SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Ekonomik ve Sosyal Araştırmalar Dergisi / 2020 / Cilt: 16 - Sayı: 1

A SUB-SECTORAL APPROACH ON THE NEXUS BETWEEN R&D AND VALUE-ADDED IN OECD COUNTRIES

OECD ÜLKELERİNDE AR-GE VE KATMA DEĞER İLİŞKİSİNE ALT-SEKTÖREL BİR YAKLAŞIM

Bayram Veli DOYAR
Pages
1–12
Publication Date
2020-05-02
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Lastly, causality tests reveal a causality from R&D expenditures to value-added of ‘food, beverages, and tobacco’ sub-sector.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Current study aims to investigate the impact of R&D expenditures on added values of manufacturing sub-sectors in OECD countries.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Data employed spans 1998-2015.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Lastly, causality tests reveal a causality from R&D expenditures to value-added of ‘food, beverages, and tobacco’ sub-sector.
🔬Design:Modeling & Simulation
📍Scope:2015 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Ar-Ge · Yenilik · Katma Değer

Abstract

Current study aims to investigate the impact of R&D expenditures on added values of manufacturing sub-sectors in OECD countries. Data employed spans 1998-2015. Cointegration tests validate long-run relationship for each model. Long-run coefficient estimates show R&D elasticities of added values are 0.3 and 0.4 for ‘food, beverages, and tobacco’; 0.7 and 0.8 for ‘machinery and transportation equipment’; 0.5 and 0.6 for ‘medium and high-tech industry’; -0.30 and -0.31 for ‘textiles and clothing’; and 0.4 and 0.35 for ‘chemicals’. Lastly, causality tests reveal a causality from R&D expenditures to value-added of ‘food, beverages, and tobacco’ sub-sector.

Özet

Bu çalışma OECD ülkelerinde Ar-Ge harcamalarının imalat sanayi alt sektörlerinin katma değerlerine etkilerini incelemeyi amaçlamaktadır. Veriler 1998-2015 dönemini kapsamaktadır. Eşbütünleşme testleri tüm modeller için uzun dönemli ilişkileri onaylamıştır. Uzun dönem katsayı tahminlerine göre Ar-Ge esneklikleri “yiyecek, içecek ve tütün” alt sektörü için 0.3 ve 0.4; “makine ve taşımacılık ekipmanları alt sektörü” için 0.7 ve 0.8; “orta ve yüksek teknoloji sanayi alt sektörü” için 0.5 ve 0.6; “tekstil ve giyim alt sektörü” için -0.30 ve -0.31; ve “kimyasallar alt sektörü” için 0.4 ve 0.35’tir. Son olarak nedensellik testleri Ar-Ge harcamalarının “yiyecek, içecek ve tütün” alt sektörünün katma değerinin Granger-nedeni olduğunu göstermiştir.

🔖

Cite This Article

DOYAR, B. V. (2020). A SUB-SECTORAL APPROACH ON THE NEXUS BETWEEN R&D AND VALUE-ADDED IN OECD COUNTRIES. Ekonomik ve Sosyal Araştırmalar Dergisi, Cilt: 16 - Sayı: 1, 1–12. https://ajindex.com/articles/167711

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (19)

  1. Acosta, M., Coronado, D., & Romero, C. (2015).
  2. Linking public support, R&D, innovation and productivity: New evidence from the Spanish food industry. Food Policy, 57, 50-61.
  3. Asteriou, D., & Hall, S. G. (2011). Applied Econometrics. Macmillan International Higher Education. Bozkurt, C. (2015). R&D expenditures and economic growth relationship in Turkey. International Journal of Economics and Financial Issues, 5(1), 188-198.
  4. Bravo-Ortega, C., & Marin, A. G. (2011). R&D and productivity: A two way avenue?. World Development, 39(7), 1090-1107.
  5. Choi, C., & Yi, M. H. (2018).
  6. The Internet, R&D expenditure and economic growth. Applied Economics Letters, 25(4), 264-267.
  7. Choi, I. (2001). Unit root tests for panel data. Journal of international money and Finance, 20(2), 249-272.
  8. Comanor, W. S., & Scherer, F. M. (1969). Patent statistics as a measure of technical change. Journal of political economy, 77(3), 392-398. Crépon, B., Duguet, E., & Mairesse, J. (1998).
  9. Research, Innovation and Productivity: An Econometric Analysis at the Firm Level. Economics of Innovation and new Technology, 7(2), 115-158.
  10. Doyar, B. V. (2019). R&D expenditures by field of science and GDP: Which causes which in Canada?. Economics and Business Letters, 8(1), 31-40.
  11. Dumitrescu, E. I., & Hurlin, C. (2012). Testing for Granger non-causality in heterogeneous panels. Economic modelling, 29(4), 1450-1460.
  12. Engle, R. F., & Granger, C. W. (1987). Co-integration and error correction: representation, estimation, and testing. Econometrica: journal of the Econometric Society, 55(2), 251-276.
  13. Erdil, E., Cilasun, S. M., & Eruygur, A. (2013). Do R&D Expenditures Matter for Labor Productivity in OECD Countries? An Unresolved Question. Hacettepe Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 31(1), 71-82.
  14. Falk, M. (2007). R&D spending in the high-tech sector and economic growth. Research in economics, 61(3), 140-147.
  15. Fu, X., Mohnen, P., & Zanello, G. (2018). Innovation and productivity in formal and informal firms in Ghana. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 131, 315-325.
  16. Griliches, Z. (1964). Research expenditures, education, and the aggregate agricultural production function. The American Economic Review, 54(6), 961-974.
  17. Guellec, D., & De La Potterie, B. V. P. (2002). R&D and productivity growth. OECD Economic studies, 2001(2), 103-126.
  18. Harhoff, D. (1998). R&D and productivity in German manufacturing firms. Economics of Innovation and New Technology, 6(1), 29-50.
  19. Hu, A. G. (2001). Owner