Exploring the link between innovation and growth in Chilean firms

Abstract

Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen:Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden.Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen.Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in der dort genannten Lizenz gewährten Nutzungsrechte. Terms of use: Documents in AbstractWe employ a balanced panel dataset representative of the entire Chilean productive structure in order to investigate the relation between the introduction of innovation and subsequent firm growth in terms of sales. Recent contributions examining the returns to innovation on firm performance have stressed the need of going beyond the analysis of the 'average effect for the average firm'. However, previous studies in the case of Latin American economies have often overlooked the importance of analyzing which firms benefit more from the introduction of innovations. Our analysis consists of a series of parametric and non-parametric exercises which take into account the properties of the firm growth distribution. In particular, we adopt quantile treatment effects (QTE) which allow to estimate the effect of the introduction of innovation by comparing firms with a similar propensity to innovate for different quantiles of the firm growth distribution. On one hand, our results indicate that process innovation shows a positive and significant relation with firm growth for those firms located at the 75th and 90th percentiles. On the other, product innovation shows a negative association only for high-growth firms.

Ownership feature and firm performance via corporate innovation performance

“…The result may also imply that the economy of scale plays an important role in this setting; larger SMEs can reduce cost to gain the cost advantage when increasing output, which in turn helps raise sales growth. This finding is in line with previous studies by Santi and Santoleri (2016) in the case of Chilean firms or Kasseeah (2013) in the context of Mauritius.…”

“…We also include the lagged log of real revenue from sales to account for the time lag of innovation in response to the growth of sales, and also as a way to partially explore the reverse causality from growth of sales to innovation. Finally, Industry is the sector dummies for each two-digit sector of the manufacturing industry that the SME belongs to (Kasseeah, 2013;Santi and Santoleri, 2016). Detailed definition and measurement of all variables are presented in Table AI. In the proposed systems of equations, the coefficient β 22 captures the impact of ownership concentration on corporate innovative performance, the coefficient β 11 captures the contribution from innovative activities to corporate performance, and the coefficient β 21 captures the reverse causality from performance to innovation; we account for the reverse causality of performance to innovation also as a means to control for possible endogeneity issue arising from potential reverse causality from performance to innovation.…”

“…Research on the impact of firm's innovation on firm growth is rich and diverse (Goedhuys and Veugelers, 2012;Hölzl and Friesenbichler, 2010;Kannebley et al, 2010;Raffo et al, 2008;Santi and Santoleri, 2016). In the case of SMEs, according to Subrahmanya (2011), SMEs are regarded as the "driving forces" of the economy due to their extensive contributions with respect to technological innovation, export enhancement and job creation.…”

Laggards imitate, leaders innovate: the heterogeneous productivity effect of imitation versus innovation

“…To illustrate, when estimated at the qth quantile, the estimation of the coefficient of a particular regressor can be interpreted as the marginal change in the qth conditional quantile of the dependent variable, due to the marginal change in the particular regressor (Yasar et al, 2006). At the firm level, quantile regression has been applied in relation to different topics, such as estimating the production function (Yasar et al, 2006;Montresor and Vezzani, 2015), productivity (Bartelsman et al, 2014), and firm growth (Coad and Rao, 2008;Bianchini et al, 2014;Santi and Santoleri, 2017;Coad et al, 2016).…”

Evaluación del impacto del programa Redes de Innovación

“…Una característica común en los estudios sobre innovación es que tanto las estrategias innovadoras como sus efectos dependen de varios factores, entre ellos, el tamaño y la edad de la empresa, así como el sector económico (Rodeiro y López, 2007;Santi y Santoleri, 2017). Schumpeter (1942) analizó por primera vez la relación entre la innovación y el tamaño, afirmando que las grandes empresas que operan en mercados concentrados son el principal motor del progreso tecnológico.…”