Research and/or Development? Financial Frictions and Innovation Investment
August 2023
Working Paper Number:
CES-23-39
Abstract
U.S. firms have reduced their investment in scientific research ('R') compared to product development ('D'), raising questions about the returns to each type of investment, and about the reasons for this shift. We use Census data that disaggregates 'R' from 'D' to study how US firms adjust their innovation investments in response to an external increase in funding cost. Companies with greater demand for refinancing during the 2008 financial crisis, made larger cuts to R&D investment. This reduction in R&D is achieved almost entirely by reducing investment in research. Development remains essentially unchanged. If other firms patenting similar technologies must refinance, however, then Development investment declines. We interpret the latter result as evidence of technological competition: firms are reluctant to cut Development expenditures when that could place them at a disadvantage compared to potential rivals.
Document Tags and Keywords
Keywords
Keywords are automatically generated using KeyBERT, a powerful and innovative
keyword extraction tool that utilizes BERT embeddings to ensure high-quality and contextually relevant
keywords.
By analyzing the content of working papers, KeyBERT identifies terms and phrases that capture the essence of the
text, highlighting the most significant topics and trends. This approach not only enhances searchability but
provides connections that go beyond potentially domain-specific author-defined keywords.
:
investment,
market,
researcher,
company,
study,
technology,
technological,
research,
financial,
investing,
finance,
financing,
innovation,
expenditure,
patent,
economically,
patenting,
funding,
invest,
innovative,
firm patenting
Tags
Tags are automatically generated using a pretrained language model from spaCy, which excels at
several tasks, including entity tagging.
The model is able to label words and phrases by part-of-speech,
including "organizations." By filtering for frequent words and phrases labeled as "organizations", papers are
identified to contain references to specific institutions, datasets, and other organizations.
:
National Science Foundation,
Survey of Industrial Research and Development,
Census Bureau Disclosure Review Board,
Disclosure Review Board,
Business R&D and Innovation Survey,
Business Research and Development and Innovation Survey
Similar Working Papers
Similarity between working papers are determined by an unsupervised neural
network model
know as Doc2Vec.
Doc2Vec is a model that represents entire documents as fixed-length vectors, allowing for the
capture of semantic meaning in a way that relates to the context of words within the document. The model learns to
associate a unique vector with each document while simultaneously learning word vectors, enabling tasks such as
document classification, clustering, and similarity detection by preserving the order and structure of words. The
document vectors are compared using cosine similarity/distance to determine the most similar working papers.
Papers identified with 🔥 are in the top 20% of similarity.
The 10 most similar working papers to the working paper 'Research and/or Development? Financial Frictions and Innovation Investment' are listed below in order of similarity.
-
Working PaperThe Color of Money: Federal vs. Industry Funding of University Research
September 2021
Working Paper Number:
CES-21-26
U.S. universities, which are important producers of new knowledge, have experienced a shift in research funding away from federal and towards private industry sources. This paper compares the effects of federal and private university research funding, using data from 22 universities that include individual-level payments for everyone employed on all grants for each university year and that are linked to patent and Census data, including IRS W-2 records. We instrument for an individual's source of funding with government-wide R&D expenditure shocks within a narrow field of study. We find that a higher share of federal funding causes fewer but more general patents, more high-tech entrepreneurship, a higher likelihood of remaining employed in academia, and a lower likelihood of joining an incumbent firm. Increasing the private share of funding has opposite effects for most outcomes. It appears that private funding leads to greater appropriation of intellectual property by incumbent firms.View Full Paper PDF
-
Working PaperR&D or R vs. D? Firm Innovation Strategy and Equity Ownership
April 2020
Working Paper Number:
CES-20-14
We analyze a unique dataset that separately reports research and development expenditures for a large panel of public and private firms. Definitions of 'research' and 'development' in this dataset, respectively, correspond to definitions of knowledge 'exploration' and 'exploitation' in the innovation theory literature. We can thus test theories of how equity ownership status relates to innovation strategy. We find that public firms have greater research intensity than private firms, inconsistent with theories asserting private ownership is more conducive to exploration. We also find public firms invest more intensely in innovation of all sorts. These results suggest relaxed financing constraints enjoyed by public firms, as well as their diversified shareholder bases, make them more conducive to investing in all types of innovation. Reconciling several seemingly conflicting results in prior research, we find private-equity-owned firms, though not less innovative overall than other private firms, skew their innovation strategies toward development and away from research.View Full Paper PDF
-
Working PaperThe Industry Life Cycle and Acquisitions and Investment: Does Firm Organization Matter?
October 2005
Working Paper Number:
CES-05-29
We examine the effect of financial dependence on the acquisition and investment of single segment and conglomerate firms for different long-run changes in industry conditions. Conglomerates and single-segment firms differ in the investments they make. The main differences are in the investment in acquisitions rather than in the level of capital expenditure. Financial dependence, a deficit in a segment's internal financing, decreases the likelihood of acquisitions and opening new plants, especially for single-segment firms. These effects are mitigated for conglomerates in growth industries and also for firms that are publicly traded. In declining industries, plants of segments that are financially dependent are less likely to be closed by conglomerate firms. These findings persist after controlling for firm size and segment productivity. We also find that plants acquired by conglomerate firms in growth industries increase in productivity post-acquisition. The results are consistent with the comparative advantages of different firm organizations differing across long-run industry conditions.View Full Paper PDF
-
Working PaperPropagation and Amplification of Local Productivity Spillovers
August 2022
Working Paper Number:
CES-22-32
This paper shows that local productivity spillovers can propagate throughout the economy through the plant-level networks of multi-region firms. Using confidential Census plant-level data, we find that large manufacturing plant openings not only raise the productivity of local plants but also of distant plants hundreds of miles away, which belong to multi-region firms that are exposed to the local productivity spillover through one of their plants. To quantify the significance of plant-level networks for the propagation and amplification of local productivity shocks, we develop and estimate a quantitative spatial model in which plants of multi-region firms are linked through shared knowledge. Counterfactual exercises show that while knowledge sharing through plant-level networks amplifies the aggregate effects of local productivity shocks, it can widen economic disparities between workers and regions in the economy.View Full Paper PDF
-
Working PaperIPO Waves, Product Market Competition, and the Going Public Decision: Theory and Evidence
March 2012
Working Paper Number:
CES-12-07
We develop a new rationale for IPO waves based on product market considerations. Two firms, with differing productivity levels, compete in an industry with a significant probability of a positive productivity shock. Going public, though costly, not only allows a firm to raise external capital cheaply, but also enables it to grab market share from its private competitors. We solve for the decision of each firm to go public versus remain private, and the optimal timing of going public. In equilibrium, even firms with sufficient internal capital to fund their new investment may go public, driven by the possibility of their product market competitors going public. IPO waves may arise in equilibrium even in industries which do not experience a productivity shock. Our model predicts that firms going public during an IPO wave will have lower productivity and post-IPO profitability but larger cash holdings than those going public off the wave; it makes similar predictions for firms going public later versus earlier in an IPO wave. We empirically test and find support for these predictions.View Full Paper PDF
-
Working PaperThe Location of Industrial Innovation: Does Manufacturing Matter?
