Skip to main content

Part of the book series: Studies in Economic Transition ((SET))

Abstract

How do new and foreign firms achieve superior productivity? Do they conduct more and better R&D? Or do they distinguish themselves through computerization and organizational capital? We investigate the determinants of and returns on several types of investment, using a panel of over 40,000 Ukrainian industrial firms in 2000–2007. Foreign firms engage in more non-technological investment and IT and in less R&D than domestic private firms. Similarly, new firms invest more in non-technological capital and IT and less in R&D than initially state-owned firms. Productivity gains from R&D and non-technology investment are insignificantly different across ownership types, whereas foreign firms achieve much higher returns on IT investment than other firms. These results suggest that foreign firms outperform others through organizational capital that is better able to exploit IT investment. New firm productivity growth is a result of higher investment volume rather than investment efficiency.

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

Access this chapter

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 EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
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

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  • Bergson, Abram (1983), ‘Technological Progress’, in Abram Bergson and Herbert S. Levine (eds), The Soviet Economy, Toward the Year 2000 (London: George Allen and Unwin Ltd).

    Google Scholar 

  • Berliner, Joseph (1976), The Innovation Decision in Soviet Industry (Cambridge: MIT Press).

    Google Scholar 

  • Bloom, Nick, Raffaela Sadun and JohnVan Reenen (2007), ‘Americans Do I.T. Better: US Multinationals and the Productivity Miracle’, CEP Discussion Paper No. 788 (April).

    Google Scholar 

  • Boycko, M., A. Shleifer and R.W. Vishny (1996), ‘A Theory of Privatization’, Economic Journal, 106(435), 306–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bresnahan, Timothy F., Erik Brynjolfsson and Loren Hitt (2002), ‘Information Technology, Workplace Organization and the Demand for Skilled Labor: Firm-level Evidence’, Quarterly Journal of Economics, 117(1): 338–76.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown, J. David, John S. Earle and Álmos Telegdy (2007), ‘What Makes ECA Firms Productive? Ownership, Age, Market Structure, and Import Penetration in Georgia, Hungary, Romania, Russia, and Ukraine’ World Bank background paper (mimeo).

    Google Scholar 

  • Brynjolfsson, Erik, and Loren Hitt (2000), ‘Beyond Computation: Information Technology, Organizational Transformation and Business Performance’, Journal of Economic Perspectives, 14(4): 23–48.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burkart, Mike, Denis Gromb and Fausto Panunzi (1997), ‘Large Shareholders, Monitoring, and the Value of the Firm’, Quarterly Journal of Economics, 112: 693–728.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chen, Victor Z., Jing Li, Lisa Papania and Daniel M. Shapiro (2008), ‘Ownership Structure and Innovation Performance of Firms in an Emerging Market’ downloadable from http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1299737 (7 December).

  • Chung, Kee H., Peter Wright and Ben Kedia (2003), ‘Corporate Governance and Market Valuation of Capital and R&D Investment’, Review of Financial Economics, 12: 161–72.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Coles, Jeffrey L., Naveen D. Daniel and Lalitha Naveen (2008), ‘Boards: Does One Size Fit All?’, Journal of Financial Economics, 87: 329–56.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Crespi, Gustavo, Chiara Criscuolo and Jonathan Haskel (2007), ‘Information Technology, Organizational Change and Productivity Growth: Evidence from UK Firms’, CEP Discussion Paper No. 783 (March).

    Google Scholar 

  • Devaraj, S. and R. Kohli (2003), ‘Perfor mance Impacts of Information Technolog y: Is Actual Usage the Missing Link?’, Management Science, 49(3): 273–89.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Domadenik, Polona, Janez Prasnikar, and Jan Svejnar (2007), ‘How to Increase R&D in Transition Economies? Evidence from Slovenia,’ IZA Discussion Paper No. 2801 (May).

    Google Scholar 

  • Eklund, Johan E., Johanna Palmberg and Daniel Wiberg (2009), ‘Ownership Structure, Board Composition and Investment Performance’, Ratio Institute Working Paper No. 129 (February).

    Google Scholar 

  • Girma, Sourafel, Yundan Gong and Holger Gorg (2008), ‘Foreign Direct Investment, Access to Finance, and Innovation Activity in Chinese Enter prises’, Kiel Working Paper No. 1400 (February).

    Google Scholar 

  • Griffith, Rachel, Stephen Redding and John Van Reenen (2000), ‘Mapping the Two Faces of R&D: Productivity Growth in a Panel of OECD Industries’, IFS Working Paper WP02/00 (London: Institute for Fiscal Studies).

    Google Scholar 

  • Griliches, Zvi and Jacques Mairesse (1984), ‘Productivity and Research and Development at the Firm Level’, in Zvi Griliches (ed.) Research and Development, Patents and Productivity (Chicago University Press).

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Hanson, Philip (1982), ‘The Soviet System as a Recipient of Foreign Technology’, in Ronald Amann and Julian M. Cooper (eds) Industrial Innovation in the Soviet Union (New Haven: Yale University Press).

    Google Scholar 

  • Ho, Joanna L.Y., Anne Wu and Sean Xin Xu (2011), ‘Corporate Governance and Returns on Information Technology Investment: Evidence from an Emerging Market’ Strategic Management Journal, 32(6): 595–623 (June).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kinoshita, Yuko (2000), ‘R&D and Technology Spillovers via FDI: Innovation and Absorptive Capacity’, William Davidson Institute Working Paper No. 349 (November).

    Google Scholar 

  • La Porta, Rafael, Florencio Lopezde Silanes, Andrei Shleifer and Robert W. Vishny (2000), ‘Investor Protection and Corporate Governance’, Journal of Financial Economics, 58: 141–86.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Megginson, W.L. and Netter, J.M. (2001), ‘From State to Market: A Survey of Empirical Studies on Privatization,’ Journal of Economic Literature, 39(2): 321–89.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ortega-Argiles, Raquel, Rosina Moreno-Serrano and Jordi Surinach Caralt (2005), ‘Ownership Structure and Innovation: Is There a Real Link’, The Annals of Regional Science, 39(4): 637–62 (December).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shleifer, Andrei, and Robert W. Vishny (1997), ‘A Survey of Corporate Governance’, Journal of Finance, 52(2): 737–83.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sutton, Anthony C. (1973), Western Technology and Soviet Economic Development 1945 to 1965 (Stanford, CA: Hoover), Volume III.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sveikauskas, Leo (2007), ‘R&D and Productivity Growth: A Review of the Literature,’ BLS Working Paper No. 408 (September).

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Copyright information

© 2012 J. David Brown, John S. Earle, Hanna Vakhitova and Vitaliy Zheka

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Brown, J.D., Earle, J.S., Vakhitova, H., Zheka, V. (2012). Innovation, Adoption, Ownership and Productivity: Evidence from Ukraine. In: Brück, T., Lehmann, H. (eds) In the Grip of Transition: Economic and Social Consequences of Restructuring in Russia and Ukraine. Studies in Economic Transition. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230363595_4

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics