Spillovers and absorptive capacity in the decision to innovate of Spanish firms: the role of human capital

This paper investigates whether the existence of knowledge spillovers and the capacity of firms to assimilate them, which we relate with R&D intensity and some human resource management practices, are associated with the decision to innovate of Spanish firms. In order to do this, we employ data from the ‘Central de Balances’ database, which covers both manufacturing and services firms during the period 2003–2007, and use an estimator proposed by Wooldridge [2005. Simple solutions to the initial conditions problem in dynamic nonlinear panel data models with unobserved heterogeneity. Journal of Applied Econometrics 20, no. 1: 39–54] for dynamic random effects discrete choice models. The empirical exercise provides evidence on the positive link between spillovers and the innovative behaviour of companies, not just for the knowledge generated in the same industry, but also for that generated in the same region or by the public sector. Moreover, this link is stronger for those firms with a higher capacity to absorb those spillovers. This ability not only works through firms’ R&D capabilities, but also through factors such as the quality of the labour force, the share of temporary employment and the amount of resources spent in training. In addition to these factors, we find that innovation performance exhibits a high degree of inertia. Further, some other observed firm characteristics, such as size, sales growth, export behaviour, sector capital intensity or financial structure variables, are also found to be relevant determinants of the likelihood of innovation.

[1]  Dominique Guellec,et al.  From R&D to Productivity Growth: Do the Institutional Settings and the Source of Funds of R&D Matter? , 2004 .

[2]  Jonathan Michie,et al.  Labour market deregulation, 'flexibility' and innovation , 2003 .

[3]  HA Henny Romijn,et al.  Determinants of innovation capability in small electronics and software firms in southeast England , 2002 .

[4]  J. A. Máñez,et al.  The Role of Sunk Costs in the Decision to Invest in R&D , 2009 .

[5]  Elhanan Helpman,et al.  North-South R&D Spillovers , 1994, SSRN Electronic Journal.

[6]  F. Lichtenberg,et al.  The Comparative Advantage of Educated Workers in Implementing New Technology: Some Empirical Evidence , 1985 .

[7]  Bronwyn H Hall Investment and Research and Development at the Firm Level: Does the Source of Financing Matter? , 1992 .

[8]  J. Dolado,et al.  Do Temporary Contracts Affect TFP? Evidence from Spanish Manufacturing Firms , 2008, SSRN Electronic Journal.

[9]  Elena Huergo,et al.  DOES HISTORY MATTER FOR THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN R&D, INNOVATION AND PRODUCTIVITY? , 2011 .

[10]  Krishnamurthy Subramanian,et al.  Labor Laws and Innovation , 2009, The Journal of Law and Economics.

[11]  E. Mansfield,et al.  Imitation Costs and Patents: An Empirical Study , 1981 .

[12]  P. Bishop,et al.  External ownership and innovation in the United Kingdom , 1999 .

[13]  A. Vinding Absorptive Capacity and Innovative Performance: A Human Capital Approach , 2006 .

[14]  M. Spence Cost Reduction, Competition and Industry Performance , 1984 .

[15]  Kornelius Kraft,et al.  Market Structure, Firm Characteristics and Innovative Activity , 1989 .

[16]  José Manuel Montero,et al.  R&D Investment and Endogenous Growth: A SVAR Approach , 2009 .

[17]  J. Sutton Sunk Costs and Market Structure , 1991 .

[18]  Bruno Cassiman,et al.  Innovation, exports and productivity , 2010 .

[19]  S. Winter,et al.  An Evolutionary Theory of Economic Change.by Richard R. Nelson; Sidney G. Winter , 1987 .

[20]  P. Romer Endogenous Technological Change , 1989, Journal of Political Economy.

[21]  Z. Griliches,et al.  Patents and R and D: Is There a Lag? , 1986 .

[22]  Julian Atanassov,et al.  Finance and Innovation: The Case of Publicly Traded Firms , 2007 .

[23]  Z. Griliches The Search for R&D Spillovers , 1991 .

[24]  Jacob Schmookler,et al.  Economic Sources of Inventive Activity , 1962, The Journal of Economic History.

[25]  S. Jackson,et al.  Linking Competitive Strategies with Human Resource Management Practices , 1987 .

[26]  Charles H. Ford Developing a successful client‐consultant relationship , 1974 .

[27]  Vasiliki Diamantopoulou,et al.  Are ICT, Workplace Organization and Human Capital Relevant for Innovation? A Comparative Study Based on Swiss and Greek Micro Data , 2013 .

[28]  Daniel A. Levinthal,et al.  Fortune favors the prepared firm , 1994 .

[29]  Jonathan Eaton,et al.  Trade in Ideas: Patenting and Productivity in the OECD , 1995 .

[30]  M. Sheehan,et al.  HRM Practices, R&D Expenditure and Innovative Investment: Evidence from the UK's 1990 Workplace Industrial Relations Survey (WIRS) , 1999 .

[31]  Gary Chamberlain,et al.  Analysis of Covariance with Qualitative Data , 1979 .

[32]  Hans-Jürgen Engelbrecht,et al.  International R&D spillovers, human capital and productivity in OECD economies: An empirical investigation , 1997 .

[33]  F. Schiantarelli,et al.  Banks and Innovation: Microeconometric Evidence on Italian Firms , 2006, SSRN Electronic Journal.

[34]  D. Harhoff R&D Spillovers, Technological Proximity, and Productivity Growth — Evidence from German Panel Data , 2000 .

[35]  Zvi Griliches,et al.  Patents and R&D: is There a Lag? , 1984 .

[36]  Stephen J. Redding,et al.  Mapping The Two Faces Of R&D: Productivity Growth In A Panel Of OECD Industries , 2000 .

[37]  Manuel Trajtenberg,et al.  Patents, Citations, and Innovations: A Window on the Knowledge Economy , 2002 .

[38]  Daniel A. Levinthal,et al.  Innovation and Learning: The Two Faces of R&D , 1989 .

[39]  Daniel Lederman,et al.  Patenting and Research and Development: A Global View , 2005 .

[40]  John Storey,et al.  Flexible employment contracts and their implications for product and process innovation , 2002 .

[41]  Edwin Mansfield,et al.  Industrial Research and Technological Innovation: An Econometric Analysis , 1968 .

[42]  Joaquín Artés,et al.  Long-run versus short-run decisions: R&D and market structure in Spanish firms , 2009 .

[43]  Juan Llopis,et al.  A DYNAMIC APPROACH TO THE DECISION TO INVEST IN R & D : THE ROLE OF SUNK COSTS , 2004 .

[44]  John Van Reenen,et al.  Mapping the Two Faces of R&D: Productivity Growth in a Panel of OECD Industries , 2000 .

[45]  Stephen J. Redding,et al.  R&D and Absorptive Capacity: Theory and Empirical Evidence* , 2003 .

[46]  A. Jaffe Technological Opportunity and Spillovers of R&D: Evidence from Firms&Apos; Patents, Profits and Market Value , 1986 .

[47]  Charles P. Himmelberg,et al.  R&D and internal finance: a panel study of small firms in high-tech industries , 1994 .

[48]  Chaomei Chen,et al.  Patents, citations & innovations: A window on the knowledge economy , 2003, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[49]  Daniel A. Levinthal,et al.  ABSORPTIVE CAPACITY: A NEW PERSPECTIVE ON LEARNING AND INNOVATION , 1990 .

[50]  M. Lessnoff Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy , 1979 .

[51]  Bettina Peters,et al.  Persistence of innovation: stylised facts and panel data evidence , 2005 .

[52]  Bruno Crépon,et al.  Research, Innovation, and Productivity: an Econometric Analysis at the Firm Level , 1998 .

[53]  Jeffrey M. Wooldridge,et al.  The Initial Conditions Problem in Dynamic, Nonlinear Panel Data Models with Unobserved Heterogeneity , 2002 .

[54]  S. Winter,et al.  Appropriating the Returns from Industrial Research and Development , 1987 .

[55]  J. Calvo ¿Son las actividades de I+D una buena aproximación a la innovación tecnológica? , 2005 .

[56]  Henry G. Grabowski,et al.  The Determinants of Industrial Research and Development: A Study of the Chemical, Drug, and Petroleum Industries , 1968, Journal of Political Economy.

[57]  Bronwyn H Hall,et al.  Empirical studies of innovation in the knowledge-driven economy , 2006 .

[58]  Z. Griliches Patent Statistics as Economic Indicators: a Survey , 1990 .

[59]  Jeffrey M. Woodbridge Econometric Analysis of Cross Section and Panel Data , 2002 .

[60]  Jeffrey M. Wooldridge,et al.  Solutions Manual and Supplementary Materials for Econometric Analysis of Cross Section and Panel Data , 2003 .

[61]  L. Blume,et al.  The New Palgrave Dictionary of Economics, 2nd edition , 2008 .

[62]  Steven Klepper,et al.  A Reprise of Size and R & D , 1996 .

[63]  Zvi Griliches,et al.  Issues in Assessing the Contribution of Research and Development to Productivity Growth , 1979 .

[64]  D. Frantzen R&D, Human Capital and International Technology Spillovers: A Cross‐country Analysis , 2000 .

[65]  Elena Huergo,et al.  How Does Probability of Innovation Change with Firm Age? , 2004 .

[66]  Richard Blundell,et al.  Individual effects and dynamics in count data models , 2002 .

[67]  Lee Branstetter,et al.  Japanese Research Consortia: A Microeconometric Analysis of Industrial Policy , 1997 .

[68]  Leslie E. Papke,et al.  Panel data methods for fractional response variables with an application to test pass rates , 2008 .

[69]  Jérôme Danguy,et al.  The R&D-Patent Relationship: An Industry Perspective , 2010 .

[70]  Carlos García‐Serrano,et al.  Firm-provided training and temporary contracts , 2005 .

[71]  K. Arrow Economic Welfare and the Allocation of Resources for Invention , 1962 .

[72]  Daron Acemoglu,et al.  Training and Innovation in an Imperfect Labour Market , 1997 .

[73]  José Manuel Montero,et al.  Understanding the Spanish Business Innovation Gap: The Role of Spillovers and Firms’ Absorptive Capacity , 2010 .