March 2013
Working Paper Number:
CES-13-09
What explains the location of industrial innovation? Economists have traditionally attempted to answer this question by studying firm-external knowledge spillovers. This paper shows that firm-internal linkages between production and R&D play an equally important role. I estimate an R&D location choice model that predicts patents by a firm in a location from R&D productivity and costs. Focusing on large R&D-performing firms in the chemical industry, an average-sized plant raises the firm's R&D productivity in the metropolitan area by about 2.5 times. The elasticity of R&D productivity with respect to the firm's production workers is almost as large as the elasticity with respect to total patents in the MSA, while proximity to academic R&D has no significant effect on R&D productivity in this sample. Other manufacturing industries exhibit similar results. My results cast doubt on the frequently-held view that a country can divest itself of manufacturing and specialize in innovation alone.View Full Paper PDF
-
Working PaperReconciling the Firm Size and Innovation Puzzle
March 2016
Working Paper Number:
CES-16-20RR
There is a prevailing view in both the academic literature and the popular press that firms need to behave more entrepreneurially. This view is reinforced by a stylized fact in the innovation literature that R&D productivity decreases with size. However, there is a second stylized fact in the innovation literature that R&D investment increases with size. Taken together, these stylized facts create a puzzle of seemingly irrational behavior by large firms--they are increasing spending despite decreasing returns. This paper is an effort to resolve that puzzle. We propose and test two alternative resolutions: 1) that it arises from mismeasurement of R&D productivity, and 2) that firm size endogenously drives R&D strategy, and that the returns to R&D strategies depend on scale. We are able to resolve the puzzle under the first tack--using a recent measure of R&D productivity, RQ, we find that both R&D spending and R&D productivity increase with scale. We had less success with the second tack--while firm size affects R&D strategy in the manners expected by theory, there is no strategy whose returns decrease in scale. Taken together, our results are consistent with the Schumpeter view that large firms are the major engine of growth, they both spend more in aggregate than small firms, and are more productive with that spending. Moreover the prescription that firms should behave more entrepreneurially, should be treated with caution--one small firm strategy has lower returns to scale than its large firm counterpart.View Full Paper PDF
-
Working PaperFirm Leverage, Consumer Demand, and Employment Losses during the Great Recession
January 2017
Working Paper Number:
CES-17-01
We argue that firms' balance sheets were instrumental in the propagation of consumer demand shocks during the Great Recession. Using establishment-level data, we show that establishments of more highly levered firms exhibit a significantly larger decline in employment in response to a drop in consumer demand. These results are not driven by firms being less productive, having expanded too much prior to the Great Recession, or being generally more sensitive to fluctuations in either aggregate employment or house prices. At the county level, we find that counties with more highly levered firms experience significantly larger job losses in response to county-wide consumer demand shocks. Thus, firms' balance sheets also matter for aggregate employment. Our research suggests a possible role for employment policies that target firms directly besides conventional stimulus.View Full Paper PDF
-
Working PaperIT and Beyond: The Contribution of Heterogenous Capital to Productivity
December 2004
Working Paper Number:
CES-04-20
This paper explores the relationship between capital composition and productivity using a unique and remarkably detailed data set on firm-level, asset-specific investment in the U.S. Using cross-sectional and longitudinal regressions, I find that among all types of capital, only computers, communications equipment, software, and office building are associated (positively) with current and subsequent years' multifactor productivity. The link between offices and productivity, however, is shown to be due to the correlation between the use of offices and organizational capital. In contrast, the link between ICT equipment and productivity is robust to a number of controls and appears to be part causal effect and part reflection of the correlation between ICT and firm fixed (or slow-moving) effects. The implied marginal products by capital type are derived and compared to official data on rental prices; substantial differences exist for a number of key capital types. Lastly, I provide evidence of complementaries and substitutabilities among capital types ' a rejection of the common assumption of perfect substitutability ' and between particular capital types and labor.View Full Paper PDF
-
Working PaperDo Cash Windfalls Affect Wages? Evidence from R&D Grants to Small Firms
February 2020
Working Paper Number:
CES-20-06
This paper examines how employee earnings at small firms respond to a cash flow shock in the form of a government R&D grant. We use ranking data on applicant firms, which we link to IRS W2 earnings and other U.S. Census Bureau datasets. In a regression discontinuity design, we find that the grant increases average earnings with a rent-sharing elasticity of 0.07 (0.21) at the employee (firm) level. The beneficiaries are incumbent employees who were present at the firm before the award. Among incumbent employees, the effect increases with worker tenure. The grant also leads to higher employment and revenue, but productivity growth cannot fully explain the immediate effect on earnings. Instead, the data and a grantee survey are consistent with a backloaded wage contract channel, in which employees of financially constrained firms initially accept relatively low wages and are paid more when cash is available.View Full Paper PDF
