2007
DOI: 10.2139/ssrn.1694507
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The Impact of Financial Constraints on Innovation: What Can Be Learned from a Direct Measure?

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1

Citation Types

11
181
1
25

Year Published

2010
2010
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
7
2

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 150 publications
(218 citation statements)
references
References 138 publications
11
181
1
25
Order By: Relevance
“…However barriers to innovation are challenging to interpret depending on the firm's degree of engagement in innovation. The more firms engage in innovation, the better they are at identifying and characterizing the importance of the barriers they encounter during the innovation process (Galia and Legros 2004;Mohnen et al 2008;Savignac 2008). None of the existing empirical studies in the CDM tradition has included barriers to innovation as independent variables affecting either the decision to engage in innovation or the innovation intensity of a firm.…”
Section: Variablesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However barriers to innovation are challenging to interpret depending on the firm's degree of engagement in innovation. The more firms engage in innovation, the better they are at identifying and characterizing the importance of the barriers they encounter during the innovation process (Galia and Legros 2004;Mohnen et al 2008;Savignac 2008). None of the existing empirical studies in the CDM tradition has included barriers to innovation as independent variables affecting either the decision to engage in innovation or the innovation intensity of a firm.…”
Section: Variablesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, once they are treated as endogenous, their effect can become negative as one would expect them to be (see Savignac, 2008;Tiwari et al, 2008) as examples in the case of financial constraints).…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The dual-control-group approach addresses the difference in effects between innovation willing firms (recipients-control group 1) versus innovation non-willing firms (recipients versus control group 2), and it is in line with Savignac's (2008) approach to address potential problems of endogeneity of obstacles and propensity to innovate. Table 2 presents descriptive statistics of recipients and non-recipients by functional upgrading, inter-sectoral upgrading, and the critical variables used in the regressions presented in Tables 4 and 5.…”
Section: Estimation Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A bi-probit Heckman approach (Greene, 2014) is used, where a recursive model is simultaneously estimated for two equations: selection and structural (Savignac, 2008) 6 to measure the likelihood of firms achieving functional and/ or inter-sectoral upgrading in GVCs.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%