAS
    6. Ricardo J. Caballero & Adam B. Jaffe, 1993. "How High Are the Giants' Shoulders: An Empirical Assessment of Knowledge Spillovers and Creative Destruction in a Model of Economic Growth," NBER Chapters, in: NBER Macroeconomics Annual 1993, Volume 8, pages 15-86, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    7. Evans, Paul, 1996. "Growth and the Neutrality of Money," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 21(1), pages 187-202.
    8. Aghion, Philippe & Howitt, Peter, 1992. "A Model of Growth through Creative Destruction," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 60(2), pages 323-351, March.
    9. Segerstrom, Paul S, 2000. "The Long-Run Growth Effects of R&D Subsidies," Journal of Economic Growth, Springer, vol. 5(3), pages 277-305, September.
    10. Bruno Crepon & Emmanuel Duguet & Jacques Mairesse, 1998. "Research, Innovation And Productivity: An Econometric Analysis At The Firm Level," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 7(2), pages 115-158.
    11. Kocherlakota, Narayana R & Yi, Kei-Mu, 1997. "Is There Endogenous Long-Run Growth? Evidence from the United States and the United Kingdom," Journal of Money, Credit and Banking, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 29(2), pages 235-262, May.
    12. M. Ishaq Nadiri, 1993. "Innovations and Technological Spillovers," NBER Working Papers 4423, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    13. Griliches, Zvi, 1980. "R & D and the Productivity Slowdown," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 70(2), pages 343-348, May.
    14. Ariel Pakes & Zvi Griliches, 1980. "Patents and R and D at the Firm Level: A First Look," NBER Working Papers 0561, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    15. Pakes, Ariel & Schankerman, Mark A., 1978. "The Rate of Obsolescence of Knowledge, Research Gestation Labs, and the Private Rate of Return to Research Resources," Working Papers 78-13, C.V. Starr Center for Applied Economics, New York University.
    16. Pakes, Ariel & Griliches, Zvi, 1980. "Patents and R&D at the firm level: A first report," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 5(4), pages 377-381.
    17. Kahn, James A. & Ogaki, Masao, 1992. "A consistent test for the null of stationarity against the alternative of a unit root," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 39(1), pages 7-11, May.
    18. Kortum, Samuel, 1993. "Equilibrium R&D and the Patent-R&D Ratio: U.S. Evidence," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 83(2), pages 450-457, May.
    19. Ariel Pakes & Mark Schankerman, 1984. "The Rate of Obsolescence of Patents, Research Gestation Lags, and the Private Rate of Return to Research Resources," NBER Chapters, in: R&D, Patents, and Productivity, pages 73-88, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    20. Mansfield, Edwin, 1988. "Industrial R&D in Japan and the United States: A Comparative Study," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 78(2), pages 223-228, May.
    21. Dinopoulos, Elias & Thompson, Peter, 2000. "Endogenous growth in a cross-section of countries," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 51(2), pages 335-362, August.
    22. Crepon, B. & Duguet, E. & Mairesse, J., 1998. "Research Investment, Innovation and Productivity: An Econometric Analysis at the Firm Level," Papiers d'Economie Mathématique et Applications 98.15, Université Panthéon-Sorbonne (Paris 1).
    23. Zvi Griliches, 1998. "Productivity and R&D at the Firm Level," NBER Chapters, in: R&D and Productivity: The Econometric Evidence, pages 100-133, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    24. Charles I. Jones, 1999. "Growth: With or Without Scale Effects?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 89(2), pages 139-144, May.
    25. 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.
    26. Zvi Griliches, 1984. "R&D, Patents, and Productivity," NBER Books, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc, number gril84-1.
    27. Zvi Griliches, 1998. "Returns to Research and Development Expenditures in the Private Sector," NBER Chapters, in: R&D and Productivity: The Econometric Evidence, pages 49-81, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    28. Keller, Wolfgang, 2002. "Trade and the Transmission of Technology," Journal of Economic Growth, Springer, vol. 7(1), pages 5-24, March.
    29. Nadiri, M.I., 1993. "Innovations and Technological Spillovers," Working Papers 93-31, C.V. Starr Center for Applied Economics, New York University.
    30. Zvi Griliches, 1998. "Patent Statistics as Economic Indicators: A Survey," NBER Chapters, in: R&D and Productivity: The Econometric Evidence, pages 287-343, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    31. John Shea, 1999. "What Do Technology Shocks Do?," NBER Chapters, in: NBER Macroeconomics Annual 1998, volume 13, pages 275-322, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    32. Perron, Pierre, 1989. "The Great Crash, the Oil Price Shock, and the Unit Root Hypothesis," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 57(6), pages 1361-1401, November.
    33. Romer, Paul M, 1990. "Endogenous Technological Change," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 98(5), pages 71-102, October.
    34. Ariel Pakes & Zvi Griliches, 1984. "Patents and R&D at the Firm Level: A First Look," NBER Chapters, in: R&D, Patents, and Productivity, pages 55-72, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    35. Segerstrom, Paul S, 1998. "Endogenous Growth without Scale Effects," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 88(5), pages 1290-1310, December.
    36. 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.
    37. 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.
    38. 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.
    39. Ogaki, M., 1993. "CCR: A User Guide," RCER Working Papers 349, University of Rochester - Center for Economic Research (RCER).
    40. 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)

