Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-2lccl Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-25T07:37:31.347Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

EFFECTS OF R&D SUBSIDIES IN A HYBRID MODEL OF ENDOGENOUS GROWTH AND SEMI-ENDOGENOUS GROWTH

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  07 September 2020

Angus C. Chu  and
Xilin Wang
Angus C. Chu
Affiliation:
University of Liverpool
Xilin Wang*
Affiliation:
Fudan University
*
Address correspondence to: Xilin Wang, China Center for Economic Studies, School of Economics, Fudan University, Shanghai, China. e-mail: xilinwang@fudan.edu.cn.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

We explore R&D subsidies in a hybrid growth model which may exhibit semi-endogenous growth or fully endogenous growth. We consider two types of subsidies on variety-expanding innovation and quality-improving innovation. R&D subsidies on quality-improving innovation only have effects in the fully endogenous-growth regime, in which more subsidies cause an earlier activation of quality-improving innovation and increase the transitional/steady-state growth rate. R&D subsidies on variety-expanding innovation have contrasting effects in the two regimes. In the semi-endogenous-growth regime, more subsidies on variety-expanding innovation increase transitional growth but have no effect on steady-state growth. In the fully endogenous-growth regime, more subsidies on variety-expanding innovation continue to increase short-run growth but delay the activation of quality-improving innovation and reduce long-run growth. Increasing subsidies on variety-expanding (quality-improving) innovation makes the semi-endogenous-growth (fully endogenous-growth) regime more likely to emerge. Finally, we calibrate the model and find that under reasonable parameter values, the fully endogenous-growth regime is more likely to emerge.

Keywords

R&D SubsidiesInnovationEndogenous Growth Regimes
Type
Notes
Information
Macroeconomic Dynamics , Volume 26 , Issue 3 , April 2022 , pp. 813 - 832
Copyright
© Cambridge University Press 2020

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

The authors are grateful to an anonymous Referee for helpful comments. Wang gratefully acknowledges financial support from the National Natural Science Foundation of China (grant no. 71773020) and from the Ministry of Education of China for the Youth Project in Humanities and Social Sciences (20YJC790090). The usual disclaimer applies.

