Journal of Industry, Competition and Trade

, Volume 12, Issue 1, pp 93–117 | Cite as

Competition and Innovation in Luxembourg

  • Chiara Peroni
  • Ivete S. Gomes Ferreira


This paper studies the empirical relation between market competition and innovation using Luxembourg’s Structural Business Statistics. The competitive pressure in Luxembourg’s markets is assessed by computing a profit elasticity measure, based on the idea of cost-efficiency. From this, the paper analyses the relation between competition and innovation performance by estimating an equation for the determinants of R&D expenditure. The results show that Luxembourg’s industries are characterised by low levels of competition intensity, especially in markets relevant to competition policy and regulation. The relation between competition and innovation is non-linear and depends crucially on the efficient use of inputs to production. The impact of the distribution of technological efficiency on innovation is assessed by measuring both average technology gap and technology spread. The innovation effort is increasing as industries are closer to the frontier, and decreasing in the technology spread.


competition innovation profit elasticity R&D 

JEL Classification

C24 L10 031 



Chiara Peroni is a researcher at the Service Central de la Statistique et des Études Économiques (Statec). This work has been carried out while the author was involved in the Partnership between Statec, the Observatoire de la Compétitivité and the Centre de Recherche Henri Tudor, under the research agreement signed by these institutions in 2005. Ivete S. Gomes Ferreira has contributed to this paper while working at the CRP/Statec. The opinions and views expressed in this paper are those of the authors and do not reflect those of the Statec, the CRP, and the Observatoire. Thanks are due to an anonymous referee, Charles-Henri DiMaria, Anna-Leena Asikainen, George Zangerlé, Serge Allegrezza and Bastien Larue for useful comments. I am grateful to participants at the Luxembourg 2020 conference (“4me colloque luxembourgeois sur l’economie de la connaissance”, Luxembourg, 7th–9th December 2010), where a previous version of this paper was presented, for interesting discussion. I am also grateful to Anne Dubrocard and my colleagues at the EPR2 unit at Statec for their help and support and to members of the Scientific Committee of Statec-Tudor-Observatoire partnership for their feedback.


  1. Aghion P, Bloom N, Blundell R, Griffith R, Howitt P (2005) Competition and innovation: an inverted U relationship. Q J Econ CXX:701–728Google Scholar
  2. Aghion P, Howitt P (1992) A model of growth through creative destruction. Econometrica 60:323–351.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Allegrezza S ed. (2005) L’innovation au Luxembourg. Cahier economique du Statec sur l’innovation. StatecGoogle Scholar
  4. Archibugi D (2000) Pavitt’s taxonomy sixteen years on: a review article. Econ Innov New Technol 10:415–425CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Asikainen A (2008) Innovation and productivity in Luxembourg. STATEC Working Papers No 23Google Scholar
  6. Berube C, Duhamel M, Ershov D (2010) Market incentives for business innovation: results from Canada. MimeoGoogle Scholar
  7. Boone J (2000) Competitive pressure: the effects on investments in product and process innovation. RAND J 31:549–569CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Boone J (2008a) Competition: theoretical parameterizations and empirical measures. J Inst Theor Econ 164:587–611CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Boone J (2008b) A new way of measuring competition. Econ J 118:1245–1261CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Boone J, and van Leuvensteijn M (2010) Measuring competition using the profit elasticity: American sugar industry, 1890–1914. CEPR Discussion Paper series No 8159Google Scholar
  11. Boone J, van Ours J, van de Wiel H (2007) How (not) to measure competition. CEPR Discussion Paper no 6275Google Scholar
  12. Braila C, Rayp G, Sanyal S (2010) Competition and regulation: Belgium, 1997–2004. Federal Planning Bureau, Working Paper 3–10Google Scholar
  13. Creusen H, Vroomen B, van der Wiel H, Kuypers F (2006) Dutch retail trade on the rise? CPB document, No 137Google Scholar
  14. Dasgupta P, Stiglitz J (1980) Industrial structure and the nature of innovative activity. Econ J 90:266–293.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. de Bondt R, Vandekerckhove J (2010) Reflections on the relation between competition and innovation. J Ind Compet Trade, 6 July 2010. doi: 10.1007/s10842-010-0084-z
  16. DiMaria C (2008) Taux de marge et concurrence pure et parfaite au Luxembourg. mimeoGoogle Scholar
  17. Duhamel M, Kelly R (2009) Are changes in the boone and lerner indices of competition correlated? Evidence from OECD countries. mimeoGoogle Scholar
  18. Griffith R, Boone J, Harrison R (2005) Measuring competition. AIM Research Working Paper SeriesGoogle Scholar
  19. Griffith R, Harrison R, Simpson H (2006) Product market reform and innovation in the eu. IFS, WP06/17Google Scholar
  20. Hall R (1988) The relation between price and marginal cost in US industry. J Polit Econ 96:921–947CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Hashmi A (2011) Competition and innovation: the inverted U relationship revisited. mimeoGoogle Scholar
  22. Hatzychronoglou T (1997) Revision of high-technology sector and product classification. 1997/2 OECD, ParisGoogle Scholar
  23. Mairesse J, Mohnen P (2002) Accounting for innovation and measuring innovativeness: an illustrative framework and an application. Am Econ Rev 92:226–230CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Mangiarotti G (2010) Knowledge management and competition success: an empirical analysis for Luxembourg. Statec Working Papers No 40Google Scholar
  25. Nickell S (1994) Competition and corporate performance. J Polit Econ 104:724CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. OECD (2010) Luxembourg economic survey. OECD Economic SurveysGoogle Scholar
  27. Pavitt K (1984) Sectoral patterns of technical change: towards a taxonomy and a theory. Res Policy, 13:343–373CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Peneder M (2003) Industry classifications: aim, scope and techniques. J Ind Compet Trade 3:109–129CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Poldahl A, Tingvall P (2006) Is there really and inverted u-shaped relation between competition and R&D. Econ Innov New Technol 15:101–118CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Polder M, Veldhuizen E (2010) Innovation and competition in the netherlands: testing the inverted U for industries and firms. Statistics Netherlands, Discussion Paper (201021)Google Scholar
  31. Romer P (1990) Endogenous technological change. J Polit Econ 98:71–102CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Sacco D, Schmutzler A (2011) Is there a u-shaped relation between competition and investment? Int J Ind Organ 29:65–73CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Schmutzler A (2010) The relation between competition and investment: why is it such a mess? University of Zurich Working Papers No 0716Google Scholar
  34. Tishler A, Milstein I (2009) Is there a u-shaped relation between competition and investment? Int J Ind Organ 27:519–531CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Service Central de la Statistique et des Études Économiques (STATEC)LuxembourgGrand Duchy of Luxembourg

Personalised recommendations