Advertisement

Small Business Economics

, Volume 43, Issue 4, pp 751–766 | Cite as

Why don't all young firms invest in R&D?

  • David B. Audretsch
  • Agustí SegarraEmail author
  • Mercedes Teruel
Article

Abstract

This article aims to analyze the different impacts that some factors may exert on the probability that a small young firm invests intensively in R&D. Recently, an increasing amount of the literature makes reference to the vital role played by a small number of young firms in generating jobs and increasing efficiency levels. However, not all new firms invest in R&D. Departing from the definition of Young Innovative Companies (YICs, firms younger than 6 years old, fewer than 250 employees and with more than 15 % of their revenues invested in R&D activities), and with an extensive sample of the Spanish Community Innovation Survey between 2004 and 2010, we try to determine: (1) those factors that cause firms to become YICs (innovative young small firms) or Young Non-Innovative Companies (YNICs, moderately innovative young small firms), and (2) what is the difference in the impact of those factors between YICs and YNICs. Our results show that factors such as initial innovation capacity and cooperation in R&D projects enhance the probability of becoming a YIC. Nevertheless, factors such as export potential and market uncertainty may influence the decision to invest moderately and become a YNIC.

Keywords

Innovation Policy YICs 

JEL Classifications

O31 D21 L26 

Notes

Acknowledgments

The authors are grateful for the financial support of the Consolidated Group of Research 2009-SGR-907. Agustí Segarra and Mercedes Teruel acknowledge the support of the Xarxa de Referència en Economia Aplicada. We are all grateful to Verònica Gombau for her research support. The usual disclaimer applies.