References

REFERENCES

Aghion, P. and Howitt, P. (1992) A model of growth through creative destruction. Econometrica 60, 323–351.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ang, J. and Madsen, J. (2011) Can second-generation endogenous growth models explain the productivity trends and knowledge production in the Asian miracle economies?. Review of Economics and Statistics 93, 1360–1373.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ashraf, Q. and Galor, O. (2011) Dynamics and stagnation in the Malthusian epoch. American Economic Review 101, 2003–2041.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Chu, A. and Cozzi, G. (2018) Effects of patents versus R&D subsidies on income inequality. Review of Economic Dynamics 29, 68–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chu, A., Furukawa, Y. and Ji, L. (2016) Patents, R&D subsidies and endogenous market structure in a Schumpeterian Economy. Southern Economic Journal 82, 809–825.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chu, A., Kou, Z. and Wang, X. (2020) Effects of patents on the transition from stagnation to growth. Journal of Population Economics 33, 395–411.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cozzi, G. (2017a) Endogenous growth, semi-endogenous growth… or both? A simple hybrid model. Economics Letters 154, 28–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cozzi, G. (2017b) Combining semi-endogenous and fully endogenous growth: A generalization. Economics Letters 155, 89–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davis, C. and Hashimoto, K. (2015) R&D subsidies, international knowledge diffusion, and fully endogenous productivity growth. Macroeconomic Dynamics 19, 1816–1838.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ferraro, D., Ghazi, S. and Peretto, P. (2019) Lessons for Tax Reform from an Equilibrium Model of Innovation. Economic Research Initiatives at Duke (ERID) Working Paper: No. 282.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ferraro, D. and Peretto, P. (2020) Innovation-led growth in a time of debt. European Economic Review 121, 1–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Galor, O. (2011) Unified Growth Theory. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Galor, O. and Moav, O. (2002) Natural selection and the origin of economic growth. Quarterly Journal of Economics 117, 1133–1192.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Galor, O. and Mountford, A. (2008) Trading population for productivity: Theory and evidence. Review of Economic Studies 75, 1143–1179.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Galor, O. and Weil, D. (2000) Population, technology and growth: From the Malthusian regime to the demographic transition. American Economic Review 110, 806–828.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grossman, G. and Helpman, E. (1991a) Quality ladders in the theory of growth. Review of Economic Studies 58, 43–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grossman, G. and Helpman, E. (1991b) Innovation and Growth in the Global Economy. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Ha, J. and Howitt, P. (2007) Accounting for trends in productivity and R&D: A Schumpeterian critique of semi-endogenous growth theory. Journal of Money, Credit, and Banking 33, 733–774.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hansen, G. and Prescott, E. (2002) Malthus to Solow. American Economic Review 92, 1205–1217.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Howitt, P. (1999) Steady endogenous growth with population and R&D inputs growing. Journal of Political Economy 107, 715–730.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hu, R., Yang, Y. and Zheng, Z. (2019) Effects of Subsidies on Growth and Welfare in a Quality-Ladder Model with Elastic Labor. MPRA Paper 96801.Google Scholar
Iacopetta, M., Minetti, R. and Peretto, P. (2019) Financial markets, industry dynamics and growth. Economic Journal 129, 2192–2215.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Impullitti, G. (2010) International competition and U.S. R&D subsidies: A quantitative welfare analysis. International Economic Review 51, 1127–1158.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jones, C. (1995) R&D-based models of economic growth. Journal of Political Economy 103, 759–784.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jones, C. (2001) Was an industrial revolution inevitable? Economic growth over the very long run. B.E. Journal of Macroeconomics (Advances) 1, 1–45.Google Scholar
Laincz, C. and Peretto, P. (2006) Scale effects in endogenous growth theory: An error of aggregation not specification. Journal of Economic Growth 11, 263–288.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Li, B. and Zhang, J. (2014) Subsidies in an economy with endogenous cycles over investment and innovation regimes. Macroeconomic Dynamics 18, 1351–1382.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lin, H. (2002) Shall the Northern optimal R&D subsidy rate inversely respond to Southern intellectual property protection?. Southern Economic Journal 69, 381–397.Google Scholar
Madsen, J. (2008) Semi-endogenous versus Schumpeterian growth models: Testing the knowledge production function using international data. Journal of Economic Growth 13, 1–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Madsen, J. (2010) The anatomy of growth in the OECD since 1870. Journal of Monetary Economics 57, 753–767.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Matsuyama, K. (1999) Growing through cycles. Econometrica 67, 335–347.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Matsuyama, K. (2001) Growing through cycles in an infinitely lived agent economy. Journal of Economic Theory 100, 220–234.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Morimoto, T. and Tabata, K. (2019) Higher education subsidy policy and R&D-based growth. Macroeconomic Dynamics, 1–40.Google Scholar
Peretto, P. (1998) Technological change and population growth. Journal of Economic Growth 3, 283–311.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Peretto, P. (1999) Cost reduction, entry, and the interdependence of market structure and economic growth. Journal of Monetary Economics 43, 173–195.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Peretto, P. (2007) Corporate taxes, growth and welfare in a Schumpeterian economy. Journal of Economic Theory 137, 353–382.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Peretto, P. (2015) From Smith to Schumpeter: A theory of take-off and convergence to sustained growth. European Economic Review 78, 1–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Peretto, P. and Connolly, M. (2007) The Manhattan metaphor. Journal of Economic Growth 12, 329–350.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Romer, P. (1990) Endogenous technological change. Journal of Political Economy 98, S71–S102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Segerstrom, P. (1998) Endogenous growth without scale effects. American Economic Review 88, 1290–1310.Google Scholar
Segerstrom, P. (2000) The long-run growth effects of R&D subsidies. Journal of Economic Growth 5, 277–305.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Segerstrom, P., Anant, T. and Dinopoulos, E. (1990) A Schumpeterian model of the product life cycle. American Economic Review 80, 1077–1091.Google Scholar
Smulders, S. and van de Klundert, T. (1995) Imperfect competition, concentration and growth with firm-specific R&D. European Economic Review 39, 139–160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yang, Y. (2018) On the optimality of IPR protection with blocking patents. Review of Economic Dynamics 27, 205–230.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zeng, J. and Zhang, J. (2007) Subsidies in an R&D growth model with elastic labor. Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control 31, 861–886.CrossRefGoogle Scholar