IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hal/wpaper/halshs-00727362.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Strategic interactions in public R&D across EU-15 countries : A spatial econometric analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Hakim Hammadou

    (EQUIPPE - Economie Quantitative, Intégration, Politiques Publiques et Econométrie - Université de Lille, Sciences et Technologies - Université de Lille, Sciences Humaines et Sociales - PRES Université Lille Nord de France - Université de Lille, Droit et Santé)

  • Sonia Paty

    (GATE Lyon Saint-Étienne - Groupe d'Analyse et de Théorie Economique Lyon - Saint-Etienne - ENS de Lyon - École normale supérieure de Lyon - UL2 - Université Lumière - Lyon 2 - UCBL - Université Claude Bernard Lyon 1 - Université de Lyon - UJM - Université Jean Monnet - Saint-Étienne - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique)

  • Maria Savona

    (CLERSÉ - Centre Lillois d’Études et de Recherches Sociologiques et Économiques - UMR 8019 - Université de Lille - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, SPRU - Science and Technology Policy Research - University of Sussex)

Abstract

The aim of this paper is to test the presence of strategic interactions in government spending on Research and Development (R&D), among EU-15 countries. We add to the literature on public choice strategic interactions in general, and to work on R&D spending in particular. We take account of traditional and some rather overlooked factors related to countries' public R&D spending, including (i) the international context - i.e. Lisbon strategy ; (ii) country characteristics - the National System of Innovation ; (iii) national similarities in relation to (a) trade and economic size and (b) sectoral specialization. Sectoral specialization is likely to affect government spending, depending on the mechanisms of complementarity or substitution between public and private R&D. Using a dynamic spatial panel model in which spatial matrices are specified in terms of traditional Euclidean distance, and sectoral specialization proximity, we confirm the existence of strategic interactions in relation to R&D spending among European countries with similar economic, international trade and sectoral structure perspectives. Unlike the results for strategic interactions in public choice, geographic proximity seems not to affect interactions related to public spending on R&D.

