IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/cen/wpaper/93-2.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Science, R&D, And Invention Potential Recharge: U.S. Evidence

Author

Listed:
  • James D Adams

Abstract

The influence of academic science on industrial R&D seems to have increased in recent years compared with the pre-World War II period. This paper outlines an approach to tracing this influence using a panel of 14 R&D performing industries from 1961-1986. The results indicate an elasticity between real R&D and indicators of stocks of academic science of about 0.6. This elasticity is significant controlling for industry effects. However, the elasticity declines from its level during the 1961-1973 subperiod, when it was 2.2, to 0.5 during the 1974-1986 subperiod. Reasons for the decline include exogenous and endogenous exhaustion of invention potential, and declining incentives to do R&D stemming from a weakening of intellectual property rights. The growth of R&D since the mid-1980s suggests a restoration of R&D incentives in still more recent times.

Suggested Citation

  • James D Adams, 1993. "Science, R&D, And Invention Potential Recharge: U.S. Evidence," Working Papers 93-2, Center for Economic Studies, U.S. Census Bureau.
    • Handle: RePEc:cen:wpaper:93-2
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www2.census.gov/ces/wp/1993/CES-WP-93-02.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Feenstra, Robert C & Markusen, James R, 1994. "Accounting for Growth with New Inputs," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 35(2), pages 429-447, May.
    2. Gary S. Becker & Kevin M. Murphy, 1994. "The Division of Labor, Coordination Costs, and Knowledge," NBER Chapters, in: Human Capital: A Theoretical and Empirical Analysis with Special Reference to Education, Third Edition, pages 299-322, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    3. Zvi Griliches, 1998. "Issues in Assessing the Contribution of Research and Development to Productivity Growth," NBER Chapters, in: R&D and Productivity: The Econometric Evidence, pages 17-45, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    4. Evenson, Robert E & Kislev, Yoav, 1976. "A Stochastic Model of Applied Research," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 84(2), pages 265-281, April.
    5. Adams, James D, 1990. "Fundamental Stocks of Knowledge and Productivity Growth," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 98(4), pages 673-702, August.
    6. 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.
    7. Feenstra, Robert C & Markusen, James R & Zeile, William, 1992. "Accounting for Growth with New Inputs: Theory and Evidence," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 82(2), pages 415-421, May.
    8. Romer, Paul M, 1987. "Growth Based on Increasing Returns Due to Specialization," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 77(2), pages 56-62, May.
    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. James Adams & Zvi Griliches, 1996. "Measuring Science: An Exploration," NBER Working Papers 5478, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    2. Joe Mattey, 1993. "Evidence on IO Technology Assumptions From the Longitudinal Research Database," Working Papers 93-8, Center for Economic Studies, U.S. Census Bureau.
    3. A. Varga, 2006. "Spatial Knowledge Spillovers and University Research: Evidence from Austria," Springer Books, in: Innovation, Networks, and Knowledge Spillovers, chapter 10, pages 211-232, Springer.
    4. 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.
    5. Sang V Nguyen & Robert H Mcguckin & Arnold P Reznek, 1995. "The Impact Of Ownership Change On Employment, Wages, And Labor Productivity In U.S. Manufacturing 1977-87," Working Papers 95-8, Center for Economic Studies, U.S. Census Bureau.
    6. Klenow, Peter J., 1996. "Industry innovation: where and why," Carnegie-Rochester Conference Series on Public Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(1), pages 125-150, June.
    7. Andrea Bonaccorsi & Cinzia Daraio, 2013. "Knowledge spillover effects at the sub-regional level. Theory and estimation," DIAG Technical Reports 2013-13, Department of Computer, Control and Management Engineering, Universita' degli Studi di Roma "La Sapienza".

