Early Academis Science and the Birth of Industrial Research Laboratories in the U.S. Pharmaceutical Industry

The establishment and growth of industrial research laboratories is one of the key organizational innovations affecting technological progress in the United States in the 20th century. In this paper, we investigate the rise of industrial research laboratories in the U.S. pharmaceutical industry between 1927 and 1946. Our evidence suggests that institutional factors, namely the presence of universities dedicated to research, played a significant role in the establishment and diffusion of private pharmaceutical research laboratories. Specifically, we document that the growth of industrial pharmaceutical laboratories between 1927 and 1946 is positively and significantly correlated with the extent of local university research, after controlling for other observable factors likely to influence the geographic distribution of industrial research. We supplement our core results with case histories illustrative of early university-industry interaction and an examination of the determinants of university-industry research cooperation. Our qualitative historical evidence and analyses of the birth of chemical engineering programs suggest that industry also played a role in influencing university research agendas. We correct for feedback effects from industry to universities using instrumental variables. Overall, our analyses suggest that while the presence of industrial facilities helped shape the direction of university research programs, there was a significant, positive, and causal effect running from university research to the growth of pharmaceutical research laboratories in the first half of the twentieth century in the United States.

Climbing Atop the Shoulders of Giants: The Impact of Institutions on Cumulative Research

While the cumulative nature of knowledge is recognized as central to economic growth, the microeconomic foundations of cumulativeness are less understood. This paper investigates the impact of a research-enhancing institution on cumulativeness, highlighting two effects. First, a selection effect may result in a high correlation between "high-quality" institutions and knowledge of high intrinsic quality. Second, an institution may have a marginal impact -- an incremental influence on cumulativeness, conditional on the type and quality of knowledge considered. This paper distinguishes these effects in the context of a specific institution, biological resource centers (BRCs). BRCs are "living libraries" that authenticate, preserve, and offer independent access to biological materials, such as cells, cultures, and specimens. BRCs may enhance the cumulativeness of knowledge by reducing the marginal cost to researchers of drawing on prior research efforts. We exploit three key aspects of the environment in which BRCs operate to evaluate how they affect the cumulativeness of knowledge: (a) the impact of scientific knowledge is reflected in future scientific citations, (b) deposit into BRCs often occurs with a substantial lag after initial research is completed and published, and (c) "lagged" deposits often result from shocks unrelated to the characteristics of the materials themselves. Employing a difference-in-differences estimator linking specific materials deposits to journal articles, we find evidence for both selection effects and the marginal impact of BRCs on the cumulativeness of knowledge associated with deposited materials. Moreover, the marginal impact increases with time and varies with the economic and institutional conditions in which deposit occurs.

The Determinants of National Innovative Capacity

Motivated by differences in R&D productivity across advanced economies, this paper presents an empirical examination of the determinants of country-level production of international patents. We introduce a novel framework based on the concept of national innovative capacity. National innovative capacity is the ability of a country to produce and commercialize a flow of innovative technology over the long term. National innovative capacity depends on the strength of a nation's common innovation infrastructure (cross-cutting factors which contribute broadly to innovativeness throughout the economy), the environment for innovation in its leading industrial clusters, and the strength of linkages between these two areas. We use this framework to guide our empirical exploration into the determinants of country-level R&D productivity, specifically examining the relationship between international patenting (patenting by foreign countries in the United States) and variables associated with the national innovative capacity framework. While acknowledging important measurement issues arising from the use of patent data, we provide evidence for several findings. First, the production function for international patents is surprisingly well-characterized by a small but relatively nuanced set of observable factors, including R&D manpower and spending, aggregate policy choices such as the extent of IP protection and openness to international trade, and the share of research performed by the academic sector and funded by the private sector. As well, international patenting productivity depends on each individual country's knowledge stock.' Further, the predicted level of national innovative capacity has an important impact on more downstream commercialization and diffusion activities (such as achieving a high market share of high-technology export markets). Finally, there has been convergence among OECD countries in terms of the estimated level of innovative capacity over the past quarter century.

Public & Private Spillovers, Location and the Productivity of Pharmaceutical Research

While there is widespread agreement among economists and management scholars that knowledge spillovers exist and have important economic consequences, researchers know substantially less about the "micro mechanisms" of spillovers -- about the degree to which they are geographically localized, for example, or about the degree to which spillovers from public institutions are qualitatively different from those from privately owned firms (Jaffe, 1986; Krugman, 1991; Jaffe et al., 1993; Porter, 1990). In this paper we make use of the geographic distribution of the research activities of major global pharmaceutical firms to explore the extent to which knowledge spills over from proximate private and public institutions. Our data and empirical approach allow us to make advances on two dimensions. First, by focusing on spillovers in research productivity (as opposed to manufacturing productivity), we build closely on the theoretical literature on spillovers that suggests that knowledge externalities are likely to have the most immediate impact on the production of ideas (Romer, 1986; Aghion & Howitt, 1997). Second, our data allow us to distinguish spillovers from public research from spillovers from private, or competitively funded research, and to more deeply explore the role that institutions and geographic proximity play in driving knowledge spillovers.

