Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

Determinants of Innovative Behaviour pp 63–76Cite as

Palgrave Macmillan

Skill Endowment and R&D Investment: Evidence from Micro Data

  • Chapter

  • 176 Accesses

Abstract

History has seen periods of change biased in favour of the unskilled: this was the case during the transition from the artisan-based to the factory-based system of production (Marx, 1961, Book I, Chap. XIII; Goldin and Katz, 1998), and of the massive introduction of Tayloristic methods in the 20th century (Braverman, 1974).

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD   54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  • Acemoglu, D. (1996) ‘A Micro Foundation for Social Increasing Returns in Human Capital Accumulation’, Quarterly Journal of Economics, 111, pp. 779–804.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Acemoglu, D. (1998) ‘Why Do New Technologies Complement Skills? Directed Technical Change and Wage Inequality’, Quarterly Journal of Economics, 113, pp. 1055–90.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, T. W. and C. Hsiao (1981) ‘Estimation of Dynamic Models with Error Components’, Journal of the American Statistical Association, 76, pp. 598–606.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Antonelli, C. (1998) ‘The Dynamics of Localized Technological Changes. The Interaction between Factor Costs Inducement, Demand Pull and Schumpeterian Rivalry’, Economics of Innovation and New Technology, 6, pp. 97–120.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Arellano, M. and S. Bond (1991) ‘Some Tests of Specification for Panel Data: Monte Carlo Evidence and an Application to Employment Equations’, Review of Economic Studies, 58, pp. 277–97.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Arellano, M. and O. Bover (1995) ‘Another Look at the Instrumental Variables Estimation of Error-components Models’, Journal of Econometrics, 68, pp. 29–51.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Arthur, B. W. (1988) ‘Competing Technologies: An Overview’, in G. Dosi, C. Freeman, R. Nelson, G. Silverberg and L. Soete (eds) Technical Change and Economic Theory (London: Pinter), pp. 590–607.

    Google Scholar 

  • Atkinson, A. B. and J. E. Stiglitz (1969) ‘A New View of Technological Change’, Economic Journal, 79, pp. 573–78.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berman, E. and S. Machin (2000) ‘Skill-biased Technology Transfer around the World’, Oxford Review of Economic Policy, 16, pp. 12–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berman, E. and S. Machin (2004) ‘Skill-Biased Technological Change and Labour Demand’, in E. Lee and M. Vivarelli (eds) Understanding Globalization, Employment and Poverty Reduction (New York: Palgrave Macmillan), pp. 39–66.

    Google Scholar 

  • Berman, E., J. Bound and Z. Griliches (1994) ‘Changes in the Demand for Skilled Labor Within US Manufacturing Industries: Evidence from the Annual Survey of Manufacturing’, Quarterly Journal of Economics, 109, pp. 367–97.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blundell, R. and S. Bond (1998) ‘Initial Conditions and Moment Restrictions in Dynamic Panel Data Models’, Journal of Econometrics, 87, pp. 115–43.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Braverman, H. (1974) Labour and Monopoly Capital (New York: Monthly Review Press).

    Google Scholar 

  • Breschi, S., F. Malerba and L. Orsenigo (2000) ‘Technological Regimes and Schumpeterian Patterns of Innovation’, Economic Journal, 110, pp. 388–410.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brouwer, E. and A. Kleinknecht (1999) ‘Keynes-plus? Effective Demand and Changes in Firm-level R&D: An Empirical Note’, Cambridge Journal of Economics, 23, pp. 385–91.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bruno, G. S. F. (2005a) ‘Approximating the Bias of the LSDV Estimator for Dynamic Unbalanced Panel Data Models’, Economics Letters, 87, pp. 361–66.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bruno, G. S. F. (2005b) ‘Estimation and Inference in Dynamic Unbalanced Panel Data Models with a Small Number of Individuals’, The Stata Journal, 5, pp. 473–500.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bun, M. J. G. and J. F. Kiviet (2001) ‘The Accuracy of Inference in Small Samples of Dynamic Panel Data Models’, Tinbergen Institute Discussion Paper TI 2001–006/4.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bun, M. J. G. and Kiviet, J. F. (2003) ‘On the Diminishing Returns of Higher Order Terms in Asymptotic Expansions of Bias’, Economics Letters, 79, pp. 145–52.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cassiman, B. and R. Veugelers (2002) ‘R&D Cooperation and Spillovers, Some Empirical Evidence from Belgium’, American Economic Review, 92, pp. 1169–84.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, W. M. and D. A. Levinthal (1989) ‘Innovation and Learning: the Two Faces of R&D’, Economic Journal, 99, pp. 569–96.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, W. M. and D. A. Levinthal (1990) ‘Absorptive Capacity: A New Perspective on Learning and Innovation’, Administrative Science Quarterly, 35, pp. 128–52.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Colombo, M. G. and P. Garrone (1996) ‘Technological Cooperative Agreements and Firms’ R&D Intensity: a Note on Causality Relations’, Research Policy, 25, pp. 923–32.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • CRIC (2005) A Literature Review on Skills and Innovation. How Does Successful Innovation Impact on the Demand for Skills and How Do Skills Drive Innovation?, CRIC report for the Department of Trade and Industry, Centre for Research on Innovation and Competition, University of Manchester.