Suggested Citation

  • Hakim Hammadou & Sonia Paty & Maria Savona, 2012. "Strategic interactions in public R&D across EU-15 countries : A spatial econometric analysis," Working Papers halshs-00727362, HAL.
    • Handle: RePEc:hal:wpaper:halshs-00727362
    Note: View the original document on HAL open archive server: https://shs.hal.science/halshs-00727362
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://shs.hal.science/halshs-00727362/document
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Besley, Timothy & Case, Anne, 1995. "Incumbent Behavior: Vote-Seeking, Tax-Setting, and Yardstick Competition," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 85(1), pages 25-45, March.
    2. Arellano, Manuel & Bover, Olympia, 1995. "Another look at the instrumental variable estimation of error-components models," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 68(1), pages 29-51, July.
    3. Feld Lars P. & Reulier Emmanuelle, 2009. "Strategic Tax Competition in Switzerland: Evidence from a Panel of the Swiss Cantons," German Economic Review, De Gruyter, vol. 10(1), pages 91-114, February.
    4. Coe, David T. & Helpman, Elhanan, 1995. "International R&D spillovers," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 39(5), pages 859-887, May.
    5. Timothy Besley & Anne Case, 1995. "Does Electoral Accountability Affect Economic Policy Choices? Evidence from Gubernatorial Term Limits," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 110(3), pages 769-798.
    6. Dreher, Axel, 2006. "The influence of globalization on taxes and social policy: An empirical analysis for OECD countries," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 22(1), pages 179-201, March.
    7. Blundell, Richard & Bond, Stephen, 1998. "Initial conditions and moment restrictions in dynamic panel data models," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 87(1), pages 115-143, August.
    8. David, Paul A. & Hall, Bronwyn H. & Toole, Andrew A., 2000. "Is public R&D a complement or substitute for private R&D? A review of the econometric evidence," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 29(4-5), pages 497-529, April.
    9. Devereux, Michael P. & Lockwood, Ben & Redoano, Michela, 2008. "Do countries compete over corporate tax rates?," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 92(5-6), pages 1210-1235, June.
    10. Rosanne Altshuler & Timothy J. Goodspeed, 2015. "Follow the Leader? Evidence on European and US Tax Competition," Public Finance Review, , vol. 43(4), pages 485-504, July.
    11. Craig Brett & Joris Pinkse, 2000. "The determinants of municipal tax rates in British Columbia," Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d'économique, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 33(3), pages 695-714, August.
    12. Baicker, Katherine, 2005. "The spillover effects of state spending," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 89(2-3), pages 529-544, February.
    13. Brueckner, Jan K. & Saavedra, Luz A., 2001. "Do Local Governments Engage in Strategic Property-Tax Competition?," National Tax Journal, National Tax Association;National Tax Journal, vol. 54(2), pages 203-230, June.
    14. Daniele Archibugi, 2001. "Pavitt'S Taxonomy Sixteen Years On: A Review Article," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 10(5), pages 415-425.
    15. Bordignon, Massimo & Cerniglia, Floriana & Revelli, Federico, 2003. "In search of yardstick competition: a spatial analysis of Italian municipality property tax setting," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 54(2), pages 199-217, September.
    16. Dosi, Giovanni & Llerena, Patrick & Labini, Mauro Sylos, 2006. "The relationships between science, technologies and their industrial exploitation: An illustration through the myths and realities of the so-called `European Paradox'," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(10), pages 1450-1464, December.
    17. Crepon, Bruno & Duguet, Emmanuel, 1997. "Estimating the Innovation Function from Patent Numbers: GMM on Count Panel Data," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 12(3), pages 243-263, May-June.
    18. Case, Anne C. & Rosen, Harvey S. & Hines, James Jr., 1993. "Budget spillovers and fiscal policy interdependence : Evidence from the states," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 52(3), pages 285-307, October.
    19. Sylvie Charlot & Sonia Paty, 2007. "Market access effect and local tax setting: evidence from French panel data," Journal of Economic Geography, Oxford University Press, vol. 7(3), pages 247-263, May.
    20. Manuel Arellano & Stephen Bond, 1991. "Some Tests of Specification for Panel Data: Monte Carlo Evidence and an Application to Employment Equations," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 58(2), pages 277-297.
    21. Jan K. Brueckner, 1999. "Welfare Reform and the Race to the Bottom: Theory and Evidence," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 66(2), pages 505-525, January.
    22. Jan K. Brueckner, 2003. "Strategic Interaction Among Governments: An Overview of Empirical Studies," International Regional Science Review, , vol. 26(2), pages 175-188, April.
    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. Hammadou, Hakim & Paty, Sonia & Savona, Maria, 2014. "Strategic interactions in public R&D across European countries: A spatial econometric analysis," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(7), pages 1217-1226.
    2. Cassette, Aurélie & Paty, Sonia, 2008. "Tax competition among Eastern and Western European countries: With whom do countries compete?," Economic Systems, Elsevier, vol. 32(4), pages 307-325, December.
    3. Michael P. Devereux & Simon Loretz, 2013. "What Do We Know About Corporate Tax Competition?," National Tax Journal, National Tax Association;National Tax Journal, vol. 66(3), pages 745-774, September.
    4. Caldeira, Emilie, 2012. "Yardstick competition in a federation: Theory and evidence from China," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 23(4), pages 878-897.
    5. Federico Revelli, 2005. "On Spatial Public Finance Empirics," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 12(4), pages 475-492, August.
    6. Cassette, Aurélie & Di Porto, Edoardo & Foremny, Dirk, 2012. "Strategic fiscal interaction across borders: Evidence from French and German local governments along the Rhine Valley," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 72(1), pages 17-30.
    7. Revelli, Federico, 2006. "Performance rating and yardstick competition in social service provision," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 90(3), pages 459-475, February.
    8. Matthieu Leprince & Thierry Madiès & Sonia Paty, 2007. "Business Tax Interactions Among Local Governments: An Empirical Analysis Of The French Case," Journal of Regional Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 47(3), pages 603-621, August.
    9. Ruiz, Fernando & Gerard, Marcel, 2008. "Is there evidence of strategic corporate tax interaction among EU countries?," MPRA Paper 10094, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    10. Sandy Fréret & Denis Maguain, 2017. "The effects of agglomeration on tax competition: evidence from a two-regime spatial panel model on French data," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 24(6), pages 1100-1140, December.
    11. Karen Crabbé, 2013. "Are Your Firm´s Taxes Set in Warsaw? Spatial Tax Competition in Europe," FinanzArchiv: Public Finance Analysis, Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen, vol. 69(3), pages 317-337, September.
    12. Matthieu Leprince & Sonia Paty & Emmanuelle Reulier, 2005. "Choix d'imposition et interactions spatiales entre collectivités locales. Un test sur les départements français," Recherches économiques de Louvain, De Boeck Université, vol. 71(1), pages 67-93.
    13. Alexander Klemm & Stefan Parys, 2012. "Empirical evidence on the effects of tax incentives," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 19(3), pages 393-423, June.
    14. Maria Elkhdari (a), Samira Oukarfi (b), Samir Zine El Alaoui (b) and Youness Sahibi (c), 2021. "Are Strategic Interactions between Moroccan Local Governments Geographical or Political?," Journal of Economic Development, Chung-Ang Unviersity, Department of Economics, vol. 46(1), pages 33-52, March.
    15. Pantelis Kammas, 2011. "Strategic fiscal interaction among OECD countries," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 147(3), pages 459-480, June.
    16. Lars P. Feld, 2006. "Regulatory Competition and Federalism in Switzerland: Diffusion by Horizontal and Vertical Interaction," CREMA Working Paper Series 2006-22, Center for Research in Economics, Management and the Arts (CREMA).
    17. repec:lic:licosd:21608 is not listed on IDEAS
    18. Borck, Rainald & Fossen, Frank M. & Freier, Ronny & Martin, Thorsten, 2015. "Race to the debt trap? — Spatial econometric evidence on debt in German municipalities," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 20-37.
    19. Fredrik Andersson & Rikard Forslid, 2003. "Tax Competition and Economic Geography," Journal of Public Economic Theory, Association for Public Economic Theory, vol. 5(2), pages 279-303, April.
    20. Nelly Exbrayat, 2008. "The Impact of Trade Integration and Agglomeration Economies on Tax Interactions : Evidence from OECD Countries," Post-Print hal-00270067, HAL.
    21. Ferraresi, Massimiliano, 2023. "JUE Insight: Immigrants, social transfers for education, and spatial interactions," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 136(C).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Public R&D expenditures; National Systems of Innovation; complementarity public and private R&D; spatial interactions; EU countries; spatial dynamic panel data;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • H5 - Public Economics - - National Government Expenditures and Related Policies
    • O3 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:hal:wpaper:halshs-00727362. 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: CCSD (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/ .

    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.