Innovation financing and the role of relationship lending for SMEs
Financial frictions represent a severe obstacle to firm innovativeness. The paper explores this link in times of crisis and provides new insights on the role of relationship lending for small and micro-sized firms. Not only small and medium enterprises (SMEs) have a lower probability to innovate and a higher likelihood to face financial constraints, their innovative propensity is also more sensitive to firm financial condition. The establishment of close ties with the lender bank can help overcoming financial barriers to innovation. By exploiting firm-specific proxies of relationship lending I document a highly nonlinear effect that is decreasing with the size of the firm, suggesting that small companies can gain disproportional benefits from banks’ accumulation of soft information, especially for the introduction of new products and processes.
KeywordsInnovation Financial constraints Relationship lending SMEs
JEL ClassificationO31 L25 G21 L26
- Atanassov, J., Nanda, V., & Seru, A. (2007). Finance and innovation: The case of publicly traded firms. Ross School of Business Paper, 970.Google Scholar
- Bond, S., Harhoff, D., & Van Reenen, J. (1999). Investment, R&D and financial constraints in Britain and Germany. Technical Report, Institute for Fiscal Studies.Google Scholar
- Brancati, R. (2012). Crisi industriale e crisi fiscale. Rapporto MET 2012. Le relazioni delle imprese, le criticitá, il fisco e le politiche pubbliche. Meridiana Libri.Google Scholar
- Dewatripont, M., & Roland, G. (2000). Soft budget constraints, transition, and financial systems. Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics (JITE)/Zeitschrift für die gesamte Staatswissenschaft, 127, 245–260.Google Scholar
- Hajivassiliou, V., & Savignac, F. (2011). Novel approaches to coherency conditions in LDV models with an application to interactions between financing constraints and a firms decision and ability to innovate. LSE discussion papers.Google Scholar
- Hall, B. H., & Khan, B. (2003). Adoption of new technology. Technical report, National Bureau of Economic Research.Google Scholar
- Hauswald, R., & Marquez, R. (2000). Relationship banking, loan specialization and competition. In: Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago Proceedings 695.Google Scholar
- Lollivier, S. (2001). Endognit d’une variable explicative dichotomique dans le cadre d’un modle probit bivari. Annales d’Economie et de Statistique, 62, 251–269.Google Scholar
- Maddala, G. S. (1986). Limited-dependent and qualitative variables in econometrics, vol 3. Cambridge university press. doi:10.1017/CBO9780511810176.
- Mulkay, B., Hall, B. H., & Mairesse, J. (2001). Firm level investment and R&D in France and the United States: A comparison. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer.Google Scholar
- OECD. (2005). Oslo manual: Guidelines for collecting and interpreting innovation data. OECD publishing. doi:10.1787/9789264013100-en.
- Poterba, J. (1988). Comments on Fazzari, Hubbard, and Petersen. Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, 1, 200–204.Google Scholar
- Schumpeter, J. A. (1934). The theory of economic development: An inquiry into profits, capital, credit, interest, and the business cycle (Vol. 55). Piscataway: Transaction Publishers.Google Scholar
- Segarra, A., García-Quevedo, J., & Teruel, M. (2013). Financial constraints and the failure of innovation projects. Universitat Rovira i Virgili, wp 06-2013.Google Scholar
- Stoneman, P. L., & David, P. A. (1986). Adoption subsidies vs information provision as instruments of technology policy. Economic Journal 142–150. doi:10.2307/2232977.