    Google Scholar 

  • David, P. (1985) ‘Clio and the Economics of QWERTY’, American Economic Review Proceedings, 75, pp. 332–37.

    Google Scholar 

  • Doms, M., T. Dunne and K. Troske (1997) ‘Workers, Wages and Technology’, Quarterly Journal of Economics, 112, pp. 253–90.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dosi, G. (1988) ‘Source, Procedure and Microeconomic Effect of Innovation’, Journal of Economic Literature, 26, pp. 1120–71.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dunne, T. and K. Troske (2005) ‘Technology Adoption and the Skill Mix of US Manufacturing Plants’, Scottish Journal of Political Economy, 52, pp. 387–405.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Finegold, D. and D. Soskice (1988) ‘The Failure of Training in Britain: Analysis and Prescription’, Oxford Review of Economic Policy, 4, pp. 21–51.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Freeman, C. and L. Soete (1994) Work for All or Mass Unemployment (London: Pinter).

    Google Scholar 

  • Funk, P. and T. Vogel (2004) ‘Endogenous Skill Bias’, Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, 28, pp. 2155–93.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goldin, C. and L. F. Katz (1998) ‘The Origins of Technology-skill Complementarity’, Quarterly Journal of Economics, 113, pp. 693–732.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Griliches, Z. (1969) ‘Capital-Skill Complementarity’, Review of Economics and Statistics, 51, pp. 465–68.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hall, B., J. Mairesse, L. Branstetter and B. Crépon (1999) ‘Does Cash Flow Cause Investment and R&D? An Exploration Using Panel Data for French, Japanese, and United States Scientific Firms’, in D. Audretsch and R. Thurik (eds) Innovation, Industry Evolution and Employment (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press), pp. 129–56.

    Google Scholar 

  • Haskel, J. E. and Y. Heden (1999) ‘Computers and the Demand for Skilled Labour: Industry and Establishment-level Panel Evidence for the UK’, Economic Journal, 109, pp. C68–C79.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hicks, J. R. (1932) The Theory of Wages (London: Macmillan).

    Google Scholar 

  • Judson, R. A. and A. L. Owen ‘Estimating Dynamic Panel Data Models: a Guide for Macroeconomists’, Economics Letters, 65: 1, pp. 9–15.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kamien, M. I. and I. Zang (2000) ‘Meet Me Halfway: Research Joint Ventures and Absorptive Capacity’, International Journal of Industrial Organization, 18, pp. 995–1012.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Katsoulacos, Y. and D. Ulph (1998) ‘Endogenous Spillovers and Research Joint Ventures’, Journal of Industrial Economics, 96, pp. 333–57.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kiley, M. T. (1999) ‘The Supply of Skilled Labour and Skill-biased Technological Progress’, Economic Journal, 109, pp. 708–24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kiviet, J. F. (1995) ‘On Bias, Inconsistency, and Efficiency of Various Estimators in Dynamic Panel Data Models’, Journal of Econometrics, 68, pp. 53–78.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kiviet, J. F. (1999) ‘Expectation of Expansions for Estimators in a Dynamic Panel Data Model;Some Results for Weakly Exogenous Regressors’, in C. Hsiao, K. Lahiri, L. F. Lee and M. H. Pesaran (eds) Analysis of Panel Data and Limited Dependent Variables (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press), pp. 199–225.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Kleinknecht, A. and B. Verspagen (1990) ‘Demand and Innovation: Schmookler Reexamined’, Research Policy, 19, pp. 387–94.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kultti, K. and T. Takalo (1998) ‘R&D Spillovers and Information Exchange’, Economics Letters, 61, pp. 21–3.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Judson, R. A. and A. L. Owen (1999) ‘Estimating Dynamic Panel Data Models: A Guide for Macroeconomists’, Economics Letters, 65, pp. 9–15.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leiponen, A. (2000) ‘Competencies, Innovation and Profitability of Firms’, Economics of Innovation and New Technology, 9, pp. 1–24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leiponen, A. (2005) ‘Skills and Innovation’, International Journal of Industrial Organization, 23, pp. 303–23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Machin, S. (1996) ‘Changes in the Relative Demand for Skills in the UK Labor Market’, in A. Booth and D. Snower (eds) Acquiring Skills: Market Failures, Their Symptoms and Policy Responses (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press), pp. 129–46.

