-
Desperate Capital Breeds Productivity Loss: Evidence From Public Pension Investments in Private Equity
July 2026
Working Paper Number:
CES-26-47
I study investments of U.S. public pensions in private equity (PE), and trace them to ultimate micro assets'target firms which PE funds invest in, using micro-data on private investments combined with confidential U.S. Census data. I show that more severely underfunded public pensions receive lower average PE returns, and match with smaller GPs on average, than less underfunded pensions. Consistent with matching and returns, firms financed by most underfunded public pensions and smallest PE funds face labor productivity decreases. I introduce a novel instrument'public unionization'in support of underfunding positions driving selection into funds. Lastly, I evaluate alternate mechanisms.
View Full
Paper PDF
-
Investments under Risk: Evidence from Hurricane Strikes
June 2025
Working Paper Number:
CES-25-43
We demonstrate that firms with plants in areas subject to a significant hurricane strike reduce their capital expenditures at the hurricane-affected plants and shift capital expenditures to plants in non-hurricane-affected areas. This effect is not present prior to 1997 and only appears from 1997 on. Our evidence is consistent with the possibility that a significant climate event such as the signing of the Kyoto Protocol raised the salience of the perceived risk from actual hurricane strikes and shifted firm behavior.
View Full
Paper PDF
-
Dynamics of High-Growth Young Firms and the Role of Venture Capitalists
June 2025
Working Paper Number:
CES-25-38
Motivated by the substantial growth and upfront investments of venture capital (VC) backed firms observed in administrative US Census data, this paper develops a firm dynamics model over the life cycle. In the model, startups choose the source of financing from VC, Angel investors, or banks, depending on their growth potential, and invest in innovation. The calibrated model explains the life-cycle dynamics of firms with different sources of financing and implies that venture capitalists' advice accounts for around 22% of the growth of VC-backed firms. A counterfactual economy without VC financing would lose aggregate consumption by around 0.4%.
View Full
Paper PDF
-
Property Rights, Firm Size and Investments in Innovation: Evidence from the America Invents Act
May 2025
Working Paper Number:
CES-25-31
I analyze whether a change in patent systems differentially affects firm-level innovation investments at patent-valuing firms of different sizes. Using legally required, economically representative, U.S. Census Bureau microdata, I separate firms into groups based on a firm's response to a question asking it to rank the degree of patent importance to its business and firm-size. I then measure how firms' innovation inputs/outputs respond to the America Invents Act (AIA). Results show the AIA reduced innovation investments at smaller, patent-valuing firms while increasing innovation investments at larger, patent-valuing firms, highlighting differential firm-size effects of patent policy and policy's importance to investments.
View Full
Paper PDF
-
Impact Investing and Worker Outcomes
May 2025
Working Paper Number:
CES-25-30
Impact investors claim to distinguish themselves from traditional venture capital and growth equity investors by also pursuing environmental, social, and governance (ESG) objectives. Whether they successfully do so in practice is unclear. We use confidential Census Bureau microdata to assess worker outcomes across portfolio companies. Impact investors are more likely than other private equity firms to fund businesses in economically disadvantaged areas, and the performance of these companies lags behind those held by traditional private investors. We show that post-funding impact-backed firms are more likely to hire minorities, unskilled workers, and individuals with lower historical earnings, perhaps reflecting the higher representation of minorities in top positions. They also allocate wage increases more favorably to minorities and rank-and-file workers than VC-backed firms. Our results are consistent with impact investors and their portfolio companies acting according to non-pecuniary social goals and thus are not consistent with mere window dressing or cosmetic changes.
View Full
Paper PDF
-
The Intangible Divide: Why Do So Few Firms Invest in Innovation?
February 2025
Working Paper Number:
CES-25-15
Investments in software, R&D, and advertising have surged, nearing half of U.S. private nonresidential investment. Yet just a few hundred firms dominate this growth. Most firms, including large ones, regularly invest little in capitalized software and R&D, widening this 'intangible divide' despite falling intangible prices. Using comprehensive US Census microdata, we document these patterns and explore factors associated with intangible investment. We find that firms invest significantly less in innovation-related intangibles when their rivals invest more. One firm's investment can obsolesce rivals' investments, reducing returns. This negative pecuniary externality worsens the intangible divide, potentially leading to significant misallocation.
View Full
Paper PDF
-
Good Dispersion, Bad Dispersion
March 2024
Working Paper Number:
CES-24-13
We document that most dispersion in marginal revenue products of inputs occurs across plants within firms rather than between firms. This is commonly thought to reflect misallocation: dispersion is 'bad.' However, we show that eliminating frictions hampering internal capital markets in a multi-plant firm model may in fact increase productivity dispersion and raise output: dispersion can be 'good.' This arises as firms optimally stagger investment activity across their plants over time to avoid raising costly external finance, instead relying on reallocating internal funds. The staggering in turn generates dispersion in marginal revenue products. We use U.S. Census data on multi-plant manufacturing firms to provide empirical evidence for the model mechanism and show a quantitatively important role for good dispersion. Since there is less scope for good dispersion in emerging economies, the difference in the degree of misallocation between emerging and developed economies looks more pronounced than previously thought.
View Full
Paper PDF
-
Research and/or Development? Financial Frictions and Innovation Investment
August 2023
Working Paper Number:
CES-23-39
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.
View Full
Paper PDF
-
R&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
-
Do Firms Mitigate or Magnify Capital Misallocation? Evidence from Plant-Level Data
January 2017
Working Paper Number:
CES-17-14
Almost two thirds of the cross-plant dispersion in marginal revenue products of capital occurs
across plants within the same firm rather than between firms. Even though firms allocate investment very differently across their plants, they do not equalize marginal revenue products across their plants. We reconcile these findings in a model of multi-plant firms, physical adjustment costs and credit constraints. Credit constrained multi-plant firms can utilize internal capital markets by concentrating internal funds on investment projects in only a few of their plants in a given period and rotating funds to another set of plants in the future. The resulting increase in within-firm dispersion of marginal revenue products of capital is hence not a symptom of misallocation within the firm, but rather actions taken by the firm to mitigate external credit constraints and adjustment costs of capital. Economies with multi-plant firms produce more aggregate output despite higher dispersion in marginal revenue products of capital compared to economies with single-plant firms. Because emerging economies are predominantly populated by single-plant firms, the gains from reducing their distortions to the level of developed are
larger than previously thought.
View Full
Paper PDF
