Firm-Level Investment in France and the United States: An Exploration of What We Have Learned in Twenty Years

Our two related goals in this paper are the following: Firstly and mainly, we want to examine the effects of major changes in modelling strategy and econometric methodology, over the past twenty years, on estimation of firm-level investment equations using panel data. Secondly, we try to assess whether the differences in the estimated investment equations, as between recent years and ten to twenty years go in the French and U.S. Manufacturing industries, are real' and economically meaningful. Thus our paper consists of a series of comparisons: a simple accelerator-profit specification versus one with error correction, traditional between- and within-firm estimation versus GMM estimation, the investment behavior of French firms versus that of U.S. firms, and investment behavior in recent years versus ten to twenty years ago. Although the important econometric advances of the past twenty years have been far from being as successful as we had hoped for, we do find some significant improvement in the specification, estimation and interpretation of firm investment equations; we also fin some real changes in the investment behavior of French and U.S. firms during these twenty years.

An Exploration of Local R&D Spillovers in France

This paper is an attempt to assess the existence and magnitude of local research spillovers in France. We rely on the model of an extended production function (Cobb-Douglas and Translog) with both local and neighborhood R&D capital stocks. We estimate this model on 312 employment areas as of 1999, first for the whole economy, then separately for five large manufacturing industries. The estimated elasticities of productivity with respect to R&D capital are significant and plausible, both within own-area and across neighboring areas as well as within own-industry, but they are weaker across different industries.

Firm Level Investment in France and the United States: An Exploration of What We Have Learned in Twenty Years

We review the changes in modelling strategy and econometric methodology when estimating a firm-level investment equation on panel data during the past twenty years, in order to assess which of these changes result from new estimation methods and changes in the practice of panel data econometrics, and which are "real" and due to the evolution of the economy. Thus our paper consists of a series of comparisons: a simple accelerator-profit specification versus one with error correction, traditional between- and within-firm estimation versus GMM estimation, the investment behavior of French firms versus that of U.S. firms, and investment behavior today versus ten to twenty years ago. Although the econometric advances have perhaps not been as successful as we had hoped, we do find some real change in firm behavior and some improvement in equation specification and interpretation during the past twenty years.investment, panel data, GMM, international comparisons, firm- level

Financial factors and investment in Belgium, France, Germany, and the United Kingdom: A comparison using company panel data

We construct company panel data sets for manufacturing firms in Belgium, France, Germany, and the United Kingdom, covering the period 1978-1989. These data sets are used to estimate empirical investment equations, and to investigate the role played by financial factors in each country. A robust finding is that cash flow and profits terms appear to be both statistically and quantitatively more significant in the United Kingdom than in the three continental European countries. This is consistent with the suggestion that financial constraints on investment may be relatively severe in the more market-oriented U.K. financial system

Firm Level Investment and R&D in France and the United States: A Comparison

This paper is a contribution to the small but growing literature that compares the investment and R&D behavior of manufacturing firms in large developed countries that have varying financial and capital market institutions. Specifically, we look at two similar samples of French and United States firms during the period 1982-1993. We estimate a dynamic specification of a simple error-corrected investment model for both ordinary investment and for R&D investment, a model that incorporates both output (sales or turnover) and cash flow as predictors for investment. Our focus is on two comparisons: France versus the United States and physical investment versus R&D investment. In general, we do not find any significant differences between the two countries in the long run effects of demand (output) on investment. However, we do find that cash flow or profits appear to have a much larger impact on both R&D and investment in the U.S. Except for the well-known difference in the serial correlation of the two types of capital spending, we reject any signficant differences between investment and R&D behavior for each country; the major differences are between countries.Investment, R&D, financing constraint, liquidity constraint, cash flow sensitivity, international comparison

Firm Level Investment and R&D in France and the United States: A Comparison

This paper is a contribution to the small but growing literature that compares the investment and R&D behavior of manufacturing firms in large developed countries that have varying financial and capital market institutions. Specifically, we look at two similar samples of French and United States firms during the period 1982-1993. We estimate a dynamic specification of a simple error-corrected investment model for both ordinary investment and for R&D investment, a model that incorporates both output (sales or turnover) and cash flow as predictors for investment. Our focus is on two comparisons: France versus United States and physical investment versus R&D investment. In general, we do not find any significant differences between the two countries in the long run effects of demand (output) on investment. However, we do find that cash flow or profits appear to have a much larger impact on both R&D and investment in the U.S. Except for the well-known difference in the serial correlation of the two types of capital spending, we reject any significant differences between investment and R&D behavior for each country; the major differences are between countries.

Financial Factors and Investment in Belgium, France, Germany and the UK:A Comparison Using Company Panel Data

We construct company panel datasets for manufacturing firms in Belgium, France, Germany and the UK, covering the period 1978-89. These datasets are used to estimate a range of empirical investment equations, and to investigate the role played by financial factors in each country. A robust finding is that cash flow or profits terms appear to be both statistically and quantitatively more significant in the UK than in the three continental European countries. This is consistent with the suggestion that financial constraints on investment may be relatively severe in the more market-oriented UK financial system.

Impact of safety-related dose reductions or discontinuations on sustained virologic response in HCV-infected patients: Results from the GUARD-C Cohort

BACKGROUND: Despite the introduction of direct-acting antiviral agents for chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection, peginterferon alfa/ribavirin remains relevant in many resource-constrained settings. The non-randomized GUARD-C cohort investigated baseline predictors of safety-related dose reductions or discontinuations (sr-RD) and their impact on sustained virologic response (SVR) in patients receiving peginterferon alfa/ribavirin in routine practice. METHODS: A total of 3181 HCV-mono-infected treatment-naive patients were assigned to 24 or 48 weeks of peginterferon alfa/ribavirin by their physician. Patients were categorized by time-to-first sr-RD (Week 4/12). Detailed analyses of the impact of sr-RD on SVR24 (HCV RNA <50 IU/mL) were conducted in 951 Caucasian, noncirrhotic genotype (G)1 patients assigned to peginterferon alfa-2a/ribavirin for 48 weeks. The probability of SVR24 was identified by a baseline scoring system (range: 0-9 points) on which scores of 5 to 9 and <5 represent high and low probability of SVR24, respectively. RESULTS: SVR24 rates were 46.1% (754/1634), 77.1% (279/362), 68.0% (514/756), and 51.3% (203/396), respectively, in G1, 2, 3, and 4 patients. Overall, 16.9% and 21.8% patients experienced 651 sr-RD for peginterferon alfa and ribavirin, respectively. Among Caucasian noncirrhotic G1 patients: female sex, lower body mass index, pre-existing cardiovascular/pulmonary disease, and low hematological indices were prognostic factors of sr-RD; SVR24 was lower in patients with 651 vs. no sr-RD by Week 4 (37.9% vs. 54.4%; P = 0.0046) and Week 12 (41.7% vs. 55.3%; P = 0.0016); sr-RD by Week 4/12 significantly reduced SVR24 in patients with scores <5 but not 655. CONCLUSIONS: In conclusion, sr-RD to peginterferon alfa-2a/ribavirin significantly impacts on SVR24 rates in treatment-naive G1 noncirrhotic Caucasian patients. Baseline characteristics can help select patients with a high probability of SVR24 and a low probability of sr-RD with peginterferon alfa-2a/ribavirin

The R&D tax credit in France: assessment and ex ante evaluation of the 2008 reform

International audienc