    Google Scholar 

  • Machin, S. and J. van Reenen (1998) ‘Technology and Changes in the Skill Structure: Evidence from Seven OECD Countries’, Quarterly Journal of Economics, 113, pp. 1215–44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Malerba, F. (2005) ‘Sectoral Systems of Innovation: A Framework for Linking Innovation to the Knowledge Base, Structure and Dynamics of Sectors’, Economics of Innovation and New Technology, 14, pp. 63–82.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Malerba, F. and L. Orsenigo (1996) ‘Schumpeterian Patterns of Innovation’, Cambridge Journal of Economics, 19, pp. 47–65.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marx, K. (1961) Capital (Moscow: Foreign Languages Publishing House) (first edition: 1867).

    Google Scholar 

  • Milgrom, P. and J. Roberts (1990) ‘The Economics of Modern Manufacturing: Technology, Strategy, and Organization’, American Economic Review, 80, pp. 511–28.

    Google Scholar 

  • Milgrom, P. and J. Roberts (1995) ‘Complementarities and Firms: Strategy, Structure and Organisational Change in Manufacturing’, Journal of Accounting and Economics, 19, pp. 179–208.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nickell, S. and D. Nicolitsas (1997) ‘Human Capital Investment and Innovation: What Are the Connections’? Paper CEPDP0370 (London: Centre for Economic Performance).

    Google Scholar 

  • Pavitt, K. (1984) ‘Sectoral Patterns of Technical Change: Towards a Taxonomy and a Theory’, Research Policy, 3, pp. 343–73.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Piga, C. A. and M. Vivarelli (2003) ‘Sample Selection in Estimating the Determinants of Cooperative R&D’, Applied Economics Letters, 10, pp. 243–46.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Piga, C. A. and M. Vivarelli (2004) ‘Internal and External R&D: A Sample Selection Approach’, Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, 66, pp. 457–82.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Piva, M. and M. Vivarelli (2006) ‘Is Demand-Pulled Innovation Equally Important in Different Groups of Firms?’, IZA Discussion Paper no. 1982, February (Bonn: IZA).

    Google Scholar 

  • Piva, M. and M. Vivarelli (2007) ‘Demand-Pulled Innovation under Liquidity Constraints’, Applied Economics Letters, forthcoming.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosenberg, N. (1982) Inside the Black Box: Technology and Economics (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).

    Google Scholar 

  • Ruttan, V. W. (1997) ‘Induced Innovation, Evolutionary Theory and Path Dependence: Sources of Technical Change’, Economic Journal, 107, pp. 1520–29.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scherer, F. M. (1982) ‘Demand-pull and Technological Invention: Schmookler Revisited’, Journal of Industrial Economics, 30, pp. 225–37.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • J. Schmookler (1966) Invention and Economic Growth (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press).

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Topkis, D. M. (1998) Super Modularity and Complementarity (Princeton: Princeton University Press).

    Google Scholar 

  • Verbeek, M. (2004) A Guide to Modern Econometrics, 2nd edition (Chichester: Wiley).

    Google Scholar 

  • Veugelers, R. (1997) ‘Internal R&D Expenditures and External Technology Sourcing’, Research Policy, 26, pp. 305–15.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vivarelli, M. (1995), The Economics of Technology and Employment: Theory and Empirical Evidence (Cheltenham: Edward Elgar), reprinted 1997.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilson, R. and T. Hogarth (2003) Tackling the Low Skills Equilibrium: A Review of Issues and some New Evidence (London: Department of Trade and Industry).

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors
  1. Mariacristina Piva
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Marco Vivarelli
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Delft University of Technology (TUD), Netherlands

    Cees van Beers (associate professor of innovation economics), Alfred Kleinknecht (Professor of Innovation Economics), Roland Ortt (associate professor of technology and R&D management) & Robert Verburg (associate professor of organizational behaviour) (associate professor of innovation economics),  (Professor of Innovation Economics),  (associate professor of technology and R&D management) &  (associate professor of organizational behaviour)

Copyright information

© 2008 Mariacristina Piva and Marco Vivarelli

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Piva, M., Vivarelli, M. (2008). Skill Endowment and R&D Investment: Evidence from Micro Data. In: van Beers, C., Kleinknecht, A., Ortt, R., Verburg, R. (eds) Determinants of Innovative Behaviour. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230285736_4

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation