|
on Technology and Industrial Dynamics |
| By: | Mercedes Delgado; Michael E. Porter; Scott Stern |
| Abstract: | Clusters are geographic concentrations of industries related by knowledge, skills, inputs, demand, and/or other linkages. A growing body of empirical literature has shown the positive impact of clusters on regional and industry performance, including job creation, patenting, and new business formation. There is an increasing need for cluster-based data to support research, facilitate comparisons of clusters across regions, and support policymakers and practitioners in defining regional strategies. This paper develops a novel clustering algorithm that systematically generates and assesses sets of cluster definitions (i.e., groups of closely related industries). We implement the algorithm using 2009 data for U.S. industries (6-digit NAICS), and propose a new set of benchmark cluster definitions that incorporates measures of inter-industry linkages based on co-location patterns, input-output links, and similarities in labor occupations. We also illustrate the algorithm’s ability to compare alternative sets of cluster definitions by evaluating our new set against existing sets in the literature. We find that our proposed set outperforms other methods in capturing a wide range of inter-industry linkages, including grouping industries within the same 3-digit NAICS. |
| JEL: | R0 R1 |
| Date: | 2014–08 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:nbr:nberwo:20375&r=tid |
| By: | Hottenrott, Hanna; Lopes-Bento, Cindy; Veugelers, Reinhilde |
| Abstract: | This study investigates the effects of an R&D subsidy scheme on participating firms' net R&D investment. Making use of a specific policy design in Belgium that explicitly distinguishes between research and development grants, we estimate direct and cross-scheme effects on research versus development intensities in recipients firms. We find positive direct effects from research (development) subsidies on net research (development) spending. This direct effect is larger for research grants than for development grants. We also find cross-scheme effects that may arise due to complementarity between research and development activities. Finally, we find that the magnitude of the treatment effects depends on firm size and age and that there is a minimum effective grant size, especially for research projects. The results support the view that public subsidies induce higher additional investment particularly in research where market failures are larger, even when the subsidies are targeting development. -- |
| Keywords: | R&D,Complementarity,Research Subsidies,Development Subsidies,Innovation Policy |
| JEL: | H23 O31 O38 |
| Date: | 2014 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:zbw:dicedp:152&r=tid |
| By: | Bozeman, Barry (Arizona State University); Link, Albert N. (University of North Carolina at Greensboro, Department of Economics) |
| Abstract: | Five important policy initiatives were promulgated in response to the slowdown in U.S. productivity in the early-1970s, and then again in the late-1970s and early-1980s. These initiatives included the Bayh-Dole Act of 1980, the Stevenson-Wydler Act of 1980, the R&E Tax Credit of 1981, the Small Business Innovation and Development Act of 1982, and the National Cooperative Research Act of 1984. Scholars and policy-makers have long debated the direction and magnitude of impacts from these policies but empirical evidence remains modest, especially evidence of their aggregate effects. Our assessment of these policies is based on quantifying their collective impact on industrial investments in R&D in the post-productivity slowdown period. Our findings support the conclusion that the relative levels of industrial investments in R&D from 1980 forward were significantly higher than before, ceteris paribus. |
| Keywords: | technology; innovation; R&D; policy assessment |
| JEL: | H50 O31 O33 O47 |
| Date: | 2014–08–14 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:ris:uncgec:2014_005&r=tid |
| By: | Hottenrott, Hanna; Lopes-Bento, Cindy |
| Abstract: | R&D collaboration facilitates pooling of complementary skills, learning from the partner as well as sharing risks and costs. Research therefore repeatedly stressed the positive relationship between collaborative R&D and innovation performance. Collaboration, however, involves transaction costs in form of coordination and monitoring efforts and requires knowledge disclosure. This study explicitly considers a firm's collaboration intensity, that is, the share of collaborative R&D projects in a firms' total R&D projects in a sample of mostly small and medium-sized firms (SMEs). We can confirm previous findings in terms of gains for innovation performance, but also show that collaboration has decreasing and even negative returns on product innovation if its intensity increases above a certain threshold. In particular, costs start outweighing benefits if a firm pursues more than about two thirds of its R&D projects in collaboration. -- |
| Keywords: | innovation performance,product innovation,R&D partnerships,collaboration intensity,SMEs,transaction costs,selection model,endogenous switching |
| JEL: | O31 O32 O33 O34 |
| Date: | 2014 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:zbw:dicedp:154&r=tid |
| By: | Francesco Caselli |
| Abstract: | The average Latin American country produces about 1 fifth of the output per worker of the US. What are the sources of these enormous income gaps? I report development-accounting results for Latin America. On average Latin America's overall physical and human capital endowment relative to the USA is essentially identical to Latin America's efficiency relative to the USA . In my main sample average relative capital and average relative efficiency are both roughly double actual average relative incomes. Hence, both capital gaps and efficiency gaps are very large: the average Latin American country has less than half the capital (human and physical) per worker of the US, and uses it less than half as efficiently. In assessing this evidence, it is essential to bear in mind that efficiency gaps contribute to income disparity both directly -- as they mean that Latin America gets less out of its capital -- and indirectly -- since much of the capital gap itself is likely due to diminished incentives to invest in equipment, structure, schooling, and health caused by low efficiency. The consequences of closing the efficiency gap would correspondingly be far reaching. Explaining the Latin American efficiency gap is therefore a high priority both for scholars and for policy makers. |
| Keywords: | Latin America, income gaps, development accounting |
| JEL: | O11 |
| Date: | 2014–08 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:cep:cepdps:dp1289&r=tid |