-
What Happens When Firms Patent? New Evidence from U.S. Economic Census Data
January 2008
Working Paper Number:
CES-08-03
In this study, we present novel statistics on the patenting in US manufacturing and new evidence on the question of what happens when firms patent. We do so by creating a comprehensive firm-patent matched dataset that links the NBER patent data (covering the universe of patents) to firm data from the US Census Bureau (which covers the universe of all firms with paid employees). Our linked dataset covers more than 48,000 unique assignees (compared to about 4,100 assignees covered by the Compustat-NBER link), representing almost two-thirds of all non-individual, non-university, non-government assignees from 1975 to 1997. We use the data to present some basic but novel statistics on the role of patenting in US manufacturing, including strong evidence confirming the highly skewed nature of patenting activity. Next, we examine what happens when firms patent by looking at a large sample of first time patentees. We find that while there are significant cross-sectional differences in size and total factor productivity between patentee firms and non-patentee firms, changes in patentownership status within firms is associated with a contemporaneous and substantial increase in firm size, but little to no change in total factor productivity. This evidence suggests that patenting is associated with firm growth through new product innovations (firm scope) rather than through reduction in the cost of producing existing products (firm productivity). Consistent with this explanation, we find that when firms patent, there is a contemporaneous increase in the number of products that the firms produce. Estimates of (within-firm) elasticity of firm characteristics to patent stock confirm our results. Our findings are robust to alternative measures of size and productivity, and to various sample selection criteria.
View Full
Paper PDF
-
Democratizing Entry: Banking Deregulations, Financing Constraints, and Entrepreneurship
December 2007
Working Paper Number:
CES-07-33
We study how US branch-banking deregulations affected the entry and exit of firms in the non-financial sector using establishment-level data from the US Census Bureau's Longitudinal Business Database. The comprehensive micro-data allow us to study how the entry rate, the distribution of entry sizes, and survival rates for firms responded to changes in banking competition. We also distinguish the relative effect of the policy reforms on the entry of startups versus facility expansions by existing firms. We find that the deregulations reduced financing constraints, particularly among small startups, and improved ex ante allocative efficiency across the entire firm-size distribution. However, the US deregulations also led to a dramatic increase in 'churning' at the lower end of the size distribution, where new startups fail within the first three years following entry. This churning emphasizes a new mechanism through which financial sector reforms impact product markets. It is not exclusively better ex ante allocation of capital to qualified projects that causes creative destruction; rather banking deregulations can also 'democratize' entry by allowing many more startups to be founded. The vast majority of these new entrants fail along the way, but a few survive ex post to displace incumbents.
View Full
Paper PDF
-
Access to Financial Capital Among U.S. Businesses: The Case of African-American Firms
December 2006
Working Paper Number:
CES-06-33
The differences between African-American business ownership rates and white business ownership rates are striking. Estimates from the 2000 Census indicate that 11.8 percent of white workers are self-employed business owners, compared with only 4.8 percent of black workers. Furthermore, black-white differences in business ownership rates have remained roughly constant over most of the twentieth century (Fairlie and Meyer 2000). In addition to lower rates of business ownership, black-owned businesses are less successful on average than are white or Asian firms. In particular, black-owned businesses have lower sales, hire fewer employees and have smaller payrolls than white- or Asian-owned businesses, on average (U.S. Census Bureau 2001, U.S. Small Business Administration 2001). Black firms also have lower profits and higher closure rates than white firms (U.S. Census Bureau 1997, U.S. Small Business Administration 1999). For most outcomes, the disparities are extremely large. For example, estimates from the 2002 Survey of Business Owners (SBO) indicate that white firms have average sales of $437,870 compared with only $74,018 for black firms.
View Full
Paper PDF
-
Determinants of Business Success: An Examination of Asian-Owned Businesses in the United States
December 2006
Working Paper Number:
CES-06-32
Using confidential and restricted-access microdata from the U.S. Census Bureau, we find that Asian-owned businesses are 16.9 percent less likely to close, 20.6 percent more likely to have profits of at least $10,000, and 27.2 percent more likely to hire employees than whiteowned businesses in the United States. Asian firms also have mean annual sales that are roughly 60 percent higher than the mean sales of white firms. Using regression estimates and a special non-linear decomposition technique, we explore the role that class resources, such as financial capital and human capital, play in contributing to the relative success of Asian businesses. We find that Asian-owned businesses are more successful than white-owned businesses for two main reasons . Asian owners have high levels of human capital and their businesses have substantial startup capital. Startup capital and education alone explain from 65 percent to the entire gap in business outcomes between Asians and whites. Using the detailed information on both the owner and the firm available in the CBO, we estimate the explanatory power of several additional factors.