Automation, research technology, and researchers’ trajectories: evidence from computer science and electrical engineering

We examine how the introduction of a technology that automates research tasks influences the rate and type of researchers’ knowledge production. To do this, we leverage the unanticipated arrival of an automating motion-sensing research technology that occurred as a consequence of the introduction and subsequent hacking of the Microsoft Kinect system. To estimate whether this technology induces changes in the type of knowledge produced, we employ novel measures based on machine learning (topic modeling) techniques and traditional measures based on bibliometric indicators. Our analysis demonstrates that the shock associated with the introduction of Kinect increased the production of ideas and induced researchers to pursue ideas more diverse than and distant from their original trajectories. We find that this holds for both researchers who had published in motion-sensing research prior to the Kinect shock (within-area researchers) and those who did not (outside-area researchers), with the effects being stronger among outside-area researchers.Published versio

Retractions

To what extent does “false science” impact the rate and direction of scientific change? We examine the impact of over 1,100 scientific retractions on the citation trajectories of articles that are related to retracted papers in intellectual space but were published prior to the retraction event. Following retraction and relative to carefully selected controls, related articles experience a lasting five to ten percent decline in the rate of citations received. This penalty is more severe when the retracted article involves fraud or misconduct, rather than honest mistakes. In addition, we find that the arrival rate of new articles and funding ows into these fields decrease after a retraction.National Science Foundation (U.S.) (SciSIP Program Award SBE-0738142)National Science Foundation (U.S.) (SciSIP Program Award SBE-0738394

Firm performance and state innovation funding: evidence from China’s Innofund program

Can firms leverage public entrepreneurship investments to improve innovation and financial performance? Analysis of this question is frustrated by the difficulty of distinguishing treatment from selection effects. We take advantage of internal administrative data on applications to China’s Innofund program in order (a) to identify which application features are associated with higher chances of obtaining grants and (b) to evaluate the causal impact of receiving a grant on firm performance using a regression discontinuity (RD) design. With regards to grant receipt, we find that firms possessing observable merits and political connections are more likely to receive Innofund grants. We also find evidence of bureaucratic intervention, as applicants’ evaluation scores are non-randomly missing and that some firms whose scores did not meet funding standards nonetheless received grants. With regards to post-grant performance, we find that firms receiving high project evaluation scores and Innofund grants perform better than those that do not receive grants and have lower scores. These do not appear to be causal effects, however. Applying Fuzzy RD methods, we find no evidence that receiving an Innofund grant boosts survival, patenting, or venture funding. Our analysis demonstrates the value of administrative data for causal analysis and for uncovering evidence regarding the possibility that bureaucratic intervention affects firm and program outcomes.Published versio

Disclosure and subsequent innovation: evidence from the patent depository library program

How important is access to patent documents for subsequent innovation? We examine the expansion of the USPTO Patent Library system after 1975. Patent libraries provided access to patents before the Internet. We find that after patent library opening, local patenting increases by 8–20 percent relative to similar regions. Additional analyses suggest that disclosure of technical information drives this effect: inventors increasingly take up ideas from outside their region, and the effect is strongest in technologies where patents are more informative. We thus provide evidence that disclosure plays an important role in cumulative innovation.SES-1564368 and SES-1564381 - National Science FoundationPublished versio

Measuring the direction of innovation: frontier tools in unassisted machine learning

NSF SciSIP grant, SES-1564368. - National Science FoundationOthe

Social globalization and design innovation

While designs play a critical role in corporate innovation and business operations, the determinants of design innovation (i.e., new aesthetic or stylistic forms) are largely underexplored in the literature. Accumulating evidence suggests that openness to the exchange of ideas, the adoption of progressive policies, and the circulation of human capital play significant roles in driving regional innovative activities. In this study, we ask a variation of this question: Is there evidence that social globalization, i.e., “the spread of ideas, information, images and people” (Dreher et al., 2008, p. 43) – can drive the extent of national design innovation? We leverage a survey instrument reporting on globalization levels, the KOF Globalization Index, to measure national levels of social globalization. We find that national levels of social globalization predict design innovation, as measured by the number of annual design awards granted by the Industrie Forum (iF) over the period 1973-2015. To address the potential endogeneity in our analysis, we instrument for social globalization using a differences-in-differences approach and an instrumental variable approach. Our findings remain robust when we use U.S. design patents as an alternative measure for design innovation. We further show that personal contact could be the main underlying mechanism for social globalization to encourage design innovation.Othe