This paper looks at the effects of demand uncertainty and stagnancy on firms’ decisions to engage in R&D activities and the amount of financial effort devoted to these. The paper provides a number of contributions to the innovation literature: first, it adds to the revived debate on demand-pull perspectives in innovation studies by examining demand-related (lack of) incentives to invest in innovation. Second, it complements the literature on barriers to innovation by focusing on demand-related obstacles rather than the more frequently explored financial barriers. Third, it analyses whether experiencing demand barriers is a sector-specific feature. Firms active in high- or low-tech manufacturing or in knowledge-intensive or low-tech services might be more or less dependent on demand conditions when deciding to perform R&D. We find that uncertain demand and lack of demand are perceived as two quite distinct barriers. While the perception of a lack of demand has a marked negative impact not only on the amount of investment in R&D but also the likelihood of firms to engage in R&D activities, demand uncertainty seems, on the contrary, to represent an incentive to spend more in R&D, although only in low-tech sectors. We interpret this evidence in terms of the specific phase of the innovation cycle in which decisions to invest in R&D are taken. Sectoral affiliation seems to be playing a role only for demand uncertainty, supporting the conjecture that positive expectations on the presence of adequate market demand are a necessary condition to invest in R&D.

García-Quevedo, J., Pellegrino, G., Savona, M., Reviving demand-pull perspectives: The effect of demand uncertainty and stagnancy on R&D strategy, <<CAMBRIDGE JOURNAL OF ECONOMICS>>, 2016; 2017 (41): 1087-1122. [doi:10.1093/cje/bew042] [http://hdl.handle.net/10807/205760]

Reviving demand-pull perspectives: The effect of demand uncertainty and stagnancy on R&D strategy

Pellegrino, Gabriele;
2017

Abstract

This paper looks at the effects of demand uncertainty and stagnancy on firms’ decisions to engage in R&D activities and the amount of financial effort devoted to these. The paper provides a number of contributions to the innovation literature: first, it adds to the revived debate on demand-pull perspectives in innovation studies by examining demand-related (lack of) incentives to invest in innovation. Second, it complements the literature on barriers to innovation by focusing on demand-related obstacles rather than the more frequently explored financial barriers. Third, it analyses whether experiencing demand barriers is a sector-specific feature. Firms active in high- or low-tech manufacturing or in knowledge-intensive or low-tech services might be more or less dependent on demand conditions when deciding to perform R&D. We find that uncertain demand and lack of demand are perceived as two quite distinct barriers. While the perception of a lack of demand has a marked negative impact not only on the amount of investment in R&D but also the likelihood of firms to engage in R&D activities, demand uncertainty seems, on the contrary, to represent an incentive to spend more in R&D, although only in low-tech sectors. We interpret this evidence in terms of the specific phase of the innovation cycle in which decisions to invest in R&D are taken. Sectoral affiliation seems to be playing a role only for demand uncertainty, supporting the conjecture that positive expectations on the presence of adequate market demand are a necessary condition to invest in R&D.
2017
Inglese
García-Quevedo, J., Pellegrino, G., Savona, M., Reviving demand-pull perspectives: The effect of demand uncertainty and stagnancy on R&D strategy, <<CAMBRIDGE JOURNAL OF ECONOMICS>>, 2016; 2017 (41): 1087-1122. [doi:10.1093/cje/bew042] [http://hdl.handle.net/10807/205760]
File in questo prodotto:
Non ci sono file associati a questo prodotto.

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/10807/205760
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus 31
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 24
social impact