View Full
Paper PDF
-
The Industry R&D Survey: Patent Database Link Project
November 2006
Working Paper Number:
CES-06-28
This paper details the construction of a firm-year panel dataset combining the NBER Patent Dataset with the Industry R&D Survey conducted by the Census Bureau and National Science Foundation. The developed platform offers an unprecedented view of the R&D-to-patenting innovation process and a close analysis of the strengths and limitations of the Industry R&D Survey. The files are linked through a name-matching algorithm customized for uniting the firm names to which patents are assigned with the firm names in Census Bureau's SSEL business registry. Through the Census Bureau's file structure, this R&D platform can be linked to the operating performances of each firm's establishments, further facilitating innovation-to-productivity studies.
View Full
Paper PDF
-
The 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
-
Where Do Manufacturing Firms Locate Their Headquarters?
October 2005
Working Paper Number:
CES-05-17
Firms' headquarters [HQ] support their production activity, by gathering information and outsourcing business services, as well as, managing, evaluating, and coordinating internal firm activities. In search of locations for these functions, firms often separate the HQ function physically from their production facilities and construct stand-alone HQs. By locating its HQ in a large, service oriented metro area away from its production facilities, a firm may be better able to out-source service functions in that local metro market and also to gather information about market conditions for their products. However if the firm locates the HQ away from its production activity, that increases the coordination costs in managing plant activities. In this paper we empirically analyze the trade-off of these two considerations.
View Full
Paper PDF
-
Estimating the Hidden Costs of Environmental Regulation
May 2002
Working Paper Number:
CES-02-10
This paper examines whether accounting systems identify all the costs of environmental regulation. We estimate the relation between the 'visible' cost of regulatory compliance, i.e., costs that are correctly classified in firms' accounting systems, and 'hidden' costs i.e., costs that are embedded in other accounts. We use plant-level data from 55 steel mills to estimate hidden costs, and we follow up with structured interviews of corporate-level managers and plant-level accountants. Empirical results show that a $1 increase in the visible cost of environmental regulation is associated with an increase in total cost (at the margin) of $10-11, of which $9-10 are hidden in other accounts. The findings suggest that inappropriate identification and accumulation of the costs of environmental compliance are likely to lead to distorted costs in firms subject to environmental regulation.
View Full
Paper PDF
-
Diversification Discount or Premium? New Evidence from BITS Establishment-Level Data
December 2001
Working Paper Number:
CES-01-13
This paper examines whether the finding of a diversification discount in U.S. stock markets is only a data artifact. Segment data may give rise to biased estimates of the value effect of diversification because segments are defined inconsistently across firms, and that inconsistency does not occur at random. I use a new establishment-level database that covers the whole U.S. economy (BITS) to construct business units that are more consistently and objectively defined across firms, and thus more comparable. Using a common methodological approach on a sample of firms which exhibit a diversification discount according to segment data, I find that, when BITS data are used, diversified firms actually trade at a significant average premium. The premium is robust to variations in the method, sample, business unit definition, and measures of excess value and diversification used.
View Full
Paper PDF
-
Business Success: Factors Leading to Surviving and Closing Successfully
January 2001
Working Paper Number:
CES-01-01
This paper focuses on the startup factors that lead to new firms remaining open, and if they close, the factors leading to whether the owner considered the firm successful at closure. Two independent logit models were developed for closure and success characteristics using the Bureau of the Census' Characteristics of Business Owners (CBO). Business Information Tracking Series (BITS, formerly the LEEM), also from the Bureau of the Census, was used to evaluate business survival rates as the CBO had non-response bias with respect to closure. About half of new employer firms survive at least four years (an estimated one-third of non-employer firms survive this period), and of the firms that closed, owners of about a third felt the firm was successful at closure. Major factors leading to remaining open are having ample capital, having employees, having a good education, and starting for personal reasons (freedom for family life, or wanting to become one's own boss). If the firm closed, major factors leading to owners perceiving the business successful at closure are having no start-up capital or ample capital, having previous ownership experience, and avoiding the retail trade industry. Owners of firms with and without employees had similar rates of believing closed businesses were successful at closure. Owners who were young or started without capital had a higher likelihood of closure but when they closed, they were more likely to consider the firm successful. Gender, race and being older play a small, if any, role in survivability or in owners' perception that the closed firm was successful. Retail trade was the only variable that led to businesses being more likely to close, and more likely to be deemed unsuccessful by the owner at closure.
View Full
Paper PDF