References

  1. Abernathy, W. J., & Clark, K. B. (1985). Innovation: Mapping the winds of creative destruction. Research Policy, 14(1), 3–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Acs, Z. J., & Audretsch, D. B. (1987). Innovation, market structure and firm size. The Review of Economics and Statistics, 69(4), 567–574.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Acs, Z. J., Audretsch, D. B., Braunerhjelm, P. & Carlsson, B. (2005). The missing link: The knowledge filter, entrepreneurship and endogenous growth. Papers on entrepreneurship, growth and public policy, Discussion papers on entrepreneurship, growth and public policy, wp2005-08.Google Scholar
  4. Acs, Z. J., Audretsch, D. B., Braunerhjelm, P., & Carlsson, B. (2009). The knowledge spillover theory of entrepreneurship. Small Business Economics, 32(1), 15–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Acs, Z. J., Audretsch, D. B., & Lehmann, E. E. (2013). The knowledge spillover theory of entrepreneurship. Small Business Economics, 41(4), 757–774.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Aghion, P., Bloom, N., Blundell, R., Griffith, R., & Howitt, P. (2005). Competition and innovation: An inverted-U relationship. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 120, 701–728.Google Scholar
  7. Aghion, P., Blundell, R., Griffith, R., Howitt, P., & Prant, S. (2009). The effects of entry on incumbent innovation and productivity. Review of Economics and Statistics, 91(1), 20–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Aghion, P., Harris, C., Howitt, P., & Vickers, J. (2001). Competition, imitation and growth with step-by-step innovation. The Review of Economic Studies, 68(3), 467–492.Google Scholar
  9. Aghion, P., & Howitt, P. (2005). Growth with quality-improving innovations: An integrated framework. In P. Aghion & S. Durlauf (Eds.), Handbook of economic growth. Amsterdam: North-Holland.Google Scholar
  10. Anton, J., & Yao, D. (1994). Expropriation and inventions: Appropriable rents in the absence of property rights. American Economic Review, 84(1), 190–209.Google Scholar
  11. Audretsch, D. B., Keilbach, M., & Lehmann, E. (2006). Entrepreneurship and economic growth. New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Barge-Gil, A. (2010). Cooperation-based innovators and peripheral cooperators: An empirical analysis of their characteristics and behaviour. Technovation, 30(3), 195–206.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Baumol, W. J. (2002). The free market innovation machine: Analyzing the growth miracle of capitalism. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  14. Birch, D. L. (1979). The job generation process. Report prepared by the Massachusetts Institute of Technology Program on Neighborhood and Regional Change, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
  15. Carlsson, B., Braunerhjelm, P., Mckelvey, M., Olofsson, C., Persson, L., & Ylinenpää, H. (2013). The evolving domain of entrepreneurship research. Small Business Economics, 41, 913–930.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Cassiman, B., & Veugelers, R. (2002). R&D cooperation and spillovers: Some empirical evidence from Belgium. The American Economic Review, 92(4), 1169–1184.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Cincera, M., & Veugelers, R. (2013). Young leading innovators and the EU’s R&D intensity gap. Economics of Innovation and New Technology, 22(2), 177–198.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Coad, A. (2009). The growth of firms: A survey of theories and empirical evidence. Camberley: Edward Elgar Publishing.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Cohen, W. M., & Klepper, S. (1996). Firm size and the nature of innovation within industries: The case of process and product R&D. The Review of Economics and Statistics, 78(2), 232–243.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Cohen, W. M., & Levinthal, D. A. (1990). Absorptive capacity: A new perspective on learning and innovation. Administrative Science Quarterly, 35(1), 128–152.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Czarnitzki, D. & Delanote, J. (2012). Young innovative companies: The new high growth firms? ZEW - Centre for European Economic Research Discussion Paper No. 12–030.Google Scholar
  22. Dosi, G., Llerena, P., & Labini, M. S. (2006). The relationships between science, technologies and their industrial exploitation: An illustration through the myths and realities of the so-called ‘European Paradox’. Research Policy, 35(10), 1450–1464.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Dosi, G., & Teece, D. J. (1998). Organizational competencies and the boundaries of the firm (pp. 281–302). In R. Arena and C. Longhi (eds) Markets and Organizations. Springer.Google Scholar
  24. Gans, J., Hsu, D., & Stern, S. (2002). When does start-up innovation spur the gale of creative destruction. RAND Journal of Economics, 33(4), 571–586.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Gans, J., & Stern, S. (2000). Incumbency and R&D incentives: Licensing the gale of creative destruction. Journal of Economics and Management Strategy, 9(4), 485–511.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Geroski, P. A. (1990). Innovation, technological opportunity, and market structure. Oxford Economic Papers, 42(3), 586–602.Google Scholar
  27. Geroski, P., & Machin, S. (1992). Do innovating firms outperform non-innovators? Business Strategy Review, 3(2), 79–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Geroski, P. A., & Mazzucato, M. (2001). Modelling the dynamics of industry populations. International Journal of Industrial Organization, 19, 1003–1022.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Gilbert, R. J., & Newbery, D. M. G. (1982). Preemptive patenting and the persistence of monopoly. American Economic Review, 72, 514–526.Google Scholar
  30. Helmers, C., & Rogers, M. (2010). Innovation and the survival of new firms in the UK. Review of Industrial Organization, 36(3), 227–248.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Henderson, R. (1993). Underinvestment and incompetence as responses to radical innovation: Evidence from the photolithographic alignment equipment industry. The Rand Journal of Economics, 24(2), 248–270.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Henderson, R., & Clark, K. (1990). Architectural innovation: the reconfiguration of existing product technologies and the failure of established firms. Administrative Science Quarterly, 35(1), 9–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Henrekson, M., & Johansson, D. (2010). Gazelles as job creators—A survey and interpretation of the evidence. Small Business Economics, 35, 227–244.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Heunks, F. J. (1998). Innovation, creativity and success. Small Business Economics, 10(3), 263–272.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Hottenrott, H., & Peters, B. (2012). Innovative capability and financing constraints for innovation: More money, more innovation? Review of Economics and Statistics, 94(4), 1126–1142.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Katz, J. A., Aldrich, H. E., Welbourne, T. M., & Williams, P. M. (2000). Guest editor’s comments special issue on human resource management and the SME: Toward a new synthesis. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 25, 7–10.Google Scholar
  37. Klepper, S. (1996). Entry, exit, growth, and innovation over the product life cycle. American Economic Review, 86(3), 562–583.Google Scholar
  38. Malerba, F. (Ed.). (2004). Sectoral systems of innovation: Concepts, issues and analyses of six major sectors in Europe. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  39. Nickell, S. (1996). Competition and corporate performance. Journal of Political Economy, 104, 724–746.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. OECD (2005). Oslo manual: Guidelines for collecting and interpreting innovation data. Paris: OECD publishing.Google Scholar
  41. Reinganum, J. F. (1983). Uncertain innovation and the persistence of monopoly. American Economic Review, 73(4), 741–748.Google Scholar
  42. Roper, S. (1997). Product innovation and small business growth: A comparison of the strategies of German, UK and Irish companies. Small Business Economics, 9(6), 523–537.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Scherer, F. M. (1967). Research and development resource allocation under rivalry. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 81(3), 359–394.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Schneider, C., & Veugelers, R. (2010). On young highly innovative companies: Why they matter and how (not) to policy support them. Industrial and Corporate Change, 19(4), 969–1007.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Schumpeter, J. A. (1934). The Theory of Economic Development. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  46. Schumpeter, J. A. (1942). Capitalism, socialism and democracy. New York: Harper, 1975.Google Scholar
  47. Segarra, A., & Arauzo, J. M. (2008). Sources of innovation and industry-university interaction: Evidence from Spanish firms. Research Policy, 37(8), 1283–1295.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 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
  49. Segarra, A. and Gombau, V. (2013). Young innovative firms and R&D strategies: is the Spanish case different? Working paper 6, Universitat Rovira i Virgili.Google Scholar
  50. Teece, D. J. (1986). Profiting from technological innovation: Implications for integration, collaboration, licensing and public policy. Research Policy, 15(6), 285–305.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Tushman, M., & Anderson, P. (1986). Technological discontinuities and organizational environments. Administrative Science Quarterly, 31(3), 439–465.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Utterback, J. M. (1996). Mastering the dynamics of innovation. Boston: Harvard Business Press.Google Scholar
  53. Vaona, A., & Pianta, M. (2008). Firm size and innovation in European manufacturing. Small Business Economics, 30(3), 283–299.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Veugelers, R. (2008). The role of SMEs in innovation in the EU: A case for policy intervention? Review of Business and Economics, 53(3), 239–262.Google Scholar
  55. Wynarczyk, P., & Thwaites, A. (1997). The economic performance, survival and non-survival of innovative small firms. In R. Oakey & S. Mukhtar (Eds.), New Technology Based Firms in the 1990s (Vol. 3). London: Paul Chapman.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • David B. Audretsch
    • 1
  • Agustí Segarra
    • 2
    Email author
  • Mercedes Teruel
    • 2
  1. 1.Institute for Development StrategiesIndiana UniversityBloomingtonUSA
  2. 2.Research Group of Industry and Territory, Department of Economics – CREIPUniversitat Rovira i VirgiliReusSpain

Personalised recommendations