    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. Marios Zachariadis, 2004. "R&D‐induced Growth in the OECD?," Review of Development Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 8(3), pages 423-439, August.
    3. Neves, Pedro Cunha & Sequeira, Tiago Neves, 2018. "Spillovers in the production of knowledge: A meta-regression analysis," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(4), pages 750-767.
    4. Hall, Bronwyn H. & Mairesse, Jacques & Mohnen, Pierre, 2010. "Measuring the Returns to R&D," Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, in: Bronwyn H. Hall & Nathan Rosenberg (ed.), Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, edition 1, volume 2, chapter 0, pages 1033-1082, Elsevier.
    5. Jakob Madsen, 2008. "Semi-endogenous versus Schumpeterian growth models: testing the knowledge production function using international data," Journal of Economic Growth, Springer, vol. 13(1), pages 1-26, March.
    6. Raquel Ortega-Argilés, 2013. "R&D, knowledge, economic growth and the transatlantic productivity gap," Chapters, in: Frank Giarratani & Geoffrey J.D. Hewings & Philip McCann (ed.), Handbook of Industry Studies and Economic Geography, chapter 11, pages 271-302, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    7. Marios Zachariadis, 2002. "International Technology Diffusion and Growth in the Manufacturing Sector of Developing Economies," Departmental Working Papers 2002-20, Department of Economics, Louisiana State University.
    8. G Medda & C. Piga, 2004. "R&S e spillover industriali: un'analisi sulle imprese italiane," Working Paper CRENoS 200406, Centre for North South Economic Research, University of Cagliari and Sassari, Sardinia.
    9. Jakob B. Madsen & Md. Rabiul Islam & James B. Ang, 2010. "Catching up to the technology frontier: the dichotomy between innovation and imitation," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 43(4), pages 1389-1411, November.
    10. Richard M. H. Suen, 2013. "Research Policy and U.S. Economic Growth," Working papers 2013-18, University of Connecticut, Department of Economics.
    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. Peter Gustafsson & Paul Segerstrom, 2010. "Trade Liberalization and Productivity Growth," Review of International Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 18(2), pages 207-228, May.
    13. Gray, Elie & Grimaud, André, 2016. "Using the Salop Circle to Study Scale Effects in Schumpeterian Growth Models: Why Inter-sectoral Knowledge Diffusion Matters," TSE Working Papers 16-676, Toulouse School of Economics (TSE).
    14. A. Minniti & F. Venturini, 2014. "R&D Policy and Schumpeterian Growth: Theory and Evidence," Working Papers wp945, Dipartimento Scienze Economiche, Universita' di Bologna.
    15. Bosch, Mariano & Lederman, Daniel & Maloney, William F., 2005. "Patenting and research and development : a global view," Policy Research Working Paper Series 3739, The World Bank.
    16. Hans Loof & Almas Heshmati, 2006. "On the relationship between innovation and performance: A sensitivity analysis," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 15(4-5), pages 317-344.
    17. Martin Aarøe Christensen, 2015. "A CGE model with ICT and R&D-driven endogenous growth: A detailed model description," JRC Research Reports JRC97908, Joint Research Centre.
    18. Elie Gray & André Grimaud, 2016. "Using the Salop Circle to Study Scale Effects in Schumpeterian Growth Models: Why Inter-sectoral Knowledge Diffusion Matters," CESifo Working Paper Series 6021, CESifo.
    19. Cohen, Wesley M., 2010. "Fifty Years of Empirical Studies of Innovative Activity and Performance," Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, in: Bronwyn H. Hall & Nathan Rosenberg (ed.), Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 0, pages 129-213, Elsevier.
    20. Steven Bond-Smith & Philip McCann & Les Oxley, 2018. "A regional model of endogenous growth without scale assumptions," Spatial Economic Analysis, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 13(1), pages 5-35, January.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • O40 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Economic Growth and Aggregate Productivity - - - General
    • O30 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - General

    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:wly:canjec:v:36:y:2003:i:3:p:566-586. 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1111/(ISSN)1540-5982 .

    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.