    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. Michael C. Burda & Barbara Dluhosch, 2002. "Fragmentation, Globalisation and Labour Markets," International Economic Association Series, in: David Greenaway & Richard Upward & Katharine Wakelin (ed.), Trade, Investment, Migration and Labour Market Adjustment, chapter 4, pages 47-65, Palgrave Macmillan.
    2. Michael C. Burda & Barbara Dluhosch, 2002. "Cost Competition, Fragmentation, and Globalization," Review of International Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 10(3), pages 424-441, August.
    3. Cassiman, Bruno & Veugelers, Reinhilde & Zuniga, Pluvia, 2009. "Diversity of science linkages and innovation performance: some empirical evidence from Flemish firms," Economics Discussion Papers 2009-30, Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW Kiel).
    4. Colantone, Italo & Crinò, Rosario, 2014. "New imported inputs, new domestic products," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 92(1), pages 147-165.
    5. Pinelopi Koujianou Goldberg & Amit Kumar Khandelwal & Nina Pavcnik & Petia Topalova, 2010. "Imported Intermediate Inputs and Domestic Product Growth: Evidence from India," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 125(4), pages 1727-1767.
    6. 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.
    7. Pinelopi Koujianou Goldberg & Amit Kumar Khandelwal & Nina Pavcnik & Petia Topalova, 2010. "Imported Intermediate Inputs and Domestic Product Growth: Evidence from India," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 125(4), pages 1727-1767.
    8. Kasahara, Hiroyuki & Lapham, Beverly, 2013. "Productivity and the decision to import and export: Theory and evidence," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 89(2), pages 297-316.
    9. repec:pri:cepsud:192goldberg is not listed on IDEAS
    10. James D. Adams, 2000. "Endogenous R&D Spillovers and Industrial Research Productivity," NBER Working Papers 7484, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    11. Dias, Joilson, 1995. "The quantum of knowledge theory," Revista Brasileira de Economia - RBE, EPGE Brazilian School of Economics and Finance - FGV EPGE (Brazil), vol. 49(1), January.
    12. 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.
    13. Mary Amiti & Jozef Konings, 2007. "Trade Liberalization, Intermediate Inputs, and Productivity: Evidence from Indonesia," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 97(5), pages 1611-1638, December.
    14. Kym Anderson, 2005. "On the Virtues of Multilateral Trade Negotiations," The Economic Record, The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 81(255), pages 414-438, December.
    15. Ahn, JaeBin & Choi, Moon Jung, 2020. "From firm-level imports to aggregate productivity: Evidence from Korean manufacturing firm data," Japan and the World Economy, Elsevier, vol. 56(C).
    16. Beck, Mathias & Junge, Martin & Kaiser, Ulrich, 2017. "Public Funding and Corporate Innovation," IZA Discussion Papers 11196, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    17. Joze Damijan & José de Sousa & Olivier Lamotte, 2010. "Trade Liberalization in Southeastern Europe," Chapters, in: Robert E.B. Lucas & Lyn Squire & T. N. Srinivasan (ed.), Global Exchange and Poverty, chapter 4, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    18. Christoph Meister & Bart Verspagen & Guntram B. Wolff, 2006. "European Productivity Gaps: Is R&D the Solution?," Chapters, in: Susanne Mundschenk & Michael H. Stierle & Ulrike Stierle-von Schütz & Iulia Traistaru-Siedschlag (ed.), Competitiveness and Growth in Europe, chapter 8, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    19. Toole, Andrew A. & King, John L., 2011. "Industry-science connections in agriculture: Do public science collaborations and knowledge flows contribute to firm-level agricultural research productivity?," ZEW Discussion Papers 11-064, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    20. Andrea, Bastianin & Paolo, Castelnuovo & Massimo, Florio & Anna, Giunta, 2019. "Technological Learning and Innovation Gestation Lags at the Frontier of Science: from CERN Procurement to Patents," Working Papers 405, University of Milano-Bicocca, Department of Economics, revised Apr 2019.
    21. Yong He & Hong Zhou, 2011. "Estimating Chinese Interprovincial OutPut Spillovers with Provincial Input-Output Tables," CERDI Working papers halshs-00553102, HAL.

    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:cen:wpaper:93-2. 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: Dawn Anderson (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cesgvus.html .

    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.