The New Palgrave Dictionary of Economics

2018 Edition
| Editors: Macmillan Publishers Ltd

Research and Experimental Development (R&D) and Technological Innovation Policy

  • Henri Delanghe
  • Ugur Muldur
Reference work entry


Research and experimental development (R&D), when appropriately valorised, lead to technological innovation in the form of new products and processes, which contribute to growth, competitiveness and job creation, and which produce other societal benefits. Because of market failures, the private sector, left to its own devices, invests in R&D in sectors not always fully aligned with, and at levels below, the socially desirable, and is unable to fully valorise its research output, which justifies public intervention. The latter needs to be thought through carefully based on ex ante impact assessment informed by credible ex post evaluation.


Economic growth Economic policy Private sector R&D Technological innovation 

JEL Classifications

O3; O31; O320; O380 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.


  1. Abramowitz, M. 1986. Catching up, forging ahead, and falling behind. Journal of Economic History XLV(2): 385–406.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Abramovsky, L., R. Harrison, and H. Simpson. 2007. University research and the location of business R&D. Economic Journal 117(519): 114–141.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Aghion, P., and P. Howitt. 2006. Appropriate growth policy: A unifying framework. Journal of the European Economic Association 4: 269–314.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Baumol, W.J. 2002. The free-market innovation machine. Analyzing the growth miracle of capitalism. Princeton/Oxford: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Belderbos, R., B. Leten, and S. Suzuki. 2009. Does excellence in academic research attract foreign R&D? Strategy and Innovation, Working Paper Series. Leuven: Department of Managerial Economics, Katholieke Universiteit.Google Scholar
  6. Cohen, W.M., R.R. Nelson, and J.P. Walsh. 2002. Links and impacts: the influence of public research on industrial R&D. Management Science 48(1): 1–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Czarnitzki, D., and G. Licht. 2006. Additionality of public R&D grants in a transition economy. The case of Eastern Germany. The Economics of Transition 14(1): 101–131.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Dosi, G., P. Llerena, and M. Sylos Labini. 2009. Does the ‘European Paradox’ still hold? – did it ever? In European science and technology policy: Towards integration or fragmentation? ed. H. Delanghe, U. Muldur, and L. Soete, 214–236. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
  9. European Commission. 2004. European Competitiveness Report 2004. Enterprise and Industry Publications, European Communities.Google Scholar
  10. Griliches, Z. 1995. R&D and productivity. In Handbook of industrial innovation, ed. P. Stoneman, 52–89. London: Blackwell Press.Google Scholar
  11. Griffith, R. 2000. How important is business R&D for economic growth and should the government subsidise it? Briefing Note No. 12. London: The Institute for Fiscal Studies.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Guellec, D., and B. van Pottelsberghe de la Potterie. 2000. The impact of public R&D expenditure on business R&D, STI Working Papers 2000/4. Paris: OECD.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Guellec, D., and B. van Pottelsberghe de la Potterie. 2001. R&D and productivity growth: Panel data analysis of 16 OECD countries, STI Working Papers 2001/3. Paris: OECD.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Guimón, J. 2008. Government Strategies to Attract R&D-Intensive FDI. OECD Global Forum on International Investment, 27 and 28 March.Google Scholar
  15. Jones, C.I., and J.C. Williams. 1998. Measuring the social return to R&D. The Quarterly Journal of Economics 113(4): 1119–1135.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Mansfield, E. 1998. Academic research and industrial innovation: An update of empirical findings. Research Policy 26(7–8): 773–776.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Margolis, R.M., and D.M. Kammen. 1999. Evidence of under-investment in energy R&D in the United States and the impact of Federal policy. Energy Policy 27: 575–584.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Martin, B.R., A. Salter, D. Hicks, K. Pavitt, J. Senker, M. Sharp, and N. von Tunzelmann. 1996. The relationship between publicly funded basic research and economic performance. London: SPRU Review. HM Treasury.Google Scholar
  19. OECD. 2002. Frascati manual. Paris: OECD.Google Scholar
  20. OECD. 2005. Oslo manual. Paris: OECD.Google Scholar
  21. OECD. 2008. Science, technology and industry outlook 2008. Paris: OECD.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. OECD. 2010. Science, technology and industry outlook 2010. Paris: OECD.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. OECD. 2011. Towards green growth. Paris: OECD.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. OECD. 2012. Science, technology and industry outlook 2012. Paris: OECD.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Romer, P.M. 1990. Endogenous technological change. Journal of Political Economy 98(5): S71–S102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Solow, R.M. 1957. Technical change and the aggregate production function. The Review of Economics and Statistics 39: 312–320.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Tijssen, R.J.W. 2002. Science dependence of technologies: Evidence from inventions and their inventors. Research Policy 31: 509–526.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Van Reenen, J. 1997. Employment and technological innovation: Evidence from UK manufacturing firms. Journal of Labour Economics 15(2): 255–284.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Macmillan Publishers Ltd. 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Henri Delanghe
    • 1
  • Ugur Muldur
    • 1
  1. 1.